HomeMy WebLinkAbout633 2
A VASO tTION at the City of teat,
3 Washingt4mj, axdoptlap the CmVre assive 1
Plax of t ho City of %vatC p pursuant to �
i
WAMMASO prior to April 21P 156t, the mmt plowing 1
6 1 1
7 � }'c'�iaarie n ►1d at loo�st. oe'a public heaarl.
,� b7 giving notice
8 I of the Use ata4 place by e'axe p licxacition is a now of "moral
!'circulation ulatti.on is the city of Xont, and in the Official gaaatto of
!,th* City of Xent, rogarrdiaq the *doptloas and rocoomalda ties of a
10
j
ii i�'Nov Cosprat a x.mi,ve plan for the City of Rovit, Noshixxgtom1 404 1
WSRUS, thereafter, the Koutt Playming Commission romo a
12
4e4 a New coepar+bolksiv* Playa to the *nt City counail for at40ptieat
13
14
15 K6 A r thereafter, the Xont City C+d1t w-L1 jn=#u&ftt to
'
16 � tiro p> ish*4 is a nuevspap*r of Vemmai civaulatiou is the
17 'City of 1404t. and IXthe Official 1at3xette Of toe Citg of Wit. held
i8 I a public hoarixg oA April 21 ,, 1I49, regarding the axoption of
18 sa L4 Nov C arohessi" Plan for the City of Nest, I
i
20 Y"* ?"IREPO", 2xx CITY CWKfL Or t� CITY or
i
21 IrAsar"T"t TIN A 4ViAlk xxxTual, OI;Y 1121t2MPI' , x2vt w3"f8 anow
22 Ike roes a
23 ; 4w t oa ., The UW cavroboasi.ve Pl.aart + 0mvistl of
24 'text a swra: (true aced certified oet ion whit era att,ae hoe e-
25 ito3 to b*r"itax adoptod As the Nam CA"aprohensivo Plan fvc the
26 I ity of Kont, as hi,ngtoft,
27 ftifttiopn 2. 'The New +lea rahoaai.va Colas eonti its of tie
28 kolLevial doocrib*d +d+aemeats,. which ore herewith incorporated
28 ; mroia. by raft mm and made a party of this Revolution as gaga
I ;
30 ;tally sot forth# to-vjt c
31
A, Text �
32 p. Land tisa Map 1
C, vablicy 9040vine a €xti1.1.0*9 ;#sr
i
I D. Education and Recreation Facilities Map
2 E. Circulation Map
3 F. Comprehensive Plan Map.
4 Section 3. Upon passage and adoption of this Resolution,
5 the City Clerk shall certify the original thereof (as well as
6 certify the above mentioned documents attached hereto) and shall
7 then keep said original Resolution with attachments on file in
8 the Office of the Kent City Clerk.
9 PASSED at a regular meeting of the rent City Council
10 this day of May, 1969.
11
12 ALEX THORNTON, MAYOR
i
13 Attest:
14
MARIF JF, . N, City Clerk
15 j
rAp roved as o form:
16
17 B. BE'REITER , City Attorney
18
i
19 ' I hereby certi.fv that this is a true copy of Resolution
: No. Vb passed by the City Council of the City of Dent the
20 ' a o Ma ., 1,969 . j
21 (SEAL)
MAR. . ., JENSEN, City Clerk
22
23
24 a
i
25
26 t
i
27
28
i
29
30
CITY CLERK,
`C
RECEIVED
PP
C I T Y 0 F K E N T
MAYOR Former Mayor
Isabel Hogan Alex Thornton
CITY COUNCIL - 1970 Former City Counc
Peter Baffaro M.L. Armstrong
y
Jerome Barnier Isabel Hogan
Harry Clements Carl Pozzi
Bill Elliott Larry Woodworth
Robert E. Lee
Charles Martel
Jeanne Masters
PLANNING COMMISSION - 1970 Former Planning Commission Members
Gordon Hall, Chairman Harlan Bull
Noel Bicknell Donald A. Eide
Fred Frazier
Monte Fugate
Lou Koszarek
Richard Land
Terry McKenna
Tom O'Connell
James Rayfuse
DEPARTMENT HEADS - 1970
Joseph A. Street City Administrator
Donald Mirk City Attorney
Marie Jensen City Clerk
Margaret Drotz City Treasurer
James P. Harris Planning Director
Glen Sherwood City Engineer
Barney Wilson Recreation Director
Dave McQuery Police Chief
Thomas L. Foster Fire Chief
{l
�I
RESOLUTION NO.
a I
A RESOLU77TION of the Cit1 of Kent, i
Washington, adopting the Comprehensive
3 f Plan of. -he City of Kent, ,pursuant to !
R.C.V% . 35 . 63 . 100 .
5 , p
WHEREAS - ri_or to April 21, 1969 , the Kent Planning
ii
6 ,'Commission held at least one public hearing, by giving notice `
7 rf the time and Mace by one publication in a newspaper of generals
8 l 1Icirculation in the City of Kent, and in the official gazette of
8 I+the City of Kent, regarding the adoption and reconunendation of a j
Plan for the City 1
1p New Comprehensive 1 Y of Kent, Washington; and
11 f
WHEREAS , thereafter, the Kent Planning Commission recommen-
12 I�Ided a New Comprehensive Plan to the Kent City Council for adoption;`
I
13 !'and
14 WHEREAS , thereafter, the Kent City. Council, pursuant to
15 �notice published in a newspaper of general circulation in the
1
16 hCity of Kent and in the official gazette of the City of Kent, held `
17 a public hearing on April 21, 1969 , .regarding the adoption o.L
f 16 said New Comprehensive Plan for the City of Xent,
18 �I '
f I�3O?nI, THEREFORE, THE CITY. CO:JNC.IL OF THE :CITY. GF KENT,
!1
20
I�ti7ASI.INGTON, IN A REGULAR MEETING, DULY ASSEMBLED, HEP�EWIT! RESOLVES
21 �
�AS FOLLOWS :
22 i I
Section 1. The New. Comprehensive Plan,. consisting of
23 text and maps, .(true and certified copies which are attached here-
24 Zito) is herewith adopted as the. New Comprehensive Plan for the
I, {{
25 City of Kent, Washington. I
26 Section 2 . The New Comprehensive Plan consists of the 1
27 'following described documents , whiciz are herewith incorporated.
28 herein by reference and made a part of this Resolution as thoug.L
29 ;fully set forth, to-wit:
34 A. Text
31 B. Land Use Map
1,
32 C. Public Service and Utilities Map
SI -1
f,
i
1
I
1 I� D. Education and Recreation Facilities Map 1
I �
2 E. Circulation Map
3 F. Compreht�nsive Plan Map.
4 Section 3 . Upon passage and adoption of this Resolution,
5 �� the City Clerk shall certify the original thereof (as well as
6 `jcertify the above mentioned documents attached hereto) and shall
7 fthen keep said original Resolution with attachments on file in
i
8 i? the Office of the Kent City Clerk.
9 I� PASSED at a regular meeting of the Kent City Council
10 `�� this LL day of May, 1969 . �\
12 I ALEX THORNTON, MAYOR
I�
13 Attest:
14
jIMARIE JENS , City Clerk
15 i
i! Approved as to form:
16 �I
, A
"_� �!-✓``ice
17 J•OHN B. BEREITER, City Attorney
111
18 J
19
I hereby certify th
at this is a true copy of Resolution
y I
I; No. ;- -> �� , passed by the City Council of the City of Kent the �
20 1 e Lfi/- day of May, 1969 .
w (SEAL)21
1
I,22 MARS JENSEN, City Clerk !
I �
I �
i )
23 � l
24 I
25
1
26
27
28 I�
29 !I
�
30 +`
31
I
32 -
�} l
i
I
T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
Page
FOREWORD
1. History of Kent 1
2. Physical Characteristics 2
3. Growth of the City and its Environs 2
4. Planning for the Future 2
PREFACE
1. The Kent Comprehensive Planning Effort 3
2. Purpose, Scope and Meaning of the Comprehensive Plan 4
3. State Enabling Legislation 5
Chapter I POPULATION 6
Chapter II LAND USE 8
Chapter III PUBLIC FACILITIES 16
LL A. Public Services & Utilities 16
B. Educational & Recreational Facilities 19
Chapter IV CIRCULATION 23
Chapter V THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ITS IMPLEMENTATION 28
Maps
1. City of Kent's Location in the Region precedes 1
2. Growth of Kent - from 1890 to 1968 follows 2
3. Land Use 15
4. Public Services and Utilities " 18
5. Educational & Recreational Facilities " 22
6. Circulation " 27
7. Comprehensive Plan 1988 " 30
Tables
Table 1 Population Growth & Projections 7
Table 2 Estimated Land Requirements 10
Table 3 Recreational Needs & Space Standards 21
Table 4 Population of Local Planning Areas 22
Table A Summary of New Construction in the City of Kent Appendix
Table B Summary of Rezoning Applications Approved in the Appendix
City of Kent.
APPENDIX 31
BIBLIOGRAPHY 33
sl Ol s O
saliw
N 0103 b *41 ul uol+ ®•ao
1N3 )1 A4 ! ,
�r
ui no
1N � )1 :
uo a�
C
O
es
•oa 6 u 1 ll O
•0a y s lino y o u s
C
Z
AD
FOREWORD
( The City of Kent, situated in south King County, Washington, is part of one
Lof the most rapidly urbanizing areas of the nation. For many years an
agrarian economy in an idyllic setting, the City and the areas around it
are now experiencing major changes in economic activity, population composi-
tion, environmental character, and physical appearance.
1. History of Kent. Originally called Titusville after one James H. Titus
L who platted the boundaries of the original Town, Kent was incorporated in
L 1890 and named after Kent, England, the famous hop growing center. The ori-
ginal townsite was approximately one square mile including the central business
district. The present city limits comprise approximately 14 square miles.
Most of this growth in the municipal boundaries occurred after 1953. PoP-
L ulation within the city limits as of April 1968 was nearly 16,000.
Although predominantly an agricultural area for many years, with hop growing
L having been one of the original major products, the City of Kent and its.
environs are rapidly acquiring the urban character of many other communities
in the Puget Sound region. Industrial development is preempting agriculture
in the use of the valley floor. The City's proximity to Seattle-Tacoma
International Airport, the presence of two major transcontinental rail lines,
the completion and the planning of future freeways by the State Highway
Department have already had, and will continue to have, a major impact on
ll the future character of Kent.
t
2. Physical Characteristics & Regional Setting. Kent is situated on a
valley floor running south to north. The valley has a width of two to two
�- and a half miles. East and west of this valley is a row of hills with eleva-
tions ranging up to 500 feet above the valley floor. The valley is the major
drainage basin for the Green River which accounts for the historic development
of agricultural uses in the valley. The meandering character of the Green
LRiver is one of the area's major scenic assets. This asset should be preserved
to the maximum possible extent despite urbanization and industrialization .
Inevitably, major transportation routes including highways and railroads which
roughly parallel the river's course from south to north, and construction of
Hanson Dam, provided the basic incentive for the industrial development
occuring today.
L
L
2
3. Growth of the City and its Environs. Most of Kent's growth occured after
1953.Areas annexed to the City since 1953 are illustrated on the sketch titled
"Growth of Kent" - by five year increments. In addition to dramatic and sudden
growth in land area and population, Kent has become a major employment center.
The day-time employment population probably exceeds the residential population..
Nevertheless, as of 1967, about 601/ of the land within the city limits was
still undeveloped Cir in agricultural use. The development of the areas around
Kent is similar. The 58 square mile planning area delineated in the Plan
housed only 37,000 people in 1968.
The activities of numerous public agencies which provide a variety of public
facilities contribute to the acceleration of the area's growth. It is esti-
mated that by 1988, the planning area will be home for about 145,000 persons.
The City has therefore an unusual opportunity to guide and control its future
development ; an opportunity, and an obligation.
4. Planning for the Future. By establishing a Comprehensive Plan, by revis-
ing it when needed, and by referring to it in the day-to-day decisions that
occur in administering a city, the future development of Kent and its environs
can be guided toward becoming the kind of environment that the residents
desire. This environment is described in the needs, the objectives, and the
proposals that are part of each element of this Plan.
If the Plan is to remain useful, it is esser+ial that a continuing planning
program be established. A continuing planning program involves many activities
and programs the most inportant of which are discussed in Chapter V,
Implementation.
f
� 3
L.
PREFACE
1. The Kent Comprehensive Planning Effort. This Comprehensive Plan is the
culmination of a twelve-year effort on the part of the citizens of Kent and
their public officials to effectively guide the quality and character of
their rapidly changing community.
Beginning in 1957, a number of plans, studies and reports have been authorized
by the City to develop workable plans, ordinances and programs to cope with
growth. The first of these, a Comprehensive Plan and a Zoning Ordinance,
prepared by Ivan Bloch and Associates in October of 1957, was confined to
the then existing city limits. By 1960, nearly 5,000 acres had been added
to the City's land area, and it was recognized that revision of the plan was
r necessary. The firm of Harlan Nelson and Associates was engaged for this
revision.
On September 6, 1960,the Kent Comprehensive Plan was adopted by Resolution #431
of the City Council after public hearings. The Zoning Ordinance prepared by
the Nelson firm was adopted by the City Council, after public hearings, as
Ordinance #1071 on September 19, 1960.That ordinance, although amended several
times since its adoption, is still in effect.
In 1964, the City applied for and received "701"* funds to finance: (a) review
of the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance; (b) study of the downtown
core area; and (c) aerial topographic mapping of the entire City. John Graham
and Company, engaged for this work, delivered the following reports to the
�.. City in July 1966; Development Plan which focused on streets and arterials,
central business district, and parks and recreation; a Technical Supplement,
which documents the statistical data supporting the Development Plan; and the
Kent Zoning Proposal, which recommended a number of changes in the City's
zoning ordinance-An additional report, the Technical Supplement Parking Study,
was received by the City in February 1967. Aerial topographic maps were made
by the firm of Walker and Whiteford, Inc.
After reviewing the aforementioned reports for several months, the Planning
Commission concluded that further work was advisable on the Comprehensive Plan
(the Graham Development Plan) , especially in the designation and distribution
of land areas for residential, commercial and industrial uses. The Commission
also concluded that drafting an entirely new zoning ordinance would be more
effective than additional amendments to the existing ordinance.
Section 701 of the Housing Act of 1954, as amended, provides funds
to local communities for planning.
L
F
8961- 9961 9961- 0961
6S61- PS6l
£S6l - 0681
a4isurn04 how&io
in
8961 04 0681 WOJf 1N3)I 10 H1M0110
4
Beginning in February, 1967, and with the assistance of its own staff during
_.-- the year of 1968, the Planning Commission held fifteen public hearings and
twenty-five work sessions to develop this plan, titled Comprehensive Plan 1988.
The objectives, policies and proposals made in this Plan constitute the find-
ings and recommendations of the Kent City Planning Commission. Rudolf Gast,
Planning Consultant was engaged by the Commission in January, 1969, to edit
and expand the text and to redraft the maps. The consultant was assisted in
this work by Wes Hendrickson of the City's planning staff,and by William Palmer,
graduate student in urban planning at the University of Washington.
2. Purpose, Scope and Meaning of the Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of the
Comprehensive Plan is to:
- provide a foundation for the orderly physical development of the community;
- promote a desirable environment for housing, commerce, industry, agricul-
ture and recreation;
- aid in coordinating city programs, services and facilities;
- aid in coordinating plans, programs and regulations of local, regional,
�- state and federal agencies of government;
- establish criteria and objectives, formally adopted by the City, setting
forth the desired pattern and direction of growth and the general guide-
lines necessary for City government to put the Plan into effect.
The Comprehensive Plan is intended to be a general guide for future development.
However, it is not intended to be inflexible. Periodic and regular review of
the Plan is necessary to take into account changing conditions and new infor-
mation which may justify amending and updating the Plan.
The scope of the Plan is broad in time and area. The Plan indicates the
recommended pattern of land use to the year 1988. It also takes into account
the need for major utilities, parks, open space, schools, shopping districts,
living areas, industrial areas, and traffic circulation.
fThe Plan includes areas beyond the existing city limits.The Kent Planning Area,
as identified on the maps, includes those areas in which the majority of resi-
dents are Kent oriented. Criteria employed in delineating this area include
school district boundaries, Kent postal service areas, drainage and topography,
and municipal services provided by the City of Kent outside the existing city
limits.The delineation of the Kent Planning Area (and the Future Planning Area)
does not necessarily mean that all of this area should or will be annexed to the
City of Kent; nor does it mean that the City should or would provide all of the
many public services and utilities which newly developing areas will require.
These are matters to be determined in the future by the City officials and the
residents of the areas outside the present city limits. The delineation of the
Kent Planning Area does indicate the relationship of the City of Kent to its
immediate environs and serves as a means for coordinating the development and
the programs of several public agencies; and it provides a perspective for
evaluating and guiding the future development of those areas for which Kent's
city officials do have, or may have in the future, direct responsibility.
4
5
Meaning of the Comprehensive Plan, General Objectives and Relationship to
Codes and Ordinances. The Comprehensive Plan consists of a text, maps and
tables all relating to the general development of the community by the year
1988.
As indicated elsewhere, the Plan is general and broad in scope.
It is important to maintain a clear distinction between the Comprehensive Plan
and the Zoning Ordinance and other regulations affecting the use of land.
Zoning regulations identify precise land areas and define more precisely than
the Comprehensive Plan the types of uses which are permitted in various districts
of the City. The Comprehensive Plan serves as the basis for the zoning ordinance
and platting regulations. However, the Plan spells out only the general objec-
tives and policies pertaining to land use and other elements of community
development which ordinances do not.
Once agreement is reached on the objectives and policies found in the Compre-
hensive Plan a more effective and understandable zoning ordinance and other
necessary regulations and programs can be drafted by city officials.
The general objectives of this Plan are to:
- stress development and presentation of a desirable human environment
- encourage, but control the growth of the community
- link technological change to the service of human needs.
- define the relationships among physical, social, and economic needs
- balance the interests of the individual and the community
3. State Enabling Legislation. The planning program of the City of Kent is
authorized by the Planning Enabling Act of 1935 (R.C.W. 35.63) , as amended.
This Comprehensive Plan meets the requirements of said act.
This Plan, comprising text, tables and maps, upon its adoption, becomes the
official Comprehensive Plan of the City of Kent. The publication may be refined
to reflect improvements in format provided that there is no change in intent and
meaning as established by the document originally adopted.
6
Chapter I
POPULATION
The Comprehensive Plan is based on the Land Use, Circulation and Public
Facility requirements of existing and future population in the Kent Planning
Area.
In 1967 the Planning Area contained about 37,000 people; by 1988 the area
will probably contain 145,000 people. This projection is based on the best
available data as developed by the Population and Research Division of the
Planning and Community Affairs Agency, the King County Planning Department
and the Kent Planning Department.
Population projections are subject to constant review. The 1970 census will
provide the best opportunity to re-examine growth rates in the Kent Planning
Area; and the results of the census may require re-appraisal of Comprehensive
Plan proposals.
-- In the past, the population growth of the City of Kent has been largely due
to annexation. However, even without future annexations the population within
the present city limit: is likely to grow substantially beyond the present
16,000 due to the relatively large amounts of undeveloped land in Kent.
shows past population growth in the City of Kent,
Table 1, following, p p p g y
King County, the State of Washington and the neighboring cities of Renton
and Auburn.
It is significant that the recent rate of growth for the three cities in the
Green River Valley has been similar. It reflects the fact that cities
similarly situated are likely to be similarly affected by economic growth,
migration from other parts of the Nation, and other factors beyond the control
of local communities. Such external factors compel a community to plan if
the environment is to remain livable as well as productive.
Population projections are important for estimating the requirements for future
public facilities. Chapter III (Public Facilities) shows estimated population
for 26 "Local Planning Areas" within the Kent Planning Area. The actual future
population in the local areas will be determined by the land required by future
freeways and other factors which cannot be determined precisely at this time.
It is suggested therefore that all figures be recognized as the best approximations
which can be made.
7
TABLE 1
POPULATION GROWTH 1960-1968 IN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
AND SELECTED URBAN AREAS
196o 1965 1966 1967 1968
State 2,853,214 3,107,249 3,120,000 3,175,627 3,294,420
(% Increase) (8.9) ( .4) (1.8) (3.7)
King County 935,ol4 1,005,300 1,o43,400 1,051,089 1,085,285
(% Increase) (7.5) (3.8) (.7) (3.3)
Auburn 11,933 14,8o0 15,300 17,092 18,435
(% Increase) (24.0) (3.4) (11.7) (7.9)
Renton 18,8o0 21,900 23,700 23,068 24,550
(% Increase) (16.5) (8.2) (-2.7) (6.4)
KENT 9,017 11,700 12,312 14,0o9 15,835
(% Increase) (29.8) (5.2) (13.8) (13.0)
KENT PLANNING AREA - - - - 37,217
(% Increase) - - _ - -
POPULATION PROJECTIONS
1970 1975 198o 1985 1988
State 3,506,633(a) 3,925,756(a) 4,399,300(a) 4,919,589(a) -
King County 1,162,361 1,305,677 1,469,097 1,649,732 1,76o,700
KENT 19,000 27,000 36,000 46,000 50,000
(% Increase) (19.9) (42.1) (33.3) (27.8) (8.2)
KENT PLANNING AREA 41,000 60,o00 89,o00 127,000 145,000
N Increase) (31.3) (46.3) (48.3) (42.7) (14.2 )
(a) Population Forecasts, State of Washington, 1965-1985
State Planning Series No. 4; Planning & Community Affairs
Agency, Olympia
8
Chapter II
LAND USE
This chapter discusses existing land use and estimated land use requirements
in the Kent Planning Area for the year 1988.
Estimated future land use requirements are based on projected population
growth, existing land use, and some recent trends in construction activity.
The Planning Commission also developed a statement of land use objectives.
These objectives are based upon the kind of environment the residents of Kent
seem to want as learned from extensive public hearings.
To clarify the text, the following definitions are used in this chapter:
Agriculture
An area preserved primarily for agriculture, dairy farming,
poultry farming, animal husbandry, grazing and horticulture.
- Residence-Agriculture
An area in which both agricultureal and residential uses are
permitted uses.
Residence - Low Density
An area consisting primarily of single family homes on one
or more individual lots.
Residence - Medium-High Density
An area consisting primarily of structures containing two or
more dwelling units.
Mobile Home Park
A common court designed for accommodation of individual mobile
homes.
Commercial(Central Business District)
Area designated to conduct the community's commerce which is
composed primarily of retail stores and office buildings and
other uses generally considered compatible therewith.
Highway-Oriented Commercial District
An area in which heavy equipment is rented or sold, including
vehicles and machinery requiring outdoor display.
Neighborhood or Community Business District
An area in which neighborhood or community shopping and-
services are conducted.
Industry
An area reserved for industrial uses generally known as heavy
industry. Industries permitted in this area are allowed legal
noxious emissions, minimum setback and minimum lot coverage
- restrictions. Commercial use is restricted and residential use
is limited to caretaker facilities.
9
Industrial Park
An area established which requires high standards of operation and
environment and which is reserved for uses generally known as
heavy and light industry. Operational development plans and sub-
sequent operation shall clearly demonstrate that processes will be
controlled so as to minimize external noxious effects. Reasonable
setbacks, screening, marginal landscaping, lot coverage restrictions
and area compatibility will be the essence of this concept. Commercial
use is restricted and residential use is limited to caretaker facilities.
Neighborhood
An area devoted to residential and residentially-oriented uses (such
as churches, schools and parks). The area is usually of sufficient
size to support an elementary school, and is usually bounded by
arterial streets, natural barriers or non-living areas.
Planned Unit Development
A concept of housing development on a given parcel of land that gives
primacy to attractiveness and whereby an'undivided area of open space
is provided by permitting proportionate reduction in lot sizes, or by
allowing a more concentrated arrangement of residences (single family
through high rise apartments) to a degree that is commensurate with the
additional land that will be made available thereby for open space.
Open Space
An area designating existing or anticipated open space use of land.
Existing Land Use. Existing land use was surveyed and tabulated in May, 1967.
At that time 12 percent of the land in Kent was used for agriculture, 8 percent
for industry, and approximately 7 percent for residential use. More than
60 percent of the land in Kent was vacant, undeveloped land; (Table 2).
A city with three-fifths of the land inside its city limits still vacant can
make long range plans, plans that can be carried out by residents determined
to control their environment.
Trends. During the period 1960-1968, 2,062 dwelling units were built in the
City of Kent. Although single-family homes accounted for some 71 percent of
the building permits (Table A, Appendix) , they accounted for only 48 percent
of the total dwelling units; multiple family buildings accounted for 6 percent
of the building permits but 52 percent (1082) of the dwelling units.
Table B in the Appendix, showing rezone applications approved from September
1960 through May 1968, reveals that nearly 46 percent of rezoning was for
industrial classifications. Changes from single-family to multi-family con-
stituted 18 percent of the rezoning applications approved. Reclassification
of zoning districts is taking place at a much faster rate than actual change
of land use. As of July 1968 less than half of the land had been developed
to the use for which it had been rezoned.
L10
L
0 Cd
U 0 (D O O O In O O Lr\ o
fti d CO a\ Kl O C 1 O
ao a o o
00
o ..
I o0 W O r-4 to O Lrl O O N o K 1 O 00 Cd
L 00 fx of Ri G) CI- 00 -f O rl t L� N n 3 to
ON mt O 4) U O� Kl Kl C� r� O� H a)
H d d
1 CS ri E CV r I K"1 r I rl1 rn O cl $-4 N
C- z .. N rn C-q E
1. . Z •0 3 r01
a d 4.3
>
w � 0
L r 0 0
Q Z O pq O 4 -� N O ON \10 O O,\ O N
x N1 00 Uc
H 4) L♦ 0 N r-I N N N N Cd -)
r z d w a° m
d > 0
w a +�
N Z N n
to
Lpq H�H (D 4,3 Cd C` ON N n _:t rrl O tt
d Z 0 O () O\ 00 00 n M \-o 00 O a)
H t-r . . . . . • . . •rl
2 4) � rH1 � O 0 4
a O ri U O
` 0 +)
l� opU
W 0 a)
tli ^ rl
fq O
q H W co O C` �- Ln H O\ - Cd �($ Cd a) • • • . • •
+) (1) Si N O H [` -f 0
a C` O sA U � n (V rn 00 C` 00 H H rc$ (1) •
\10 ON H d d ri C` N UIN O C- N � U
�O * .� H n O\ E N
`- H
EH� Z O O O K
Z O •-) a\ _:t l L 00 C` In - N LO (11) N
d (T Cd-i i O Cd
• • • . • • . • a) co10
O r-i U1 r ri l!1 N r-I lD r+ \D r� 00 O ai �'
a) 0 -zj- ri vl� r-1 ..:I- � r-1 n q !Q Cd
R, S4 6 i a --
H O U N O
L � a daa
m CQ
a) ri H
rq Cd Cd r I 0
a�i m rl
•rl S H •rl •o •rl Cd d d
W N E ro .O E 0 ty U EH E-H
rd•7 � a U H p:5., t(L) 0 tto > H H
L
L.,
L
L..
� I
11
Estimated Future Land Requirements. Analysis of a land use survey made of
The City of Kent in May 1967 indicates the actual amount of land used in
ratio to each 1,000 persons in the population. The following compares these
ratios with the 1988 Kent Planning Area projection developed in Table 2:
Acres per 1,000 Population
City of Kent Kent Planning Area
Land Use May 1967 1988 Projection
Residential 45.9 20.4
Commercial 12.4 10.2
Industrial 51.5 23.0
Public & Semi-public 16.8 8.9
Roads & Streets 41.7 25.6
Agriculture 76.5 23.0
This analysis is based on a 1967 City of Kent population of 14,009 persons
and a 1988 Kent Planning Area population projection of 145,000; however,
the actual land use in 1988 will be the result of trends in land use, demands
of industry, demands for residences by types (single family or multi-family)
as they may occur.
In projecting the land use requirements for 1988, as shown in Table 2, a
number of assumptions were made and certain specific needs were recognized.
Also, as a result of public hearings and other expressions of community senti-
ment on the part of the residents of Kent regarding the desired quality of
the environment, several objectives and policies pertaining to land use were
adopted for this Plan. Land use proposals for 1988 are then summarized.
Assumptions
1. Land in agricultural use will receive some kind of tax relief and
other forms of financial aid enabling such land to remain agricultural.
2. The trend to apartment living will continue to grow. In centers of
high population density there will be a growing need for more adequate
access, parking, and open space.
3. The central business district will be redeveloped in accordance with
the recommendations of the Development Plan prepared by the John Graham
Company in 1966.
4. The Space requirements for industrial land will continue to increase.
5. The demand for recreation areas, open space, new schools, and a civic
center will increase.
6. Streets, highways and freeways will continue to occupy an increasing
amount of land.
7. Vacant land in the Kent Planning Area will be absorbed by the steadily
increasing demand for residential, industrial and recreational space.
12
Needs. The following needs were recognized in the preparation of this Plan:
L.
1. Preservation of some of the existing agriculture areas
L 2. Additional parks and playgrounds to overcome the present deficiencies
based upon accepted standards (see Table 3, page 21) , and to provide
sufficient land area for such parks and playgrounds for the future
Lpopulation.
3. Preservation of natural open space areas that are physically not readily
adaptable to development, and of other areas that are unusually and
peculiarly situated so as to be in the best interests of the public by
being left as open space.
4. Development of reasonable standards for the preservation of natural
` amenities in conjunction with industrial development and to prevent
noxious pollution of air, water, sound and vision.
5. The present emphasis on construction of apartments (multi-family
residential) and the manifestation of a trend throughout the more
populated sectors of the county toward construction of high-rise
apartments, indicates that provisions must be made for such con-
struction in the Kent area. Incorporated in the Comprehensive Plan,
r therefore, is the recognition that high-rise apartment dwellings are
compatible with:
(a) Land abutting arterial streets or highways, provided such
construction is deemed by the Planning Commission to be
harmonious with the surroundings.
(b) Within the fringes of commercial areas, provided not view
L obstructing to surrounding residential neighborhoods.
s (c) Where the topography lends itself to such construction
without unduly obstructing the view from the neighboring
residential areas.
L Objectives. Objectives of this Plan for future land use are:
1. Provide for the highest and the best use of the land in the
L public interest.
2. Promote the coordinated development of the land in this City.
L3. Protect residential neighborhoods from conflicting land uses
and from hazardous through-traffic. (It is for this reason that
schools and parks are located in or near the center of neighbor-
hoods, and commercial districts are concentrated at the inter-
sections of neighborhood boundaries).
4. Prevent mixed land uses. Occasional exceptions are apartments
and motels in some commercial areas, and motels, restaurants,
banks and service stations to a limited extent in industrial areas.
5. Limit placement of billboards, wrecking yards, and junk yards to
areas where their appearance will be least objectional to the public.
L6. Reserve areas for commercial use in proportion to need for commercial
areas.
L7. Conserve in the interest of the public the natural environmental
qualities provided by the Green River.
M
f
F
`
L
13
Policies. In implementing control of the uses of land as described in this
Plan it is the intent of the City of Kent that decisions be made within the
framework of the following policies:
1. Encourage construction of planned unit development in which dwellings
are grouped together abutting a permanently reserved open space.
2. Allow development of new commercial districts only to the extent needed
to provide essential day-to-day services for residential neighborhoods.
3. Consider professional and general service business offices as belong-
ing in districts classified as commercial.
4. Locate highway-oriented businesses near intersections of major arterials
as part of other business areas.
5. Permit churches, parks, open space, schools and utilities in all agri-
cultural and residential districts.
6. Discourage the extension of highway-oriented business in strips along
trafficways.
7. Develop compact, attractive shopping areas that are easily accessible,
have adequate customer parking and provide safe pedestrian ways.
8. Encourage automotive and allied sales and services to locate together
in the fringes of the central business district.
9. Segregate commercial uses into two groups: business and commercial,
concentrating business district and commercial uses in specific areas.
10. Encourage service, distribution and light frabrication enterprises
to locate in the fringes of the central business district or adjacent
to industrial areas.
11. Locate industries that are likely to produce maximum allowable noise,
smoke and other noxious or otherwise disagreeable effects, in areas
appropriate for safeguarding the environmental qualities of the City
and where there is adequate space adjacent to the site to allow gradual
transition of land-use application into successively higher restricted
zones.
12. Recognize the trend of increased per capita vehicular ownership in
establishing off-street parking standards pertaining to residential
developments.
13. Encourage parking beneath buildings in multi-family dwelling structures.
14. Develop high density residential structures in the following areas:
- land abutting arterial streets or highways and where
such construction is harmonious with the surrounding
area
- land at the fringe of commercial areas
- hillsides or gullies where they will not be
unduly view obscuring to neighboring residential areas.
F
L. 14
Summary of Land Use Proposals. The following types of land use are recommended:
Industrial Parks
L, Type A - An industrial area that has high standards regarding performance,
development, design, screening and lot coverage. It is best suited for
locations where preservation of natural amenities for maintaining an
attractive environment is of prime importance, such as in the areas sit-
uated adjacent to freeways or located within the surroundings of a resi-
dential neighborhood without detriment to that locality.
Type B - An industrial area with lower standards regarding performance,
screening, landscaping, lot coverage. Commercial uses are limited to
service garages, branch banks., restaurants, public facilities, transient
lodgings, regional home offices.
Type C - An area in which performance, screening, lot coverage, and setback
requirements are less restrictive, and additional commercial uses are per-
mitted.
Industry
As indicated on the land use map, most of the Valley flat land north of the
core area of Kent and lying between ,the Green River and the Valley Freeway
is designated for industrial use and the land south of the core area, between
the West and East Valley Highways is also proposed for industrial purposes.
In the north part of the Valley, the area bounded by the river on the west and
on the east by 72nd Avenue extended, is considered for Industrial Park: devel-
opment, as is the land on the east side of the Valley lying between the
East Valley Highway and the Valley Freeway, .while the land between the rail-
roads or immediately adjacent thereto is designated as "Industrial". The land
to the south of So. 264t-h Street and between the railroads is classified as
Industry and the remainder of the land between the West and East Valley High-
ways, in this south sector, as Industrial Park. The areas proposed for
�-^ Industry and Industrial Park around the perimeters of the downtown core area
of Kent are shown on the land use map.
Commerce
Proposed commercial districts are situated in the central business district,
at the intersections of major highways and in areas where local neighbor-
hood shopping districts are needed or are already existing.
Agriculture
Agriculture is proposed in two areas, both south of the cross-valley express-
way; one area along the western edge of the valley and the other area along
the eastern edge of the valley. It is recognized that many factors, most of
which are beyond the control of local government, may require change of use
to something other than agriculture. Such factors shall be given due consid-
eration in the future zoning or rezoning of lands designated in this Plan as
agriculture, if and when such lands become part of the corporate limits of
t the City of Kent. Therefore, the designation as agriculture may be regarded
4... as a desireable but transitional use.
r-
Residence- Agriculture
The flat valley ground west of the Green River and north of the Kent-DesMoines
Highway is proposed generally as Residence-Agriculture.
15
Residence
Two types of residential areas are shown on the land use map -- single family
and multi-family.
Single family areas are situated primarily on the extensive plateau
areas east and west of the Kent Valley and in existing residential
areas on the Valley floor.
Multi-family areas are shown in accordance with the Needs (No. 5)
and the Policies (No. 14) in this chapter. Distinctions within the
multi-family category, eg. , "High Density" and "Medium Density" are
more appropriately treated in the zoning ordinances.
Certain areas on the east slope of West Hill, north of the Kent-DesMoines
Road, shown in this Plan as "Residence - Low Density", shall be re-examined
by the Planning Commission upon its first annual review following adoption
of the Plan. The appropriateness of redesignating the aforementioned
areas as "Residence - Medium-High Density11 shall have first consideration.
Open Space
Open space areas are proposed on some of the side hills, on the valley floor
along the river and in residential neighborhoods.
Areas designated as open space may be either privately or publicly owned.
It is recognized, however, that actual use of the land cannot be limited to
open space unless the City or other public agency acquires title or rights
to such land.
The map entitled "Future Land Use" shows the various areas of land use as
proposed in this Plan. The map and the text must be considered together for
proper interpretation.
' $
� rT
t
' I- �'� / -� � � i3 � Y, � ,�{ •M.✓ `vim"'b"y _ ,M� V
LU
tA
./lam' r��' i y���s :' � .�.:r' x f •.•w~'"
j ,.... r zy '.' •��'�... sib r r. N _
r t sX
/• // Cj •-v ryMx
� to is a 3
Lu
mA
\ n
i._
^m , Z V v '.n ... i O d 6
_ Q
99 de
bc
04
M;O
p
3.,
W F W p
u
c
°s
C
W'
f
i oa
Chapter III
PUBLIC FACILITIES
Public facilities are those land areas and physical improvements which are
generally owned and operated by governmental agencies and to which the
public has direct access. Public facilities are treated as two sub-groups
in this Plan. The first group, Public Services and Utilities, includes
water and sewer systems, fire stations, city hall, post offices, refuse
disposal sites, etc. The second group, Educational and Recreational Facil-
ities, includes schools, parks, open space, libraries, etc.
A. Public Services and Utilities
1. Water and sewer systems. The water and sewer systems which will
have the most significant impact on future development of the Kent area are
those developed and planned by the City of Seattle and Metro. Systems
already built and others planned by these two agencies will accelerate
industrial and residential growth, the latter particularly in the eastern
sections of the Kent planning area. The general location of existing and
proposed extensions of these water and sewer mains is shown on the map titled
"Public Services and Utilities"; the map also shows water mains of the City
of Kent serving the area south and east of Lake Meridian. Scale of the map
does not permit inclusion of all of the water and sewer systems operated by
the City of Kent; however, Kent's mains serve areas already developed and
, can serve many other areas to be developed in the future.
The direction of the expansion of these utilities, their timing, and their
financing should be subject to continuing review and coordination by the
planning commission and the city departments directly responsible for
engineering and construction. Equally important, is the continuing coordi-
nation between the utility divisions of the .City of Kent, the City of Seattle
and Metro.
2. Storm Drainage. Plans for the development of an improved storm
drainage control project in the Green River basin were not sufficiently
advanced to permit inclusion of the proposed system on the Public Services
and Utilities map. However, federal, state and local authorities are jointly
participating in the program, and the development of a complete drainage
system is, by the concept of the Comprehensive Plan, considered to be of vital
importance to the future economic welfare of the City. In particular, the
work of the King County Flood Control District shall be coordinated with
the continuing planning program of the City of Kent.
17
L
It is an objective of this Plan that coordinated planning and development
of water, sewer and drainage facilities be achieved in the interest of
economy, efficiency and the guidance of future land development in the Kent
planning area.
3. Fire Stations. Existing and proposed fire stations (shown on the
Lmap of "Public Services and Utilities") were designated by the Fire Depart-
ment of the City of Kent. General location of future fire stations outside
Lof the present city limits were coordinated with the county fire station plan
of the King County Planning Department. The location of these facilities is
based on a system of service areas determined by character and density or
expected development, topography, accessibility to arterial streets, and
railroad crossings. By consensus of the administrators for the affected fire
departments, the locations suggested will best serve the existing and future
population of Kent.
t 4. City Hall. It has long been recognized that the present City Hall
needs to be replaced. The inadequacies of the existing building are pain-
fully apparent to all who need to do business with municipal departments.
By any criteria that can be applied to the needs of municipal government,
the earliest possible construction of a new administrative center is called
L for.
( Two possible sites for such a facility are suggested:
L Site #1 at 4Lh and Titus
Site #2 at James St. and Russell Rd.
Each of the two sites has certain advantages.
Site #1 could provide:
L - joint parking for city employees and customers
of downtown business establishments
L - close proximity to stores, banks, restaurants,
garages and the public library
- a focal point within the core area which may
L unify the east and west sides of Kent
Site #2 could provide:
- savings in land acquisition costs since the land
is already owned by the City; such savings plus the
funds received for the present site could provide
L a more substantial structure.
- more generous space for off-street parking and
L landscaping, and greater flexibility in building
design; there is enough space, too, for the pos-
sible development of a civic center complex which
might include a larger library or other community-
L wide facility.
L
18
No estimate has been made to determine the floor space requirements for
a new city hall. It is recommended architectural and planning consultants
be engaged for a preliminary study of space requirements and selection of
a final site.
5. Post Offices. The location of Kent's existing main post office is
shown on the Public Services and Utilities map. Also shown is the location
of the new East Hill branch. It is likely, however, that as the population
of the Kent planning area approaches the estimate of 145,000, that additional
or larger postal facilities will be required. The impact of new locations or
expansion of existing facilities should be carefully considered in the future.
6. Refuse Disposal Sites (Garbage Dumps). Four existing refuse disposal
facilities are shown in the Plan; a site north of S. 188Lh St. and west of
Interstate #5; a transfer station operated by King County in the general vicinity
of SE 272nd St. immediately east of the Green River; the Midway Fill, west of
Interstate Highway #5 and north of S. 252nd Street; the newly created land fill
area operated by the City of Seattle in the vicinity of Military Road and the
Kent-DesMoines Road.
Recent controversy surrounding the last named of these sites illustrates
the importance of careful planning and stingent controls in determining the
location and usefulness of this type of facility. Although the Plan does not
show locations for additional refuse handling sites, it is obvious that addi-
tional sites will be required for a growing population. It is one of the most
important (and noxious) of planning and municipal house keeping chores, but
one which city officials cannot refuse to handle.
It is an objective of this Plan that public facilities of every type and
description, built or operated by any public agency, shall be adequate for
short range and long range needs, and that they shall be so located and
designed as to be an aesthetic as well as a functional asset to the area.
B. Educational and Recreational Facilities.
1. Libraries. Kent's present library contains about 4200 square feet.
Based on standards of the American Library Association (600 sq. ft. per 1000
population) , it should contain about 9600 square feet to serve the present
population of 16,000 in the City of Kent.
These same library standards call for a central library facility to serve a
population of about 25,000. Additional libraries should be developed in
county areas. The program for library development prepared by the King County
Library Board and the County Planning Department should be more fully reviewed
19
to determine adequacy of proposals for the Kent planning area. This review
and development of standards and locations for additional library facilities
shall be part of the planning commission's continuing work program.
Nevertheless, future library locations are shown in the Plan based on the
Library Location Plan of the King County Planning Department, July 1965.
2. Schools. The number of schools in the Kent Planning Area will
�y approximately double between 1968 and 1988.
At least one school, O'Brien, will probably be discontinued as an elementary
school. It has been suggested that the building be converted to a vocational
r
school. This suggestion should be more fully examined.
Proposed school sites shown in this Plan have been reviewed by school officials
of the Kent School District #415 and Federal Way District #210. Many of the
�.. locations were recommended to the Kent School District by the firm of Booz,
Allan and Hamilton. Their study showed additional classroom needs through
1973 as follows:
1968 1973
Elementary 44 336
Junior High - 120
Senior High 64 64
F
4 Future school requirements will also depend on new developments in educational
practices and philosophy. Such developments may have a major impact on the
number, type and location of school plants. It is recommended that close
liaison be established between school authorities and City Officials in order
to provide the best educational facilities at the lowest possible costs for
future students.
3. Parks, Open Space and Recreation. This Plan recommends that the exist-
ing 215 acres of parks and playfields be increased to over 1,700 acres by the
year 1988. This recommendation is based on standards of the National Recreation
LAssociation as shown in Table 3.
The distribution of these facilities is based in part on the estimated popu-
lation of the Local Planning Areas as shown in Table 4.
L
L
I Tm �
m rn G
F
m a
rrl
rm GND
ID
El
J
I �
O
N T
4—.
r
O Z O �•.."' \ LJI
m CA
a
�.
-
1
Z rn
71
i r
m
ti-
.a Ew
r _
Y x C _ram ✓ � �- �� - �_. `:��� i� � �'
b-61
20
Other factors considered in the proposals as shown in the Plan for Education
and Recreation facilities are the age characteristics of the future population.
It is assumed that age group ratios will be similar to those of today:
20,000 under five e ears of age
g
15,660 five to nine years of age
13,920 ten to fourteen ,years of age
�:. 10,150 fifteen to nineteen years of age
66,845 twenty to sixty years of age
17,545 sixty years and over
145,000 Total
The Plan shows only major jor o spaces and parks. A system of neighbor-
hood and community parks as well as a series of neighborhood and community
y centers must be developed to provide the full complement of active and passive
recreation facilities required by various age groups. Tables 3 and 4 serve
as a guide for future planning in the Local Planning Areas.
The City of Kent already conducts an excellent recreation program, and is
actively engaged in park acquisition. These programs and acquisitions should
be guided by the following general objectives and policies;
1. As a minimum, future park and recreation facilities shall be in
accordance with the standards of the National Recreation Associ-
ation as shown in Table 3.
2. The natural amenities of the Kent Planning Area shall be preserved
to the maximum possible extent.
3. The banks of the Green River shall remain accessible to the public
for active or passive recreation by whatever means are available
to the City or other public agencies, i.e. , through purchase,
dedications, easements, etc. (This is further justified by the
State Park Department's program for the preservation of the
Greer_ River Gorge).
4. The continuing development of flood plain easements for
recreational use as currently programmed by the Department
of Fish and Game shall be encouraged.
5. The right-of-ways of high voltage electric transmission lines
r shall be made accessible for passive and active recreational use
wherever possible.
6. Future planning shall take into account historic sites and
buildings. These shall be integrated into future developments
in the Kent Planning Area.
4
4
L
6 I
21
TABLE 3
RECOMMENDED STANDARDS FOR RECREATION AREAS AND FACILITIES
FOR THE KENT PLANNING AREA 1968-1988
(Based on standards of the National Recreation Association)
NATIONAL ACRES TOTAL ACRES TOTAL ACRES
RECREATION EXISTING NEEDED NEEDED
RECREATION AREAS STANDARDS 1968 (A) IN 1968 (B) IN 1988 (C)
* Minor Parks 6.00 acres/1000 persons 195 222 870
** Major Parks 6.25 acres/1000 persons 20 231 906
215 453 1776
NATIONAL NUMBER SHOULD TOTAL NUMBER
RECREATION RECREATION EXISTING HAVE NEEDED
FACILITIES STANDARDS 1968 (A) IN 1968 (B) IN 1988 (C)
Swimming Pools 1 pool/15,000 persons None 2-3 10
Baseball
Diamonds l diamond/6,000 persons 5 6 24
Tennis Courts 1 court/2,000 persons 8 19 23
Softball
Diamonds 1 diamond/3,000 persons 2 12 45
Golf Course
(18 Hole) 1 course/50,000 persons None 1 3
Handball Courts 1 court/10,000 persons None 4 15
Neighborhood
Centers 1 center/5,000 persons 1 7 29
Community
Centers 1 center/20,000 persons None 2 7
* Minor Parks include playgrounds, playfields and school areas
** Major Parks is over 50 acres or a green belt and trail system
(A) Includes school acres and facilities
(B) Based on 1968 estimated population in Kent Planning Area (37,217)
(C) Based on 1988 estimated population in Kent Planning Area (145,000)
22
Table 4
POPULATION OF LOCAL PLANNING AREAS
1968 1988
LOCAL PLANNING ESTIMATED ESTIMATED
AREAS POPULATION POPULATION
A 200 3,563
B 1,419 3,102
C 2,58o 7,8o9
D 1,178 7,000
E 1,676 4,973
F 760 6,Too
G- l,ol4 3,010
H 1,584 5,636
I 430 2,900
1 232 3,100
K 1,4o9 4,000
L 1,650 4,000
M 765 6,000
N 1,531 7,000
0 354 4,o89
P 490 4,400
Q 1,366 7,o62
R 1,445 4,320
S 3,544 4,915
T 2,080 5,000
U 1,620 9,600
V 980 3,400
W 637 3,boo
x 1,343 3,434
Y 841 3,88o
Z 898 7,351
OUTSIDE OF
LOCAL PLAN- 5,191 15,556
NING AREAS
TOTAL 37,217 145,000
LU
0 U
LL.
JL 4t )p
Cc
A
LU
LU
E
LU w
IV
z
N
cm
0
..........
�41
11
..........
0
Zo.
LLJ
mod, q
z
CL
4- 0
77 -Z
le
040
7
Cl
0
ca
z
0
0 uj
z Ix
0 LLA
23
Chapter IV
CIRCULATION
The circulation element of this Plan describes a traffic system designed
`- to provide convenience and efficiency in the movement of people and goods.
The circulation system is graphically illustrated in the "Circulation" Plan
z_ comprising part of this chapter.
The Plan addresses itself only to the major traffic circulation system.
` Minor streets are subordinate to the streets and highways shown in the Plan,
and they are more appropriately treated in the City's subdivision code and
- other development Plans.. Scale alone precludes their inclusion in the
Comprehensive Plan.
Although the Plan implicitly assumes that the private automobile will continue
to be the primary transportation mode in the Kent Planning Area and in other
parts of the Region, it recognizes the importance of existing rail transporta-
tion for the growing industrial areas of the Green River Valley. The details
of spur lines serving large industrial tracts are not shown on the Plan, but
the need for them is recognized and encouraged as an integral part of the
Valley's industrial development.
This Plan also recognizes the desirability of developing an efficient mass
transportation system. Therefore, the "Circulation" Plan includes a rapid
transit line as recommended by DeLeuw Cather & Company in its report to METRO
in 1967 as part of a rapid transit system for the Seattle Metropolitan Area.
Finally, the Circulation Plan graphically identifies existing and proposed
streets and highways. Proposed freeways such as the Eastside Freeway are
shown on the map although it is not yet officially designated as part of the
— State Highway System. Moreover, the alignment or routing of such freeways
is not exact, nor can it be until route hearings are held by the State Highway
Commission. The Plan assumes the approximate locations and the Planning
Commission approves and recommends the general locations of streets and high-
ways as shown in this Plan.
Definitions
Freeway
A divided, high capacity trafficway designed for through-traffic,
having full access control and separation of crossing movements.
Expressway
A divided trafficway designed for through-traffic having partial
access control and grade separations at major intersections.
24
Collector Highway
A highway providing access to and from freeways or expressway and
connecting major centers of traffic generation.
Arterial Street
A trafficway funneling traffic between large traffic generators
and collector highways.
Scenic Drive
A road used by sightseeing, slow-moving traffic and providing space
for turnouts and parking.
Interchange
Trafficways that intersect at separate grade levels and have full
ingress/egress to each other.
Grade Separation
Trafficways that intersect at separate grade levels with no ingress
or egress to each other.
Needs. Studies of the major circulation needs in the Kent Planning Area show
that there is a need to:
1. Minimize travel distance and travel time wherever possible.
2. Provide separate automobile and truck routes in this City.
3. Provide offstreet parking areas, adequate in size and number,
to serve their function of freeing the streets in Kent for the
unrestricted movement of traffic.
4. Separate automobile traffic from pedestrian traffic, particularly
in the downtown section. This need has been recognized in pro-
posed plans for redevelopment of the central business district.
Objectives. It is an objective in this element of the Plan to:
1. Develop an arterial system that will encourage fast, through-
traffic to use arterial streets on the boundaries of neighbor-
hoods and discourage through-traffic within neighborhoods.
2. Provide streets and arterials that will meet City and State
standards.
3. Minimize traffic congestion.
4. Provide routes for truck traffic and for through-traffic that
will not conflict with local traffic.
5. Develop offstreet parking areas that will be adequate to
provide free movement of traffic on city streets.
6. Provide trafficways that will have the least conflict with
schools and with home-to-school movements
25
Policies
1. The City of Kent shall take all such reasonable steps within its
power to secure adequate right-of-way for streets and roads over
which it has jurisdiction.
2. Circulation routes shall have adequate reserved rights-of-way to
accommodate future as well as existing traffic volumes.
3. All parts of the circulation system shall be scaled to the func-
tion they are to perform in conformance with the density and
Ltotal population of an area and its related land use requirements.
4. Trafficways in the Kent Comprehensive Plan shall be coordinated
Lwith County, State, and neighboring cities.
5. Major arterials shall be located on community boundaries, where
possible, and always on neighborhood boundaries.
L 6. Secondary arterials shall be located on neighborhood boundaries
and shall be located where they can collect and distribute traffic
from major arterials to less important streets, or directly to
traffic destinations.
7. Elimination of grade crossings on main line railroad tracks shall
be encouraged in order to reduce losses due to traffic delays
and accidents, to increase the efficiency of railroad operation,
and to reduce inconvenience, danger and annoyance to the public.
8. The City of Kent should adopt street standards patterned after
those in Table 3-1, "Street Design Standards", page 51 of the
1964 King County Comprehensive Plan.
9. This Plan proposes that sidewalks be built in close vicinity to
each school in Kent, to provide safe home-to-school routes for
children; pedestrian malls be built as designed in the redeveloped
central business district to separate pedestrians and automobiles.
Proposals. The Circulation system proposed for the Kent Planning Area is
described in the list of existing and proposed trafficways. The list includes
general right-of-way standards, number of moving lanes and anticipated daily
traffic volumes.
tlj
X
A H
W FrJ Z cn rn w H F-3 (V c-, td FrJ c-+ x Cn o0 0-\-7 c., N N N N A - t� x bd N N x ttr-y( 0 Lz7
(D H• Fi H a H• N :r• V1 W cD O W cD a O �N W N N O 000 w (D W H• cD -1 F H• t=1 +i A) A) 0
a O W 0 (D (D 4--O O'\ M O Ir 0) (D H• c+ c+ Z a O Oo N O OD H 0) 0) 04 ::l N N H 0 O 0) H e+ �
' C CORD C FN� E C+ Irr Fi c+ O H Fi O x ] �c+ ' CL (D c+ c+ 'l c+ c+ A ct c+ a• O 1 c+ 1-" 1-3 0) cr H N f4
p a (D c+ a (D ,'v U! P' �3• P. p a• ti £ O N �3- ct O U) O cD ►! U]
OC Fi H UN 0 0 A c+0 cn 11 a Fi AAA C C W a _Q W F.d 1 W C4 0)
m O w C C+ 0 O m �'' A Cn 4 C C En to cn to W to W W C4 v 1 Fs C a c+
c+ Fi A C zn c+ (D cD m c+ c+ c+ c+ O y H F- w c+ cq x W cD It A) trJ
0 O m SD 1-1 0Oa O C (D c+ y - P.
O ¢ w. cn ti W aCnO (D 9 pW, (D • N COD (mD N m (mD a (HD CCDD � W O `Z 0 I•-' 4jN (D I'd W
H Ffi 0 cC Ft • W c+ CD (D c+ Cn to ccDy, c0+• c0+ c0+ N� y �C tC a co Oo 00 cD (D cD Oa
Fi s Fi P, N (D X c+ 1 N Cn x x �+, Fi � a � (DD p) \tl iCa 0
n Cam]
(D O M H) O Ft v N Fi x c+ . . . . N a, cr v c+ a W H. Fj (D H4
0) a Fi C a 1-1Fi i " m 000 c+ cD +y FY ti a" Fi -1' (D (D (D SL oq 04 O cD CO cn XLTJ A)
0 m 0 O li c+ c+ a w 0 0 0 0 0 0 c+ (+ (+ 0. 0+ a c+ c+ Fd A 0
wxa waxao £ :• 0a0 aaaac+ £ EEcorn £ E 0 " ►s F4
0 (D co a cD 7C " (D a ::V cD (D (D c+ c+ Al W N (D (D rn
W '.3' x cn t:s ri (D c+ (D (D P. p" cn U] U? cD (D N y Fs c•4 c4 01(D N 0)
1 � H• 1 a (D c+ c+ p7 yc O (D (D cam+ cx+ 00)) L'
C c+ N C ct ^Y In w I " 0 a c+ H N F� c+ W c+
Fi (D I cD F-' (D 1 c+ (D a C ~l (D 1 00 H 00(D r- � N 0) 0) 's 0 4
0 0 t7 O N CO 7" 1 d H• (D 0 0 0 71 O N 0 a 0) 0) 0 U1 a Fi H
a cD c+ A) C M c+ 0) a O W c+ c+ c+ A.. 0) CA A. a' cr O cD O C�
0) ::E: O• :� a (D O �r £ A 0 �3' ::5' �Y (D (D (D (D (D
C+ O W Ooq rn a n�: n (D C 04 P, HH A (+ c+
.�• H• :7z 1�4 c+ H- F rn O Fi (D H c+ c+ c+ H F+ 4 £ £ (D I F f�
(D :1 0 0 0 (D (+ H- O rn • (D O O O c+ (D (D (D £ W C cn
(D P.
c+ (D t4 O a' )-i 0 CA c+ ce O Z W • cD (D (D 0) W
W ':s 0 W 0) H• W (D (D M M c+ rn C] W O O �j d 03 c+ H
CD (D W ::S a (D 0) 1 (D 0 w • 11 • W 0 0 rn c+ £ H
CCD Fw W +3 0 F,.(-1 0 (D c+ 4 (D O O Sr a A. • c+ Oo E W (D
(D O a• (A O W 0) W w W c+ x W H 02 N 0) a' O A) Fi cy
O P W 0 O p a d O H (D 0. \,D 0) N Co A) 0 W cD c+ Fi f3.
CL O F1 0 a w R. W F-' C 0 O\ 1 Oo cD a k a of
W 0) 0 p. (D H• c+ c+ ct 4 c+ H R (L 9L E c+ Fi
c+ C)• c+ ;d c+ o W H C4 W I O �• W � H cD A c+ O 0
Q O 0 0 0 z . -P- 0) C i Y "c tm] c+ 0) C O
O c+ W c+ 00 O t=J F3 (D � H F.d cD W W c+ (D [�
Fi c+ O Gb H F'3' c+ c+ Z X H• 0) (D (D 0 0) 0) (D • A) N
a' ;U 01 E 0 �3' c+'d c+ 0) C-4 W c+ c+ C W 0) W
c+ (D N O c-+ Fi a :9 c+ R tli W rn Fj c+ 0)
(D 0) O ttJ C C W F' • N c+
O F' {~ C2. C1. �] ¢) CA H• C x SD W CA H C
�_N C+ A c+ 'd F-' F-' (+ cD ¢) OV W x
0 c+ or C Q, £ ct cD I-J 11 H H cC a FJ (D
•lD A `-4 N O (HD 0)) cC � � x ¢ CD (C+
U) 4 (D Fly cei 0) H H' tj cy'
(p (D p, rn (D c+ c+ O E = M F'09 M c+
cf R. H• cC
at H• ,y 4 rn U) O OR w c W oq
�
e ¢ • • £ SE1) tx SD g
0 ((DD
C4 C4~' O U) +3 O m cC � FF- cC £
rU cn N ¢ C+ W N tC CD cC N
14
c+ c+ N
0) ►' fi W O A Oq
cG 0 O W (D £
0 a O oq m ca
• • £
W N cH+
0
N (D
\n (D
x
(D
W
W H• ro
�. 09 111
CD �r 0
d c+Fd
1 O
NNNN 0 0)
00 0o rn o0 00 00 00 00 0o rn o a,o -oo 00 0)Oo 0 00 00 00 00 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 8080 pp O �-p- p -p- p po 0 0 0 -� -p- Ppo pp -p- pp 0000000
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
4 H.
H.
� Fi•
a
c+
o
IV N N -p7- 10 -P- � +-P'• � I -;:7- _p- _- _p- �-p3 �P' � 1 1 1 1 1 CD a
00000000 04
Cv
H N F� I-.•i H F� F-' F� H F' H H F�W -�� o ta-F
0 01 N co�7 O-,00 0�rn 0 01 O oo O0 O0 Oo N N O m co O O O N O O 00 ' 0 A
0 000000 00000 00000 00000 00p0 •
g000 (D N-
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 0 00000 000
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000 0 00 0 0 O C 0 0 0 00000 0000
W 1 (D
0
a
o to
o H51)
� H•
0o H
9z 00C.4
'27
The following is a list of existing and proposed interchanges and grade
separations.
t
A. Interchanges
L.
Valley Freeway (SR 167) at the following locations
- 130Lh, 212L', 228Lh
- proposed Cross-valley Expressway
- 277L"
- proposed Eastside Freeway
Interstate #5 Freeway the interchanges are installed and in
use.
- Eastside Freeway
Eastside Freeway at the following locations
- Interstate #5
- West Valley Highway
- Valley Freeway
- East Valley Highway
South 272nd, 240Lh St. , 208t St.
- Petrovitsky Road vicinity
A- Cross-valley Expressway at the following locations
- Meeker Street - Reith Road
- Valley Freeway
- East Valley Highway
- Benson Road extended southerly
- SE 272nd St.
B. Grade Separations
Where not already in existence, grade separations, with no ingress or
or egress from the freeways or expressways, are proposed at all rail-
road crossings and at the following points:
Valley Freeway
i
- Fourth Ave.
- James Street
- Smith Street
- Meeker Street
Eastside Freeway
- Extension of Benson Road
- 124t Ave. S.E. , 256t St., S.E. 192nd
00
cc
IL
sommomwooffofte
Is
ile il iiii
+ T
cx
7z (D
-k7 1H
128
r
Min
On wo a
C�l
X 0
U- to U
--.A
28
Chapter V
F
�J THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ITS IMPLEMENTATION
F
The Comprehensive Plan is a guide to future development. To be an effective
L. guide, it must be implemented. Traditionally, the zoning ordinance and the
subdivision code have been considered the primary vehicles for such imple-
mentation. They will continue to play an important role in shaping the
physical form and the character of the City. There are, however, additional
vehicles for implementing the Plan. It should be recognized that a dis-
cussion of implementation is, in effect, a commitment to a program for con-
tinuing planning for the City Council as well as the Planning Commission.
r-
The priority of the steps outlined below may change as the City's needs and
growth patterns change, but all of the steps must be taken, and soon, if
the Comprehensive Plan is to have any significance.
1. Zoning Ordinance. The present zoning ordinance needs to be replaced
or drastically amended. The ordinance should more precisely reflect the
general land use recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. A new zoning
F ordinance should include a provision for "Planned Unit Development" which
permits more flexible arrangement of buildings and lot shapes than the rigid
set-back requirements of the present ordinance; such a provision should also
offer incentives for the creation of greater open space in developments than
is presently achieved. The ordinance should also specify "performance"
e
standards for various types of land uses, especially industrial land use.
This will require taking into account advances in technology which, in many
cases, make modern industry much less objectionable than those which were in
existence when zoning first came into vogue.
Planned Unit Development and performace standard provisions will, however,
require staff of sufficient size and competence for effective administration;
it will also demand more sophisticated review of individual projects on the
part of the planning cammission and city council.
2. Subdivision Ordinance. Kent's rapid development may mean that a new
subdivision ordinance deserves higher priority than a new zoning code.
The present ordinance is particularly weak in its procedural requirements
and is, therefore, difficult to administer. Since the subdivision of land
includes the creation of new streets as well as new building sites, the
adequacy of the ordinance is critical for the community as a whole as well
as for the particular area being platted.
3. Capital Improvement Program. The provision of public facilities con-
stitutes the huge capital investment required of the city and other public
agencies. The need for public facilities is generally at least two years
ahead of the revenues to pay for them. Therefore, programming of these
investments of public funds, indicating the priorities, and identifying the
sources of funds, is crucial if the city is to have any hope of achieving
the standards and development objectives described in the Comprehensive Plan.
The Planning Commission should be the instigator and the coordinator for a
Capital Improvement program. A six-year arterial plan is already required
of communities sharing in state collected gas tax funds. Other public fac-
ilities should have the same care in capital planning, even if no superior
government specifically requires it.
4. Mandatory Referral. As a matter of policy, the City Council should
require that all public improvements by any governmental agency in the plan-
ning area be referred to the City Planning Commission for review and comment.
In particular, the planning commission should be prepared to indicate if
specific projects are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
5. Periodic Review of the Comprehensive Plan. The Plan must be reviewed
by the planning commission and the city council. Initially this should be
done on an annual basis. In view of the numerous areas which this Plan has
not treated in the depth they deserve, frequent and regular review should
initially focus on these sections which need strengthening. Moreover, popu-
lation projections and land use requirements will change. A city is not a
static entity; nor should its plan be. This does not mean that the Plan
should be changed just for the sake of change or for the limited interest
of the few.
Among other factors to be considered in greater depth in future review of
the Plan shall be the geologic, hydrologic and seismic characteristics of
the planning area and their implications for future development of the area.
30
6. Coordination Between City Departments. Coordination between city depart-
ments becomes increasingly critical as the city grows in population and land
area. Steps have already been taken at the administrative level of the City
`- to facilitate inter-departmental communication and to improve working relation-
ships, but the Plan itself should be used as a vehicle to coordinate plans and
programs of various departments.
7. Coordination Between Autonomous Governments. The City has long recognized
that a community cannot be effectively planned except within the context of
r--
the region in which it is situated. The City of Kent should continue to play
a leading role in coordinating the activities of various jurisdictions. The
r City's participation in the work of the Valley Regional Planning Commission
and the Puget Sound Governmental Conference should be continued to assure that
productivity and tangible results are derived from the expenditure of funds
,�.. and man-hours that are being invested.
r
8. Review of Policies on Annexation and Utility Extensions. The geographic
area of the City will probably continue to grow. Municipal services constitute
a strong incentive for property owners to annex their land to a city. More-
over, Kent is already providing water service to areas as far as three miles
beyond the city limits. Should the City continue to do so? Should the City
require annexation of lands prior to extending these types of services? Is
the leap-frogging of residential development justified simply because municipal
services are available? On the other hand, if the City of Kent does not pro-
vide these services, will the availability of Seattle water and Metro sewers
encourage new incorporations? And are such incorporations in the best interests
of the City of Kent? These are some of the questions to which city officials
must address themselves if the Comprehensive Plan is to be relevant to the
area's future development
9. The Comprehensive Plan. The map following this page, the Comprehensive
Plan, incorporates the proposals for major land use, circulation, open
space and certain public facilities such as schools and illustrates their
interrelationships.
All of the other maps contained in the preceding chapters comprise elements
of the Comprehensive Plan which because of practical considerations such as
scale and readability cannot be shown on the final map. The other maps (as
well as the text and tables) are, however, an integral part of the Comprehensive
Plan.
r
LU
�Lj Z
LU
LU
wh�
71, 0
0 m
..........
...... .. .......
...........
...... . .........
... ......
X
............
SIM
. ..........
cc
L
C
L
L
C
L
C
L
L
L
C
L
L
L
L
L
L
C
C
L
L
C
C
C
_ 1-3
p ca Ul p' ¢ O '� `. Co (D
�' N• ct 0 H 0 Eg O F�- ::s N• (D
(ol D 0 G7 ~ F' ~h � (Dc+ �
(A F'• U1 H F-' Q� 0 cam+
n :rt. F' F-
t� v F
F. ¢, (D
c+- ()I; N
Cl) ri)
H
N F•' N O
O
H
v N l!7 O> H N H Zn
C.,
N H
� a v
F4
O N O-N H IHV d, Ol p 0
Fd F4
H
H (D ttFJ
00 H
�O N N -mil OHo W�7 � m O
W ?i P� :2i
N H � N
�
x -i F3
00 , O y
O N ��+
lIl lNrl _W O UN p' w O ti
N
H
rS
N
F-' O N _Q\-D H n H
W W 00 F
v (D
H
N N H F-3
N VNi �ON
O\
VWi '�J
H H H I O F' W N _�O 01\
W �
Oo
v
ON I
O O � N N N
�O W_7 d>
W
H
O
v
W I H
� N VHi Oo Oho c0+
�O Vt \-n O fy
H
O
Oo
N
H v
O O d
O H �O H 01 F-' � (D
O d> H W N O (D
c+ �:s
ct
H
Zit
i
32
aQ
Cd
0 +) "O O I O
U P O
N r-I N r-I O
N 4-1
(14 o
L.®
Cd co H ( H
o H H H H l0
H
00
H I I H Pf1 I 11\
E-I
F
O Kl I I N H I L0
ON
H
U
r� 00 -t
E-1 H
H O �ri
CYN
co H to I N I I 00
ON
A rs H �0 N -�-
a rI
as a m
Cd
0 4-)
� U) 0) O
H O w ON
E-H 0
U W �
a co LC
H I H f�1 I I �
_-- co
U I
L ' L`
r`` ' I (
o ON
o H
I I I H I ( rl
a �
ON I I I I I t o
o a
.H H o H H r-I •rl
co H U H •H r-II co O
U 0 �+ r'i £a Cd U H U •r-I Gti EH
•ri P +) cd -P f-i Sti cd fA E I
41 ;s U] •rl U] d N •rI O cd •ri
4-4 U) rl •d rl E I~ H
O [a S. N S: ;s 0 N O N 0
N Cd rUIH H 0U U -i�¢1 U IH O U) 0 SLI 0 co O I'i O
Narho4' 41) 4-) bO 4-3 04' -ri -'
L
33
B I B L I O G R A P H Y
A. DOCUMENTS AND REFERENCES USED IN THE PREPARATION OF THE PLAN
Published Material:
1. Develo ment Plan, Kent, Washington, John Graham & Company,
July 15, 1966
2. Kent Zoning Proposal, John Graham & Company, July 15, 1966
3. Green River Valley Transportation Study, V.I.S.T.A.
4. Comprehensive Plan, 1957, Ivan Bloch & Associates
5. Zoning Ordinance #1071, City of Kent, Harlan Nelson &
Associates, Oswego, Oregon, August 1960
6. Eastside Freeway - Auburn Vicinity to Bothell Vicinity,
Washington State Highway Commission Legislative Study, Sept. 1968
7. King County Comprehensive Plan, King County Planning Dept. , 1964
8. King County Zoning(Publications)
9. Park Site Selection Study, King County Planning Dept. , 1963
10. Ten Year Program For Open Space Acquisition, King County
Planning and Park Departments, March 1967
11. Major Streets & Highways Plan, Office of the King County
Engineer and King County Planning Department, 1964
12. Report of a Planning Project for Kent, Washington, Ivan Bloch
& Associates, July 1959
13. Puget Sound Transportation Plan, Puget Sound Governmental
Conference, October 1967
14. Report on a Comprehensive Plan for the Seattle Metropolitan
Area, DeLeuw, Cather & Company, October 19 7.
Unpublished Material:
1. Kent Annexation Map
2. Kent School District Map
3. Bonneville Power Administration Transmission Line Map for
King County.
4. Kent Post Office Service Area Map
5. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (METRO) Facilities Map
6. United State Geological Survey Maps
7. Aerial Topographic Maps, Walker & Whiteford, Inc. , Dec. 1964
8. Kent Population Map(by precints) , April 1968
9. City of Kent Existing Land Use Map, 1967
10. Sanitary Sewer Vicinity Map
11. Six-year Arterial Street Improvement Plan Map
34
B. OTHER DOCUMENTS AND REFERENCES RECOMMENDED IN FUTURE PLANNING
1. Project Open S ace, 35 Volumes, Puget Sound Governmental
Conference, 1965
2. Transportation Study, Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Area,
Lewis-Redford Engineers, Washington State Department of Highways,
January 1969
3. East Valley Health Welfare & Recreation Study, Council of
Planning Affiliates, 1967, Seattle
4. A Survey of Zoning Ordinances, Puget Sound Governmental Conference
5. A Survey of Building Codes, Puget Sound Governmental Conference
6. A Survey of Subdivision Codes, Puget Sound Governmental Conference
7. A Study of South Area Park & Athletic Fields, David Jensen
Associates, October 1968
r
8. Seattle Comprehensive Plan Map
9. Green River Flood Control Zone District - Soil Conservation
Service
10. Project Map - East Side Green River Watershed - Soil Conservation
Service
11. Sketch of Historic Sites by Clarence Shoff in files of Kent
Planning Department
C. GENERAL REFERENCES
L 1. Kent Aerial Photos, Puget Sound Regional Transportation Study,
June 30, 1965
L2. City of Kent Aerial Topographic Maps, 1" = 2001 , contour interval 5' ,
December 1964
3. Zoning Maps:
(a) DesMoines
(b) Renton
(c) Auburn
(d) Kent
f
L
A C K N 0 W L E D G E M E N T S
Acknowledgement is gratefully given to the following
past members of the Council and Planning Commission
who have given much of their time and effort toward
completion of this Plan.
FORMER COUNCIL MEMBERS
Owen Buxton Dave Mooney
Dave Durand Ted Strain
FORMER PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS
Robert Coen M.G. (Bud) Poole,
A. J. Ladner Planning Director
Gordon Magness
Acknowledgement is also given to the following
individuals and agencies for their cooperation and
assistance in developing this Plan.
KENT SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION
C. W. Iles, Superintendent of Schools
Don Orr, Facilities Planner
OTHER SCHOOL DISTRICTS
Auburn
Highland
Federal Way
Maple Valley
Renton
PLANNING AGENCIES
Auburn Planning Department
Renton Planning Department
King County Planning Department
Puget Sound Governmental Conference
Valley Regional Planning Commission
OTHER AGENCIES
King County Highway Department
Washington State Highway Department
Association of Washington Cities
Kent Chamber of Commerce
Kent Library Board
Kent News-Journal
Kent Park Board
Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (METRO)
PARTICIPATING STAFF
Westly J. Hendrickson, Planner
Lin Davis, Secretary