No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3222 Ordinance No . 3222 (Amending or Repealing Ordinances) CFN-377 = Comprehensive Plan Passed - 4/18/1995 Adoption of Kent's Comprehensive Plan Amended by Ords. 3412; 3436; 3437; 3440, 3441, 3442; 3472, 3473, 3482; 3504; 3505;3544;3551;3558;3589;3590;3995 1 ORDINANCE NO. oL , 3a$ AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the O City of Kent, Washington, regarding the 5 adoption of the City of Kent Comprehensive 3o Plan. 3 WHEREAS, in 1990 the Washington State Legislature adopted the Growth Management Act (GMA) , which was subsequently I amended by the legislature in 1991 and 1993 ; and O WHEREAS, the GMA requires jurisdictions throughout the State of Washington, including the City of Kent, to prepare and adopt comprehensive plans which contain, at a minimum, elements relating to land use, transportation, capital facilities, housing, and utilities; and which must be both internally consistent and consistent with comprehensive plans from surrounding jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the GMA, the City of Kent began work on its comprehensive plan in 1990, and this work included the adoption of Framework Planning Goals and the establishment of an Interim Urban Growth Area boundary in 1992, and adoption of development regulations protecting critical areas and the establishment of an Interim Potential Annexation Area boundary in 1993 ; and WHEREAS, the GMA requires that jurisdictions shall provide for early and continuous public participation in the development and amendment of comprehensive plans (RCW 36 . 70A. 140) and accordingly, the City of Kent has undertaken an extensive public participation process for the comprehensive plan, including the establishment of several citizen advisory committees, the Kent Community Forum on Growth Management and Visual Preference Survey in 1992 , neighborhood open houses in 1993 , and a second Community Forum in 1994 ; and WHEREAS, the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requires that comprehensive plans be reviewed as to their potential environmental impact, and the City of Kent issued a Determination of Significance on the comprehensive plan and conducted three Scoping meetings in October, 1993 , prepared and distributed a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) in July, 1994 , and, based on comments received on the DEIS, issued a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) in January, 1995; and WHEREAS, based on citizen input received, and the policy direction established in state, regional, and local growth management planning goals, the City of Kent prepared a Draft Comprehensive Plan, dated July 18 , 1994, and made this draft plan available for public review and input; and WHEREAS, in ten public meetings and hearings conducted between July and December, 1994, the Kent Planning Commission reviewed the Draft Comprehensive Plan dated July 18, 1994 , the Comprehensive Plan Map, the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) , the land use policies, the capital facilities element, the transportation element, and on December 12 , 1994 , the Commission voted to recommend adoption of the Draft Comprehensive Plan as amended by the Planning Commission to the Kent City Council; and WHEREAS, the Mayor transmitted the Planning Commission' s recommendation on the Draft Comprehensive Plan to 2 the City Council in January, 1995, and that upon receipt of the draft plan the Council referred it to the City Council Planning Committee to conduct such meetings as deemed necessary to develop a recommendation for consideration by the full City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council Planning Committee conducted three public meetings in February, March, and April, 1995 during which they heard public testimony and deliberated on the draft plan as submitted by the Planning Commission, and considered further amendments thereto, and on April 4 , 1995, the Committee developed a recommendation for the full City Council consisting of the Draft Comprehensive Plan dated July 18, 1994 , the Land Use Plan Map dated April 11, 1995, the Policy Revisions dated April 4 , 1995, the Capital Facilities Element dated December 12, 1994, the Transportation Element dated April 4 , 1995, and the Non- motorized Vehicles Policy dated April 18 , 1995 ; and WHEREAS, the City Council Planning Committee recommended that the City' s land use map designations be named consistently with those land use map designations used by King County where the unincorporated areas of King County overlap with the City' s comprehensive plan boundaries; WHEREAS, on April 18, 1995, the City Council reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Planning Committee on the Draft Comprehensive Plan as amended; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS : 3 Section 1 . Based on work proposed by City Staff, Consultants, Citizen input received at public hearings, and the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements, the City adopts the Kent Comprehensive Plan recommended by the Planning Committee and consisting of the following documents : 1 . The Draft Comprehensive Plan dated July 18, 1994 , identified as Exhibit A hereto, which exhibit is on file with the City Clerk' s Office and incorporated by reference as if set forth herein in full, and 2 . The Land Use Plan Map dated April 11, 1995, attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated into the Draft Comprehensive Plan, and 3 . The Policy Revisions dated April 4 , 1995 attached hereto as Exhibit C and incorporated into the Draft Comprehensive Plan, and 4 . The Capital Facilities Element dated December 12 , 1994 attached hereto as Exhibit D and incorporated into the Draft Comprehensive Plan, and 5 . The Transportation Element dated December 12 , 1994 attached hereto as Exhibit E, and incorporated into the Draft Comprehensive Plan, and 6 . The Non-motorized Vehicles Policy dated April 18, 1995 attached hereto as Exhibit F and incorporated into the Draft Comprehensive Plan. 4 Section 2 . Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance 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 ordinance. Section 3 . Effective Date . This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. q�:.,�_ �� J WHITE, MAYOR ATTEST: BRENDA JACOB , CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: ROVER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTEOR�NEY 5 PASSED day of 1995 . APPROVED day of 1995 . PUBLISHED day of 1995 . I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated. a (SEAL) BRENDA JACO R, CITY CLERK gma.ord 6 Draft / I tea . � /% ' G, .r I - j /��+/ Y� P, 1 / ,t', r y > � ,� r� ~•����M� .. �i��� �'�'���,/y.'a _ �r� ♦/,I,I�i �� ��r / . fu rf. / �' /IT , -� �/a/,,.rlr��4�1� �� 1�� � I rr /�l 7/IMf �l� r��% Ml .! .!;�/ �/Ire/' Y �• .,r►� 3, ri . by ' WW1� •vl�/...✓�„♦4,/iS' //f 'f'N'� 'r';+�ml ., �:� � /` /�/ � Ii,I�i �ir�����ldlµ�.��b! r� ��li�/ � ,��tll� '�� � /' s✓`S' /ii///.;i h.�✓� P. " 'r , �/-l�/ / /��J. t♦rl lA-7lµda4'" �i !:n��rnPoi!%�,;. S .r�'a1 / �/,'. .k �,: MG} ...1/W1gPrri��Fi Imo' 1n,,%A�rGIt/✓�!�77�T�nIr✓+ /ii � r � � ea i s - - .xi rOYY.r�� i�.r4���WI�U�OAYd�IyiYW+�•hlhmm■�' or�w-_ .'. /r �Y� ����y� � � .i M������ \.,Kent Comprehensive Plan EXHIBIT A �!!��'' ✓/M _ 117, � /711gNM2/�/rA. 1.� ♦i.♦1l�leh��A//,C'//�slr r ��/'//1y�1 4." rr— Via• r.��. WI qomn �r� ,IjiEEi 'sclfCOj• Q��r ^e _ El ::........... Ei cfjj•j I'll E .' M!"ll ijiiii7iii7 iiE ...... �r EjE.• ;IEEE:iijii ::EEEEEEEEE:i:iEEe.. jEi :E•' ..... :a............... ..... Ei'j:::€:;Eeiiii^��E� MrsROOM \O\ wM' - - - Lrk MWO wI ...••..... •' ��� w*, ,� 1'� iUieelli tie_ 116 _ ........... a Rom; 1. UM MW IN � NON IN . Nis u _ a - • EXHIIT,.L CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED POLICY REVISIONS AND ADDITIONS TO THE DRAFT KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN APRIL 4, 1995 The following amendments and additions have been made by the City Council Planning Committee to the goals and policies in the July 18, 1994 Draft Kent Comprehensive Plan. The Committee's recommended text additions are underlined, while recommended text deletions are lined ou . Please refer to the Executive Proposed Draft Comprehensive Plan for the complete text of each element. KENT PLANNING GOALS URBAN GROWTH 8. The City shall define neighborhoods to foster a strong sense of community. The City and each neighborhood shall cooperatively develop neighborhood plans addressing land use, mobility, parks, sa fet y, and public facilities and services. TRANSPORTATION 1. The City shall develop a sa a transportation network which promotes a variety of mobility options, including private automobile, public transit, bicycling, and walking. HOUSING 3. Encourage an adequate and balanced supply of sa L housing units offering a diversity of size, densities, age, style and cost. Assure that opportunities for a diversity of housing is available to all income levels. PROPERTY RIGHTS 4. The City shall protect the rights of private property owners from arbitrary and discriminatory actions, while continuing to make land use and zoning decisions which regulate the use of land to promote the public health saLeU and general welfare of the citizens of Kent. LAND USE ELEMENT Goal LU-2 - Establish a land use pattern throughout the urban growth area that will facilitate a multimodal transportation system and provide efficient public facilities. Ensure that overall densities in the urban growth area are adequate to support a range of urban services. April 4, 1995 City Council Planning Committee Recommended Goal and Policy Amendments Page 2 Goal LU-5 - Emphasize the importance of good design:historic preservation, and aesthetics for development in the downtown area. Policy LU-5.1 -Require design review for development projects in the downtown area. Review projects for site design, effects upon historic pro ep rties• landscaping design, and pedestrian orientation. Goal LU-8 - The City of Kent adopts a 20-year housing target of 7,500 new dwelling units within the existing city limits. Coordinate with King County through an interlocal agreement on housing targets in the unincorporated area within Kent's potential annexation area. Policy LU-8.1 - Provide in the land use plan adequate land and densities to accommodate both city and county housing targets within the potential annexation area. Average net residential densities throughout the potential annexation area should be at least four units per acre in order to adequately support urban services. FolieyLUIOA Wew maximum flexibility in develepment in single family areas. by per-mitfing planned-iii�z , NATURAL RESOURCES GOALS AND POLICIES The natural environment of the Green River valley and adjacent hillsides provide unique and distinctive character to the City of Kent. The City is identified by the Green River system which consists of the river and associated creeks and wetlands. Some of the creeks in the Green River system, such as Mill Creek, Springbrook Creek, and Garrison Creek, flow through steep ravines. Significant fish and wildlife habitat areas within this system support local and regional fish and wildlife resources. The principal sources of water supply for the City's waters stem Kent Springs, Armstrong Springs and Clark Springs are located in the east hill region of Kent and within the urban growth boundary. In 1985 the City of Kent in conjunction with the establishment of the City stormwater drainage utility, adopted the following water quality goal• "Reduce the environmentally detrimental effects of present and future runoff in order to maintain or improve stream habitat and wetlands, particularly water quality, and protected water-related uses." Since 1986 the Green River Community College has analyzed samples each month from 11 stream locations in Kent for 24 water quality parameters Analysis of the data collected indicates that water quality problems exist at most of the 11 sampling stations The City of Kent Water Quality Program was drafted in 1991, and the Ci1y is presently workingto implement the recommendations of the program. A wellhead protection plan is being prepared for these water sources The plan will identify aquifer recharge areas and propose strategies for protection of aquifers through preservation and protection of groundwater. City Council Planning Committee Recommended Goal and Policy Amendments April 4, 1995 Page 3 Lake Fenwick, Panther Lake, Star Lake, and Lake Meridian are located within the growth area of the City. Since 1980, Kent has completed several projects to protect the water ualityoof Lake Fenwick. The City is currentiv evaluating measures to further improve water qualfty. Native plants and shrubs and mature evergreen and deciduous trees are found throughout the City. Preservation and planting of trees and shrubs on individual properties and in parks and other public spaces will protect and enhance environmental quality. Historically, the commercial agricultural lands in the valley have added to the City's economic support. Protection and enhancement of these natural resources is vital to maintaining a sustainable community. Goal LU-19 - , Coordinate with appropriate individuals and entities to create a long-term, sustainable relationship among natural resource protection,future growth, and economic development through enhancement of wildlife fisheries. and recreational opportunities; protection of cultural resources; protection of water quality in aquifers, lakes, streams, and the Green River; provision of open space and screening to reduce impacts of development;protection of environmentally sensitive areas to preserve life, property, and fish and wildlife habitat; and retention of the unique character and sense of place provided by the City's natural features. Policy LU-19.1 - Provide incentives for environmental protection and compliance with environmental regulations. Foster greater cooperation and education among City staff, developers, and other citizens. Determine the effectiveness of incentives by establishing monitoring programs. Goal LU-22 - Ensure that the City's environmental policies and regulations comply with state and federal environmental protection regulations regarding air and water quality, hazardous materials, and noise, and wildlife and fisheries resources and habitat protection. Demonstrate support for environmental quality in land use plans, capital improvement programs, code enforcement, implementation programs, development regulations, and site plan review to ensure that local land use management is consistent with the City's overall natural resource goals. Policy LU-22.3 - Indemnify the City from damages resulting from development in naturally constrained areas. To the extent possible or feasible require that developers provide to the City accurate and valid environmental information. Policy LU-22.4-Initiate a periodic storm drainage%nvironmental inspection program to ensure e� constant maintenance and upkeep of storm systems and on-going compliance with general environmental processes. City Council Planning Committee Recommended Goal and Policy Amendments April 4, 1995 Page 4 Policy LU-22.5 - Ensure that decisions regarding fundamental site design are made prior to the initiation of land surface modifications. Grade and fill permits which do not include site development plans may be issued by the City where such activities do not disturb sensitive areas such as wetlands. , Goal LU-23 - Protect and enhance water resources for multiple benefits, including recreation, fish and wildlife resources and habitat, flood protection, water supply, and open space. Policy LU-23.3- When jurisdictional boundaries are involved coordinate wetland protection and enhancement plans and actions with adjacent jurisdictions and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. Policy LU-23.5 - On a regular basis, evaluate the adequacy of the existing building setback and stream buffer requirements in relation to goals for water resource and fisheries and wildlife resource protection. When necessary, modify the requirements to achieve goals. Policy LU-23.6 - Coordinate with King County to produce critical area maps of the unincorporated portion of the potential annexation area which are consistent with the City of Kent maps which identify critical areas within the existing city limits Policy LU-23 7- Protect the quality and quantity of ground water used for public water supplies in accordance with the Cily of Kent Water Quality Program recommendations Policy LU-23.8 - Update the City of Kent Hazard Area Development Limitations Map as new information about recharge areas and wellhead protection areas becomes available Goal LU-24 - Ensure that uses, densities, and development patterns on lands adjacent to the shorelines of the Green River are compatible with shoreline uses and resource values, and support the goals and policies of the City of Kent's Shoreline Master Program and the Green- Duwamish Watershed Nonpoint Action Plan. Policy LU-27.4 - Coordinate with King County to provide for purchasing or transferring he development rights of agricultural land identified as having-term commercial significance. TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Policy TR-8.8 - As a means for accommodating new development mode split goals should be established in each of the 22 transportation zones that work towards a 50% increase in transit share by the year 2001, and a 100% increase by the year 2010--within the limitations of the City being able to request service from METRO. April 4, 1995 City Council Planning Committee Recommended Goal and Policy Amendments Page 5 Policy TR-8.9 - Transit priority measures such as "queuelump" lanes "traffic signal Pre- emption", and "transit only lanes"should be incorporated into the QU's Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan, consistent with achieving a significant mode shy away from continued SOV growth. PARKS ELEMENT Policy P&R-17.3 - Where possible in landsMiing parks encourage the use of low maintenance flowering plants, working toward a landscape that is colorfyIyear--round 1 9 ' CHAPTER EIGHT' CAPITAL FACILITIE'ELEMENT EXHIBIT CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT INTRODUCTION The capital facilities element contains a summary of the Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) for the City of Kent. The element consists of the following information: (1) statements of requirements, level-of-service (LOS) standards, guidelines, and criteria that are used to develop and implement the CFP; (2) inventories of existing facilities; (3) maps showing the locations of existing facilities; and (4) a list of proposed capital projects, including a financing plan, future operating costs, and reconciliation of project capacity and LOS standards. The complete CFP and supporting documents are available for review at the City of Kent Planning Department. The CFP is a required element of the City's comprehensive plan, mandated by the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA). The GMA requires cities and counties to approve and maintain a CFP which includes requirements for specific types of capital facilities, LOS standards, financial feasibility, and assurance that adequate facilities will be provided as development occurs. As required by the GMA, the CFP is a 6-year plan for capital improvements that support the City's current and future population and employment growth. It contains LOS standards for each public facility, and requires that new development is served by adequate facilities. The CFP also contains broad goals and specific policies that guide and implement the provision of adequate public facilities. The capital facilities element is the element that makes real the rest of the comprehensive plan. By establishing LOS as the basis for providing capital facilities and for achieving concurrency, the CFP determines the quality of life in the community. The requirement to fully finance the CFP provides a reality check on the vision set forth in the comprehensive plan. The capacity of capital facilities that are provided in the CFP affects the size and configuration of the urban growth area. Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 8-1 r � CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT The purpose of the CFP is to use sound fiscal policies to provide adequate public facilities in a manner consistent with the land use element and at a time concurrent with (or prior to) the impacts of development. These capital facilities propose to achieve and maintain adopted standards for LOS in order to maintain the quality of life for existing and future development. The plan fulfills the GMA requirement for facilities planning; but, in addition, the plan serves as a base for good city management and establishes eligibility for grants and loans. It provides coordination among the City's many plans for capital improvements, including other elements of the comprehensive plan, master plans of departmental service providers, and facilities plans of the state, the region, and adjacent local jurisdictions. Requirements of the Growth Management Act The GMA requires the CFP to identify public facilities that will be required during the six years following adoption of the new plan (1994 through 1999). The CFP must include the location and cost of the facilities, and the sources of revenue that will be used to fund the facilities. The CFP must be financially feasible; in other words, dependable revenue sources must equal or exceed anticipated costs. If the costs exceed the revenue, the City must reduce its level of service, reduce costs, or modify the land use element to bring development into balance with available or affordable facilities. Other requirements of the GMA mandate forecasts of future needs for capital facilities and the use of standards for levels of service of facility capacity as the basis for public facilities contained in the CFP [see RCW 36.70A.020 (12)]. As a result, public facilities in the CFP must be based on quantifiable, objective measures of capacity, such as traffic- volume capacity per mile of road and acres of park per capita. One of the goals of the GMA is to have capital facilities in place concurrent with development. This concept is known as concurrency (also called "adequate public facilities"). In the City of Kent, concurrency requires 1) facilities which serve the development to be in place at the time of development (or for some types of facilities, a financial commitment to be made to provide the facilities within a specified period of time) and 2) facilities which serve the development to have sufficient capacity to serve the development without decreasing LOS below minimum standards adopted in the CFP. The GMA requires concurrency for transportation facilities. The GMA also requires all other public facilities to be "adequate" [see RCW 19.27.097, 36.70A.020, 36.70A.030, 8-2 Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITI9S ELEMENT and 58.17.110]. Concurrency management procedures will be developed to ensure that sufficient public facility capacity is available for each proposed development. After the CFP is completed and adopted as part of the comprehensive plan, the City must adopt development regulations to implement the plan. The development regulations will provide detailed regulations and procedures for implementing the requirements of the plan. Each year, the City must update the CFP. The annual update will be completed before the City's budget is adopted in order to incorporate into the budget the capital improvements from the updated CFP. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS LOS (SCENARIO-DRIVEN) METHOD OF ANALYSIS Explanation of Levels of Service Levels of service usually are quantifiable measures of the amount of public facilities that are provided to the community. Levels of service also may measure the quality of some public facilities. Typically, measures of LOS are expressed as ratios of facility capacity to demand (i.e., actual or potential users). The following chart lists examples of LOS measures for some capital facilities. Type of Capital Facility Sample LOS Measures Corrections Beds per 1,000 population Fire and Rescue Average response time Hospitals Beds per 1,000 population Law Enforcement Officers per 1,000 population Library Collection size per capita Building square feet per capita Parks Acres per 1,000 population Roads and Streets Ratio of actual volume to design Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 8-3 ' S CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT r capacity Schools Square feet per student Sewer Gallons per customer per day Effluent quality Solid Waste Tons (or cubic yards) per capita or per customer Surface Water & River Levees Design storm (i.e., 100-year storm) Runoff water quality Transit Ridership Water Gallons per customer per day Water quality Each of these LOS measures needs one additional piece of information: the specific quantity that measures the current or proposed LOS. For example, the standard for parks might be 5 acres per 1,000 population; but the current LOS may be 2.68 acres per 1,000, which is less than the standard. In order to make use of the LOS method, the City selects the way in which it will measure each facility (i.e., acres, gallons, etc.). It also identifies the amount of the current and proposed LOS standard for each measurement. There are other ways to measure the LOS of many of these capital facilities. The examples in the previous chart are provided to give greater depth to the following discussion of the use of LOS as a method for determining the City's need for capital facilities. Method for Using Levels of Service The LOS method answers two questions in order to develop a financially-feasible CFP. The GMA requires the CFP to be based on standards for service levels that are measurable and financially feasible for the six fiscal years following adoption of the plan. The CFP must meet the City's capital needs for the fiscal years 1994 through 1999. The two questions that must be answered in order to meet the GMA requirements are: (1) What is the quantity of public facilities that will be required by the end of the 6th year (i.e., 1999)? 8-4 Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 r CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES'ELEMENT (2) Is it financially feasible to provide the quantity of facilities that are required by the end of the 6th year (i.e., 1999)? The answer to each question can be calculated by using objective data and formulas. Each type of public facility is examined separately (i.e., roads are examined separately from parks). The costs of all the types of facilities then are added together in order to determine the overall financial feasibility of the CFP. A detailed explaination of the formulas used is contained in the Capital Facilities Plan. One of the CFP support documents, Capital Facilities Requirements, contains the results of the use of this method. Setting the Standards for Levels of Service Because the need for capital facilities is determined largely by the adopted LOS, the key to influencing the CFP is to influence the selection of the LOS standards. LOS standards are measures of the quality of life of the community. The standards should be based on the community's vision of its future and its values. Traditional approaches to capital facilities planning rely on technical experts (i.e., staff and consultants) to determine the need for capital improvements. In the scenario-driven approach, these experts play an important advisory role, but they do not control the determination. Their role is to define and implement a process for the review of various scenarios, to analyze data, and to make suggestions based on technical considerations. The final, legal authority to establish the LOS rests with the City Council because the City Council enacts the LOS standards that reflect the community's vision. The City Council's decision should be influenced by recommendations of the 1) Planning Commission; 2) providers of public facilities (i.e., local government departments, special districts, private utilities, the State of Washington, tribal governments, etc.); 3) formal advisory groups that make recommendations to the providers of public facilities (i.e., community planning groups); 4) the general public through individual citizens and community civic, business, and issue-based organizations that make their views known or are sought through sampling techniques. The scenario-driven approach to developing the LOS standards provides decision-makers and anyone else who wishes to participate with a clear statement of the outcomes of various LOS for each type of public facility. This approach reduces the tendency for decisions to be controlled by expert staff or consultants, opens up the decision-making Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 8-5 y . CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT process to the public and advisory groups, and places the decisions before the City Council. Selection of a specific LOS to be the "adopted standard" ultimately will be accomplished by a 12-step process: (1) The "current" (1993), actual LOS are calculated. (2) Departmental service providers are given national standards or guidelines and examples of LOS from other local governments. (3) Departmental service providers research local standards from City studies, master plans, ordinances, and development regulations. (4) Departmental service providers recommend a standard for the City of Kent's CFP. (5) The first draft of Capital Facilities Requirements forecasts needed capacity and approximate costs of two LOS scenarios (e.g., the 1993 actual LOS and the department's recommended LOS) (6) The City Council reviews and comments on the first draft of Capital Facilities Requirements. (7) The Operations department prepare a follow-up Capital Facilities Level of Service/Cost Options report which identifies five alternative LOS options, or scenarios, to forecast the amount of capital facilities that would be most appropriate for the City of Kent during the 6-year growth period 1994-1999. This report complements Capital Facilities Requirements, which was reviewed with the City Council November 30, 1993, and not only identifies LOS options but also includes specific recommendations from the Operations department.' (8) The City Council reviews and comments on Capital Facilities Level of Service/Cost Options and indicates their preferences for LOS and noncapacity capital projects to be included in the first draft of the CFP. (9) Departmental service providers prepare specific capital improvements projects and estimates of related maintenance and operating costs to support the City Council's preferred LOS and noncapacity projects. (10) The first-draft CFP is prepared using the City Council's preferred LOS and noncapacity projects. The LOS in the first-draft CFP serves as the basis for capital projects, their costs, and a financing plan necessary to pay for the costs. 8-6 Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 CHAPTER EIGHT' CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT (11) The draft CFP is reviewed/discussed during City Council and Planning Commission workshop(s) prior to formal reading/hearing of the CFP by the City Council. (12) The City Council formally adopts LOS as part of the CFP. (13) Every year, as required by the Growth Management Act, department service providers reassess land use issues, level of service standards, and projected revenues to determine what changes, if any are needed. CURRENT FACILITIES INVENTORIES CORRECTIONAL FACILITY The Kent Correction Center is managed by the Kent Police Department. The current inventory of the Correctional Faclity totals 130 beds. The Center is located at 1201 Central in the City. An intergovernmental contract with the Federal Marshall's Office currently commits the City to provide 30 beds for Federal prisoners. The geographic location of the Correctional Facility is found on Figure 8.1. FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES The Kent Fire Department is responsible for delivering fire protectiion and emergency medical services to the City, and to the geographic area within King County fire District #37.The City owns 4 fire stations: Station 71 (south); Station 73 (west); Station 74 (east); and Station 76 (north). Each station is equipped with one fire/aid unit which consists of a pumper truck with emergency medical service/rescue equipment and manpower, and each station has a future capacity for three units. The table below lists each station, fire/aid units in service, total capacity, and average response time: Name of Fire/Aid Units Total Capacity Location Station in Service (Bays) Station 71 1 3 South Station 73 1 3 West Station 74 1* 3 East Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 8-7 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT Station 76 1 3 North *Ladder Truck King County Fire District #37 owns three fire stations: Station 72 (Meridian), with two fire/aid units in service and capacity for three; Station 74 (Covington), with one fire/aid unit and capacity for three, and Station 77 (Kentridge), with one fire/aid unit in service and capacity for two. , The geographic locations of the Fire and Emergency Services facilities are found on Figure 8.1. POLICE/FIRE TRAINING CENTER The Police/Fire Training Center is located on East Hill at 24611 116th Avenue SE. The Center, housed in an 8,000 square foot building, provides audio and visual equipment and other facilities for in-service training for City of Kent police officers and fire fighters. Instruction is conducted by Kent Police and Fire Department personnel, and by nationally known instructors from the International Association of Police Chiefs and the State Fire Service. In addition to providing a facility for training city of Kent personnel, the training center also accomodates a satelite training program sponsored by the Washington State Criminal Justice Training commission. The geographic locations of the police/fire training facilities are found on Figure 8.1. CITY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES - GENERAL GOVERNMENT The City of Kent Operations Department manages several facilities and buildings necessary to the administrative and maintenance funcetions of the City. These include City Hall and the City Council Chambers, leased offices in the Centennial Center, the Municipal Court facility, and City maintenance shops. The table below lists the name, location and capacity of each facility: Name Location Capacity (Square Feet) City Hall 220 4th Ave S 33,100 8-8 Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEBJENT Centennial 400 W Gowe 26,460 Center(Leased) Municipal 302 W Gowe 4,251 Court (Leased) The geographic locations of the City administrative facilities are found on Figure 8.1. CITY ADMINISTRATION OFFICES - POLICE HEADQUARTERS The inventory of City administrative offices for the Police Department headquarters totals 18,000 square feet, and is located at 232 4th Avenue South in downtown Kent. The geographic location of the Police Headquarters is found on Figure 8.1. CITY MAINTENANCE FACILITIES The total area of city government maintenance facilities totals 22,558 square feet, and includes the Public Works maintenance shops (17,173 square feet) and Park and Recreation Department maintenance shops (5,385 square feet). The Police Vehicle Storage facility (3,600 square feet), which is an open, uncovered yard is not included in this inventory. The geographic location of the City Maintenance facilities is found on Figure 8.1 PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES The City of Kent owns and manages 128.8 acres of neighborhood park land and 779.7 acres of community park land within the current City limits. King County owns 6.1 acres. Within the unincorporated Urban Growth Area (UGA) of Kent, King county owns 807.8 acres of park land, and the City of Kent owns 7.2 acres. the Park and Recreation Department manages a wide variety of facilities located on park land, including the Senior Center, Kent Commons, Special Populations Resource Center, playfields, and trails. A detailed inventory of current parks and recreation facilities is contained in the Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan. The geographic locations of the parks and recreational facilities are found on Figures 10.1 and 10.2 of the parks element. GOLF COURSES The inventory of current City golf courses includes the following: Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 8-9 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT Name Location Capacity (Holes) Par 3 Golf 2030 W 9 Course Meeker 18 Hole Golf 2019 W 18 Course Meeker The geographic locations of the golf course facilities are found on Figure 10.1 of the parks element. SANITARY SEWER FACILITIES The sewer service area of the City of Kent encompasses 23 square miles, and includes most of the incorporated City, as well as adjacent franchise areas within inoorporated King County. Since the existing collection system facilities already exist throughout the City's service area, expansion of this system will occur almost entirely by infill development, which will be accomplished primarily through developer extensions and local improvement districts. In general, the existing sewer system is sized basedon existing standards which will carry peak flows which will be generated by the service area for ultimate development. However, the City of Kent Comprehensive Sewerage Plan has identified various undersized lines, as well as others that require rehabilitiation. A complete inventory of Sanitary Sewer facilities is found in the City of Kent Comprehensive Sewerage Plan. The Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (Metro) has assumed the responsibility for interception, treatment, and disposal of wastewater from the City of Kent and its neighboring communities. Therefore, the City does not incur any direct capacity-related capital facilities requirements or costs for sanitary sewer treatment. The voluminous inventory of current Sanitary Sewer facilities is on file with the City's Department of Public Works. The geographic locations of the sanitary sewer facilities are found on Figure 8.2. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES The City of Kent lies primarily within the Green River Watershed, which encompasses 480 square miles and the total drainage area of the City is 23 square miles which 8-10 Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 • CHAPTER+EIGHt CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT includes most of the incorporated city, as well as the adjacent franchise areas within unincorporated King County. The eight major watershed areas include (1) Green River; (2) Lake Fenwick; (3) Midway; (4) Mill Creek (Kent); (5) Mill Creek (Auburn); (6) Mullen Slew; (7) Springbrook-Garrison Creek; (8) Star Lake. To the east, the service area boundary coincides with Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. To the north, it coincides with the mutual Kent/Renton and Kent/Tukwila City Limits. to the west, the service area boundary coincides with Des Moines Sewer District at Interstate 5. Portions of the City of Kent west of I-5 are served by Des Moines. To the south, the boundary coincides with the service area boundary of the City of Auburn and Federal Way Sewer and Water District. Conveyence systems in both the "hillside" and "valley" areas must convey at minimum the 25 year storm event. The standards include requirements to provide water quality control recommended by the "State Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual". The voluminous inventory of current stormwater management facilities is on file with the City's Department of Public Works. The geographic locations of the stormwater management facilities are found on Figure 8.3. WATER SUPPLY, DISTRIBUTION, AND STORAGE FACILITIES The water service area of the City encompasses 27 square miles. This area includes most of the incorporated City, as well as adjacent franchise areas within unincorporated King County. To the east, the service area boundary coincides with the boundary of Water District No. 111 and Soos Creek Sewer and Water District. To the north, the service area boundary coincides with the mutual Kent/Renton and Kent/Tukwila city limits. to the west, it coincides with Highline Water District's boundary, and to the south, the City's service area boundary coincides with the City of Auburn, and Federal Way Sewer and Water District. The principal sources of water supply for the City's water system are Kent Springs and Clark Springs. During high demand periods, the capacity of these two sources is exceeded, and suplemental well facilities are activated. These sources are adequate to meet peak day demands; however, during an extreme dry/hot spell, the City purchases water from adjacent purveyors. Water system interties are presently available with Highline Water District, Tukwila, and Renton during such emergency situations; however, these sources are not considered to be dependable for meeting lone-term demand requirements. A new open storage reservoir is proposed to be located on a site near 124th Avenue SE and SE 300th Street. The City also plans a future intertie with Tacoma's pipeline 5 project. The water distribution system exists Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 8-11 a CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT throughout most of the City's service area, expansion will take place almost entirely through infill development, which will be accomplished primarily through developer extentions. Most of the remaining projects in the City's most recent water system Plan consist primarily of water main replacements and upsizing in older portions of the system. A Comprehensive Water System Plan update is required by the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) every five years. The City's most recent Water System Plan (completed in 1988 and amended in 1990) has been approved by DSHS. This plan was completed in conjunction sith the Critical Water Supply Plan for the South King County area. A detailed inventory of current water system facilities, and City water rights records are on file with the City's Department of Public Works. The voluminous inventory of current stormwater management facilities is on file with the City's Department of Public Works. The geographic locations of water distribution facilities are found on Figure 8.4. TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES The City's road system current inventory consists of approximately 164 total land miles for 4 major categories of roads; 7 miles of principal arterials; 23 miles of minor arterials; 12 miles of collector arterials, and 122 miles of local roads. There are 9 bridges in Kent. Transportation networks for pedestrians include: Widened shoulder gravel paths 19.35 miles it it it if it " if it 28.31 miles Asphalt sidewalks 4.69 miles Concrete sidewalks 108.56 miles Pathways 21.01 miles The geographic locations of major transportation facilities are found on Figure 9.1 of the transportation element. 8-12 Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT PUBLIC EDUCATION FACILITIES Most of Kent's residential areas are served by the Kent School District. the Renton School District serves students from an area of Kent near the north City limits, and Kent students from a section of the West Hill of Kent attend Federal Way Schools. Detailed inventories of school district capital facilities are contained in the capital facilities plan of each school district The geographic locations of schools in Kent are found on Figure 8.1. PUBLIC LIBRARY FACILITIES The City of Kent is served by the King County Library system in the Kent Library building at 212 2nd Avenue West, which was built in 1992. Detailed information regarding the King County Library System is contained in the King County Library System, The Year 2000 Plan, September 1992. The geographic location of the Kent Library building is found on Figure 8.1. Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft-December 12, 1994 8-13 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS CAPITAL COSTS 1994-1999 Capital Facilities Plan Project Cost Statistics (In 000's) SUMMARY 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 TOTAL NON UTILITY PROJECTS TRANSPORTATION Corndors 1,982 7,511 8,877 3,734 13,529 13,163 48,796 Artenals 115 6,550 2,189 11 3,040 2,200 14,105 Intersection Improvements 265 350 150 765 Other Improvements 584 100 510 792 425 2,411 Subtotal Transportation 2,681 14,426 11,576 4,887 17,144 15,363 66,077 PUBLIC SAFETY Correctional Facility 35 105 90 230 Fire&Emergency Services 63 185 231 479 Police/Fire Training Facility 60 577 637 Police Administrative Offices 274 55 145 474 Subtotal Public Safety 95 1,019 330 145 231 1,820 Parks&Recreation Neighbrhd Park/Rec Land 100 100 200 200 600 Community Park/Rec Land 814 5,086 1,836 86 86 886 8,794 Neighborhood Rec Facilities 80 101 207 432 410 563 1,793 Community Rec Facdlities 745 866 320 3,267 254 107 5,559 Golf Courses 1,000 300 200 1,500 Subtotal Parks &Recreation 1,639 7,153 2,763 4,185 750 1,756 18,246 General Government Facilities City Administrative Offices 400 675 200 200 200 200 1,875 City Maintenance Facilities 60 55 60 1,765 125 2,065 Subtotal General Government 400 735 255 260 1,965 325 3,940 Total Non Utility 4,815 23,333 14,924 9,332 20,003 17,675 90,082 UTILITY PROJECTS Sanitary Sewer 200 769 175 250 260 270 1,924 Stormwater Management 2,662 11,265 4,363 3,013 2,793 3,072 27,168 Water Supply&Distnbution 2,344 2,264 244 1,754 1,764 1,775 10,145 Total Utility Projects 5,206 14,298 4,782 5,017 4,817 5,117 39,237 Total CIP 10,021 37,631 19,706 14,349 24,820 22,792 129,319 REVISED 11/16/94 8-14 Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 r CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT FINANCING The revenue sources that are available to the City of Kent for capital facilities include taxes, fees and charges, and grants. Some sources of revenue for capital facilities can also be used for operating costs. A comprehensive list of revenue sources and a discussion of limitations on the use of each revenue source is contained in the Capital Facilities Plan. Existing City revenues are not forcast, nor are they diverted to capital expenditures from maintenance and operations. The financing plan for these capital improvements includes the revenues listed in the pie chart below. The chart lists the major categories of Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) revenue sources and the amount contributed by each source. CITY OF KENT,WASHINGTON CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN (In 000's) Golf&Utility Fees 31,735 24 2% Transporta4on 20,975 16 0% Sale of Property 4,763 3 6°0 General CIP Revenue 9,959 7 6% LIDs 22,058 16 8% Bonds&Grants 41,802 31 8% REVENUES BY SOURCE 1994-1999 Total$131,292 REVISED 11/16/94 TOTAL REVENUES (in 000's) Detailed project lists and financing plans are contained in the Capital Facilities Plan. Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft-December 12, 1994 8-15 S ` CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT LEVEL OF SERVICE CONSEQUENCES OF THE CFP The CFP will enable the City of Kent to accomodate 15.1% growth during the next 6 years (48,144 people in 1999) while maintaining the 1993 LOS for the following public facilities: Facility LOS Units 1993 LOS CFP LOS PROPOSED Fire/Emergency Services Units/1,000 pop. 0.096 0.096 Neighborhood Rec. Facilities Investment/Capita $151.52 $151.52 Community Rec. Facilities Investment/Capita $496.26 $496.26 Sanitary Sewer Per DOE and METRO Regulations Stormwater Management Per State Regulations/King County Stds. Transportation N/A Water System Per DSHS Regulations/King County Stds The level of service for the following facilities will be increased as a result of the CFP: Facility LOS Units 1993 LOS CFP LOS PROPOSED City Maintenance Facilities Sq. Ft./1,000 pop. 539.0 625.0 The level of service for the following facilities will be reduced as a result of the CFP: Facility LOS Units 1993 LOS CFP LOS PROPOSED Correctional Facility Beds/1,000 pop. 3.11 2.70 Police/Fire Training Center Sq. Ft./Employee 32.5 28.3 City Admin. Offices Sq. Ft./1,000 pop. 1,525.0 1,325.0 - General Government City Admin. Offices Sq. Ft./1,000 pop. 430.0 396.0 - Police Headquarters Neighborhood Park/ Acres/1,000 pop. 2.59 2.53 Recreational Land Community Park/ Acres/1,000 pop. 18.80 18.19 Recreational Land Golf Courses Holes/1,000 pop. 0.65 0.56 8-16 Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 7 CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEAIENT CAPITAL FACILITIES GOALS AND POLICIES Goal CFP-1 - As the City of Kent continues to grow and develop, ensure that an adequate supply and range of capital facilities are available to provide satisfactory standards of public health, safety, and quality of life. Goal CFP-2 - Encourage and support patterns of growth and development which are consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan by concentrating capital facilities spending in those areas where growth is desired. Goal CFP-3 - Define types of public facilities, establish standards for levels of service for each type of public facility, and in coordination with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element, determine what capital improvements are needed in order to achieve and maintain the standards for existing and future populations, and to repair or replace existing public facilities. As growth and additional development occur in the City and adjacent growth areas, consistently reassess land use, update the capital facilities data, and use these data as a basis for making financial decisions regarding capital facilities investment. Identify alternatives to spending and establish priorities. Policy UP-3.1 - Establish and maintain definitions of terms which apply throughout this Capital Facilities Plan and related documents. Place the definitions in the introduction to the Capital Facilities Plan and update them as necessary. Policy CFP-3.2 - The capital facilities provided within the City of Kent are defined in the introduction and categorized below as A., B., and C. facilities. Establish standards for levels of service for Categories A and B public facilities, and coordinate with providers of Category C public facilities. Apply the standards for Category A and B facilities and coordinate Category C facilities as follows: (i) Category A: Capital facilities owned or operated by the City of Kent. Apply the standards for levels of service of each type of public facility in Category A to development permits issued by the City (as set forth in the City's Concurrency Ordinance) after the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, the City's annual budget beginning with the 1995 fiscal year, the City's Capital Improvements Program beginning with the 1995 fiscal year, and other elements of this Comprehensive Plan. Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 8-17 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT {CHAPTER EIGHT (ii) Category B• Capital facilities owned or operated by the City of Kent, but not sub ect to requirements for concurrence. Apply the standards for levels of service of each type of public facility in Category B to the City's annual budget beginning with the 1995 fiscal year, the City's Capital Improvements Program beginning with the 1995 fiscal year, and other elements of this Comprehensive Plan. The standards for levels of service in Category B are for planning purposes only, and shall not apply to development permits issued by the City. (iii) Category Q Capital facilities owned or operated by federal, state, county, independent district and private organizations. Coordinate levels of service and capacity with other entities who provide capital facilities within the City, such as libraries, Washington State Department of Transportation, school districts, and transit service providers. Policy CFP-3.3 - Provide standards for levels of service according to the following: (i) Category A Public Facilities Transportation facilities: Sanitary Sewer: State DOE and Metro Regulations Stormwater Management: State Regulations and King County Standards Water: DSHS Regulations and King County Standards (ii) Category B Public Facilities Fire and Emergency Services: 0.096 fire aid units per 1,000 population Law Enforcement: Correctional facility: 2.70 beds per 1,000 population Parks: Neighborhood Park/Recreational Land: 2.53 acres per 1,000 population Community Park/Recreational Land: 18.19 acres per 1,000 population Neighborhood Recreational Facilities: $151.52 investment per capita 8-18 Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEAIENT Community Recreational Facilities: $496.26 investment per capita Golf Courses: 0.56 holes per 1,000 population City Administrative Offices: City Hall: 1,325 square feet per 1,000 population Police Headquarters: 396 square feet per 1,000 population City Maintenance Facilities: 625 square feet per 1,000 population City Training Facilities: Police/Fire training center: 28.3 square feet per employee Policy CF7-3.4 - Determine the needed quantity of capital improvements as follows: The quantity of capital improvements needed to eliminate existing deficiencies and to meet the needs of future growth shall be determined for each public facility by the following calculation: Q = (S x D) - L Where Q is the quantity of capital improvements needed, S is the standard for level of service, D is the demand, such as the population, and I is the inventory of existing facilities. Use the calculation for existing demand in order to determine existing deficiencies. Use the calculation for projected demand in order to determine needs of future growth. Policy CFP-3.5 - Consider the standards for levels of service to be the exclusive determinant of need for a capital improvement except in the following circumstances: (i) Repair, remodeling, renovation, and replacement of obsolete or worn-out facilities shall be determined by the City Council upon the recommendation of the Mayor. (h) Capital improvements that provide levels of service in excess of the standards adopted in this Comprehensive Plan may be constructed or acquired at any time as long as the following conditions are met: Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 8-19 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT (a) The capital improvement does not make financially infeasible any other capital improvement that is needed to achieve or maintain the standards for levels of service adopted in this Comprehensive Plan, and (b) The capital improvement does not contradict, limit, or substantially change the goals or policies of any element of this Comprehensive Plan, and (c) The capital improvement meets one of the following conditions: The excess capacity is an integral part of a capital improvement that is needed to achieve or maintain standards for levels of service (i.e., the minimum capacity of a capital project is larger than the capacity required to provide the level of service), or .. The excess capacity provides economies of scale making it less expensive than a comparable amount of capacity if acquired at a later date, or The asset acquired is land that is environmentally sensitive, or designated by the City as necessary for conservation or recreation, or .... The excess capacity is part of a capital project financed by general obligation bonds approved by referendum. Policy CFP-3.6 - Encourage non-capital alternatives to achieve and maintain the adopted standard for level of service. Non-capital alternatives, which use programs, strategies, or methods other than traditional "brick and mortar" capital facilities to provide the level of service standards, may include, but are not limited to the following: (1)programs that reduce or eliminate the need for the capital facility; (2) programs that provide a non-capital substitute for the capital facility; (3)programs that reduce the demand for a capital facility, or the service it provides; (4)programs that use alternative methods to provide levels of service ; (5) programs that use existing facilities more efficiently in order to reduce the need for additional facilities. Policy CFP-3.7 - Include in the "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" contained in the Capital Facilities Plan any capital improvement that is determined to be needed as a result of any of the factors listed in Policy CFP-3.S. Approve all such capital improvements in the same manner as the capital improvements that $-20 Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 l CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILI77ES ELEMENT are determined to be needed according to the quantitative analysis described in Policy CFP-3.4. Policy CFP-3.8 - Assign relative priorities among capital improvements projects as follows: (i) Priorities Among apes of Public Facilities. Legal restrictions on the use of many revenue sources limit the extent to which types of facilities compete for priority with other types of facilities because they do not compete for the same revenues. All capital improvements that are necessary for achieving and maintaining a standard for levels of service adopted in this Comprehensive Plan are included in the financially feasible "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" contained in the Capital Facilities Plan. The relative priorities among types of public facilities (i.e., roads, sanitary sewer, etc.) were established by adjusting the standards for levels of service and the available revenues until the resulting public facilities needs became financially feasible. Repeat this process with each update of the Capital Facilities Plan, thus allowing for changes in priorities among types of public facilities. (ii) Priorities of capital improvements within a type of public facility. Evaluate and consider capital improvements within a type of public facility using the following criteria and order of priority. Establish the final priority of all capital facility improvements using the following criteria as general guidelines. Use any revenue source that cannot be used for a high priority facility by beginning with the highest priority for which the revenue can be expended legally. (a) Reconstruction, rehabilitation, remodeling, renovation, or replacement of obsolete or worn-out facilities that contribute to achieving or maintaining standards for levels of service adopted in this Comprehensive Plan. (b) New or expanded facilities that reduce or eliminate deficiencies in levels of service for existing demand. (c) New public facilities, and improvements to existing public facilities, that eliminate public hazards if such hazards were not otherwise eliminated by facility improvements prioritized according to (a) or (b), above. (d) New or expanded facilities that provide the adopted levels of service for new development and redevelopment during the next six fiscal years, as updated by the annual review of the Capital Facilities Plan. The City may acquire land Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 8-21 CAP4TAL FACILITIES ELEMENT ,CHAPTER EIGHT or right of way in advance of the need to develop a facility for new development. Ensure that the location of facilities constructed pursuant to this policy conform to the Land Use Element, and that specific project locations serve projected growth areas within the allowable land use categories. (e) Capacity of public facilities to serve anticipated new development and applicants for development permits shall be addressed in the City's concurrency ordinance. (f) Improvements to existing facilities, and new facilities that significantly reduce the operating cost of providing a service or facility, or otherwise mitigate impacts of public facilities on future operating budgets. (g) New facilities that exceed the adopted levels of service for new growth during the next six fiscal years by either Providing excess public facility capacity that is needed by future growth beyond the next six fiscal years, or .. Providing higher-quality public facilities than are contemplated in the City's normal design criteria for such facilities. (h) Facilities not described in policies (a) through (g) above, but which the City is obligated to complete, provided that such obligation is evidenced by a written agreement the City executed prior to the adoption of this Comprehensive Plan. (iii) Evaluate all facilities scheduled for construction or improvement in accordance with this policy in order to identify any plans of state or local governments or districts that affect, or will be affected by, the City's proposed capital improvement. (iv) Include in the project evaluation additional criteria that are unique to each type of public facility, as described in other elements of this Comprehensive Plan. Goal CFP-4 - To ensure financial feasibility, provide needed public facilities that the City has the ability to fund, or that the City has the authority to require others to provide. 8-22 Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Policy CFP-4.1 - In the estimated costs of all needed capital improvements, do not exceed conservative estimates of revenues from sources that are available to the City pursuant to current statutes, and which have not been rejected by referendum, if a referendum is required to enact a source of revenue. Conservative estimates need not be the most pessimistic estimate, but cannot exceed the most likely estimate. Revenues for transportation improvements or strategies must be "financial commitments" as required by the Growth Management Act. Policy CFP-4.2 - Pay for the costs of needed capital improvements in the following manner: (i) Existing development shall pay for the capital improvements that reduce or eliminate existing deficiencies and for some or all of the replacement of obsolete or worn-out facilities. Existing development may pay a portion of the cost of capital improvements needed by future development. Payments may take the form of user fees, charges for services, special assessments, and taxes. (ii) Future development shall pay its fair share of the capital improvements needed to address the impact of such development. Transportation impact fees, water, sewer, storm water infrastructure fees, and the fee in lieu of parks shall continue as established "fair share" payments. Upon completion of construction, "future"development becomes "existing"development and shall pay the costs of the replacement of obsolete or worn-out facilities as described above. Payments may take the form of, but are not limited to, voluntary contributions for the benefit of any public facility, mitigation payments, impact fees, capacity fees, dedications of land,provision of public facilities, public/private partnerships, voluntary funding agreements, future payments of user fees, charges for services, special assessments, and taxes. Future development shall not pay impact fees for the portion of any public facility that reduces or eliminates existing deficiencies. (iii) Both existing and future development may have part of their costs paid by grants, entitlements, or public facilities from other levels of government and independent districts. Policy CFP-4.3 - Finance capital improvements and manage debt as follows: (i) Finance capital improvements from City enterprise funds by: Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 8-23 r i CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT (a) Debt to be repaid by user fees and charges and/or connection or capacity fees for enterprise services, or (b) Current assets (i.e., reserves, equity or surpluses, and current revenue, including grants, loans, donations and interlocal agreements), or (c) A combination of debt and current assets. (ii) Finance capital improvements by non-enterprise funds from either current assets (i.e., current revenue, fund equity and reserves), debt, or a combination thereof. Consider in the financing decisions which funding source (current assets, debt, or both) will be a) most cost effective, b) consistent with prudent asset and liability management, c) appropriate to the useful life of the project(s) to be financed, and d) the most efficient use of the City's ability to borrow funds. (iii) Do not use debt financing to provide more capacity than is needed within the "CFP Projects and Financing Plan"for non-enterprise public facilities unless one of the conditions of Policy CFP- 3.5(h)(c) is met. Policy CFP-4.4 - Do not provide a public facility, nor accept the provision of a public facility by others, if the City or other provider is unable to pay for any planned subsequent annual operating and maintenance costs of the facility. Policy CFP-4.5 - In the event that sources of revenue listed in the "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" require voter approval in a local referendum that has not been held, and a referendum is not held, or is held and is not successful, revise this Comprehensive Plan at the next annual amendment to adjust for the lack of such revenues, in any of the following ways: (i) Reduce the level of service for one or more public facilities; (ii) Increase the use of other sources of revenue; (iii) Decrease the cost, and therefore the quality of some types of public facilities while retaining the quantity of the facilities that is inherent in the standard for level of service; (iv) Decrease the demand for and subsequent use of capital facilities; (v) A combination of the above alternatives. 8-24 Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Policy CFP-4.6 - Condition all development permits issued by the City which require capital improvements that will be financed by sources of revenue which have not been approved or implemented (such as future debt requiring referenda) on the approval or implementation of the indicated revenue sources, or the substitution of a comparable amount of revenue from existing sources. Goal CFP-5 - Provide adequate public facilities by constructing needed capital improvements which (1) repair or replace obsolete or worn-out facilities, (2) eliminate existing deficiencies, and (3) meet the needs of future development and redevelopment caused by previously-issued and new development permits. The City's ability to provide needed improvements will be demonstrated by maintaining a financially feasible "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" in the Capital Facilities Plan. Policy CFP-5.1 - Provide, or arrange for others to provide, the capital improvements listed in the "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" portion of the Capital Facilities Plan. The capital improvements projects may be modified as follows: (i) Pursuant to the Growth Management Act, the "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" may be amended one time during any calendar year. Coordinate the annual update with the annual budget process. (ii) The "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" may be adjusted by ordinance not deemed to be an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for corrections, updates, and modifications concerning costs; revenue sources; acceptance of facilities pursuant to dedications which are consistent with the plan; or the date of construction (so long as it is completed within the 6-year period) of any facility enumerated in the "CFP Projects and Financing Plan. " (iii) Any act, or failure to act, that causes any project listed in the "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" of this Comprehensive Plan to be scheduled for completion in a fiscal year later than the fiscal year indicated in the "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" shall be effective only if the act causing the delay is subject to one of the following: (a) Accelerate within, or add to the "CFP Projects and Financing Plan"those projects providing capacity equal to, or greater than the delayed project, in order to provide capacity of public facilities in the fiscal year at least equal to the capacity scheduled prior to the act which delayed the subject project. Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 8-25 y CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT (b) For those projects which are subject to concurrency requirements and which are authorized by development permits which were issued conditionally subject to the concurrent availability of public facility capacity provided by the delayed project, restrict them to the allowable amount and schedule of development which can be provided without the incomplete project. (c) Amend the Comprehensive Plan (during the allowable annual amendment) to temporarily reduce the adopted standard for the level of service for public facilities until the fiscal year in which the delayed project is scheduled to be completed. Policy CFP-5.2 - Include in the capital appropriations of the City's annual budget all the capital improvements projects listed in the "CFP Projects and Financing Plan"for expenditure during the appropriate fiscal year, except that the City may omit from its annual budget any capital improvements for which a binding agreement has been executed with another party to provide the same project in the same fiscal year. Also include in the capital appropriations of its annual budget additional public facility projects that conform to Policy CFP- 3.5(ii) and Policy CFP-3.8(h)O. Policy CFP-5.3 - Adopt a concurrency ordinance to ensure that adequate facilities, as determined by the City, are available to serve new growth and development. Policy CFP-5.4 - Determine the availability of public facilities by verifying that the City has in place binding financial commitments to complete the necessary public facilities or strategies within six years, provided that: (i) The six-year "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" is financially feasible. (ii) The City uses a realistic,financially feasible funding system based on revenue sources available according to laws adopted at the time the CFP is adopted. (iii) The six-year "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" in this Comprehensive Plan demonstrates that the actual construction of the roads and mass transit facilities are scheduled to commence in or before the fourth year of the six-year "CFP Projects and Financing Plan. " (iv) The six-year CFP Projects and Financing Plan" includes both necessary facilities to maintain the adopted level-of-service 8-26 Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 CHAPTER )FIGHT* CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT standards to serve the new development proposed to be permitted and the necessary facilities required to eliminate existing deficiencies. Goal CFP-6 - Provide adequate public facilities to urban growth areas. Policy CFP-6.1 -Ensure levels of service for public facilities in the urban growth area are consistent, and where possible, identical for the City of Kent and the unincorporated portion of the Kent Urban Growth Area (see Policy CFP-3.3). Policy CFP-6.2 - Declare the primary providers of public facilities and services in the unincorporated portion of the Kent Urban Growth Area to be: Public Facilitv Before Annexation After Annexation a. Fire Protection and Districts City of Kent emergency medical services b. Law Enforcement King County City of Kent c. Library Library District Library District d. Parks & Recreation King County City of Kent e. Local roads, sidewalks, King County City of Kent lighting f. State roads Washington State Washington State g. Sanity sewer Districts City of Kent h. Schools Districts Districts i. Solid waste disposal King County King County j. Storm Water King County City of Kent k. Transit King County King County 1. Water Districts City of Kent m. General government King County City of Kent offices Policy CFP-6.3 - Make providers of public facilities responsible for paying for their facilities. Providers may use sources of revenue that require users of facilities to pay for a portion of the cost of the facilities. As provided by law, some providers may require new development to pay impact fees and/or mitigation payments for a portion of the cost of public facilities. (i) Use Policy CFP-4.2 as the guideline for assigning responsibility for paying for public facilities in the Kent Urban Growth Area. (ii) Coordinate with King County and other providers of public facilities regarding collection of fees from development in their Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 8-27 a CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT 'CHAPTER EIGHT respective jurisdictions for impacts on public facilities in other jurisdictions. Policy CFP-6.4 - When possible, enter into agreements with King County and other providers of public facilities to coordinate planning for and development of the Kent Urban Growth Area, including implementation and enforcement of Policies CFP-6.1 - 6.3. Goal CFP-7 - Implement the Capital Facilities Plan in a manner that coordinates and is consistent with the plans and policies of other elements of the City Comprehensive Plan, Countywide Planning Policies, the Growth Management Act of the State of Washington, and, where possible, the plans and policies of other regional entities, adjacent counties, and municipalities. Policy CFP-7.1 - Manage the land development process to ensure that all development receives public facility levels of service equal to, or greater than the standards adopted in Policy CFP-3.3 by implementing the "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" contained in the Capital Facilities Plan, and by using the fiscal resources provided for in Goal CFP-4 and its supporting policies. (i) Ensure that all Category A and B public facility capital improvements are consistent for planning purposes with the adopted land use map and the goals and policies of other elements of this Comprehensive Plan. Ensure that the location of, and level of service provided by projects in the "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" maintain adopted standards for levels of service for existing and future development in a manner and location consistent with the Land Use Element of this Comprehensive Plan. (ii) Integrate the City's land use planning and decisions with its planning and decisions for public facility capital improvements by developing, adopting, and using the programs listed in the "Implementation Programs" section of the Capital Facilities Plan. (Note: Plans to implement the Comprehensive Plan elements, including a proposed concurrency ordinance, will be presented to the Planning Commission at a later date.) Policy CFP-7.2 - Ensure that implementation of the Capital Facilities Plan is consistent with the requirements of the adopted Countywide Planning Policies. 8-28 Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 F CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Goal CFP-8 - The City shall participate in a cooperative interjurisdictional process to determine siting of essential public facilities of a county-wide, regional, or state-wide nature. Policy CFP-8.1 - Proposals for siting essential public facilities within the City of Kent or within the City's growth boundary shall be reviewed for consistency with the City's Comprehensive plan during the initial stages of the proposal process. Policy CFP-8.2 - When warranted by the special character of the essential facility, the City shall apply the regulations and criteria of Kent Zoning Code Section 15.04.200, Special use combining district, to applications for siting such facilities to insure adequate review, including public participation. Conditions of appproval, including design conditions, conditions, shall be imposed upon such uses in the interest of the welfare of the City and and the protection of the environment. Policy CFP-8.3 - In the principally permitted or conditional use sections of the zoning code, the City shall establish, as appropriate, locations and development standards for essential public facilities which do not warrant consideration through the special use combining district regulations. Such facilities shall include but not be limited to small inpatient facilities and group homes. Goal CFP-9 - The City shall participate in a cooperative intetjurisdictional process to resolve issues of mitigation for any disproportionate financial burden which may fall on the jurisdiction which becomes the site of a facility of a state-wide, regional or county- wide nature. Kent Comprehensive Plan PC Revised Draft -December 12, 1994 8-29 CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION`ELEMENT • CHAPTER NINE EXHIBIT-L TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT INTRODUCTION The Growth Management Act (GMA) mandates that transportation planning is linked directly to land use decisions and to the financial structure of the city. The legislation further requires each city and county planning under GMA to incorporate a concurrency management system into their comprehensive plan. Such a system provides a policy procedure designed to enable the jurisdiction to determine whether adequate public facilities are available to serve new developments at the time development occurs. The transportation plan must include an action plan for bringing into compliance any • existing facilities or services that are below established level-of-service (LOS) standards and for providing for expansion of facilities and services to meet future need at established LOS standards. The strategy must be financially sound; planned improvements must be financially feasible and committed for implementation within six years. The future land use plan must be consistent with this action plan; future growth should not cause facilities to fall below the established LOS standards. Lastly, the action strategy must be consistent with the six-year transportation improvement programs adopted by the City, the King County Department of Metropolitan Services (Metro), and the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). If the surrounding land use density is appropriate, jurisdictions have the option to allow capacity to be provided through transit or high-occupancy-vehicle facilities. Other facilities for movement of nonmotorized users and goods also need to be considered. Changes in federal funding of transportation programs at the state and regional level, which funds then are apportioned to the local level, introduce the need to comply with regional air quality goals, in addition to basic goals for transportation capacity. • KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 9-1 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE The overall guiding goal of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Kent is to: Provide for a balanced multimodal transportation system • which will support land use patterns and adequately serve existing and future residential and employment growth within the potential annexation area. Transportation issues are among the top concerns for Kent residents. Much of this is related to the congestion on cross-valley corridors and on SR 167. Population growth in Kent has been about 5.2 percent annually over the last ten years (based on 1980 and 1990 census figures). Cities and unincorporated areas around Kent grew at similar rates over the same period, resulting in significant increases in traffic and associated vehicular air pollution. The purpose of the transportation plan is to guide the development and improvement of the City's circulation system. In support of the GMA, the policies in this element address problems such as congestion and travel-time delays, traffic impacts on residential areas, parking, and the improvement of transit, pedestrian, and other nonmotorized facilities. The policies will be used to guide transportation planning within the city. The City of Kent is also part of the Puget Sound region; as such, it is subject to • compliance with the regional planning efforts coordinated by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC). This agency oversees not only land use and transportation, but also considers compliance with air quality standards as they interrelate with land use and transportation. Under the Growth Management Act and other legislation, Kent is required to coordinate its efforts with those of adjoining jurisdictions and other agencies to ensure that plans are compatible and consistent. In order to meet the requirements of the federal Clean Air Act and Amendments, the air quality provisions of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), the Clean Air Washington Act and other relevant legislation, Kent will commit to work with the PSRC, the WSDOT, transit agencies, and other jurisdictions in the development of transportation control measures and other transportation and air quality programs where warranted. The transportation plan focuses on transportation improvements that are required by the year 2020. The Growth Management Act requires the plan to address conditions through 2020. However, the City is concerned over conditions in the midterm, so an analysis of 2010 conditions is included as well. State and regional legislation and policies lay a solid foundation for this approach. Land use plans must minimize low-density sprawl, • and provide a more concentrated and planned land use pattern to be served more 9-2 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 CHAPTER ' NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT efficiently by transportation systems and services. The land use plan is a critical tool in • creating an environment in which transit, ridesharing, and nonmotorized travel modes can serve travel demand in an attractive, efficient, and cost-effective manner. Land use and transportation planning must be integrated closely and conducted on both regional and local levels in order to find better, long-range solutions for mobility. TRANSPORTATION TRENDS There is one solid transportation trend within the region: automobile traffic is increasing. Information compiled by the PSRC shows that during the 1981-1991 period, vehicle miles of travel increased 82 percent region-wide, while employment increased 35 percent and population increased about 20 percent. The vehicle miles travelled increased four times faster than the population increased! There are a variety of reasons for this increase. There are now more people commuting within the region, and auto ownership per household is at an all-time high. In addition, the location of employment and housing impacts the length and variety of trips made. New housing development is occurring on vacant land in outlying parts of the • metropolitan area rather than on land closer to traditional urban centers. Employment centers also are relocating to suburban areas. The general increase in standard of living in the region increases traffic because as the standard of living increases, car ownership and trip-making also increase. In addition, the average length of trips is increasing. The cumulative effect of all of these factors is more cars on the road travelling more miles, and increasing traffic congestion. Kent's history is primarily as a farming community. Transportation systems were based on movement of crops to market, via truck and rail. In the 1950's, there was a shift away from rail toward automobile and truck transportation. The completion of the Howard Hanson Dam in 1961 allowed flooding of the Green River to be controlled. This in turn encouraged developers to convert farmland to urban and industrial uses. The creation of the Boeing Aerospace Center in 1965 is a primary example. Interstate 5 was completed in 1966, I-405 in 1967, and SR 167 in 1969. Other state highways (SR 181, 515 and 516) augmented and replaced the rail system. This road system was developed to provide a regional network allowing access around Lake Washington and to serve the Kent industrial area. During this period, land uses shifted • KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 9-3 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE away from agriculture, and the transportation demand shifted from exporting raw materials to importing a major work force. • Kent is home to 42,000 residents (1993 City estimates) as well as 46,520 jobs. This is an increase from 22,961 residents in 1980. In addition, about 42,000 people live in unincorporated areas surrounding the city. These people create much of the local traffic on the city's arterial system each day. In addition to being affected by local traffic, Kent is affected by regional traffic. Traffic from south King County and northern Pierce County passes through Kent to destinations in the north. Because of Kent's central location, over one-half of the traffic passing through the City each day has neither an origin nor destination in the City. This regional, "pass-through" traffic often clogs up the local transportation system. When the regional transportation system is congested, local traffic trying to enter the freeways frequently gets backed up onto the local arterials, creating local congestion. In addition, regional commuters looking for a path of least resistance through the area often resort to using the City's already-crowded arterial streets; and local travellers may resort to using neighborhood streets. As a result, when the regional system is congested, local • circulation also suffers. Traffic congestion occurs at various locations within the city; however, certain areas experience severe congestion. These highly-congested areas are located primarily near freeway interchanges and employment activity centers. Because of their location near regional freeways and high levels of employment, the central and valley portions of the City experience most of the traffic congestion. Another cause for congestion is the at- grade railroad crossings. Traffic can be backed up for considerable distances due to 5- minute-long closures of the crossings during peak periods. Kent's street system is most crowded in the early morning hours and mid- to late-afternoon when commuters are travelling between their jobs and home. Job-related commuting places a heavy strain on the transportation system in Kent because the city is an employment center. Over 46,000 people work in the city each day. More than 30 percent (about 14,100) work for the 27 employers affected by the City's commute trip reduction ordinance. These include the largest employers, such as Boeing and Heath Tecna.. Traffic can become extremely congested around the employment centers, • especially the larger ones, when workdays begin or end. 9-4 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 1Z 1994 R. ` CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Most commuters within Kent still use single-occupant vehicles for their trip to work. • Baseline estimates for Commute Trip Reduction planning from the PSRC indicate that only about 15 percent of the employees with the major employers in Kent use transit or carpooling to commute to work. Even fewer people use these alternative modes of transportation for other trips such as shopping. A recent survey of 600 residents showed that almost 80 percent of those who commute use single-occupant vehicles, while 12 percent carpool, 5 percent vanpool, and 5.8 percent use transit. Metro currently provides both local and regional bus service in Kent. Regional bus service is available at two park-and-ride facilities within the city (Kent-Des Moines Road at I-5, and Lincoln at James), and via some peak-period, commuter routes which serve neighborhood centers. Dial-a-ride service also is available on weekdays and during limited hours on weekends. At this time, the City is conducting a detailed study of transit service and is developing recommendations for service changes. The Regional Transit Authority (RTA) is in the process of finalizing implementation phasing and funding plans, which also will directly affect Kent. Under all of the RTA alternatives, the south King County commuter rail line is included as an implementation activity. This service could be in operation two years after a public vote on funding is approved. • ANALYSIS OF FACILITY NEEDS The modelling effort conducted for this transportation plan identified some interesting trends in travel demand that are tied to land use in Kent. This analysis was based on 1991 data and 2010 forecasts, unless otherwise noted. Of the total daily travel demand in the City, about 33 percent is travel within the City. By 2010, this will change to about 34 percent of all daily travel. The total volume of travel will increase by about 30 percent (508,800 daily trips in 1991; 713,900 in 2010). The actual number of internal trips are expected to increase by 45 percent (167,300 versus 242,100). The East Hill area has the greatest number of productions and attractions in Kent • (77,600 daily trips). Nearly 40 percent of trips through East Hill (202,200 daily trips) are internal to East Hill. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 9-5 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE About 54 percent of total trips to/from the downtown core have the other trip-end in Kent (89,500 daily trips). About 80 percent of trips internal to Kent (167,300 daily trips) do not have a trip- end in the downtown. About 26 percent of all trips internal to Kent (167,300 daily trips) are related to the north industrial subarea. About 60 percent of the total daily travel to the north industrial subarea (155,800 daily trips) is from outside Kent. Travel between East Hill and West Hill is minimal, and the future demand through 2010 is not anticipated to increase significantly (1,400 daily trips). Daily travel between Kent and other nearby Puget Sound cities does not significantly favor one destination over another. In light of these and other trends, as well as of the regulatory requirements at the state • and federal level, development of this transportation element required examination of a number of issues. Links Between Land Use and Transportation: The Growth Management Act requires the land use and transportation systems to grow in tandem, so that transportation facilities are in place to serve the needs of new development. The transportation system should be designed to provide adequate capacity for all modes, not just for single-occupant autos. Traffic Congestion and Use of High-Occupancy Vehicles: Due to limited funding and continuing concern for the environment, few new roads will be built. The current and future challenge is to better manage the existing system and to reduce traffic demand as much as possible by encouraging the use of alternatives to single-occupant vehicles. Displaced Regional Traffic on Local Streets: Continuing to accommodate high • volumes of "pass-through" traffic now is being questioned by business leaders and 9-6 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT - December 12, 1994 CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION'ELEM&NT residents of the downtown and centrally-located neighborhoods. Protecting • neighborhoods from the impacts of regional and city-wide traffic is desirable. Improvements to the Street System: The designation and improvement of an arterial street system which can adequately serve land uses in the City continues to be an important issue. The design and appearance of transportation facilities and their potential impact on residential and commercial areas should be considered. Improvements to the road system need to be made in a way which will encourage pedestrian activity and improve the quality of neighborhoods. Transit: The lack of convenient bus service from residential areas to the downtown and employment centers is an important issue. Buses provide limited routes between residential neighborhoods and the downtown and link downtown to the major regional centers such as Bellevue and Seattle. Major employment centers are not adequately served at this time. In addition, the routing, frequency, and length of trips often make bus transportation inconvenient. Parking: Adequate to excessive parking is available in most areas of the City. In • the downtown, however, parking is more limited. There is a perception on the part of some businesses and citizens that parking is in short supply in the downtown area. Bicycle and Pedestrian Trails: Many areas of the City are not served adequately by either bicycle trails or pedestrian walkways. Existing bike trails run predominantly north-south, and streets which are designated for bicycle use often are not maintained for safe operation of a bicycle. Some areas have a sidewalk network, while other areas have few or no sidewalks. In examining the vision developed by the City through the Community Forum and Visual Preference Survev and the possible transportation outcomes, the following are the possible scenarios for the future: Traffic Congestion and Use of High-Occupancy Vehicles: Four general scenarios can be projected for future traffic conditions in Kent. • Congestion could worsen on the existing system; KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 9-7 L I TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE New roads could be built and existing roadways improved; A new transit system (bus or rail) could absorb a large number of trips, but congestion would continue on existing roadways; Travel demand could be reduced. In reality, all of these scenarios may occur to some degree. However, it is clear that funding and environmental considerations will limit the state's and City's ability to expand the road system and Metro's ability to provide transit. To prevent overwhelming congestion from occurring, an emphasis should be placed on increasing the efficiency of the existing system. Displaced Regional Traffic on Local Streets: The most feasible way to address this problem is through a combination of neighborhood protection policies and strong incentives supporting HOV alternatives on the arterial system. The City also needs to work with other jurisdictions on regional transportation issues. Improvements to the Street System: Changes in the street system most likely • will occur as small improvements to existing streets rather than as the creation of new roadways or major expansions of the arterial network, with the exception of the three new arterials currently under study. These changes increasingly will be a product of public/private partnerships paid by impact fees or other mechanisms allowed by law. Land Use Pattern: Changes in land use patterns will aim to reduce dependence on single-occupant vehicles and to encourage pedestrians, bicycles, and transit use. Transit: Transit may provide the greatest potential change in the Kent transporta- tion system. If a regional high-capacity transit system becomes reality, Kent will need to accommodate a possible commuter rail stop near downtown and bus facilities serving the major residential and employment centers. Parking: As the City seeks ways to support transit and HOV use, the ratio of building area to parking spaces provided in buildings will come under scrutiny. • Similarly, as land becomes more intensively developed, large surface parking lots 9-8 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT will become less desirable. Alternatives such as shared parking facilities and • structured parking will become realistic as development density increases. Bicycle and Pedestrian Trails: In the future, bicycling and walking to work may become more realistic alternatives for more people. The Green River and Interurban trails provide a safe, well-used commuting route. Expansion of the existing bike and trail systems, especially for east-west travel and north-south travel outside of the valley floor, will make these modes of transportation more convenient, while congestion on the road system will make them more attractive. Land Use Assumptions Population and employment projections were refined by the City's Planning Department, based on PSRC forecasts which were derived from state-wide projections by the Office of Financial Management. Three land use plan alternatives were developed in conjunction with the refined population and employment forecast; these alternatives were used as the basis for calculating trip generation in the transportation model. The model was run using estimated levels of local land use for the years 2010 and 2020 to determine • estimated traffic volumes on local roadways and places where improvements are warranted. The three land use alternatives and the results of this analysis are described in the City's Draft Environmental Impact Statement. ExistingInventory y and d Service Needs The City's transportation resources include about 185 miles of roadway classified as local access or higher and 144 miles of bicycle and pedestrian facilities (excluding sidewalks). Transit service, provided by Metro, includes peak-period, Seattle-oriented commuter routes and some all-day local service throughout south King County. Residents interviewed through various means during the comprehensive planning process all agree that transportation congestion and improvements to transit service should be high priorities in the Kent of the future (See Figure 9.1). The traffic model which was developed using current (1991) land use levels and calibrated to 1991 traffic volumes, showed some significant deficiencies in the SR 516 corridor on East Hill, on Military Road throughout the city, S 212th/SE 208th street, 108th Ave SE in the northern section of the city, James/240th immediately east of • downtown, West Valley Road south of downtown, Meeker between SR 516 and SR 167, and virtually all state highway links. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 1Z 1994 9-9 t� TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE The GMA requires the City to establish service levels for transportation and to provide a means for correcting current deficiencies and meeting future needs. Transportation • planners and engineers use the term "level of service," or LOS, to describe availability of a given transportation facility. Generally, LOS is defined relative to demand and capacity; however, average vehicular delay also can be used. The City is proposing a flexible LOS standard for roads, which tolerates higher levels of congestion in the more urbanized area. In residential areas, a better LOS would be considered acceptable; in rural areas, an even higher standard would be required. LOS would be determined using volume-to-capacity ratios determined through modelling efforts. The currently-adopted 6-year Transportation Improvement Plan, along with several additions, are proposed to meet the requirement to correct current deficiencies. Forecast of Traffic Based on Land Use Assumptions The calibrated traffic model was applied to the three land use scenarios which were developed. The number of intersections and roadway links that approach congested levels was tallied, and a qualitative assessment of the severity of anticipated congestion • was made for each alternative. The vehicle miles travelled and the vehicle hours travelled do not vary appreciably among the alternatives. The number of intersections and links at Volume/Capacity (V/C) ratios over 0.70 also does not vary appreciably among alternatives. In some cases, the severity of the impact is greater with one alternative than with another; however, the level of accuracy provided by the model can identify order- of-magnitude impacts but cannot provide a detailed capacity analysis. Development of Level of Service Standards Level of service (LOS) is a qualitative estimate of the performance efficiency of transportation facilities in a community. These LOS standards can be based on many measures, including traffic congestion. LOS standards for traffic congestion have been developed and revised over the years by the Transportation Research Board (TRB). One of the TRB systems uses volume on a road and capacity of the road to define a ratio, called a V/C ratio, which can be classified by degree of congestion. The classifications range from A (the best) to F (the worst). • 9-10 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 1Z 1994 CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATIOAr ELEMENT LOS A - Low volume, high speeds, no delay. High freedom to select desired speed and • maneuver within traffic stream. LOS B - Stable flow with reasonable freedom to select speed. LOS C - Stable flow, but speed and maneuverability are affected by the presence of others and require care on the part of the driver. LOS D - Approaches unstable flow. Speed and maneuverability are severely restricted. Small additions to traffic flow generally will cause operational problems. LOS E - Represents operating conditions at or near the capacity of the highway. Low speeds. Freedom to maneuver is extremely difficult. Any incident can cause extensive queuing. LOS F - Represents forced-flow operation at very low speeds. Operations are characterized by stop-and-go traffic. Vehicles may progress at reasonable speeds for several hundred feet or more, then be required to stop. • Similar LOS classifications have been developed for intersections; they use volume, capacity, and signal phasing to determine average delay at the intersection, and thus a level of service. LOS formulas for pedestrian and transit service also have been developed. However, there is much debate on how effective they are in assessing situations in smaller cities and suburban settings. Under the Growth Management Act, cities and counties are required to adopt LOS standards to determine when growth has consumed available capacity for public services. LOS is the basis for determining whether there is sufficient capacity for development and for analyzing the operating efficiency of transportation facilities. The GMA requires that land use and transportation planning be coordinated so that transportation capacity exists at the time development occurs (or within 6 years). The law is not explicit about how the standards should be developed or applied. To ensure regional consistency in transportation LOS, the county-wide Growth Management Planning Council developed a 12-point framework for developing LOS • standards in King County. The LOS standards proposed for Kent follow this framework by including separate standards for different transportation modes, including KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 9-11 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE nonmotorized modes. This is in keeping with the adopted commute trip reduction ordinance, air quality legislation, and policies which support SOV mode reductions. The • City is proposing a desirable level of transit service; however, it is not being treated as a standard. Metro's proposed service for south King County already has been defined to some extent as part of the Regional Transit Plan (RTP), and it is being revisited as part of Metro's six-year planning process. By adopting an LOS standard when the supply is provided by another agency, such as Metro or Washington State, the City either may be obligating itself to pay for additional service or may be required to deny development if such service is not in place. However, the City is including demand-side performance requirements to promote an environment that is supportive of transit and nonmotorized travel. Under the county-wide framework, the PSRC is charged with developing LOS standards for regional facilities, including state highways. These roads are an integral part of the regional transportation network; however, many are currently at or near capacity. In the case of some facilities, such as I-5, the cost of adding new vehicular capacity is prohibitive. Kent acknowledges the importance of state highways in the regional system and has defined a desirable LOS. However, adopting a standard for state-controlled • facilities limits the ability of the City to approve new development if state facilities, which are beyond the City's control, are inadequate. Definition of LOS Standards for Kent For the purpose of the Kent LOS standard, 22 subareas of the city were defined. The capacities of each of the arterials crossing the boundary of the zone can be totalled to produce a directional capacity. Similarly, the traffic volumes crossing the boundaries can be totalled by direction. Kent's proposed method of determining arterial LOS standards represents a combination of two methods of estimation and is tied to land use. The proposed measure uses volumes and capacities at the boundary of each zone, with acceptable V/C ratios assigned to each zone. Areas where the land use plan directs intensive growth, for example, the downtown, would have acceptable V/Cs that are high, while areas such as the Soos Creek plateau would have a lower threshold of acceptability. In addition, several intersections and critical road links have been identified in most every zone as a way to confirm LOS at key locations. Some of these intersections and road segments are on the • 9-12 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEAJENT boundaries, which will allow a more refined estimate of volume and capacity than the • model would present across the entire boundary. In establishing a standard for each zone in the City, the general focus of future land use - - where activity centers are proposed and where low-density uses are located -- needs to be compared to information generated by the traffic model. As growth occurs, the land use levels in the traffic model need to be updated. The assumption was made, similar to King County and other cities, that high levels of congestion are acceptable in the Central Business District, and possibly in other major activity centers, but that lower levels of service (high V/C ratios) are not acceptable in residential areas and low-density commercial areas. Table 9.1 shows the V/C ratios associated with each LOS for the purpose of this analysis. For planning purposes, the actual V/C for each boundary was not calculated, but was estimated based on reviewing the existing and projected V/C ratios in excess of 0.70, whether the total boundary fell in the <0.7, <0.8, or <0.9 category. Table 9.1 • LOS DEFINITION Lo$ `V/C RATIO A 0.01-0.60 B 0.61-0.70 C 0.71-0.80 D 0.81-0.90 E 0.91-0.98 F 0.99+ Table 9.2 presents the existing (1991) zone levels of service for the 22 zones in Kent. It was developed using existing land uses and modelled traffic volumes for the mixed-use alternative in the year 2010, assuming that the improvements adopted in the 1993-1999 transportation improvement program (TIP) are funded and completed. A second scenario • assumes the current TIP and the proposed east legs of both the 224th/228th corridor and the 196th/200th corridor are built (See also Figure 9.2). KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 9-13 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE As a supplement to the zonal LOS system, the City has identified control intersections and roads in each zone, which also must be at or below the LOS standard for the zone. • Concurrency would be proven using the appropriate Highway Capacity Manual techniques which are current at the time of analysis. Nonmotorized and Transit LOS There are two additional components of the LOS standard: transit and nonmotorized service. The proposed transit service standards are tentative, as the City is working with Metro to implement a transit strategy for Kent. The transit standard considered the arterial structure of the city and land use forecasts to determine whether each zone has a need for fixed-route arterial transit service. Generally it was found that areas that are primarily low-density residential would be best served by peak-period commuter-oriented service and off-peak dial-a-ride service. Areas that are defined as activity centers should have frequent all-day service, and areas such as downtown Kent should fill a role as a transit hub. Nonmotorized service standards also are tied to the types of roadways and land uses in • the zones. An examination of the existing road system and proposed new roadways, as related to land uses and densities, helped guide the estimates. Where environmental or topographical constraints do not prohibit such activity, land use standards for new development of larger multitenant sites, either residential or commercial, are encouraged to provide linkages for nonmotorized travel between adjacent sites. The City is developing an inventory of existing sidewalks. While the sidewalk network in downtown appears to be complete, sidewalks in the industrial area north of the CBD and in commercial centers such as East and West Hills are lacking coordination. An initial priority should be to develop sidewalks that would serve as safe walking routes in the vicinity of schools, parks, and playgrounds. Identification of Service Needs Rail Crossings - One of the most significant problems with downtown circulation is the problem created by the at-grade railroad crossings on the east-west arterials. Currently, James, Smith, Titus, and SR 516 (Willis) cross the tracks at grade. Other east-west • 9-14 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 t' CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT arterials, such as 212th and 277th Streets also are affected. Traffic backs up on these • arterials, and intersections may or may not remain clear for north-south traffic to pass. Traffic signal cycles are not tied to the crossings and can compound delays and congestion by making east-west traffic queue through several cycles after the train has cleared. Burlington Northern estimates about 40-50 trains per day use the tracks, including a variable number of trains in the 4-6 PM peak period. Union Pacific estimates their track utilization at 10-20 trains per day. This could increase by as many as 20 trains per day and 10 per peak period as a result of the proposed commuter rail operation. Problems associated with railroad grade crossings could be exacerbated with the implementation of commuter rail. • • KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 9-1 S TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE • a U o m V1 00 N + v1 0� Cl C Cr1 ~ 00 V1 r v1 vi v1 r vl pr a+ N l� .� o\ O\ N 00 .�+ l� N h �O v1 M M V1 m + + + + + + + + + + + bct m v1 r N T O� oo N r m vl �o v to m m to r v1 v1 N Co Oo r r O 00 W) O O� �o N m O oo CV Vi OO d N 00 O G cV 4 "61 41 wi I vi 41 M 1 O .- cd 5 a CDo o a A m Cl) A A A G7 " V1 O O O O O O O h O O O O O O a O Q N m m m m M a U Vl V1 h N O V1 V'1 O O Vl V1 Vl v1 Vl O Vl O 0 b 'd � o O U O w � a o 00 00 00 Oo rn r o\ o0 0 00 00 0o Oo 0o r r r o p oo r r r r oo r O0 r Oo r r r r C r r r r r r r rz v v v +1 v n v n v v n n v v v v v v v v v v • U 0 9a O . - O0 r r r r O0 r O0 r o0 0o r r r O0 r r r r r r r Nw v v n -H v n v n v v A. n v v v v v v v v v v A b > > a 00 O0 r r r Oo r oo t� r r r r r oo r r r r r r as v v +i +i v n v n v v n v v v v v v v v v v v a o Cn - 0 x -� 9 0 a a� b b b b -00A U a A b A N m et to �o r 00 Q\ O N m It v1 �o r 00 0� O + N e • 9-16 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT - December 12, 1994 CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Proposals to create grade separation at one or more of these intersections and to provide • crossing at both the BN and UP tracks have been discussed over the years. The elevated section of SR 167 through the valley floor would make elevated arterial crossings of the UP tracks difficult, if not impossible, because the arterial would need to pass over the freeway as well as over the tracks. Arterial undercrossings would be possible but could eliminate intersections with important north-south streets. Capacity Needs - Currently, Kent has several areas of severe traffic congestion. Other than the downtown intersections, areas of congestion include virtually all of the intersections on SR 516 and on SE 208th/212th Street, Military Road intersections and roadway within Kent, the section of Meeker between SR 516 and SR 167, SR 181, south of Willis, the length of SR 167 in the peak travel direction within Kent, and all of peak direction I-5. In the future, these problems will be compounded under each of the land use alternatives. Additional intersections and roadway segments will become congested, primarily on the East Hill north of SE 240th Street and in the northern industrial part of the valley. • Goods Movement - Kent is a significant center of goods distribution. Much of the industrial area is dedicated to warehousing, and there are several sites along the railroad tracks that are intermodal transfer centers for various manufacturers or transfer companies. Designation of a network of truck routes will help ensure that roads of sufficient design and capacity are available to move materials into and out of the city. The railroads are planning track improvements to improve efficiency on the two main lines that travel through the city. Public Transit Needs - Some significant changes in public transit service will be needed to meet the needs of the regionally-adopted urban centers concept. Focusing commuter service on Seattle as a destination will need to give way to a multidestination peak-period service, regardless of whether a regional rail system is approved. Service improvements for trips internal to Kent also will be needed to support trip reduction and other demand management strategies. Bicycle and Pedestrian Needs - The City has a network of sidewalks and bicycle lanes, • mostly on City streets. There are some significant gaps in the sidewalk network, which can be discouraging to pedestrians. Some of these gaps exist in areas where there is a KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT - December 12, 1994 9-17 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE high potential for walkers, such as near schools. Kent also is fortunate to be a participant in the development of the- Green River and Interurban trails, two • nonmotorized trails that see significant commuter and recreational use. The Kent Bicycle Advisory Board, a citizens group, has recommended support of three east-west corridors and three north-south corridors. These include 208th/212th Street, Reith/Meeker/Canyon/SR 516, and the planned SE 272nd/277th Street. North- south routes include Military Road, the Interurban Trail, and 116th Ave SE. These main routes need to be supplemented by additional collector routes within neighborhoods and business centers. COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION In January 1993, the City enacted a commute trip reduction ordinance. This ordinance, required by state law, applies to all employers in the City with 100 or more full-time employees who start work between 6AM and 9AM at least two weekdays per week for 12 continuous months of the year. At the present time, this ordinance affects 27 employers at 31 sites and covers about 14,100 employees. The ordinance requires the affected employers to develop and implement commute trip • reduction programs such that there is a reduction of 15 percent in the number of single- occupant vehicle (SOV) trips and vehicle miles of travel per employee in 1995. The required reduction is 25 percent in 1997 and 35 percent in 1999. The modelling effort for this transportation plan included an appropriate reduction in SOV trips to account for the law. It also was assumed in the model that the regional rail system would serve 10.4 percent of home-based work and college trips. Assuming that employers are successful in implementing their programs, and that the number of affected employees stays roughly the same over the 1993-1999 time period, the reduction from 1993 SOV trips would be about 1,800 by 1995, 3,000 by 1997, and 4,200 by 1999. The actual number of vehicles removed is related to which alternate modes are selected. For example, if all of the affected employees switched to bicycles or rail transit, the full number of trips would be removed from the network; if they all switched to two-person carpools, only half the number would be removed. Under the assumption that Kent started with an average mode split of 85 percent single- occupant vehicles (SOV) and that the Commute Trip Reduction Act remains in place, • 9-18 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT - December 12, 1994 CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT requiring major employers to maintain an SOV rate of 55 percent or lower after 1999, • we may assume about 20 percent of the new trips based on ITE values would not occur. This is because not all new employers would fall into the affected employer category. PM peak trips are generated by many uses, and the proportion of "affected employee trips" is fairly low. Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Support - At the present time, City zoning policies support nonSOV modes; however, there is minimal incentive for a developer or employer to implement any actions beyond the minimum. City codes could provide development incentives, such as more leasable space, if a facility provides permanent incentives for nonSOV use, such as reserving a percentage of employee parking for HOV users. Allowing developers to contribute to off-site parking in trade for reduced on-site parking requirements, or to sponsor a spillover mitigation program (such as a residential parking zone), could encourage developers and businesses to support CTR. The City also should consider requiring employers to charge for parking and encouraging property managers to include parking as a negotiable, chargeable element rather than an inclusive feature in a building lease. • Finally, by adopting CTR requirements which are more stringent than the state guidelines, more employers could be forced into complying with CTR. These requirements could include reducing the threshold from 100 to 50 employees, imposing penalties for nonattainment of goals, or requiring a minimum number of specific CTR measures based on site size. TRANSIT PLAN The City has conducted a study of transit service. Major findings and recommendations of this study (in a separate document) will guide the City in working with transit providers to develop service for the Kent area. The King County Department of Metropolitan Services (Metro), currently operates 24 transit routes that serve the Kent area. Twenty of these routes are fixed-route service, one is a dial-a-ride paratransit route, and three are custom-bus routes. Peak period service generally is provided every 30 minutes or less on every route except two. Midday service is provided on seven of the fixed routes. Weekday evening service after 11PM • is provided on three routes. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 9-19 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE Much of Kent's transit service is focused on the downtown Kent Transit Center/Park-and- Ride. The Kent-Des Moines Park-and-Ride is served by six routes, primarily with • Seattle CBD destinations. A third park-and-ride recently opened just outside the City limits, near SR 516 and 132nd, and is served by three routes. Metro also provides commuter vans to 70 vanpool groups with origins or destinations in Kent; this represents about 13 percent of Metro's vanpool fleet. Metro also provides door-to-door, advance- reservation service for elderly or disabled persons. The Regional Transit Authority (RTA) is examining the implementation of a commuter rail line from Tacoma to Everett via downtown Seattle and the Green River valley. This rail line would use one of the sets of existing tracks. Under the current proposal, commuter trains could run in both directions during the morning and afternoon peak periods. Stations would be located in each of the cities along the alignment, and each station would be served by a network of feeder buses from residential centers and shuttles to employment centers. The Kent Transit Advisory Board has recommended to the City Council that commuter rail operate on the Burlington Northern line, with a station in the vicinity of James Street-Smith Street. This is somewhat consistent with previous City positions that the station should be in downtown; this location would encourage commuters to patronize downtown businesses before and after their commutes and would • provide easy access for commuters with jobs in the downtown area. The ultimate regional system also includes a proposed light rail or possibly rapid rail line in the I-5 corridor through Kent, with a stop at the Kent-Des Moines Park-and-Ride. This system also would be served by a network of feeder and shuttle buses. Bus service improvements, the commuter rail portion, and an initial light rail segment closer to Seattle are anticipated to go to the public for a funding vote in 1995. Transit Recommendations For the purpose of analyzing transit markets and demand, the City was divided into four areas: East Hill, West Hill, Downtown, and the North Industrial Area. Based on telephone surveys, origin-destination information, key-person interviews, and an evaluation of current services and facilities, recommendations were developed and evaluated. Actions for market areas that are tied to Kent, such as other south King County cities, also were reviewed and recommended. The following is a summary of the recommended actions: • 9-20 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT - December 12, 1994 CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT East Hill Action 1 - Implement a combined fixed route/route deviation/demand • responsive service to provide circulation among East Hill, Downtown, and the North Industrial Area. East Hill Action 2 - Increase the frequency of service on Route 168 in order to meet future local-travel demand among Covington, East Hill, and Downtown. Route 168 is currently a popular and productive route. West Hill Action 1 - Implement a combined fixed route/route deviation/demand responsive service to provide circulation among West Hill, Downtown, and the SR 99 corridor. The service should focus on midday coverage and provide connections to regional service. Downtown Action 1 - Enhance service coverage and connections in the downtown through the development of local circulators from East and West Hills, and a new local fixed route from Downtown to the North Industrial Area. North Industrial Area Action 1 - There is currently one transit service corridor • in this area. Implement a new fixed route from Downtown Kent which circulates through the area and continues to Renton. Focus on enhancing service coverage. South King County Action 1 - Improve service connections between local Kent routes at the Kent-Des Moines Park-and-ride and routes serving the SR 99 corridor. South King County Action 2 - Enhance service coverage through implementation of a new Renton-to-Kent route via the North Industrial Area, west of SR 167. South King County Action 3 - Provide all-day, bidirectional service on Route 167 through Auburn, Kent, Renton, Bellevue, and the University of Washington. Regional Action 1 - If commuter rail is implemented, reinvest discontinued service hours in local service improvements. If not, provide additional connections to major transit generators/employment centers in the Seattle area (U- District, First Hill, Northgate). • KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 9-21 TR4NSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE Regional Action 2 - Improve connections with Pierce Transit, especially if commuter rail is not implemented, to provide a regional bus line from Pierce • County to Kent, via Auburn. The recent Downtown Parking Study suggested that there is an imbalance in long- and short-term parking in the downtown area. It is also agreed that the existing downtown park-and-ride is too far from downtown for employees to use, and that existing transit service from that lot to downtown is inconvenient. Conversion of the area near the BN tracks to long-term transit/commuter parking would require relocation of some existing long-term, general-use parking. If the area is not appropriately sized, on-street parking in downtown could be affected by spillover as a result of increased use of transit. System Management Alternatives - The City currently is involved in two projects to improve system operation in the valley. One is a multijurisdictional examination and review of signal timing and coordination for valley arterials that cross jurisdictional bounds. The outcome of this project should be improved flow on major roads and the ability, via computer technology, to adjust signal cycles as demand warrants. The second project is within the City and includes installing a new master computer for the City's signal system. This will allow the City to adjust signal cycles as demand varies. • As technology improves over the next 10 to 20 years, a system of surveillance, control, and driver information (SC&DI), similar to that operated by WSDOT on I-5, I-90, and SR 520, would be appropriate for the principal arterials in south King County. This would allow drivers to be notified where back-ups are occurring and what alternate routes may be available. It also would provide a way to meter traffic entering congested facilities. IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS Six-Year Program Every year, the City adopts a transportation improvement program aimed at showing improvements and expenditures over the next six years. The program adopted for 1994- 2000 generally provides adequate levels of service and corrects existing deficiencies, as defined by the City's service standard. Elements of this action plan include road widening and development of new corridors, support for demand management programs including a significant upgrade to traffic signal control, and support for neighborhood • traffic control. 9-22 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT 2010 Improvements • As new development occurs additional improvements p p ements will be needed to maintain the proposed LOS standards. A number of projects have been identified, including road widening for general purpose traffic and for HOV lanes, completion of the regional network, and conversion of lanes for peak-period HOV use. Each of the land use alternatives which were originally developed has a slightly different effect in terms of traffic impact, so the project lists are slightly different in terms of magnitude of impact on a specific corridor or facility. 2020 Improvements A similar project list has been identified for implementation between 2010 and 2020, assuming growth occurs at the rate identified in the land use alternatives. These projects include more widening, primarily to serve HOV users. r • KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 9-23 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION FINANCING & IMPLEMENTATION PLAN The creation of a financing and implementation plan is critical to the overall development of the transportation element. In turn the transportation element is a critical element of the comprehensive plan. Development of a financing and implementation plan involves the examination of a number of issues including, improvements to the street system, transit, parking, pedestrian and bicycle facilities. A key tool of the examination was the development of a computer forecast model which simulates the future year travel patterns on the City's transportation system. A key parameter in determining the needs of the system was service levels. Under Growth Management service levels or degree of congestion is a local discretion subject however to consistency at jurisdictional boundaries. The methodology used to develop the financing plan was consistent with that of the countrywide planning policies. This section is a critical component of the transportation element, and as such plays a important part in enabling growth to occur in concert with the land use projections. It should be noted that while the land use element projected three different scenarios, the differences with respect to the transportation system were negligible. While the • transportation element incorporates an improvement program for 2010 and 2020, the critical component is the Six Year Transportation Improvement Program. The recommended 6 Year T.I.P. is shown on Table 9.3. It is critical because Growth Management mandates that all plans be financially sound and implementable with respect to concurrancy. The 6 Year T.I.P. outlines over $72,000,000 in improvements, of which approximately $50,000,000 is to be spent on corridor projects, more than $17,000,000 on arterials, almost$800,000 on intersections and over $4,000,000 on non-motorized and maintenance improvements. It should be noted that no new revenue sources are contemplated. The bulk of the revenue comes from Grants ($31,000,000), LIDs ($17,000,000), and existing sources ($21,000,000) such as Cash on Hand, MV Fuel Tax, MV Registration Fee and Street Utility. Both project costs and anticipated revenues are shown on Figure 9.3. With respect to Grants, 74% ($23,018,000) thereof are existing commitments with the balance ($8,038,000) related to highly eligible type projects. • 9-24 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Similarly so with respect to LIDS where 82% ($14,147,000) pertains to the corridor • projects for which adequate covenants exist. The balance ($3,046,000) involves projects that due to a combination of low assessment level and adjacent high density land use should be supportable. The implementation schedule which is equally important with respect to Growth Management and the assemblage of funds is reflected in Table 9.4. The crucial projects such as the 196th Street Corridor, Orillia to West Valley Highway, and West Valley Highway to East Valley Highway, and the 272nd Street Corridor are anticipated to be opened in 1998, 2000 and 1999 respectively. i • • KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 9-25 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE FIGURE 9.3 CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON 6 YEAR T.I.P. PROJECT COSTS Non-motorized&Maint Imps(5.571/4) Intersections(1.11%) Arterials(23 68%) Corridor Projects(69 64%) CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON 6 YEAR T.I.P. REVENUES 66sLng So,rces (30 43%) Grants(44 93%) L 1 D's Includes Cash on Hand, MV Fuel Tax, MV Registration Fee &Street Utility • 9-26 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 CHAPTER NINE + TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Table 9.3 • Six Year Capital Improvement Projects (1995 - 2000) Corridors: 1 272nd Corridor(Auburn Way North-SR516) 17,258 (Total Project Cost$27,500,Cost Beyond 2000$6,218) 2 196th Street(East Valley Highway-West Valley Highway) 20,391 (Total Project Cost$22,044) 3 196th/200th Street(Orillia-West Valley Highway) 12,249 (Total Project Cost$12,741) Total Corridors 49,898 Arterials: 4 212 Street HOV Lanes(West Valley Highway-SR167) 3,900 5 64th Avenue Extension(224th-216th South) 2,200 6 West Meeker Street Widening(4/5 Lanes) 2,566 (SR516-East Bank of Green River) 7 Pack Highway HOV Lanes(SR516-Southeast 240th Street) 1,650 8 Washington Ave Widening(7 Lanes) 1,000 (Harrison Street to Green River Bridge) 9 72nd Avenue Extension(South 194th-South 196th) 540 • 10 Southeast 256th Widening(5 Lanes)(SR516- 116th Ave) 2,900 11 Pacific Highway HOV Lanes(Southeast 240th-S City Limits) 2,500 Total Arterials 17,256 Intersection Improvements: 12 Reith Road/West Meeker Street Intersection Widening 57 13 Russell Road/West Meeker Street Signalization 200 14 Military Road Intersection Improvements(Left Turn Pocket) 150 15 James Street/Central Avenue(Northbound Right Turn Lane) 350 16 Green River Signal Coordination g Total Intersection Improvements 765 Other Improvements: 17 Sidewalk Rehabilitation 1,800 18 Bike Path Improvements 500 19 Canyon Drive Sidewalk&Bicycle Lane 792 20 Neighborhood Traffic Control 60 21 Bus Service Enhancements 79 22 Pavement Markings(Restoration) 100 23 East Valley Highway Pavement Rehabilitation 510 24 South Central Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation 425 Total Other Improvements 4,266 • Total Capital Improvement Projects 72,185 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 9-27 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE Table 9.4 Six Year Capital Improvement Program (1995-200) • Revenues: 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Total Vehicle Fuel Tax(Unrestricted) 712 726 741 756 771 '786 4,491 Vehicle Fuel Tax(Restricted) 61 202 133 288 208 892 Public Works Operation Budget 192 300 492 Total Revenue 712 979 943 1,189 1,059 994 5,875 Program Expenditures: Sidewalk Rehabilitation 300 300 300 300 300 300 1,800 Bike Paths 100 100 100 100 100 500 Bus Demonstration 30 49 79 Neighborhood Traffic 20 20 20 60 Control Total Program Expenditures 450 449 320 400 420 400 2,439 Subtotal 262 530 623 789 639 594 3,436 Projects: Reith/W Meeker Intersection 0 0 212th HOV Lanes 0 0 Russell1W Meeker Signal 168 168 64th Ave Extension 489 11 500 • Canyon Drive Sidewalk& 542 542 Bicycle Lanes W Meeker Widening 657 109 766 Pacific Highway HOV Lanes 0 0 Phase I Washington Ave Widening 0 0 Military Road Intersection 150 150 Improvements 72nd Avenue Extension 340 340 S.E.256th Street Widening 485 485 Pacific Highway HOV Lanes 0 0 Phase II Pavement Markings Project 100 100 Green River Signal Coord. 0 0 James&Central 70 70 Northbound Right 1brn Lane EVH Pavement Rehabilitation 192 192 S Central Pavement Rehabilitation 300 300 Total Projects 268 681 623 790 657 594 3,613 Beginning Fund Balance 228 222 71 71 70 51 Ending Fund Balance* 228 222 71 71 70 51 51 + ed + Restricted = $227 919 • Ending Fund Balance 1994(Unrestricted ) , 9-28 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT - December 12, 1994 t, CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT TRANSPORTATION GOALS AND POLICIES The transportation plan was developed around one central goal. Overall Goal: Provide for a balanced multimodal transportation system which will support land use patterns and adequately serve existing and future residential and employment growth within the potential annexation area. This goal is supported by 10 goals and almost 100 policies. The goals and policies under each goal are as follows: TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE GOALS AND POLICIES Goal TR 1 - Coordinate land use and transportation planning to meet the needs of the City and the requirements of the Growth Management Act. Policy TR 1.1 - Locate commercial, industrial, multifamily, and other uses that generate high levels of traffic in designated activity centers around intersections of principal or minor arterials or around freeway interchanges. Policy TR 1.2 - Coordinate new commercial and residential development in Kent with transportation projects to improve affected roadways. Policy TR 1.3 - Fund development of the roads necessary for a complete arterial system serving all travel needs in the planning area (inside and outside the City) through fair-share payments by new residential, commercial, and industrial development. Policy TR-1.4 - Along all principal and minor arterial corridors, consolidate access points to residential, commercial, and industrial development. Consider proposals to consolidate access points during development review, as part of road improvement projects, or as part of land use redevelopment projects. Policy TR-1.5 - Ensure consistency between land use and transportation plans so that land use and adjacent transportation facilities are compatible. Policy TR-1.6 - Phase implementation of transportation plans concurrently with growth to allow adequate transportation facilities and services to be in place at the time of occupancy. Policy TR-1.7 - Promote land use patterns which support public transportation. • KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 9-29 } TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE Policy TR 1.8 - Create land uses in the downtown and commercial areas which better support transit and reduce peak-hour trip generation. • PARKING GOALS AND POLICIES Goal TR 2 - Promote a reasonable balance between parking supply and parking demand. Policy TR 2.1 - Develop parking ratios which take into account existing parking supply, minimums and maximums, land use intensity, and transit and ride-sharing goals. Policy TR-2.2 - Develop criteria for a network of park-and-ride lots to serve residential areas which feed into the regional transit system/commuter rail line located downtown. Policy TR-2.3 - Incorporate ground-level retail and/or service facilities into any parking structures that are constructed within the downtown DCE, DC, and DLM zones. Policy TR 2.4 - Remove the provisions in the existing zoning regulations that distinguish between parking structures and surface parking lots. Policy TR-2.5 - Provide an option for developers to construct the minimum number of parking spaces on-site or pay an in-lieu fee to cover the cost of the City's construction and operation of parking at an off-site location. Policy TR-2.6 - Evaluate the parking requirements for all other uses, including mixed-use projects, within the DC, DCE, and DLM zones on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the following factors: (a) the potential of shared parking and transit facilities in proximity to the site; (b) the employee profile of a proposed site, including the number and type of employees and the anticipated shifts; (c) the potential for "capture" trips that will tend to reduce individual site parking requirements due to the aggregation of uses within concentrated areas; (d) the Institute of Transportation Engineers Parking Generation report and other publications which provide parking generation indices; and (e) any studies of similar specific uses conducted either by the City of Kent or the applicant. The City of Kent parking coordinator, with the Planning • 9-30 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT - December 1Z 1994 CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Director's concurrence, will prepare a report recommending specific parking • requirements. Policy TR-2.7 - Recommend no parking maximum ratios for retail or residential uses. Policy TR-2.8 - Require reduced maximum-allowable-parking ratios for development projects that are in close proximity to intermodal transit/commuter rail facilities. A development project may provide up to 50 percent of the applicable maximum parking standard if the development is located within 250 feet of a designated intermodal transit/commuter rail facility. Such project may provide up to 75 percent of the applicable maximum parking standard if the development is located between 250 and 500 feet of an intermodal facility. Policy TR-2.9 - Require a specific ratio of the total parking area for HOV parking. A minimum of two (2) HOV parking spaces for every 25 on-site spaces is suggested. Policy TR 2.10 - Require bicycle parking under the zoning code. Recommended standards are: one bicycle parking space for every 10 motor vehicle spaces in a new development, with a minimum of 10 bicycle spaces for any new development in the DC, DCE, and DLM zones. • Policy TR 2.11 - Do not differentiate among the DCE, DC, and DLM zones in terms of parking requirements for the same land uses within Kent's downtown. STREET SYSTEM GOALS AND POLICIES Goal TR 3 - Provide a balanced transportation system that recognizes the need for major road improvements to accommodate many travel modes. Create a comprehensive street system that provides reasonable circulation for all users throughout the City. Policy TR 3.1 -Assign a functional classification to each street in the City based on factors including volumes of motorized and nonmotorized traffic, type of service provided, adjacent land use, and preservation of existing neighborhood traffic characteristics. Policy TR-3.2 - Coordinate implementation of street construction standards for each functional classification with policies in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Community Design Element. • KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 9-31 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE '4 TRAFFIC FLOW GOALS AND POLICIES Goal TR-4 - Eliminate disruptions which reduce the sae and reasonable nctionin • P safety functioning of the local transportation system. Policy TR-4.1 - Maximize traffic flow and mobility on arterial roads, especially on regional through routes, while protecting local neighborhood roads from increased traffic volumes. Policy TR-4.2 - Provide a balance between protecting neighborhoods from increased traffic and reducing accessibility for the City-wide road network. Policy TR-4.3 - Balance the dual goals of providing accessibility within the local street system and protecting neighborhoods. Where overflow traffic from the regional system significantly impacts neighborhoods, protect the residential area. Policy TR 4.4 - Develop a system of level-of-service standards which promote growth where appropriate and preserve the transportation system where appropriate. Policy TR 4.5 - Limit heavy, through truck traffic to designated truck routes in order to reduce its disruptive impacts. Policy TR 4.6 - Minimize the effects of regional traffic congestion and overflow •onto the local transportation system. Policy TR 4.7 - Develop strategies to reduce traffic flows in local areas experiencing extreme congestion. Policy TR-4.8 - Enhance the neighborhood Traffic Safety Program to include in neighborhoods a wide range of passive control devices. Policy TR 4.9 - Reduce the disruptive impacts of traffic related to major institutions, activity centers, and employers via trip-reduction efforts, access/egress controls, and provision of alternatives to SOV use. FACILITY DESIGN GOALS AND POLICIES Goal TR-5 - Design transportation facilities to preserve and to be consistent with the natural and built environments. Policy TR 5.1 -Landscape transportation facilities to complement neighborhood character and amenities. 9-32 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Policy TR-5.2 - Maintain and incorporate prominent features of the natural • environment into the landscape of transportation facilities. Policy TR-5.3 - Protect neighborhoods from transportation facility improvements that are not in character with the residential areas. Encourage pedestrian and bicycle connections among residential developments to serve as an alternative to automobile use. Policy TR 5.4-Arrange streets and pedestrian paths in residential neighborhoods as an interconnecting network and connect them to other streets. Policy TR-5.5 - Limit the development of new cul-de-sac streets to situations where continuation of the road at some time in the future is unlikely. Policy TR-5.6 - Develop the urban design elements of the street system in accordance with policies in the City's visioning document. GOODS MOVEMENURAIL GOALS AND POLICIES Goal TR 6 - Maintain existing rail service to commercial and industrial sites. • Policy TR-6.1 - Design transportation facilities in a manner which complements railroads. Policy TR-6.2 - Locate new spur tracks to provide a minimum number of street crossings and to serve a maximum number of sites. Policy TR 6.3 - Minimize adverse impacts of railroad operations on adjoining residential property by limiting nighttime operation and by constructing noise and visual buffers as needed. Policy TR-6.4-Design railroad crossings to minimize maintenance and to protect the street surface. Policy TR 6.5 - Provide protective devices, such as barriers and warning signals, on at-grade crossings. Develop traffic signal prioritization that is activated by crossing signals in order to maintain non-conflicting, auto/truck traffic flow when crossings are occupied by trains. Policy TR 6.6 - With the assistance of the railroads, develop grade separation priorities for arterial street crossings . This is supported by state-level plans for high-speed rail between Eugene, Oregon and Vancouver, British Columbia. • KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 9-33 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE NONMOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION GOALS AND POLICIES -Improve the nonmotorized trans transportation stem or both internal circulation • Goal TR 7 pp system f and linkages to regional travel. Policy TR 7.1 -Accommodate pedestrian and bicycle traffic within all residential and employment areas of the City. Policy TR 7.2 - Require residential development standards to include pedestrian facilities, such as pathways connecting with adjacent developments, transit service, and arterials. Policy TR 7.3 - Review site plans for all new construction and site re- development to ensure compatibility with goals and policies for nonmotorized transportation, automobile, and transit. Policy TR 7.4 - Enhance safety of pedestrian and bicycle movement across principal arterial intersections. Policy TR-7.5 - Equip intersections which have high pedestrian and bicycle volumes with activation buttons and additional fixtures as needed to ensure visibility. • Policy TR-7.6 Minimize obstructions and conflicts with pedestrian movement on sidewalks, paths, and other pedestrian areas. Policy TR 7.7 - Minimize obstructions and potential conflicts with bicycle movement on streets where bicycle use is encouraged. Policy TR-7.8 - Sign street intersections of streets with nonmotorized trails for both trail users and street users. Policy TR 7.9 - Provide convenient and safe pedestrian and bicycle access to transit stops for all users. Policy TR 7.10 - Provide convenient pedestrian and bicycle access between downtown and the commercial area on the west side of SR 16Z Policy TR-7.11 - Encourage bicycle storage facilities and parking within de- velopment projects, at park-and-rides, in commercial areas, and in parks. Policy TR-7.12-Incorporate bicycle-supportive design in transportation projects, using a variety of techniques appropriate to the particular project and right-of- way characteristics. • 9-34 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Policy TR-7.13 - Ensure that street-trail crossings with nearby signals provide • trail users adequate gaps in the cross traffic to allow crossing. Policy TR-7.14 - Encourage major employers, as defined by Kent's commute trip reduction ordinance, to provide arrangements for bicycle commuters to change clothes and safely store their bicycles. Policy TR 7.15-Encourage new commercial or industrial development to provide covered bicycle lock-up facilities. Require multifamily residential developments to include bicycle lockers or lock-up rooms. Policy TR 7.16 - Whenever possible, use standards which meet the guidelines of AASHTO (American Association of Highway and Transportation Officials) Guide to the Development of Bicycle Facilities. Policy TR-7.17 - Consider development of nonmotorized transportation facilities which are separated from roads which are not part of the Regional Trails System only if they: provide needed access across gaps in the nonmotorized transportation system; provide linkages to the Regional Trails System, eliminate barriers to access by nonmotorized transportation; replace access which is removed from a portion of the transportation system previously open to bicycles or pedestrians; or, provide access to new transit or transportation facilities. • Policy TR 7.18 - Design residential streets, including those in single and multifamily developments, to accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists. Policy TR-7.19 - Provide bicycle and pedestrian access at transit sites and park- and-ride facilities. Policy TR-7.20-Locate pedestrian and bicycle routes to be safe, convenient, and to provide transportation among neighborhoods and schools, industrial and commercial business areas, employment centers, institutions, recreational facilities, activity centers, and other off-road trail systems, both local and regional. Policy TR-7.21 - Provide trail opportunities in areas designated as environmentally sensitive or designated for conservation, open space, utility corridors, abandoned railroad corridors, and undeveloped City-owned rights-of- way. Policy TR-7.22 - Review right-of-way vacations for impacts on nonmotorized facility systems. Policy TR-7.23 - Encourage pedestrian and bicycle safety programs for youth, • the elderly, and the handicapped. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 9-35 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE Policy TR 7.24 - Via incentives or regulatory means, require new residential, commercial, and industrial developments to incorporate pedestrian and bicycle • design elements, both on-road systems and off-road trails. Policy TR 7.25 - Require redeveloping properties to provide bicycle and pedestrian facilities to promote walking and to encourage the use of bicycles by employees, visitors, residents, and shoppers. Policy TR 7.26 - Wherever possible, separate pedestrian and bicycle trails from roadway systems and traffic hazard areas. Policy TR 7.27 - Encourage transit use by improving pedestrian and bicycle connections to transit stops, park-and-ride lots, and transit facilities. Policy TR 7.28 - Ensure that trail systems located in sensitive or conservation areas are compatible with the environment in which the trail is located as well as with the intended uses. Policy TR 7.29 - Apply for federally funded programs, such as those authorized under the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, to develop regional trails, intermodal connections to transit facilities, and park-and-ride lots. Policy TR 7.30 - Encourage participation of developers, businesses, and other • private enterprises in the development and/or funding of nonmotorized trail systems. At a minimum, require all properties to provide sidewalks along their roadway frontage. Policy TR 7.31 - Provide near regional systems trailhead facilities that include parking, restroom facilities, informational signage on trail use regulations, trash receptacles, and domestic water. Policy TR-7.32 - Where convenient, locate trailhead facilities within park and recreational facilities to provide multiple use opportunities. Policy TR 7.33 - Provide along trail systems rest areas for sitting, eating, and stationary exercise to take advantage of views, cultural resources, and points of interest. Policy TR-7.34 - Encourage commercial/industrial employers located along existing and future regional trail systems to provide commuter facilities for bicyclists, including secure parking areas, showers, lockers, and educational information which promotes bicycling and walking as a method of commuting. Policy TR 7.35 - Encourage the upgrade of and enhancement to existing pedestrian and bicycle systems in order to improve safety, maintenance, and to provide informational signage. 9-36 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 r CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Policy TR 7.36 - Implement a comprehensive pedestrian and bicycle signage • program for directional information, identification of on- and off-street routes, interpretive education, and a printed, updated trails facility map. Policy TR-7.37 - Provide at park-and-ride facilities safe and secure bicycle parking areas that are covered, lighted, and that include permanent fixtures for storing bicycles. Policy TR-7.38 - Provide safe crossings at major street and railroad facilities, with traffic control that includes signs, bollards, painted markings, and clear sight distances. Where possible, provide grade separation for trails. Policy TR 7.39 - Explore potential partnerships with other agencies and utility companies that have networks and easements in the City. Policy TR 7.40- Provide interpretive and educational signage along trail systems located in sensitive, conservation, and open space areas. Policy TR-7.41 - Use landscaping to direct trail users and to enhance and create an aesthetically pleasing environment. • TRANSIT/HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE GOALS AND POLICIES Goal TR 8.0 - Encourage the development and use of alternatives to single- occupancy vehicles. Policy TR 8.1 - Work with other jurisdictions in the greater metropolitan area toward providing frequent, coordinated, and comprehensive bus service and facilities in all residential and employment areas. Policy TR 8.2 - Promote the establishment of a multimodal transit center in downtown Kent as part of a regional high-capacity transit system. Policy TR-8.3 - Provide the non-CBD, residential portion of the transit system with parking, via either park-and-ride lots or shared-use parking facilities. Policy TR-8.4 - Coordinate park-and-ride facilities located near downtown with downtown parking programs for merchants and shoppers. Policy TR 8.5 - Support the completion of a comprehensive system of HOV improvements and programs on state highways and regional arterials which give high-occupancy vehicles a travel time advantage over single-occupancy vehicles. • KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 9-37 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE Policy TR 8.6 - Promote measures to increase the use of high-occupancy vehicles among employers located within the City who are not required to comply with • commute trip reduction. Policy TR 8.7 - Support development of a regional network using rail technology to move people and goods. Policy TR 8.8 - As a means of accommodating new development, mode split goals should be established in each of the 22 transportation zones, that work towards a 50% increase in transit share by the year 2001, and a 100% increase by the year 2010 -- within the imitations of the City being able to request service from METRO. Policy TR-8.9 - Transit priority measures, such as "queue jump" lanes , "traffic signal pre-emption", and "transit only" lanes should be incorporated in the City's Six Year Transportation Improvement Plan, consistent with achieving a significant node shift away from continued SOV growth. FUNDING GOALS AND POLICIES Goal TR 9 - Pursue funding for transportation improvements from all potential sources in an efficient and equitable manner. • Policy TR-9.1 - Allow for funding of growth-related traffic improvements proportionately by impact fees charged to new development. Policy TR-9.2 - Coordinate equitable public/private partnerships, such as Trans- portation Benefit Zones (TBZ) and Transportation Benefits Districts (TBD), to help pay for transportation improvements. Policy TR 9.3 - Pursue federal, state and local sources of funding (e.g. loans, matching funds)for transportation improvements. Policy TR 9.4 -Establish a mechanism to provide multijurisdictional cooperation to fund transportation improvements. Policy TR 9.5 - Create a funding mechanism, such as a Transportation Benefit District, which can be applied across boundaries to address the impact on the City's transportation system of growth outside the City limits. • 9-38 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 F CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION GOALS AND POLICIES • Goal TR-10 - Coordinate transportation operations, planning, and improvements with the county, WSDOT, other cities, and the Regional Transit Authority. Policy TR-10.1 - Design and implement a subregional transportation system in cooperation with neighboring jurisdictions. Policy TR-10.2 - Plan and improve local and regional transit service and facilities in cooperation with the Regional Transit Authority. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PC REVISED DRAFT -December 12, 1994 9-39 Exhibit 1' l � NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION GOALS AND POLICIES (Revised 4118195) Goal TR 1 - Coordinate land use and transporiation planning to meet the needs of the City and the requirements of the growth Management Act. Alternative flexible and creative transportation options that maximize these requirements should also be allawed in the planning process. Goal TR 7- Improve the non-motorized transportation system or both internal circulation and linkages fo regional travel, and promote the use of non-motorized transportation. Policy TR 7. 1 - Whenever practical, give consideration to pedestrian and bicycle traffic within all residential and development areas of the City. Policy TR 7.2 - Whenever practical, use incentives or regulations to encourage new construction to promote pedestrian and bicycle movements to pathways, transit services and arterials. Policy TR 7.3 - Establish a non-motorized transportation network within the City to be comprised of the primary routes, collector routes and recreation routes denoted on the non-moiorized facilities map. Policy TR 7.4 - Enhance and promote the safety of pedestrian and bicycle movements across arterial intersections, major street crossings and railroad facilites. Policy TR 7.5 - Provide visibility and promote safe crossings for pedestrians and bicycles where streets intersect with trails, paths and ofher areas where pedestrians andor bicycle movements are encouraged. Policy TR-7.6 - Whenever practical, provide safety and safe access for pedestrians and bicyclists to transit stops. Sign street intersections of streets with nonmotorized trails for both trail users and street users. Policy TR 7.7- Whenever practical, using incentives or regulatory means, encourage bicycle storage facilities with adequate lighting of residential development projects, park and rides, employment and industrial centers, schools, activity centers and retail areas. Policy TR-7.8 - Whenever practical using incentives or regulatory means, encourage employers to provide clothing change facilities. Policy TR 7.9 - Promote the use of non-motorized travel through bicycle safety programs. Non-Motorized Page 2 (Revised 4118195) Policy TR 7.10 - Implement a comprehensive pedestrian and bicvcle signage program for directional information, identification of on/off street routes, interpretive education and a printed updated trails facility map. Policy TR-7.11 - City standards for transportation facilities shall incorporate bicycle- friendly and pedestrian friendly design elements wherever possible, use standards for public roadways which meet the guidelines of AASHTO (American Association of State Highway Traffic Officials Guide to the Development Bicycle Facilities. Policy TR 7.12 - Ensure that trail systems located in sensitive or conservation areas are compatible with the environment in which the trail is located as well as with the intended uses. EXHIBIT F CITY OF KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF ti .+ Adopted April 18, 1995 Ordinance #3222 Mayor Jim White Director of Operations J. Brent McFall City Clerk Brenda Jacober City Council Judy Woods, President Jim Bennett Tim Clark Christi Houser Jon Johnson Paul Mann Leona Orr Planning Commission Kent Morrill, Chair Russ Stringham, Vice Chair Gwen Dahle Kenneth Dozier Connie Epperly Ed Heineman Robert Maclsaac Janette Nuss Mike Pattison Former Member Raymond Ward Table of Contents City of Kent Comprehensive Plan Page Chapter One Introduction 1-1 Chapter Two Community Profile 2-1 Chapter Three Framework Policies 3-1 Chapter Four Land Use Element 4-1 Chapter Five Community Design Element 5-1 Chapter Six Housing Element 6-1 Chapter Seven Human Services Element 7-1 Chapter Eight Capital Facilities Element 8-1 Chapter Nine Transportation Element 9-1 Chapter Ten Parks Element 10-1 Chapter Eleven Utilities Element 11-1 Chapter Twelve Economic Development Element 12-1 Appendix A Supporting Documents List of Maps Chapter One - Introduction Figure 1.1 Regional Map Chapter Four - Land Use Figure 4.1 Urban Growth Area Figure 4.2 Potential Annexation Area Figure 4.3 Kent Zoning Districts Figure 4.4 Hazard Areas Figure 4.5 Inventoried Wetlands Figure 4.6 Vacant and Redevelopable Land Figure 4.7 Land Use Plan Map Chapter Eight - Capital Facilities Figure 8.1 Public Services and Facilities Figure 8.2 Sewer System Figure 8.3 Storm Drainage Service Area Figure 8.4 Water System Chapter Nine - Transportation Figure 9.1 Principal Arterials Figure 9.2 Traffic Zones Chapter Ten - Parks Figure 10.1 Parks and Recreation Facilities Figure 10.2 Existing Trails Chapter Eleven - Utilities Figure 11.1 Puget Power Electrical System Figure 11.2 Natural Gas Figure 11.3 Telecommunications List of Tables Chapter Two - Community Profile Figure 2.1 Population Growth, Kent and Potential Annexation Area Figure 2.2 Population by Ethnicity, 1980 and 1990 Figure 2.3 Population per Household, Kent and Potential Annexation Area Figure 2.4 Household Income Figure 2.5 Kent's Housing Mix: 1970, 1980, 1990 Figure 2.6 Net New Housing Units, 1980 - 1994 Figure 2.7 Housing Growth Figure 2.8 Employment Trends Figure 2.9 Employment: 1970, 1980, 1990 Chapter Four - Land Use Element Table 4.1 1991 City of Kent Zoning Designations Table 4.2 City of Kent Residential Capacity Table 4.3 Unincorporated King County Residential Capacity Table 4.4 City of Kent Commercial and Industrial Capacity Chapter Six - Housing Element Figure 6.1 1990 Population by Age, Kent Potential Annexation Area Figure 6.2 Households by Income Level, Kent Potential Annexation Area Table 6.3 1990 and 2010 Housing Need by Income Group Chapter Eight - Capital Facilities Element Table 8.1 Capital Costs Table 8.2 Financing Plan Chapter Nine - Transportation Element Table 9.1. Level of Service Definition (LOS) Table 9.2 Zone Level of Service Standards Figure 9.3 6-Year TIP Project Costs and Revenue Table 9.3 Six Year Capital Improvement Projects Table 9.4 Six Year Capital Improvement Program (1995-2000) Acknowledgements Citizen Advisory Committees Advisory Committee on Growth Management Bicycle Advisory Board Leona Orr, Chair Steve Babbitt Jack Cosby Mark Davis Tracy Antley David Hoffman Walter Flue Steve Knight Larry Frazier David McLean Ed Heineman Steve Nuss Linda Martinez John Streich Raul Ramos Advisory Committee on Impact Fees Economic Development Committee Leona Orr, Chair Jay Bakst Carl Bloss Ron Cole Jack Cosby Arthur Martin Tracy Antley Howard Montoure Walter Flue Jerry Prouty Ed Heineman Kathleen Rotello Fred High Paul Seely Linda Martinez Barbara Ivanov Raul Ramos Mike Visser Jim Williams Fred Westerfield Transit Advisory Board Human Services Commission Robert Whalen, Co-Chair Susan Ramos, Chair Mike Skehan, Co-Chair Marijean Heutmaker Jay Bakst Dee Moschel Mike Etzell Judy Sarff Linda Johnson Constance Stockton Jennifer Looney Melvin Tate Don McDaniel Janer Wilford Ted Nixon Lucyle Wooden Janette Nuss Judy Woods Claudia Otey Russ Stringham Frank Wiemes City Staff Planning Department Parks Department James Harris, Planning Director John Hodgson, Parks Director Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager Patrice Thorell, Cultural Arts Lin Ball, Human Services Manager Superintendant Kevin O'Neill, Senior Planner Helen Wickstrom, Parks Administration Charlene Anderson, Planner Superintendant Betsy Czark, Planner Matthews Jackson, Planner/GIS Coordinator Operations Department Linda Phillips, Planner May Miller, Finance Manager Armin Quilici, Planning Intern Cliff Craig, Financial Analyst Nora Gierloff, Planning Intern Jim Huntington, Field Auditor NanSea Potts, Administrative Charlie Lindsey, Support Services Secretary Manager Dea Drake, Graphics Lead Public Works Department Jan Cutting, Graphic Artist Don Wickstrom, Public Works Director Gary Gill, City Engineer City Attorney's Office Ed White, Transportation Engineer Kristen Langley, Assistant Roger Lubovich, City Attorney Transportation Engineer Laurie Evezich, Asst. City Attorney Bill Wolinski, Water Quality Tom Brubaker, Asst. City Attorney Engineering Supervisor Kurt Palowez, GIS Coordinator Fire Department Document Production Norm Angelo, Chief Charlene Anderson Jed Aldridge, Assistant Chief Dea Drake Mary Berg, Assistant Chief Jan Cutting Jackie Figgins, Administrative NanSea Potts Services Assistant Police Department GIS/Cartography Ed Crawford, Chief Matthews Jackson Jim Miller, Captain Kurt Palowez Mary Ann Kern, Administrative Services Assistant Consulting Assistance Beckwith Consulting Group Kasprisin Pettinari Design Bucher, Willis and Ratliff KJS Associates Forum Foundation A. Nelessen Associates Henderson, Young & Company PEI/Barrett Consulting HT Associates W & H Pacific CITY OF KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ORDINANCE LIST Ordinance Date Adopted Ordinance Summary 3222 April 18, 1995 Adopted Comprehensive Plan 3261 December 19, 1995 Amended Land Use Plan Map for Meridian Annexation area(done as an emergency/no text changes) 3281 March 5, 1996 Amended Capital Facilities Element (Ch 8) to allow collection of school impact fees (done as an emergency) 3302 June 18, 1996 Amended policy in the Land Use Element (Ch 4) (done as an emergency) 3305 July 16, 1996 Amended Land Use Plan Map (done as annual amendment process) 3331 January 21, 1997 Amended Land Use Plan Map, Capital Facilities Element (Ch 8), and Transportation Element (Ch 9) CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION This document represents the first overall revision to the Kent Comprehensive Plan since 1977. When the 1977 plan was produced, the City was approximately 16 square miles and had a population of 17,500 persons. Today, while the City's land area has increased to only 19.5 square miles, the City's population has experienced unprecedented growth rates and now exceeds 42,000 persons. This rapid growth and change in the character of the city has naturally provided impetus to revise and update the Comprehensive Plan. However, the major reason that the Comprehensive Plan is being updated at this time is the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA). The GMA was passed by the state legislature in 1990, with amendments added in 1991. The legislature passed the GMA in recognition of the rate of growth which was occurring throughout the state, particularly on the west side of the Cascades. The legislature was responding not only to the rate of growth, but also to the type and location of growth. Two-thirds of the state's population and household growth in the 1980's took place in unincorporated areas, and produced sprawling subdivisions, commercial strips, and urbanization of land which only ten years before was rural. These growth patterns have resulted in increased traffic congestion and inadequate public services, and have threatened forest land, agricultural land, and environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands. These impacts have been felt in Kent just as they have been felt in other parts of the state. Requirements of the Growth Management Act The GMA requires that each jurisdiction produce a comprehensive plan which contains, at a minimum, elements pertaining to land use, transportation, capital facilities, housing, and utilities. These elements must be consistent with one another. Jurisdictions also are required to adopt policies and regulations protecting resource lands and critical areas, such as agricultural land, wetlands, and hillsides. Each jurisdiction must coordinate its plans with the plans from surrounding jurisdictions. Furthermore, each county planning under the Act must designate an urban growth area boundary, outside of which urban development shall not occur within the next 20 years. This means that all jurisdictions KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 1-1 INTRODUCTION CHAPTER ONE in King County, including Kent, must designate a countywide urban growth area which can accommodate 20 years of projected population growth. Perhaps what most distinguishes the GMA from previous planning statutes is the requirement that public _ services must be available or funded at some designated level of service before development may occur. If a jurisdiction cannot provide services to an area, then it may not permit development in that area. The 1991 amendments to the GMA require all counties planning under the act to adopt countywide planning policies, which provide a framework upon which local comprehensive plans are developed and adopted. In July 1992, the King County Council adopted countywide planning policies; the policies subsequently were ratified by Kent. The policies were amended in 1994. The Kent Comprehensive Plan has been prepared according to the provisions of the Growth Management Act and the Countywide Planning Policies. However, Kent's plan also contains many components which are not referenced in the GMA; these additional components are included in the plan due to their importance to the Kent community. Although Kent's goals and policies for growth and the provision of services are guided by GMA requirements and are based in part upon state and regional goals, they primarily reflect the vision and goals of our own elected officials, community advisory groups, and citizens. HISTORY OF KENT In order to prepare adequately for the future, it is important to review and understand what occurred in the past and what is occurring in the present. Each chapter of the plan will review in some detail trends relevant to that particular component of the plan. What follows here is a general overview of Kent's history, to provide an overall perspective and framework for planning the future. 1850 - 1950 Prior to settlement of the area, Kent was distinguished by the Green River valley, with abundant fish and waterfowl living in the river and densely wooded hillsides framing the valley. The first Native American inhabitants of the area developed a culture which was intertwined with and relied on the natural systems. When the first white settlers arrived in the Kent area, they approached the environment in an entirely different manner. Within 140 years the densely-forested hillsides, underbrush and deciduous trees in the 1-2 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 1 NORTH �a V CLRLLRM JEFFERSON MASON GRAYS HARBOR i THUW PACIFIC THIS MAP IS INTENDED AS AN RID IN GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ONLY AND IS NOT R LEGAL DOCUMENT. WAHKIAKUM )i c! REGIONAL MAP FIGURE 1 . 1 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION lowlands, abundant wildlife, and salmon and steelhead in the rivers and streams were converted to the present urban environment. The first white settlers arrived in 1853 and established a claim just southeast of what is now downtown Kent. Soon, small farms were established to serve the growing Seattle area. The early farmers produced butter, eggs, and vegetables. Farming was supplemented by growing fruit trees and livestock, as well as by hunting and fishing. In the 1870's, the first hop fields in the Kent Valley were planted and harvested. The high yields and profits from the hops attracted other farms, and hop growing soon spread through most of the valley. Local farmers were able to enjoy several years of prosperity, and the White River Valley became well known as a major hop-growing center. Commercial logging also was becoming popular. In 1881, the Kent Lumber Company and other sawmills opened and began clearing the East and West Hill forests. The hop boom led to improvements in the transportation system which had been limited mainly to canoe and foot trails. Captain Simon Peter Randolph dredged and cleared the White River, and he ran the first steamboat up the river in 1871. River boat travel ended > about 1887 as other modes of transportation, like the Puget Sound Shore Railroad, J became available. The town of Kent was officially incorporated on May 28, 1890. Prior to this time, the west side of Kent was known as Yesler (named after Henry Yesler's plat) and the east side was known as Titusville. The conflict in naming the city was resolved when "Kent" was named after the English hop-growing center of Kent County, England. The original town encompassed one square mile and 853 people. The 1890's were a decade of growth for Kent as the railroad depot Kent as the business center for much of the valley. After incorporation, the hop boom, which had lasted ten years, began a heavy decline due to lower yields, appearance of the hop louse, and lower market prices. As a result, lands were converted to grass land and dairying. The Carnation Milk Company manufactured its first can of Carnation Milk in Kent in 1899. While dairy farms are no longer abundant, the Standard Dairy (now Smith Brothers) still produces dairy products at the southern end of Kent. By 1917, there was a definite shift in farming toward the intensive growing of various types of vegetables. This shift was due in part to the immigration of European and KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 1-3 IN7ROD UC770N CHAPTER ONE Japanese farmers who established truck farms in the lowlands. In the 1920's, Kent became known as the "Lettuce Capital of the World". Transportation improvements including the Chicago-Milwaukee-St. Paul Transcontinental Rail Line, the Seattle Tacoma Interurban Line, as well as two-lane, hard-surfaced roadways for automobiles encouraged growth of new businesses and residents. A small - commercial center grew up at the intersection of Benson Road and Kent-Kangley Road; a feed store and a grocery store with lockers in the early 1920's. In 1942, the forced evacuation of the Japanese who farmed much of the valley resulted in a change in both the agricultural landscape and the cultural diversity of valley residents. Fewer than one-third of the Japanese returned to resume their former method of agriculture. However, at the end of World War II, the Kent Valley still was basically rural and agricultural. Cash cropping in the eastern part of the lowland and dairying were the principle agricultural activities. By 1950, the city's population of 3,278 people still was concentrated within an area not much larger than one square mile. 1950 - 1980 Flood control continued to be a problem to Kent's settlers because the Green River flooded annually, and ponding of water was common during the wet season. Serious floods in 1906 and 1946 caused major property damage; the latter finally led to a flood control study conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. As a result of this study, Congress authorized the construction of the Howard Hanson Dam in 1955. The dam was completed in 1961. The decision to construct the dam was based in part on the potential benefits to both industry and agriculture. From 1950 to 1954 the number of commercial farms and the amount of land devoted to farming decreased in King County as a whole. This trend impacted the Kent area. At this same time, planning was underway fur significant improvements to the regional transportation system, particularly Interstate 5 and State Route 167. The flood control and freeway planning projects contributed significantly to the major changes which were soon to occur in the valley. Large speculative land purchases began in anticipation of future urban and industrial development in the valley. Corporations and railroad companies began to aggregate large tracts of land, driving up the market value. Most of the farmland still lay within the 1-4 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION unincorporated areas of the county. The county's agricultural zoning policies and its inability to provide urban services posed a problem to those who wished to develop their lands. Therefore, landowners turned to the valley cities, seeking both new zoning and utility services through annexation. Anxious to increase their limited tax base, the cities agreed to annexations and subsequently grew rapidly. The City of Kent grew from one square mile in 1953 to 12.7 square miles in 1960. By 1960, major forces were working to change the character and nature of the entire Kent area, especially the valley floor. Valley lands were attractive to industrial developers due to the flat terrain, the availability of major rail lines and transportation routes, and Kent's proximity to Seattle, Tacoma, and the Sea-Tac International Airport. Much of the valley floor was zoned industrial, providing a supply of industrial-zoned land that is roughly equivalent to two-thirds the supply of Seattle's industrial land. In 1965-66, the Boeing Aerospace Center was constructed in the middle of Kent's former agricultural land, isolated from the then-existing pattern of urban development. Eventually, other sites for industrial park development became available, which attracted industries such as Tradewell Stores, Inc., Cam Industries, Northwest Steel, Rolling Mills and Western Electric. To provide the services needed by these firms, the City designed large water and sewer projects which were financed through Local Improvement Districts. These L.I.D.s resulted in high assessments to farm land and a higher charge for water. The higher cost of water directly affected the agriculturally-oriented industries, such as canneries. By the late 1960's many of these agricultural industries were leaving Kent. By 1970, the major land-use changes and growth in the Kent area were obvious. The city's population increased from 9,017 in 1960 to 16,275 in 1970. New industries continued to locate in Kent, including firms relocating from Seattle and Tacoma industrial areas. Warehousing and distribution became an increasingly important part of Kent's industrial development. The fast major commercial development outside the downtown area began in the early 1970's, following the opening of the Kent East and East Kent shopping centers in 1967-68. Throughout the decade, commercial development continued to occur on East Hill in areas such as the intersection of Benson Road and Kent-Kangley Road, changing the character of both East Hill and downtown. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 1-5 INTROD UCTION CHAPTER ONE 1980 - Present By 1980, the overall character of Kent had changed significantly. The city's population had increased to 22,961 persons. What was perhaps most striking, however, was not so much the overall growth in population as was the change in housing stock during the previous 20 years. In 1960, over 90 percent of Kent's housing was single-family detached homes. By 1980, that percentage had decreased to 47 percent, with the number of single-family units and multi-family units being roughly equal (the remainder were mobile homes). The 1980's saw a continued dramatic change in the city's housing mix. Between 1980 and 1988, for example, there were an average of 93 additional single- family homes built in Kent every year; by contrast, there were an average of 598 additional multi-family units permitted annually during the same period. Consequently, by 1992, only 32 percent of Kent's overall housing stock was single-family, while over 7,000 new multi-family units had been constructed since 1980 (a growth rate of over 250 percent). This increased residential population has led to increased demand for public facilities and commercial services. Commercial development, both retail and office, has continued to occur on East Hill, particularly along Benson Highway. Office development also has spread throughout the city, in the form of office and corporate parks along West Valley Highway and on East Hill. On the other hand, commercial activity in the downtown area has been minimal. During the 1980's, less than two percent of the city's commercial development took place in the downtown core. City services have had to be enhanced in outlying areas of the city to meet the demands of growth, particularly on East Hill. The city's street network has been particularly burdened by the increased traffic associated with the sprawling development pattern. In the past few decades, Kent has been transformed from a small, primarily residential and agricultural community into an employment and population center for South King County. While this growth has brought some benefits to the city, particularly in terms of increased economic opportunities, it also has produced urban sprawl, congested streets, and increased demand for community and human services, as well as threatened environmentally sensitive areas. Responding to these and other issues will be the challenge of the future. 1-6 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION OF THE PLAN As described in the previous section, Kent has undergone significant changes throughout its history, particularly in the past 30 years. In the next 30 years, we can anticipate even more change. While we certainly cannot predict the future, we can attempt to shape the type of community in which we wish to live, work, and play. This plan represents the City's vision for the next 20 years. The plan will function as the City's statement of how it will meet the challenges posed by growth into the next century. While the plan has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of the State Growth Management Act, it more importantly has been prepared to meet the needs and demands of Kent's future. Organization of the Plan The heart of the plan is the nine individual elements which outline goals and policies. The plan includes the five elements which are mandated by the Growth Management Act: land use, transportation, capital facilities, housing, and utilities. It also includes four elements which the GMA does not reference which deserve special mention. An economic development element is included; this is not only in conformance with the Countywide Planning Policies, but also is in recognition of Kent's position as an employment center in South King County. A community design element is included because citizens increasingly have been reacting to both the pace and form of growth, which has strong impacts on Kent's livability. A parks element is included because of the importance of parks facilities to the community and the strong link between parks and land use planning. Finally, a human services element is integrated in the plan, in recognition of the City's efforts to fund human services (begun in 1986) and in recognition of the connection between physical and social planning. These diverse subjects and elements are integrated in one planning document for the first time in Kent's history. Each of the elements has been coordinated with the others, resulting in a plan which is consistent internally. Each of the goals in the plan, while expressing a specific policy direction, also functions as part of a coordinated expression of the city's vision for the future. Use of the Plan This plan is intended to be used by a broad range of public and private entities, including elected officials, staff, citizen groups, developers, and other governmental agencies. Accordingly, the plan will be used in many ways. The plan will provide the framework KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 1-7 INTRODUCTION CHAPTER ONE for all future subarea or neighborhood plans. The plan also will be used as the basis for making decisions regarding funding of capital improvements and projects, such as streets, parks, and water/sewer transmission lines. Subsequent changes to the City's - implementing regulations which guide development, such as the zoning and subdivision codes, will be based on the policy framework outlined in the plan. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the Comprehensive Plan will present to citizens, the development - community, and other public agencies a clear expression of the City's vision for growth. HOW THE PLAN WAS DEVELOPED A project of this magnitude includes the efforts of many people. While it would be impossible to describe all of the work which went into producing this plan, the following presents a summary of how it was put together. Public Participation From the beginning, this planning effort has focussed on citizen involvement. In August of 1990, shortly after the state legislature adopted the Growth Management Act, Mayor Dan Kelleher appointed a citizen advisory committee on growth management. This committee, chaired by City Councilmember Leona Orr, examined ways in which the city could better manage growth and balance the rate of growth with the provision of public services. The Committee's recommendations are outlined in a report dated May, 1991. In October 1991, the City Council authorized the Growth Management Community Participation Program, an unprecedented effort to involve as many citizens as possible early in the planning process. The Community Participation consisted of the Community Forum and the Visual Preference Survey. The Community Forum was a series of small group discussions held throughout the Kent area. These discussions on growth management were led by a citizen facilitator. Over 400 citizens participated in the forums which were conducted in February, 1992. In March of 1992, A. Nelesson Associates of Princeton, New Jersey, conducted the Visual Preference Survey (VPS). VPS participants rated a series of slide images of selected development projects, streets, and open spaces on a scale from +10 to -10. The results of the Community Participation Program are outlined in a report dated June, 1992. These results have been used in the preparation of this document and will be further described in various elements of the plan. I-8 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION In September of 1992, the City Council adopted Growth Management Planning Goals, which were used as a framework for the goals and policies included in this plan. The goals were based on the planning goals contained in the GMA, the Countywide Planning Policies, and the results of the Community Participation Program. The goals were sent in draft form to all Community Forum and VPS participants, and their responses were used in the refinement of the goals and in the preparation of the policies found in this plan. Based on the results of these efforts, staff prepared three growth alternatives for public review. The alternatives are the basis of the Environmental Impact Statement which accompanies this plan. Three public workshops were held in October, 1993, to get preliminary reactions of citizens to these alternatives. After revisions, based on these workshops, were made to the alternatives, a video was prepared which described the alternatives. The video was shown to citizen groups and local businesses in April and May of 1994, and participants were asked to complete a questionnaire. Over 275 people completed questionnaires, and the information received from this process was instrumental in preparing the proposed land use plan map and the goals and policies contained in the plan. Interdepartmental Coordination Staff from several different city departments have been involved in the City's growth management efforts. In June of 1991, based on a recommendation by the Mayor's Citizen Committee on Growth Management, an inter-departmental committee was formed to develop a workplan to implement GMA requirements. The workplan, which was subsequently approved by the Mayor, identified specific tasks related to the Comprehensive Plan, those departments who would be responsible for completing the task, and a timeline for completion. This committee has continued to meet in order to ensure that the work being done by the various departments is consistent and coordinated. Interjurisdictional Coordination The Growth Management Act requires that the comprehensive plan of each city is coordinated and consistent with the comprehensive plans adopted by neighboring jurisdictions. This provision, as well as the requirements for regional coordination which are mandated by the Countywide Planning Policies, have resulted in an unsurpassed level of communication with other jurisdictions throughout the Central Puget Sound region. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 1-9 INTRODUCTION CHAPTER ONE In preparing this plan, city staffinembers have participated in regional forums and work groups on such issues as affordable housing, urban growth areas, potential annexation areas, sharing of data resources, designation of urban centers, critical areas and resource - lands, human services, and transportation planning. Kent staffinembers have coordinated with staff from other city and county governments, as well as special districts such as the Kent School District and the Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. Elected officials - from the City have served on regional groups involving growth management issues, including the King County Suburban Cities Association and the Growth Management Planning Council. The goals and policies outlined in the Comprehensive Plan will be reviewed by neighboring jurisdictions, and we have reviewed the plans of jurisdictions surrounding Kent. Because all jurisdictions in the region are preparing and updating comprehensive plans at the same time and under the same guidelines and countywide framework policies, consistency among the plans and policies of neighboring jurisdictions will be greatly enhanced. The effort which has gone into producing this plan on the part of citizens, elected and appointed city officials, and staff is indicative of the importance of this document. This plan recognizes that additional growth is going to occur due to the amenities and quality of life offered by our community. The challenge before us is to limit the negative impacts of growth, which we know through experience can occur, and help create a community in which both present and future residents can take pride. The goals and policies outlined in the following nine elements present the first step in meeting that challenge. 1-10 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER TWO COMMUNITY PROFILE CHAPTER TWO KENT COMMUNITY PROFILE INTRODUCTION The Introduction to the Comprehensive Plan outlines many of the changes which have occurred in the Kent area in the recent past. This chapter will provide more specific information about some of those changes, analyze what they mean for Kent today, and examine what may occur in the future. This analysis plays a major role in determining what types of households and jobs to plan for in the future. The changing demographics of Kent influence every element in the Comprehensive Plan, and are thus presented here for easy reference. Population and Employment Forecasts The population and employment forecasts used in this chapter, as well as in the rest of the plan, were generated by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC). The PSRC (formerly the Puget Sound Council of Governments) has developed demographic analyses and projections for the Central Puget Sound area since 1965. They began their latest round of population and employment forecasts in 1991, subsequent to the adoption of the Vision 2020 plan by the PSRC member jurisdictions, which included the City of Kent. The projections were made for the years 2000, 2010, and 2020, and were based on alternative growth scenarios: an existing plans alternative and two alternatives from Vision 2020. The PSRC first made forecasts for population and employment growth for the entire Central Puget Sound region (King, Pierce, Snohomish, and Kitsap counties), using a forecasting model which is based on economic trends. Projected regional growth then was allocated into smaller subareas, called Forecast Analysis Zones (FAZ). This allocation was based on several criteria, including the level of existing development, access to transportation, and available land. The FAZ forecasts then were allocated to smaller Traffic Analysis Zones, using the assumption that future distribution of households and employment would be consistent with data collected in 1990. �.J KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2'I COMMUNITY PROFILE CHAPTER TWO The PSRC completed its initial set of forecasts in 1992 and updated them in 1993. Kent has used PSRC data to forecast growth for both the existing Kent city limits and the overall Potential Annexation Area. The term "Potential Annexation Area" refers to the City's entire planning area, which includes the current city limits. It is important to distinguish between growth projections and growth targets. Growth projections are based on the Regional Council's overall model for the Central Puget Sound region. Growth - targets are locally-designated policy statements regarding household and employment growth and are based on the Countywide Planning Policies. Additional clarification of this distinction is presented later in this chapter. POPULATION TRENDS AND FORECASTS Population Growth The population of Kent and the surrounding area has grown tremendously in recent decades, and this growth is expected to continue in the next 20 years (see Figure 2.1). According to the PSRC forecasts, the population of the existing city limits is expected to grow approximately 59 percent from a 1990 population of 37,960 to a 2010 population of 60,257. While this is an extremely high growth rate, it is actually much lower than Kent's previous growth rates. Between 1970 and 1990, Kent's population grew by over 125 percent; in fact, the City's population grew by 65 percent in the period between 1980 and 1990 alone. Figure 2.1 POPULATION GROWTH KENT AND POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA 120 100 Z 80 O F- M � 60 0 t a t— 40 20 0 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 ® KENT CITY UMITS = KENT PAA Sources:U.S. Census, 1970, 1980, 1990; PSRC Forecasts, 1993 2-2 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER TWO COMMUNITY PROFILE As Figure 2.1 shows, population growth in the Potential Annexation Area as a whole is expected to occur at a fairly rapid rate, from an estimated 79,948 people in 1990 to 118,604 people in 2010. This represents an increase of almost 50 percent. It was not possible to extrapolate 1970 and 1980 growth for the entire Potential Annexation Area; however, between 1980 and 1990, the Soos Creek Community Planning Area experienced more growth than any other community planning area in King County. Ethnicity Kent's population is not only growing, it also is changing in characteristics. For example, while the population of the city and the annexation area is predominantly Caucasian, more diversity is apparent in 1990 than in 1980 (as shown in Figure 2.2). Furthermore, the growth rate between 1980 and 1990 for non-Caucasian groups was higher than it was for Caucasians, suggesting that Kent may become more diverse in the future. Perhaps the most striking sign of Kent's increasing diversity is the number of Kent School District students enrolled in English As a Second Language (ESL) classes. In 1980, there were 135 students enrolled in ESL classes, while in 1990 this number had increased to 1,056 students. Currently, there are 40 languages spoken in these ESL classes. Figure 2.2 POPULATION BY ETH'�1i ICITY 90 80 70 Z so 0 gm 50 N : 40 a o a 30-- 20-, W- 11 — ILL] 10 0 KENT-1980 KENT-1990 PAA-1990 ® CAUCASIAN BLACK ®AMERICAN INDIAN ®ASIAN ®OTHER Sources:U.S. Census, 1980, 1990 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2-3 COMMUNITY PROFILE CHAPTER TWO Household Size Along with the rest of the country, Kent is experiencing a decrease in household size. _ Figure 2.3 shows Kent's average household size has decreased fairly significantly since 1970. This is due in part to a change from predominantly single-family households in Kent to predominantly multifamily households. However, it also reflects many national trends: people living longer, parents having fewer children, and a rise in single-parent households. These trends are expected to continue in the Kent area and in King County as a whole, where household sizes are expected to decrease from 2.5 in 1980 to 2.2 in 2010. Shrinking household sizes have obvious implications for housing needs. Population growth in the future will require more housing units per capita and different types of housing. Figure 2.3 POPULATION PER HOUSEHOLD KENT AND POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA 0 3 J O = 2.5 w M p 2 2 w O 1 0.5 O LL 0 3 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 ® CITY LIMITS M KENT PAA Sources:U.S. Census and Puget Sound Regional Council Forecasts 2-4 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER TWO COMMUNITY PROFILE Household Income Median income in the City of Kent rose from $20,407 in 1980 to $32,341 in 1990, an increase of 58 percent. Unfortunately, like most of the nation, Kent's median income has not risen as fast as inflation. During this same period of time, the 58 percent increase in median income in Kent was countered by a 70 percent increase in median rents and an 100 percent increase in the cost of home ownership. Given these statistics, the rise in median incomes in the 1980's is misleading. In reality, the purchasing power of Kent residents has been decreasing steadily. As mentioned above, this dilemma is not unique to Kent; it is a national problem. Categorizing Kent by income provides a better idea of the populace's wealth than does showing the change in median incomes. Income groups typically are divided into very low-income, low-income, moderate-income, middle-income, and upper-income which are defined as making 0 to 30 percent, 30 to 50 percent, 50 to 80 percent, 80 to 120 percent, and 120 percent or more, respectively, of the county's median income. King County's 1990 median income for all households, regardless of the number of people per household, was $36,179. The income groups for Kent's Potential Annexation Area in 1990 are pictured in the graph below. Income distribution by group for the current city limits and the Potential Annexation Area is almost the same. Figure 2.4 HOUSEHOLDS BY INCOME LEVEL KENT POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA r-EXTREMELY LOW (7.6%) ,--VERY LOW (9.6%) ABOVE MIDDLE (38.4%) \` K LOW (21.2%) MIDDLE (13.6%) MODERATE (9.5%) Source:1990 U.S. Census KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2-5 COMMUNITY PROFILE CHAPTER TWO HOUSING TRENDS AND PROJECTIONS Change in Housing Types Perhaps the most striking demographic trend in Kent over the past two decades has been the change in the city's housing stock. Figure 2.5 shows that in 1970, two-thirds of all housing units in the city were single-family residential, while one-third were multifamily.By 1990, this trend literally had reversed; approximately one-third of all housing units were single-family and 60 percent were multifamily. There also has been a large percentage growth in mobile homes. Figure 2.5 1970 HOUSING MIX 1980 HOUSING MIX CITY OF KENT CITY OF KENT MOBILE HOMES(1.0%) MOBILE HOMES(7.0%) MULTIFAMILY(33.0%) MULTIFAMILY (47.0%) SINGLE FAMILY (66.0%) SINGLE FAMILY(46.0%) Source: U.S. Census, 1970 Source:U.S. Census, 1980 1990 HOUSING MIX CITY OF KENT OTHER 1.0%) MOBILE HOMES(5. ) SINGLE FAMILY(34.0%) MULTIFAMILY(60.0%) Source: 1990 U.S. Census 2-6 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER TWO COMMUNITY PROFILE The growth in multifamily versus single-family households was most dramatic in the mid- 1980's, when thousands of new multifamily units were constructed between 1985 and 1990. As Figure 2.6 shows, this trend has slowed since 1990, as the number of single- family units have increased fairly steadily in the last few years. Figure 2.6 NET NEW HOUSING UNITS CITY OF KENT - EXCLUDING ANNEXATIONS 1000 N900 ----------- .._.._._._....__.._—._..--_-_----- ---- Cz z c� 600 __.. __..._.__..-------_.._._..... . ..� Oz 500 ------..... --- 400 ------------_--...--­__._� w z I— z 200 100 0 1980 1985 1990 1494 —�— SINGLE FAMILY —+— MULTIFAMILY Source: Office of Financial Management �J KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2-7 COMMUNITY PROFILE CHAPTER TWO Housing Growth The projected increase in population and shrinking household size are expected to result in a growth rate for households which is higher than the growth rate for population over the next 20 years. For the city limits, households are expected to increase by 72 percent, from 16,246 in 1990 to 28,024 in 2010. For the Potential Annexation Area as a whole, households are projected to grow from 30,318 in 1990 to 50,132 in 2010, an increase of 65 percent. Figure 2.7 HOUSEHOLD GROWTH _ KENT AND URBAN GROWTH AREA so 0 50 J 0 w 40 0 cis0 ' CITY LIMITS M co 30 LL - 0 � PAA Cr 20 m z 10 Sources: U.S. Census, 1970, 1980, 1990 Puget Sound Regional Council Forecasts, 0—1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 1993 EMPLOYMENT TRENDS Employment Growth For several years Kent has been recognized as an employment center for South King County. As Figure 2.8 shows, employment growth over the past twenty years has proceeded at an even faster rate than population growth. In 1970, just under 15,000 2-8 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER TWO COMMUNITY PROFILE people were employed in Kent, while over 46,000 people worked here in 1990--an increase of over 200 percent. Most of this growth was attributed to manufacturing and warehouse employment. This is not surprising, given the large amount of industrially- zoned land in Kent (6 square miles, which is one-third of all land in the City), Kent's strategic location between both the Ports of Seattle and Tacoma, and the excellent rail and truck transportation corridors which pass through Kent. While Kent will continue to grow as an employment center, growth rates to the year 2010 are expected to be much lower. This is due in large part to an expected decline in manufacturing jobs. This decline reflects both regional and national employment trends and was included in the Regional Council's modelling for the Kent area. Figure 2.8 EMPLOYMENT TRENDS KENT AREA 25 20 Z W }O y 15 v J m m o J € 10 — Q H O �- 5 1970 1980 1490 2000 2010 -� MANUFACTURING t WHOL/TRAN/COMM/UTIL- -RETAIL TRADE -E SERVICES -GOVT/EDUCATION Source: PSCOG and PSRC Forecasts KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2-9 COMMUNITY PROFILE CHAPTER TWO Employment Composition As Kent's overall employment numbers have grown, the distribution of jobs among different sectors of the economy has changed. Figure 2.9 shows that in 1970, over 60 percent of jobs in the Kent area were in the manufacturing sector. While this percentage declined to 46 percent in 1990, wholesale/warehouse employment increased to 24 percent of the total. This kept the overall manufacturing/warehouse sectors at approximately 70 percent of the area's total job market. Looking ahead to 2010, the manufacturing sector is expected to decline to 37 percent of the total; and the retail and service sectors are expected to increase to 31 percent of the total, up from 25 percent in 1990 and 19 percent in 1970. Therefore, while the majority of jobs will remain in the manufacturing and warehouse sectors, most future job growth actually will occur in the retail and service sectors. Figure 2.9 KENT AREA Source: PSCOG and PSRC Forecasts 1970 EMPLOYMENT GOVT/EDUCATION(7.7%) SERVICES(8.0%) RETAIL TRADE(10.8%) WHOL/TRAN/COMMAML(12.1%) 1 MANUFACTURING(61.4%) 1990 EMPLOYMENT GOVT/EDUCATION(4.8%) SERVICES(14.8%) 1�il�ip I RETAIL TRADE(10.1%) MANUFACTURING(46.0%) WHOUTRAN/COMMAML(24.3%) 2010 EMPLOYMENT GOVT/EDUCATION(8.2%) SERVICES(18.1%) MANUFACTURING(37.0%) RETAIL TRADE(12.4%) WHOL/TRAN=MMfUTIL(28.4%) 2-I D KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER TWO COMMUNITY PROFILE HOUSEHOLD AND EMPLOYMENT TARGETS The Countywide Planning Policies call for each jurisdiction to establish 20-year targets of households and employment. The Policies state, in part: LU-51 In order to ensure efficient use of the land within the Urban Growth Area, provide for housing opportunities, and to support efficient use of infrastructure, each jurisdiction shall: Establish in its comprehensive plan a target minimum number of net new dwelling units the jurisdiction will accommodate in the next 20 years and adopt regulations to achieve the target number; LU-53 Targets for employment growth outside Urban Centers shall be established for cities and for unincorporated urban communities through the joint local and countywide adoption process . . . Over the past two years, City staff members have participated in an interjurisdictional task force which was established subsequent to the adoption of the Countywide Planning Policies. This task force has advised the Growth Management Planning Council on targets for each jurisdiction in the county, and these targets are being considered in amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies. As a result of this task force, and after consultation with the City Council, Kent established targets of 7,520 additional households and 11,500 additional jobs. It is important to note that these targets are for the existing city limits only. Targets for the portion of the Potential Annexation Area located in unincorporated King County will be negotiated by Interlocal Agreement with King County. It must be stressed that there is a distinction between projections and targets. As stated earlier, projections are done by the PSRC for the entire four-county Central Puget Sound Region, and then are allocated to smaller areas. Targets, on the other hand, are locall - designated numbers which state each jurisdiction's commitment to accommodate growth in the next 20 years. Although the PSRC projections took into account each county's tentative urban growth area boundaries and proposed Urban Center locations, the targets more closely reflect local policy. Therefore, the targets will be used for planning assumptions in the Land Use Element and other elements of the Comprehensive Plan. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2-11 COMMUNITY PROFILE CHAPTER TWO Even though the targets are being used by the City of Kent in our planning, the PSRC projections were extremely useful in our planning efforts. The PSRC projections helped determine both regional and local housing and employment targets. The projections also - provided valuable information on regional trends which will impact local growth patterns. While the present PSRC projections do not reflect all of the regional and local policy decisions which have been made in the past year, they will likely be revised in the next year, and then can be used for future updates to the Comprehensive Plan. 2-12 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER THREE FRAMEWORK POLICIES CHAPTER THREE FRAMEWORK POLICIES This Comprehensive Plan has been prepared to conform to and be consistent with a wide variety of state, regional, and local planning mandates. The Growth Management Act requires that the comprehensive plan is consistent not only with statewide requirements, but also with countywide planning policies which have been adopted and ratified by the county and city governments. Furthermore, in 1992 the Kent City Council adopted local Growth Management Planning Goals to provide a local policy framework for the preparation of this plan. Because this overall policy framework influences all aspects of the Comprehensive Plan, it is important to discuss these goals prior to outlining the plan elements themselves. STATE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT Along with outlining various requirements relating to the preparation of local comprehensive plans, the Growth Management Act also establishes a policy framework for planning throughout the State of Washington. This policy framework was established in the thirteen planning goals listed in the Act (RCW 36.70A.020). These planning goals were adopted to guide the development and adoption of local comprehensive plans and development regulations. These goals are listed below. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT PLANNING GOALS 1. Urban Growth. Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner. 2. Reduce Sprawl. Reduce the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development. 3. Transportation. Encourage efficient multimodal transportation systems that are based on regional priorities and coordinated with county and city comprehensive plans. 4. Housing. Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of the population of this state, promote a variety of residential densities and housing types, and encourage preservation of existing housing stock. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 3-1 FRAMEWORK POLICIES CHAPTER THREE 5. Economic Development. Encourage economic development throughout the state that is consistent with adopted comprehensive plans, promote economic opportunity for all citizens of this state, especially for unemployed and _ disadvantaged persons, and encourage growth in areas experiencing insufficient economic growth, all within the capacities of the state's natural resources, public services and public facilities. 6. Property Rights. Private property should not be taken for public use without just compensation having been made. The property rights of landowners shall be protected from arbitrary and discriminatory actions. 7. Permits. Application for both state and local government permits should be processed in a timely and fair manner to ensure predictability. 8. Natural Resource Industries. Maintain and enhance resource-based industries, including productive timber, agricultural, and fisheries industries. Encourage the conservation of productive forest lands and productive agricultural lands, and discourage incompatible uses. 9. Open Space and Recreation. Encourage the retention of open space and development of recreational opportunities, conserve fish and wildlife habitat, increase access to natural resource lands and water, and develop parks. 10. Environment. Protect the environment and enhance the state's high quality of life, including air and water quality, and the availability of water. 11. Citizen Participation and Coordination. Encourage the involvement of citizens in the planning process and ensure coordination between communities and jurisdictions to reconcile conflicts. 12. Public Facilities and Services. Ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards. 13. Historic Preservation. Identify and encourage the preservation of lands, sites, and structures that have historical or archaeological significance. Consistency with these state planning goals was a serious consideration for the Planning Commission and City Council when they adopted the City's own planning goals in 1992. The state goals also have been used as a framework for the goals and policies contained in the Comprehensive Plan as well. 3-2 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER THREE FRAMEWORK POLICIES COUNTYWIDE PLANNING POLICIES The state goals in the GMA, while fairly general, do provide policy direction and summarize the overall policy intent of the act. However, the Washington State Legislature also recognized the need of each county to develop policies specific to local needs and priorities, as well as to clarify how county and city comprehensive plans were to be consistent with one another. Therefore, in 1991, the legislature amended the GMA to require counties to establish and adopt countywide planning policies. The intent of these policies is to establish a countywide framework for the development of consistent county and city comprehensive plans. Specifically, the countywide planning policies must address the following issues: a. Policies to implement urban growth areas; b. Policies for promotion of contiguous and orderly development and provision of urban services to such development; C. Policies for siting public capital facilities of a countywide or statewide nature; d. Policies for countywide transportation facilities and strategies; e. Policies that consider the need for affordable housing, such as housing for all economic segments of the population and parameters for its distribution; f. Policies for joint county and city planning within urban growth areas; g. Policies for countywide economic development and employment; and h. An analysis of fiscal impact. To implement this requirement for countywide planning and coordination, the King County Growth Management Planning Council (GMPQ was formed in October, 1991. The GMPC consists of elected officials from King County, Seattle, and suburban cities. The GMPC developed a set of recommended countywide planning policies in the spring of 1992, and they were adopted by the King County Council in July, 1992. These policies then were considered and ratified by most of the city councils in King County, including the Kent City Council. The countywide planning policies in their entirety are incorporated by reference in this plan, and they are available for review at the Kent Planning Department. Specific countywide planning policies will be referenced throughout the Comprehensive Plan, as they relate directly to many issues and policies discussed in the plan. To briefly summarize, the countywide policies, as adopted, are framework policies which address KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 3-3 FRAMEWORK POLICIES CHAPTER THREE the eight required issues noted above and which provide specific policy statements regarding county growth. Perhaps most significantly, the policies envision an unspecified number of Urban Centers and Manufacturing/Industrial Centers throughout King County, within which a large amount of the county's future household and employment growth would be directed. Urban Centers are defined as compact areas, located within close proximity to public transit, which can accommodate both high-density residential and - office/retail development. Manufacturing/Industrial Centers are areas which are to be "set aside" to accommodate future regional manufacturing development, and where competing land uses (such as office parks) are to be discouraged. In outlining the countywide growth management process, the policies state, in part: -The Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC) shall receive by October and confirm by December 1992 nominations from cities for Urban Centers and Manufacturing/Industrial Centers as established in the Countywide Planning Policies. -The GMPC shall adopt 20 year targets for projected population growth and capacity based on Urban Centers decisions . . . -The GMPC shall adopt 20 year targets for projected employment growth and capacity based on Urban Centers decisions . . . -Housing and jobs to accommodate King County's projected population shall be planned in the context of the carrying capacity of the land. Housing density and affordability shall be considered co-equal objectives. Source: King County Countywide Planning Policies (FW 1) The Countywide Planning Policies were amended in 1994, and these amendments were adopted by King County and ratified by the cities. The amended policies designate Kent as both an urban center and a manufacturing/industrial center. KENT PLANNING GOALS In September, 1992, the Kent City Council adopted framework planning goals for the City. These goals were reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council concurrent with their review of the countywide planning policies. The Human Services Commission also reviewed the planning goals related to human services. The goals were developed to be consistent with the state planning goals in the Growth Management Act, the countywide planning policies, and the results of the Kent Community Forum and 3-4 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER THREE FRAMEWORK POLICIES Visual Preference Survey. In adopting the goals (Resolution 1325), the Council stated that they were to be used as the policy framework for the preparation of the Comprehensive Plan. The Kent planning goals are organized to be as consistent as possible with the goals outlined in the Growth Management Act. There are some issues, such as human services and urban design, for which the GMA does not outline specific goals. However, these are important local issues, and planning goals related to these issues also were adopted by the Council. These goals, therefore, also have been used extensively in the preparation of the Comprehensive Plan. The planning goals are listed as follows, by subject matter: URBAN GROWTH 1. A future growth and development pattern shall be encouraged which minimizes urban sprawl. In particular, the conversion of undeveloped land not presently in the City into low-density urban development shall be discouraged. 2. The City's Urban Growth Area boundary shall be coordinated with King County and surrounding jurisdictions, and will reflect the regional growth vision as expressed in Vision 2020 and the Countywide Planning Policies. The Urban Growth Area shall provide enough land to accommodate at least twenty years of residential, commercial, and industrial growth, and will represent the City's future annexation area. 3. Growth shall occur first in areas already served by public infrastructure, particularly roads, water, and sewer systems. 4. Areas shall be designated within the city's planning area for medium to high- density development, in order to preserve existing neighborhoods and open space areas and enhance transit opportunities. S. Mixed use development shall be encouraged in designated areas within the planning area. 6. Kent shall designate an Urban Center area, within which employment, housing, infrastructure, and transit improvements shall be concentrated. 7. Kent shall designate a Manufacturing/Industrial Center, within which manufacturing land uses and employment will be concentrated, and which shall be served by transit. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 3-5 FRAMEWORK POLICIES CHAPTER THREE 8. The City shall define neighborhoods to foster a strong sense of community. The City and each neighborhood shall cooperatively develop neighborhood plans addressing land use, mobility, parks, safety, and public facilities and services. TRANSPORTATION 1. The City shall develop a safe transportation network which promotes a variety of mobility options, including private automobile, public transit, bicycling, and walking. 2. The City shall support development of public transit, including commuter rail. Transit service shall be focussed in designated medium and high-density centers within the City. 3. The City shall promote and encourage programs which reduce the number of single occupant vehicles (SOS. 4. The City's transportation system shall be coordinated with the State of Washington, METRO, King County, and all surrounding jurisdictions. The City's transportation planning will reflect regional priorities as established in Vision 2020 and the Countywide Planning Policies. PUBLIC FACILITIES 1. The provision of public facilities shall be closely coordinated with the City's land use plan. Emphasis for extension and improvement of public facilities will be placed in those areas of the city designated for medium and high-density development. 2. Development shall not occur in areas unless there are public facilities and services in place or planned which are adequate to accommodate that development. Level of service standards should be established for public facilities which ensure the adequacy of services while at the same time facilitating the city's land use goals. 3. Provision of public facilities shall be phased in 6-10 year increments. The initial phase shall focus on providing and enhancing service to areas which are already urbanized. 4. Public facilities planning shall be coordinated with adjacent jurisdictions and special districts. Within the City's designated annexation area, as time and conditions warrant, the City may assume urban services which are presently provided by special districts. 3-6 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER THREE FRAMEWORK POLICIES HOUSING 1. Preserve, maintain and improve the City's existing single-family and multi family residential neighborhoods. 2. Guide new residential development into areas where the needed services and facilities are available, and in a manner which is compatible with existing neighborhoods. 3. Encourage an adequate and balanced supply of safe housing units offering a diversity of size, densities, age, style and cost. Assure that opportunities for a diversity of housing is available to all income levels. 4. Ensure environmental quality in residential areas. 5. Ensure housing opportunities for persons with special needs, such as senior citizens, the homeless, mentally and developmentally disabled, and low and moderate income persons and families. 6. Encourage residential development in designated medium and high-density commercial and mixed use areas. 7. Ensure opportunities for affordable housing in close proximity to employment, public transportation, and human services. URBAN DESIGN 1. The City shall develop an urban design strategy which reflects the desired community vision, its environmental and historical setting, and which maintains and enhances the livability, vitality and identity of the community. 2. Through development of an urban design strategy, the City shall ensure that the comprehensive plan and regulations and policies implementing the plan reflect the desired visions of the citizens of Kent. 3. The urban design strategy shall communicate the desired visions on a citywide as well as a neighborhood scale. 4. The City shall utilize visual images to better communicate City goals to the development community and the public. 5. The City shall promote citizen awareness of urban design issues. HUMAN SERVICES 1. The City shall maintain and enhance the quality of life for all citizens through the provision and support of effective and accessible human services. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 3-7 FRAMEWORK POLICIES CHAPTER THREE 2. The City shall incorporate consideration of the social and human development needs of its citizens in all areas of physical planning. 3. The City shall continue its commitment to human services by allocating funding, staff, and other resources to address the needs of its residents. 4. The City shall ensure the fairest distribution and most effective use of its human services resources, consistent with adopted priorities and criteria. 5. The City shall maintain information on current community human service needs and available resources. 6. The City shall support the long term stability and viability of the community based human services system. - 7. The City shall take an active role in regional and sub-regional human services issues and form partnerships to effectively address human service needs. 8. The City shall educate the community and promote awareness of human service needs. 9. The City shall provide for the full spectrum of human services needs through the support of programs that address emergency needs, preventative services, and life enhancement services. 10. The City shall promote and support humans services which are culturally relevant and physically accessible to all populations. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 1. An adequate supply of land shall be designated for commercial and industrial development to accommodate at least the next 20 years of growth. 2. Additional office and retail development shall be encouraged, particularly in designated centers which can be served by transit. 3. Public infrastructure, transportation, and transit service enhancements shall be utilized to focus economic development in designated medium and high-density areas. NATURAL RESOURCE INDUSTRIES 1. The City shall ensure the conservation and enhancement of productive agricultural land through regulation, acquisition or other methods. 2. Lands designated for long-term commercial agricultural use shall not be considered for urban development. 3-8 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER THREE FRAMEWORK POLICIES 3. The City shall discourage incompatible land uses adjacent to agricultural lands. 4. The City shall condition development in order to minimize impacts on viable agricultural lands. OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION 1. The City shall preserve and enhance significant open space, including environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat, areas prone to flooding or geological hazards, and stream corridors. The City shall also preserve and maintain its active and passive recreational areas, cultural resource areas, scenic vistas, and areas which serve as physical or visual buffers. 2. The City shall inventory its significant open spaces and develop a comprehensive management plan for those spaces. 3. The City shall seek to acquire the most significant open spaces. 4. The City shall identify and designate open space corridors that will connect environmentally sensitive areas, viewsheds, or other areas where a contiguous system would provide greater benefit than a series of isolated areas. S. The City shall regularly update its Comprehensive Park Plan for use as a tool in inventorying and planning current and future active and passive recreational open spaces. HISTORIC PRESERVATION 1. Kent's cultural, physical, and environmental heritage shall be preserved and protected. 2. Buildings having historic significance shall be preserved. Enhancement and renovation of historic buildings shall be encouraged. ENVIRONMENT 1. The City shall protect and enhance the environment, including air and water quality and the availability of water. 2. The City shall ensure that its land use and transportation policies protect the City's air and water quality. 3. The City shall develop and implement a comprehensive water quality plan that will protect and restore stream habitat and water quality. O..l KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 3-9 FRAMEWORK POLICIES CHAPTER THREE 4. The City shall participate in regional plans and programs to protect and restore regional air and water quality. S. The City shall develop a comprehensive water resources plan that will ensure adequate supplies of water within the next twenty years. PROPERTY RIGHTS - 1. Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation. 2. The property rights of landowners shall be protected from arbitrary and discriminatory actions. 3. In developing policies, plans and regulations, the City shall minimize impacts on private property rights, when feasible and consistent with the public's interest. 4. The City shall protect the rights of private property owners from arbitrary and discriminatory actions while continuing to make land use and zoning decisions which regulate the use of land to promote the public health, safety and general _ welfare of the citizens of Kent. PERMITS 1. The City shall process permit applications in a fair and timely manner, while ensuring that the public's health, safety and welfare are not compromised. 2. The City shall allocate adequate resources to the permit review process. 3. The City shall establish and utilize policies and procedures for permit review, in order to ensure that the review process is consistent and predictable. CON WUNITY INVOLVEMENT 1. The City shall provide for public participation in the development and amendment of the comprehensive plan and regulations and policies implementing such plans. CONCLUSION While these goals discuss a wide range of issues, they represent a cohesive and comprehensive set of planning and policy goals which have been used in preparing this Plan. City Council adoption of these goals has helped ensure that elements within the Comprehensive Plan are consistent with one another, and that the City's local planning goals are consistent with state and regional growth management planning policies. 3-10 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FOUR LAND USE ELEMENT CHAPTER FOUR LAND USE ELEMENT INTRODUCTION The land use element outlines the proposed general distribution and location of various uses of land within the planning area. The element consists of two major components: (1) a map which designates the general location of land uses; and (2) goals and policies which guide future development. In addition, there are reviews of existing land use trends and which have laid the foundation for the goals and policies in the element. More important than the components of the element, however, is the purpose that the element serves. The land use element will guide all decisions about where development takes place. It also will guide when development takes place, because land use policies determine the scheduling of capital improvement expenditures. In addition, it will guide the character of the development pattern of the Kent area. The land use element is not only a critical part of the Comprehensive Plan, but it is a required component of the plan under the Growth Management Act. The next section outlines the requirements of the act relating to the land use element. i Requirements of the Growth Management Act When the state legislature adopted the Growth Management Act, they found that ". . . a lack of common goals expressing the public's interest in the conservation and the wise use of our lands pose a threat to the environment, sustainable economic development, and the health, safety and high quality of life enjoyed by residents of this state. It is in the public interest that citizens, communities, local governments, and the private sector cooperate and coordinate with one another in comprehensive land use planning."(RCW 36.70A.010) This finding, which summarizes the intent of the act, emphasizes the central role of the land use element. The act requires the land use element to designate the general distribution, location, and extent of land for various land uses, including resource lands, housing, commerce, industry, open space, and public facilities. The element shall consider population densities, building densities, and estimates of future population growth. It also shall KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 4-1 LAND USE ELEMENT CHAPTER FOUR provide for protection of the quality and quantity of groundwater used for public water supplies, and consider and mitigate the impacts of storm water runoff both in the immediate area and in surrounding jurisdictions. _ Most importantly, however, the GMA requires that other elements of the Comprehensive Plan relate back to the land use element. For example, the act specifically requires both - the capital facilities and transportation elements to be coordinated and consistent with the land use element. It also states that the entire Comprehensive Plan shall be internally consistent, and that all elements shall be consistent with the future land use map. Therefore, the Growth Management Act puts the land use element in the central role of defining the direction of the Comprehensive Plan, and thereby defining the vision of the community. The focus of the element is the land use plan which outlines goals and policies and the future land use map. The goals and policies found in this plan are the product of both existing conditions and plans and policies which previously have been adopted. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS As noted in the introductory chapter of the plan, Kent has undergone a number of changes since the 1977 Comprehensive Plan was adopted, as the city and the Puget Sound region have experienced unprecedented growth over the past decade. This section analyzes the extent of existing land uses in the city, and outlines the growth which is expected to occur within the city and the planning area within the next 20 to 30 years. This analysis sets the stage for the level of growth and development which this plan will accommodate. Urban Growth Area Boundary The Growth Management Act mandates each county to designate an urban growth area (UGA) within which urban growth is to be encouraged, and outside of which urban growth and annexations may not occur. The UGA must contain enough land to accommodate 20 years of projected residential growth, as determined for each county by the State Office of Financial Management. The entire city limits of each city must be included in the UGA, and unincorporated areas also may be included. However, the GMA states that an urban growth area may include land outside of a city only if this land is "already characterized by urban growth or is adjacent to territory already characterized by urban growth" (RCW 36.70A.110). 4-2 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FOUR LAND USE ELEMENT The countywide planning policies adopted and ratified in 1992 included an urban growth boundary for King County. The Kent Planning Commission and City Council also considered an urban growth area for the City of Kent. The primary purpose of this process was to delineate a planning area for the Comprehensive Plan. The UGA also was intended to help define the City's future annexation area. After considering several alternatives, the Kent City Council designated an urban growth area (UGA) in November, 1992 (Resolution #1334). The boundaries of the UGA are shown in Figure 4.1. All of the area in the City's UGA are within the area the King County Council has designated as urban, and it also is consistent with the preliminary urban growth boundary for Kent which was outlined in the Soos Creek Community Plan. The UGA is approximately 36 square miles, roughly double the size of the existing city limits. Potential Annexation Area In addition to urban growth areas which are mandated by the State Growth Management Act, the King County countywide planning policies discuss future annexation areas. The r countywide planning policies state that within the county's UGA boundary, each city shall identify land needed for its growth during the 20-year horizon of the Comprehensive Plan. The policies further state that although the GMA does not explicitly equate urban growth areas with municipal annexation areas, the urban growth areas around cities may be considered their expansion area. Following this reasoning, and to facilitate intergovernmental planning efforts, the policies direct cities to establish Potential Annexation Areas. The policies state: In collaboration with adjacent counties and cities and King County, and in consultation with residential groups in affected areas, each city shall designate a Potential Annexation Area. Each Potential Annexation Area shall be specific to each city. Annexation areas shall not overlap. (CPP, LU-19) King County established a Potential Annexation Areas Subcommittee in January, 1993, to coordinate a regional process for the designation of municipal annexation areas. As a result of the work of this subcommittee and in coordination with adjacent jurisdictions, the Kent City Council adopted an interim Potential Annexation Area in May, 1993 (Resolution #1360). The Council amended the boundaries in March, 1995, as a result of negotiations with adjacent jurisdictions. The area is shown in Figure 4.2. However, 1 the annexation boundary is not expected to change significantly. The Potential KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 4-3 LAND USE ELEMENT CHAPTER FOUR Annexation Area has been used as the planning area for the City's land use plan map and for all the elements in the plan. Existing Land Use Pattern The City of Kent has five general categories of zoning districts: agricultural, single- _ family residential, multifamily residential, commercial, and industrial. Within each of these general categories, there are several zoning districts which allow varying levels of land uses and bulk and scale of development. Table 4.1 shows the land area of each of these zoning categories and Figure 4.3 shows the distribution of these zoning designations. In the unincorporated area within the Potential Annexation Area, the predominant land use is single-family residential. Most of the residential land is zoned either RS-7200 or RS-9600, which are fairly compatible with the City's SR-6 and SR-4.5 zones. There are three commercial/multifamily nodes in the unincorporated area: SE 208th and 108th Avenue SE; SE 240th and 132nd Avenue SE; and Kent Kangley Road and SE 132nd Avenue. The zoning for the unincorporated area was adopted in 1991 as part of the Soos Creek Community Plan, and amended in February, 1995, as part of the King County's implementation of their comprehensive plan. Inventory of Critical Areas The Growth Management Act requires cities to inventory, designate and protect through development regulations all critical areas and resource lands. "Critical areas" are defined as wetlands, areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, frequently flooded areas, and geologically hazardous areas, such as steep slopes. 4-4 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) CITY OF KENT Seatt/e—Tacomo COMPREHENSIVE PLAN /ntemotiona/Airport i ttt 0�4 Bow Lk \� NORTH J S 188 ST Vl i i I 1 I 1 r' take !e Angle �— u I o o - � S 200 ST S 200 ST SCALE: 1"=4000' ttS 208 ST "` t LEGEND > Gt tt S 216 ST , ; II URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY S 223 0 o i 0 CITY LIMITS g � 0 � O NOTE:THE BOUNDARIES OF THE POTENTIAL AMNMTION Kent O�y / �, AREA(FIGURE 4.E)ARE DIPPER@NT FROM THE URBAN GROWTH BOIINDAR7 BASED ON HVBBBQVBMT S 240 ST ACTIONS BT THE CITY COUNCIL. toy O THIS MAP IS INTENDED AS AN RID IN GRAPHIC REPRESENTRTIDN ONLY AND IS NOT R LEGAL �i DOCUMENT. 52 Sf �gQr4 rn � S 26 ST 41 l i V SZ SL 272 s'ST -� URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY = S 288 ST FIGURE 4. 1 CITY OF KENT u� COMPREHENSIVE PLAN F117temailon,al AirportBow Lk L NORTH J S 188 ST z -lake i S 200 ST S 200 ST -'av ga SCALE: 1"=4000' L l S 208 ST T.Tn,`/T rT.N e J i� a ' Gte,n� ��� POTENTIAL ANNEXATION s 21 s ST N ; AREA 1 � ;,� s 2 3 sT e }'' CITY LIMITS a / i C I ` Kent aa� S 240 ST c r THIS MAP IS INTENDED AS AN RID IN GRAPHIC REPflESENTRTION ONLY AND IS NOT A LEGRL '11 DOCUMENT. 52 ST`• � A "' Sv '� S 26 T �\\o y�\� 4-1 i s 7 Sfor<k. POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA = O S 288 ST � FIGURE 4.2 CITY OF KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN J NORTH SCALE: 1"=4000' LEGEND AGRICULTURAL AGRICULTURAL AGRICULTRAL/GENERAL ® RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL ® INDUSTRIAL AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL I R1-20 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL i RL-12 SINGLE FAMILY RBSIDENTIAL R1-9.6 SINGLE FAMILY RBSIDENTIAL RI-7.2 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 0 RI-5.0 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DUPLEX MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL E GARDEN DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL 11 - J MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL !:.. :" _..... _. MOBILE HOME PARK COMBINING DISTRICT COMMERCIAL DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAi. DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISE DOWNTOWN LIMITED MANUFACTURING ® PROFESSIONAL AND OFFICE E� NEIGHBORHOOD CONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL ® GATEWAY COMMERCIAL GENERAL COMMERCIAL ' COMMERCIAL MANUFACTURING I COMMBRCiAL MANUFACTURING 11 ry INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL PARK 4 ? ® INDUSTRIAL PARK/COMMERCIAL LIMITED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT ;,.. '' ........... CITY LIMITS POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA THIS MAP IS INTENDED AS AN RID IN GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ONLY AND IS NOT A LEGAL �i DOCUMENT. _....._ `--._� ZONING ]DISTRICTS FIIGURE 4. 3 CHAPTER FOUR LAND USE ELEMENT Table 4.1 1991 CITY OF KENT ZONING DESIGNATIONS AREA PERCENTAGE OF ZONE (ACRES) TOTAL AREA Agricultural: A-1 577.4 4.9 AG 192.6 1.6 MA 185.6 1.6 Subtotal: 955.6 8.1 SF Residential: SR-2 81.0 0.7 SR-3 294.9 2.5 SR-4.5 396.2 3.4 SR-6 1,732.5 14.7 SR-8 80.2 0.7 SR-1 765.0 6.5 MHP 95.9 0.8 Subtotal: 3,445.7 29.3 MF Residential: MR-D 115.5 1.0 MR-G 448.8 3.8 MR-M 708.8 6.0 MR-H 63.4 0.5 Subtotal: 1,336.5 11.3 Commercial: NCC 6.7 0.1 O 160.1 1.4 CC 275.7 2.3 CM-1 128.1 1.1 CM-2 142.9 1.2 DC 16.3 0.1 DCE 204.8 1.7 GC 582.6 4.9 GWC 103.2 0.9 Subtotal: 1,620.4 13.7 Industrial: M1, MI-C 1,971.0 16.7 M2 1,729.5 14.7 M3 679.4 5.8 DLM 54.0 0.4 Subtotal: 4,433.9 37.6 TOTALS: 11,792.1 100.0 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) 4-5 LAND USE ELEMENT CHAPTER FOUR The City already has adopted policies and development regulations to protect these areas. Because critical areas have a major effect on how land uses are distributed throughout the City and the planning area, their general location will be described in this section. There are many notable natural features in Kent. Kent is distinguished by the Green River valley, which runs north to south through the center of the city. To the east and west of the valley are East Hill and West Hill, respectively. One of the most significant natural features is the Green River, which extends through a major portion of the city. The Green River is considered a shoreline of statewide significance; and it falls under the jurisdiction of the Washington State Shorelines Management Act, which places restrictions on shoreline development. Due to the natural drainage patterns of the valley and the amount of development which has taken place over the past 30 years, there are a significant number of wetlands located in the City of Kent. These wetlands have been inventoried and encompass over 1,100 acres of the planning area. The hydrology of Kent also includes several major creeks, including Mill Creek, Garrison Creek, Springbrook Creek, and Big Soos Creek. Big Soos Creek functions as the eastern boundary of the planning area. In addition to the water-related natural constraints to development, the other predominant natural feature in Kent is steep slopes. Slopes in excess of 25 percent are found on both East Hill and West Hill. There also are several ravines which typically are associated with creek beds. These hillsides along East Hill and West Hill provide a natural, wooded border to. the more developed Valley Floor area, and they are a distinct part of the City's natural landscape. Environmentally .sensitive areas are shown on Figure 4.4 and Figure 4.5. These natural features are valued by the community and must be protected as part of the comprehensive planning process. The protection of these areas will constrain development. Therefore, it is important to note their location and consider their influence on the location and density of future land uses. Development Capacity A final, but critical measure of existing conditions and future development potential is land capacity. Land capacity refers to the amount of development which can be accommodated on a piece of land, if it were developed. The level of development which can occur on a parcel of land is influenced by the size of the parcel and the zoning 4-6 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF KENT Seott/e—Tocomo Q COMPREHENSIVE P .N• /ntemationo/Airport \\ Bow Lk s 188 ST _ NORTH cn r ' r'4ra9�e bake--` o ' ' S 200 ST a S 200 ST v r SCALE: 1"=4.000' r \ J 1 \ S 208 ST ` I LEGEND ee, POTENTIAL ANNEXATION s 6 sr N \� •�"• AREA s If 1 S 22s sT cl� ; CITY LIMITS , rr Q SEVERE �g HIGH o � Kent LOGY �4 s zao sr RAVINE co x \� UNIQUE & FRAGILE AREA CLASS I UNIQUE & FRAGILE AREA ®S 25 ST CLASS II � q �" N THIS MAP IS INTENDED AS AN RID IN GRAPHIC 1 REPRESENTATION ONLY AND IS NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. Ql S 26 ST Q rp \ ,-l- .r S 7 ly(l_ HAZARD AREAS = S 288 ST J FIGURE 4.4 CITY OF KENT Seatt/e—Tacoma COMPREHENSIVE PLAN intemationai Airport iv s 188 ST NORTH yakati�,i \ o L% S 200 ST S 200 ST SCALE: 1"=4000' 1 S 208 ST LEGEND JJ J Q Gte' S 216 ST N r POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA Im z z s �� •,.� s 223 sT CITY LIMITS 1 INVENTORIED WETLANDS LAKES AND CREEKS Kent N 9":�t•fi hy.. S 240 ST 3 r THIS MAP IS INTENDED AS AN RID IN GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ONLY AND I9 NOT R LEGAL 25 OF " DOCUMENT. c 1, �a S 26 S7 rl S t§ S Z727 3ror r R SK"'<k ham' �F�: INVENTORIED _ ... WETLANDS = S 288 ST to FIGURE 4.5 CHAPTER FOUR LAND USE ELEMENT district in which the parcel is located. Land capacity shows the theoretical amount of development which can be accommodated under existing zoning. It serves as a benchmark from which to gauge to what extent current land use and zoning policies can accommodate growth. In 1991, the City estimated capacity for residential, commercial, and industrial development. The City updated the information in 1993. Capacity estimates also were done for the unincorporated area located within the City's Potential Annexation Area. A detailed explanation of the methodology and assumptions used for estimating capacity is found in the supporting documents. In brief, vacant land and land deemed appropriate for redevelopment were aggregated for each zoning district. The overall development potential of each zone then was calculated, taking into consideration reductions for critical areas, land which was unlikely to develop or redevelop (such as parks, churches), and right-of-way dedications. It is important to note that these estimates represent maximum potential buildout; they are not projections of expected growth. The City used a methodology which was developed by the King County Data Resources Technical Forum; it is consistent with the methodology used by other jurisdictions in the county. Figure 4.6 shows the vacant and redevelopable sites in Kent. Residential capacity for the existing city limits is estimated as follows: Table 4.2 CITY OF KENT RESIDENTIAL CAPACITY Residential Zones Vacant Capacity Redevel Capacity Total Single-Family 1,134 units 1,857 units 2,991 units Multi-Family 1,929 units 3,026 units 4,955 units Subtotal: 3,063 units 4,883 units 7,946 units LrDowntown 1,603 units 2,362 units 3,965 units 4,666 units 7,245 units 11,911 units V 4-7 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT CHAPTER FOUR Staff estimated capacity for the unincorporated area based on the adopted zoning in the Soos Creek Community Plan. Staff used King County's discount assumptions for critical areas, rights-of-way, and public purpose lands. Given data limitations staff estimated capacity only for single-family areas, and only for the portion of the unincorporated area west of 132nd Avenue SE. However, single-family development is the predominant land use in that general area, so the capacity generally should be accurately portrayed. The capacity in the unincorporated area is summarized as follows: Table 4.3 UNINCORPORATED KING COUNTY RESIDENTIAL CAPACITY Ps� pe of Housing Vacant Capacity Redevel Capacity Total ngle Family 7,394 units 5,023 units 12,417 units Staff also estimated commercial and industrial capacity for the existing city limits. Staff did not estimate such capacity for the unincorporated area because the amount of land zoned for these uses in this area is minimal. Table 4.4 shows the capacity for both buildout (building floor area) and employment, which was estimated by using the city's existing employee-to-floor area ratios. Table 4.4 CITY OF KENT COW*IERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL CAPACITY Floor Area Vacant Capacity Redevel Capacity Total Commercial 6,698,562 sq ft 4,826,708 sq ft 11,525,270 sq ft Industrial 13,437,155 sq ft 4,770,617 sq ft 18,207,777 sq ft. CITY TOTALS: 20,135,717 sq ft 9,597,325 sq ft 29,733,042 sq ft Employment Commercial 12,048 employees 8,681 employees 20,729 employees Industrial 19,114 employees 6,786 employees 25,900 employees CITY TOTALS: 31,162 employees 15,467 employees 46,629 employees 4-8 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF KENT swdlB-r000mo COMPREHENSIVE P L.A.N /ntemotiono/Airport04 �..Bow Lk N J s 188 ST NORTH r r' Any�e o - S 200 ST S 200 ST SCALE: I"=4000' S 208 ST LEGEND S 216 ST N CITY LIMITS JS 222 S s 22s sT 'o POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA 1 a VACANT REDEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL 0 ` Kent o� 3 � \ U� �\ DEVELOPED S 240 ST ---� RECENT PLATS j v a 1} a 6, THIS MAP IS INTENDED AS AN AID IN GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ONLY AND 19 NOT R LEGAL s 25 ST as 4 DOCUMENT. S 26 r ;4 co � S272-ST-L] Star(k � C�StOt i - b VACANT AND RE DEVE LOPA.R LE LAND = S 288 ST J - FIGURE 4. 6 CHAPTER FOUR LAND USE ELEMENT Analysis of Capacity As stated in Chapter Two, the City's residential target is 7,520 units, and its employment target is 11,500 employees to the year 2010. The residential target for the unincorporated area within the City's Potential Annexation Area has yet to be determined, but it likely will be between 5,000 and 7,000 units. Additional analysis of capacity is required to determine how feasible it is to accommodate these targets. Because capacity measures total theoretical build-out it should be assumed that a large number of the units never will be constructed. The King County Data Resources Forum recommends discounting capacity an additional 15-25 percent to reflect these "market" factors. The Data Forum also recommends that each city provide enough land capacity in their land use plans to accommodate their growth targets, plus an additional 25 percent "cushion". This cushion would allow local land markets to operate without undesirable price distortion. With regard to employment and household growth in the unincorporated area, there appears to be more than adequate capacity to meet growth targets, even after the market and discount factors are put into place. However, this is not true for households within the city limits. The following chart shows how capacity compares to the City's housing target. ANALYSIS OF HOUSING CAPACITY AND TARGETS Household Target: 7,520 units Capacity Needed to Meet Target: 9,400 units City's Existing Capacity After Market Discount: Residential Zones: 6,252 units Downtown Area: 3,135 units TOTAL: 9,387 units 4-9 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT CHAPTER FOUR This chart shows almost enough capacity to meet the City's housing target with a 25 percent cushion. However, almost one-third of the residential capacity is in the downtown area. If this area does not build out to full capacity (which seems likely even if downtown development increases in the next 20 years), then the City will not meet its housing targets. POLICY BACKGROUND The previous section provided the technical background which will influence the City's future land use decisions. There also are many policy decisions which were made in past years by state, regional, and local elected officials. The decisions will have a substantial effect on the land use policies contained in this element. The policy documents referenced in this section are provided in more detail either as appendices or supporting documents. However, it is important to briefly review these policy documents here in order to provide a better understanding of the rationale behind many of the goals and policies in this element. Kent's Existing Land Use Plans The 1977 Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map provide the City's current policies on overall land use. While the text of the Comprehensive Plan has not been updated substantially since 1977, the land use map has been amended several times. The amended map provides the starting point for the land use map which is part of this element. While the proposed land use plan recommends changing designations in certain areas of the map, the general distribution of land use categories will stay substantially the same. In addition to the overall citywide Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map, there are four subarea plans, each of which contains goals, policies, and a land use map. These plans are the Valley Floor Plan, the East Hill Plan, the West Hill Plan, and the Downtown Plan. These plans were adopted in 1979, 1982, 1984, and 1989, respectively, and are therefore more up to date than the overall comprehensive plan. The Downtown Plan deserves special mention because it was completed just prior to passage of the Growth Management Act. It led to substantial zoning changes in the downtown area in 1992, which significantly increased allowable density in downtown. In a very real sense the Downtown Plan was the springboard for many of the recommendations in this element, as they relate to the downtown area. 4-10 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FOUR LAND USE ELEMENT State Growth Management Policies The Growth Management Act lists thirteen planning goals which summarize the policy intent of the act. These goals guide the development and adoption of comprehensive plans, and set the framework for local comprehensive plans. Several of these goals relate to land use planning. For example, the goals encourage development in already urbanized areas where adequate public facilities and services exist, and conversely discourage the conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development. The goals also encourage the conservation of resource lands, the retention and preservation of open space areas, and protection of the natural environment. The goals and policies in this element were prepared to be consistent with these, and other, state planning goals. Regional Policies There are two regional policy documents which were adopted and ratified by local governments in the Puget Sound area: Vision 2020 and the Countywide Planning Policies. Vision 2020, which was adopted in 1990, is the result of a four-county regional planning process undertaken by the Puget Sound Council of Governments (the predecessor agency to the Puget Sound Regional Council). After an extensive review of regional land use and transportation alternatives, the General Assembly of the COG, which consists of elected officials from many jurisdictions including Kent, adopted a regional plan which emphasized targeting growth to major and minor centers throughout the region. Vision 2020 subsequently has served as the framework for many other planning efforts, such as the Regional Transit Project and the Countywide Planning Policies for Kitsap, Pierce, Snohomish, and King Counties. The impetus for countywide planning policies came from the 1991 amendments to the Growth Management Act. These amendments require all counties planning under the act to prepare countywide planning policies. These policies must address several issues, including the designation of urban growth areas, promotion of "contiguous and orderly development and provision of urban services to such development", affordable housing, and policies for joint county and city planning within urban growth areas. In King County, the countywide policies were developed by the Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC), a group of fifteen elected officials from Seattle, King County, and suburban cities. The policies were adopted by the County Council and ratified by the cities (including Kent) in 1992, and amended in 1994. According to the act, the intent of these policies is to establish a framework from which county and city comprehensive KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 4-11 LAND USE ELEMENT CHAPTER FOUR plans are developed, and to ensure that county and city plans are consistent. Therefore, these policies have a significant impact on Kent's local land use policies. The countywide planning policies incorporated the Vision 2020 concept of directing growth to centers. Kent Growth Management Planning Goals - In the summer of 1992, in conjunction with the City's review and ratification of the countywide planning polices, the City adopted local growth management planning goals. These goals were based on the state goals in the Growth Management Act and the regional goals outlined in the countywide planning policies and Vision 2020. More importantly, they also were based on local priorities as reflected in the City's Growth Management Public Participation Program. These local planning goals provide an overall framework for the goals, policies, and objectives which are included in the Comprehensive Plan and this element. Several of the goals relate specifically to land use, including: A future growth and development pattern shall be encouraged which minimizes urban sprawl, particularly the conversion of undeveloped land not presently in the City into low-density urban development. (UG-1) Areas shall be designated within the city's planning area for medium to high- density development, in order to preserve existing neighborhoods and open space areas and enhance transit opportunities. (UG-4) Mixed use development shall be encouraged in designated areas within the planning area. (UG-5) The City shall ensure that its land use and transportation policies protect the city's air and water quality. (E-2) There are several other planning goals which provide a framework for the policies and objectives in this element. These goals will be referenced throughout the element; they are listed in their entirety in the Framework Policies chapter of the plan. Summary The purpose of these background sections is to outline the environmental, historical, and policy conditions which have shaped the goals and policies in this element. It is important to emphasize that the goals and policies in this element were not created in a vacuum; they are a product of events and actions which have occurred to date. The goals and policies are presented in the following sections. 4-12 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FOUR LAND USE ELEMENT FUTURE LAND USE PLAN The future land use plan sets out the vision for the community's growth for the next 20 years. The vision which is set out in both the land use plan map and the goals and policies reflects the state, regional, and local policy framework which previously was identified. More importantly, it reflects the preferences and views of the citizens as they were expressed in the City's public participation process. The land use plan is divided into two major sections: goals and policies, and a description of the land use plan map. LAND USE GOALS AND POLICIES The land use goals and policies cover a broad spectrum of issues. They are divided into several sections to make it easier for the reader to find the policies relating to a specific issue, such as housing or environmental protection. However, it is important to note that all of the goals and policies function together as a coherent and comprehensive vision of future growth in the community. This is reflected in the overall goal of the land use element, which is: Overall Goal: Encourage a future growth and development pattern which implements the community's vision, protects environmentally sensitive areas, and enhances the quality of life of all Kent residents. URBAN GROWTH GOALS AND POLICIES The land use plan sets out the overall comprehensive vision of future growth for the community. As mandated by the Growth Management Act, it is fundamentally important to establish the policy framework for managing this growth, particularly with regard to controlling and discouraging urban sprawl. The following goals and policies establish and reinforce that framework. Goal LU-1 - Designate an urban growth area and Potential Annexation Area which will define the City's planning area and projected city limits for the next 20 years. Policy LU-1.1 - Provide enough land in the City's urban growth area to accommodate the level of household growth projected to occur in the next 20 years. Policy LU-1.2 -Monitor the urban growth area boundary as build-out occurs and make necessary adjustments. Adjustments to the City's urban growth boundaries shall be done in coordination with King County. Policy LU-1.3 -Refine the Potential Annexation Area, working with King County, adjacent cities, and citizens in Unincorporated King County. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 4-13 LAND USE ELEMENT CHAPTER FOUR Policy LU-1.4 - Do not propose or approve any annexations which are outside of the Potential Annexation Area. Goal LU-2 - Establish a land use pattern throughout the urban growth area that will facilitate a multimodal transportation system and the provide efficient public facilities. Ensure that overall densities in the urban growth area are adequate to support a range of urban services. Policy LU-2.1 - Establish transportation levels of service which will help guide development into desired areas and discourage sprawling development patterns. Policy LU-2.2 - Concentrate development in order to promote public transit. Policy LU-2.3 - Emphasize in development regulations and design review processes site design standards which facilitate public transit and pedestrian - circulation. Policy LU-2.4 - Give funding priority to for capital facility projects which are consistent with the City's land use plan. DOWNTOWN GOALS AND POLICIES Kent's downtown area has been a focus of the City's planning and policy development for some time. Over the past decade, several citizen committees have made recommendations to the Mayor and City Council improving Kent's function as a city and regional center. The culmination of the work of these committees was the adoption of the Downtown Plan by the City Council in 1989. This plan established a policy framework for a vibrant downtown community with an abundance of employment, housing, shopping, and recreational opportunities. The City took important steps in the past year toward implementation of this plan; it adopted zoning changes in 1992 and in the past year completed studies of downtown parking management and infrastructure capacity. The Council's policy direction for the downtown area was reaffirmed in September, 1992, when they elected to propose downtown Kent as an urban center, pursuant to the countywide planning policies. The countywide planning policies envision urban centers as areas of concentrated employment and housing which are served by high capacity transit. While the employment and housing targets for urban centers (15,000 employees and 4,500 households) are quite ambitious for downtown Kent, and are not expected to be reached within the 20-year horizon of this plan, other criteria for urban centers are applicable to the downtown area. These include convenient access to the commuter rail corridors being developed by the Regional Transit Authority, a pedestrian-oriented 4-14 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FOUR LAND USE ELEMENT streetscape, zoning which encourages a mixture of uses at high densities, and a local commitment to fund infrastructure and public improvements in the area. Because the 1989 Downtown Plan is fairly current and establishes a policy direction which is consistent with the Growth Management Act and countywide planning policies, the goals, policies, and objectives in that plan are incorporated herein by reference. The goals and policies listed below are designed to summarize the goals in the Downtown Plan, to reflect actions which have occurred since its adoption, and to place goals for downtown in the context of the overall land use plan. Goal LU-3 - Designate the downtown planning area as a city center. Focus both city and regional household and employment growth on the downtown area. Policy LU-3.1 - Allow and encourage mixed use development which combines retail, office, and residential uses throughout the downtown area to provide a diverse, vibrant city center. Policy LU-3.2 - Focus office employment growth on the downtown area. Policy LU-3.3 - Encourage medium- and high-density residential development in the downtown area. Emphasize design standards to provide an attractive and high-quality residential environment. Policy LU-3.4 - Enhance links between the downtown area and adjacent residential neighborhoods. Design downtown development to preserve adjacent neighborhoods. Policy LU-3.5-Encourage pedestrian-oriented retail uses and development in the downtown area. Promote and encourage retail uses which serve the residential population in, and adjacent to, the downtown area. Goal LU-4 - Plan and finance transportation and other public facilities which support the development of the downtown area as a mixed-use city center. Policy LU-4.1 - Establish transportation levels of service (LOS) which facilitate medium-to high-density development in the downtown area that is consistent with concurrency requirements. Policy LU-4.2 - Focus future investments in public transportation on the downtown area. Should commuter rail be developed as part of the Regional Transit Project, locate a station in the downtown area. Policy LU-4.3 - Enhance pedestrian circulation systems and bicycle paths in the downtown area. Place emphasis also on pedestrian and cyclist circulations systems which link adjacent neighborhoods to the downtown. Policy LU-4.4 - Take actions to ensure that adequate public parking is available to facilitate development in the downtown area. This includes efficient KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 4-1 S LAND USE ELEMENT CHAPTER FOUR management of on-street spaces and future development and enhancement of structured, off-street parking. Policy LU-4.5 - Plan and finance city water and sewer systems to ensure that - adequate capacity exists to support medium-and high-density development in the downtown area. Policy LU-4.6 - Develop park and open space areas to serve both residents and employees in the downtown area. Policy LU-4.7 - Locate civic buildings and facilities in the downtown area. Goal LU-5 - Emphasize the importance of good design, historic preservation, and aesthetics for development in the downtown area. Policy LU-5.1 - Require design review for development projects in the downtown . area. Review projects for site design, effects upon historic properties, landscaping design, and pedestrian orientation. Policy LU-5.2 - Ensure that the City's street and construction design standards in the downtown area enhance pedestrian, transit, and aesthetic objectives. Policy LU-5.3 - Continue to undertake beautification projects in the downtown area, including street trees and parks. ACTIVITY CENTER GOALS AND POLICIES One of the fundamental themes behind many of the state, regional, and local planning goals is the idea of using urban land more efficiently in order to reduce urban sprawl. In the past decade, several commercial areas in Kent have seen a large amount of new development. These areas, which are located on East Hill, West Hill, and in the Valley adjacent to downtown, have an existing base of retail and office uses and typically are surrounded by medium-density residential areas. The idea behind the activity centers concept is to encourage more development in these areas, because infrastructure to support growth is already in place, and to allow a mixture of uses (residential and commercial) which to brings housing closer to jobs and shopping and which supports transit. Allowing a mixture of uses in the community also will increase housing options. This concept is consistent with Vision 2020 and the countywide planning policies, and was also been supported by citizens during the Community Forums and Visual Preference Survey undertaken for this plan. Goal LU-6 -Designate activity centers in portions of the city and in the annexation area. Allow in these areas a mix of retail, office, and residential development. Policy LU-6.1 - Locate activity centers in areas which currently contain concentrations of commercial development with surrounding medium-density 4-16 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FOUR LAND USE ELEMENT housing. Intensify these areas to support transit and to curtail additional sprawling development patterns. Policy LU-6.2 - Allow residential uses in activity centers. Develop residential uses as part of a commercial area in a mixed use development or on a stand- alone basis in designated areas. Goal LU-7 - Develop activity centers in such a way as to facilitate pedestrian, bicycle, and public transportation. Policy LU-7.1 - Implement design review for development in designated activity centers to ensure pedestrian and transit orientation. Policy LU-7.2 - Develop site and parking design standards in activity centers which support transit. Policy LU-7.3 - Ensure that the City's street and construction design standards in activity centers enhance pedestrian circulation, transit, and aesthetics. HOUSING GOALS AND POLICIES As noted in the earlier sections of the land use element, accommodating the demand for housing may be the greatest land use challenge confronting the City of Kent. There are many factors which influence the development of housing in the community. These are explained in detail in the Housing Element. From a land use standpoint, the central issue is accommodating the City's housing target in a way which creates housing opportunities for a broad spectrum of household groups and incomes, and which is acceptable to the community. Currently, the vast majority of housing units in Kent are either single-family detached homes on large lots (over one-quarter of an acre) or apartment units in large multifamily complexes. The former type of housing, while desirable to most households, is not affordable for most families in Kent and does not use land efficiently; the latter type of housing, however, is increasingly not acceptable to the community and elected officials. The ultimate goal of these housing policies is to create a policy framework which will support the development of a wide variety of housing choices. Goal LU-8 - The City of Kent adopts a 20 year housing target of 7,500 new dwelling units within the existing city limits. Coordinate with King County through an interlocal agreement on housing targets in the unincorporated area within Kent's Potential Annexation Area. Policy LU-8.1 - Provide in the land use plan adequate land and densities to accommodate both city and county housing targets within the Potential Annexation KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 4-1 7 LAND USE ELEMENT CHAPTER FOUR Area. Average net residential densities throughout the Potential Annexation Area should be at least four units per acre in order to adequately support urban services. Policy LU-8.2 - Plan and finance transportation and capital facilities in the city to accommodate the City's housing targets. Coordinate with King County on the phasing of public services and expenditures in the unincorporated area. Policy LU-8.3 - Locate housing opportunities within close proximity to employment, shopping, transit, and human and community services. Goal LU-9 - Provide opportunities for a variety of housing types, options, and densities throughout the city and the Potential Annexation Area. Policy LU-9.1 - Allow and encourage high to medium density residential - development in the downtown and designated activity centers. Policy LU-9.2 - Allow and encourage a variety of multifamily housing forms, such as townhouses, residences above businesses, triplexes and fourplexes, - duplexes, and attached single-family units in multifamily districts and designated commercial areas. Policy LU-9.3 - Allow accessory dwellings in all residential districts, subject to design and development standards, to ensure minimal impact to surrounding properties. Policy LU-9.4 - Allow single-family housing on a variety of lot sizes, including 5,000 square foot lots. Locate smaller lot sizes within close proximity to the urban center or activity centers. Goal LU-10 - Revise development regulations to encourage more single-family development and more flexibility and innovation in terms of building and site design. Policy LU-10.1 - Calculate the allowable density for single-family developments based on the size of the overall development site, as opposed to individual lot sizes. Policy LU-10.2 - Allow clustering of housing units in subdivisions in order to maximize potential build-out of single-family homes while preserving open space and environmentally sensitive areas. Policy LU-10.3 - Allow more flexibility in residential setbacks and parking, particularly on small lots, to encourage infill development and innovative site design. Policy LU-10.4 - Allow manufactured housing on single-family lots, subject to defined criteria regarding manufactured homes. Policy LU-10.5-Adopt minimum density requirements for residential development to assure the most efficient use of residential land. 4-18 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FOUR LAND USE ELEMENT Goal LU-11 - Encourage high-quality site and building design for all residential developments. Policy LU-11.1 - Establish a design review process for multifamily residential development projects. Focus design review on integrating multifamily development into surrounding neighborhoods. Policy LU-11.2 - Promote residential streetscape patterns which foster more opportunities for pedestrians and community interaction. Such measures include sidewalks on both sides of streets, narrower, paved roadways, a grid pattern of streets instead of cul-de-sacs, and smaller front yard setbacks. Policy LU-11.3 -Design subdivisions and residential site plans to maximize solar access and protection of view. COMMERCIAL GOALS AND POLICIES Kent's major centers of commercial activity are located downtown, on East Hill along the 104th Avenue SE corridor, and along Pacific Highway on West Hill. Downtown businesses are dispersed widely along general commercial-zoned corridors north and west of the city center. At this time, opportunities exist for infill development of vacant and redevelopable properties within the city center in the Downtown Commercial and Downtown Commercial Enterprise districts. Commercial developments located adjacent to major arterials west and north of the City Center and on East Hill and West Hill are composed of predominantly one-story buildings with large surface parking lots which are accessed by separate driveways from the arterials. At key points along these corridors, opportunities exist to develop pedestrian- and transit-oriented activity centers. The activity centers would incorporate commercial, office, and residential development. Goal LU-12 - Promote orderly and efficient commercial growth within the existing commercial districts in order to maintain and strengthen existing commercial districts, to minimize costs associated with extension of facilities, and to allow businesses to benefit from their proximity to one another. Policy LU-12.1 - Maintain and enhance Kent's city center as a vital and unique commercial district. Policy LU-12.2 - Encourage large office building development and regionally- oriented retail uses to locate in the city center. Policy LU-12.3 - Develop regulatory incentives to encourage infill development in existing commercial areas. Regulatory incentives may include urban, mixed use zoning and higher-density zones, planned unit developments, transfer of density credits, and streamlined permit processes. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 4-19 LAND USE ELEMENT CHAPTER FOUR Policy LU-12.4 - Develop City investment incentives to encourage infill development in existing commercial areas. Investments may include improved sidewalks and outdoor public spaces such as urban parks or small public squares. _ Other public investment incentives include facilities such as a performing arts center, permanent public market space, daycare facilities, libraries, and community centers. Goal LU-13 - Determine the size, function, and mix of uses in the City's commercial districts based on regional, community, and neighborhood needs. Policy LU-13.1 - Develop subarea plans for the activity centers and the city center to identify visual and physical focal points, edges, and connections. Reserve open space and select target areas for development and public infrastructure. Identify pedestrian-oriented streets and paths, and links with intermodal transportation facilities. Policy LU-13.2 -Provide opportunities for residential development within existing business districts to provide support for shops, services, and employment within walking distance. Policy LU-13.3 - Subject to City review and approval, add color and life to commercial districts by allowing appropriate commercial uses to be conducted on sidewalks and in other public spaces. Examples include sidewalk cafes, public markets, espresso stands, flower pushcarts, and sidewalk sales or outdoor retail displays. Policy LU-13.4 - Allow home occupations in all residential districts, subject to criteria which will ensure compatibility with neighboring residences. Policy LU-13.5 -Analyze the potential for development of "corner store", small scale, neighborhood-oriented shops adjacent to selected rights-of-way in higher- density neighborhoods. Use the conditional use permit or another process to evaluate proposals on a case-by-case basis. Ensure that projects are pedestrian- oriented and developed with minimum parking provisions. Policy LU-13.6 - Ensure that commercial and mixed use developments adjacent to existing single-family residential areas are compatible in height and scale. Establish guidelines for design of edges where commercial and mixed uses abut single family use and medium- and 1014- density residential. MANUFACTURING CENTER GOALS AND POLICIES The countywide planning policies state that manufacturing/industrial centers are key components of the regional economy. These centers are defined as areas with a significant amount of manufacturing or other industrial employment (at least 10,000 employees). The Kent north valley industrial area clearly meets this criterion. This industrial area, which is over 6 square miles in size, has been well-established over the past two decades, and is home to dozens of companies which employ over 35,000 people 4-20 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FOUR LAND USE ELEMENT in Kent alone. This industrial area is an extremely important part of both the City's and the region's economic and employment base, and the Kent City Council has elected to propose a large portion of this industrial area as a manufacturing/industrial center. Goal LU-14 - Designate a portion of the Valley Floor Industrial Area as a Manufacturing/Industrial Center. Preserve land in this area for manufacturing and related land uses. Policy LU-14.1 - Define the boundaries of the manufacturing center as that area within which the most intensive manufacturing and warehouse uses should locate. Ensure the boundaries reflect accessibility to truck and rail corridors. Policy LU-14.2 - Discourage and limit land uses other that manufacturing and warehouse within the boundaries of the manufacturing center. Goal LU-15 - Plan and finance in the manufacturing center those transportation and infrastructure systems which can accommodate high-intensity manufacturing and warehouse uses. Policy LU-15.1 - Facilitate mobility to and within the manufacturing center for goods, services, and employees. Work with the Regional Transit Authority and King County to enhance transit service to and within the manufacturing center. Policy LU-15.2 - Upgrade water, sanitary sewer, and stormwater management facilities as necessary to support development in the manufacturing center. INDUSTRIAL GOALS AND POLICIES Over one-third of land in Kent is zoned for industrial use; this industrial area accounts for most of the City's employment and tax base. Therefore, the existing and future development pattern and potential in this area is very important to the economic health of the community. This land use plan proposes a portion of Kent's industrial area as a manufacturing/industrial center, as discussed in the countywide planning policies. The following goals and policies apply to all areas in the city designated for industrial uses. Goal LU-16 - Designate an industrial area within Kent's annexation area which will be an employment center for both the City of Kent and South King County. Policy LU-16.1 - Within the industrial area, designate a manufacturing center within which the most intensive manufacturing uses shall be located. (See Goal LU-14) Policy LU-16.2 - Within the industrial area encourage a mix of land uses which are compatible with manufacturing, industrial, and warehouse uses. These shall include office development, retail uses which serve the surrounding manufacturing KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 4-2I LAND USE ELEMENT CHAPTER FOUR uses, and retail uses which require large parcels of land which may not be available in commercial districts. Policy LU-16.3 - Zone adequate land for manufacturing and warehouse uses to _ accommodate the City's anticipated employment growth in these sectors. Do not zone additional land for these uses, however, unless it is demonstrated that more manufacturing land is needed for future employment growth. Policy LU-16.4 - To expand retail opportunities to provide necessary personal and business services for the general industrial area, implement the recommendations of the West Valley Industrial study regarding potential areas for expanded retail opportunities within the M-I Industrial Park district. Goal LU-17 - Utilize development standards in the industrial area to create an attractive employment center and to mitigate the impacts of manufacturing and warehouse uses. Policy LU-17.1 - Revise parking standards in the industrial area to support commute trip reduction goals and to discourage reliance on commuting via single- occupancy vehicles. Policy LU-17.2 - Utilize setbacks and landscaping to protect wetlands, shorelines, and streams from adjacent industrial development and impervious surfaces. Policy LU-17.3 - Ensure development standards for business and office parks in the industrial area are conducive to transit. Place emphasis on building setbacks and the location of parking areas. Discourage or minimize parking lots between the building and the sidewalk when a business or office park is located on a transit corridor. NATURAL RESOURCES GOALS AND POLICIES The natural environment of the Green River valley and adjacent hillsides provide unique and distinctive character to the City of Kent. The City is identified by the Green River system which consists of the river and associated creeks and wetlands. Some of the creeks in the Green River system, such as Mill Creek, Springbrook Creek, and Garrison Creek, flow through steep ravines. Significant fish and wildlife habitat areas within this system support local and regional fish and wildlife resources. In 1985, the City of Kent, in conjunction with the establishment of the City stormwater drainage utility, adopted the following water quality goal: "Reduce the environmentally detrimental effects of present and future runoff in order to maintain or improve stream habitat wetlands, particularly water quality, and protected water-related uses." Since 1986 the Green River Community College has analyzed samples each month from 11 stream locations in Kent for 24 water quality parameters. Analysis of the data collected indicates that water quality problems exist at most of the 11 sampling stations. The City of Kent Water 4-22 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) CHAPTER FOUR LAND USE ELEMENT Quality Program was drafted in 1991, and the City is presently working to implement the recommendations of the program. The principal sources of water supply for the City's water system, Kent Springs, Armstrong Springs and Clark Springs, are located in the east hill region of Kent and within the urban growth boundary. A wellhead protection plan is being prepared for these water sources. The plan will identify aquifer recharge areas and propose strategies for protection of aquifers through preservation and protection of groundwater. Lake Fenwick, Panther Lake, Star Lake, and Lake Meridian are located within the growth area of the City. Since 1980, Kent has completed several projects to protect the water quality of Lake Fenwick. In 1995, the City installed an aeration system to improve water quality. Native plants and shrubs and mature evergreen and deciduous trees are found throughout the City. Preservation and planting of trees and shrubs on individual properties and in parks and other public spaces will protect and enhance environmental quality. Historically, the commercial agricultural lands in the valley have added to the City's economic support. Protection and enhancement of these natural resources is vital to maintaining a sustainable community. Goal LU-18 - Foster recognition of the significant role played by natural features and systems in determining the overall environmental quality and livability of the community. Goal LU 49 - Coordinate with appropriate individuals and entities to create a long-term, sustainable relationship among natural resource protection, future growth, and economic development through enhancement of wildlife, fisheries, and recreational opportunities; protection of cultural resources; protection of water quality in aquifers, lakes, streams, and the Green River; provision of open space and screening to reduce impacts of development;protection of environmentally sensitive areas to preserve life, property, and fish and wildlife habitat; and retention of the unique character and sense of place provided by the City's natural features. Policy LU-19.1 - Provide incentives for environmental protection and compliance with environmental regulations. Foster greater cooperation and education among City staff, developers, and other citizens. Determine the effectiveness of incentives by establishing monitoring programs. Goal LU-20 - Protect and enhance environmentally sensitive areas via the adoption of City regulations and programs which encourage well-designed land use patterns such as clustering and planned unit development. Use such land use patterns to concentrate KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) 4-23 LAND USE ELEMENT CHAPTER FOUR higher urban land use densities and intensity of uses in specified areas in order to preserve natural features such as large wetlands, streams, steep slopes, and forests. Goal LU-21 - Encourage well-designed, compact land use patterns to reduce dependency on the automobile, and thereby improve air and water quality and conserve energy resources. Establish mixed use commercial, office, and residential areas to present convenient opportunities for travel by transit, foot, and bicycle. _ Policy LU-21.1 - Incorporate bicycle paths in all roadway designs, ensure that sidewalks and other pedestrian amenities are provided in conjunction with private and public development, and incorporate convenient transit stations in designs for mixed use development. Goal LU-22 - Ensure that the City's environmental policies and regulations comply with - state and federal environmental protection regulations regarding air and water quality, hazardous materials, noise and wildlife and fisheries resources and habitat protection. Demonstrate support for environmental quality in land use plans, capital improvement programs, code enforcement, implementation programs, development regulations, and site plan review to ensure that local land use management is consistent with the City's overall natural resource goals. Policy LU-22.1 - Protect and enhance environmental quality via maintenance of accurate and up-to-date environmental data, and by City support of environmental management programs, park master programs, and environmental education and incentive programs. Policy LU-22.2 - Provide to property owners and prospective property owners general information concerning natural resources, hazard areas, and associated regulations. Ensure developers provide site - specifi.c environmental information to identify possible on- and off-site constraints and special development procedures. Policy LU-22.3 - Indemnify the City from damages resulting from development in naturally constrained areas. To the extent possible or feasible, require that developers provide to the City accurate and valid environmental information. Policy LU-22.4 - Initiate a periodic storm drainage%nvironmental inspection program to ensure constant maintenance and upkeep of storm systems and on- going compliance with general environmental processes. Policy LU-22.5 - Ensure that decisions regarding fundamental site design are made prior to the initiation of land surface modifications. Grade and fill permits which do not include site development plans may be issued by the City where such activities do not disturb sensitive areas, such as wetlands. 4-24 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) CHAPTER FOUR LAND USE ELEMENT Policy LU-22.6 - Require site restoration if land surface modification violates adopted policy or if development does not ensue within a reasonable period of time. Policy LU-22.7 -Adopt a clearing and grading code to protect upland habitat as well as site designations and special restrictions relevant to Kent's construction standards and detention criteria. Policy LU-22.8 - As additional land is annexed to the City, assign zoning designations which will protect natural resources and environmentally sensitive areas. Policy LU-22.9 - Support waste reduction and recycling programs in City facilities and in the City at large. Goal LU-23 - Protect and enhance water resources for multiple benefits, including recreation, fish and wildlife resources and habitat, flood protection, water supply, and open space. Policy LU-23.1 - Maintain the quantity and quality of wetlands via current land use regulation and review, and increase the quality and quantity of the City's wetlands resource base via incentives and advance planning. Policy LU-23.2 - Protect wetlands not as isolated units, but as ecosystems, and essential elements of watersheds. Base protection measures wetland functions and values, and the effects of on-site and off-site activities. Policy LU-23.3 - When jurisdictional boundaries are involved coordinate wetland protection and enhancement plans and actions with adjacent jurisdictions and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. Policy LU-23.4 - Maintain rivers and major and minor streams in their natural state. Rehabilitate degraded channels and banks via public programs and in conjunction with proposed new development. Policy LU-23.5 - On a regular basis, evaluate the adequacy of the existing building setback and stream buffer requirements in relation to goals for water resource and fisheries and wildlife resource protection. When necessary, modify the requirements to achieve goals. Policy LU-23.6 - Coordinate with King County to produce critical area maps of the unincorporated portion of the Potential Annexation Area which are consistent with the City of Kent maps which identify critical areas within the existing city limits. Policy LU-23.7 - Protect the quality and quantity of ground water used for public water supplies in accordance with the City of Kent Water Quality Program. recommendations. Policy LU-23.8 - Update the City of Kent Hazard Area Development Limitations Map as new information about recharge areas and wellhead protection areas becomes available. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 4-25 LAND USE ELEMENT CHAPTER FOUR Goal LU-24 - Ensure that uses, densities, and development patterns on lands adjacent to the shorelines of the Green River are compatible with shoreline uses and resource values, and support the goals and policies of the City of Kent's Shoreline Master _ Program and the Green-Duwamish Watershed Nonpoint Action Plan. Policy LU-24.1 - Reserve appropriate shoreline areas for water-oriented uses. Policy LU-24.2 - Discourage incompatible land uses adjacent to districts which are zoned for agricultural uses. Policy LU-24.3 - Minimize the loss of vegetation as new development occurs. Continue to recognize the value of trees and other vegetation in increasing the livability of the City of Kent. Policy LU-24.4 - Promote and support a systematic approach to enhancing the City through carefully planned plantings and ongoing maintenance of street trees, public landscaping, and greenbelts. Policy LU-24.5-Require protection of valuable vegetation, when possible, during all phases of land use development. In cases where development necessitates the removal of vegetation, require an appropriate amount of landscaping to replace trees, shrubs, and ground cover which were removed during development. Policy LU-24.6 -Establish protected and recorded greenbelts to preserve existing natural vegetation on steep hillsides, along stream banks and other habitat areas, and where visual buffers between uses or activities are desirable. Goal LU-25 - Regulate development in environmentally critical areas such as steep slopes and landslide-prone areas to prevent harm, to protect public health and safety, and to save the remaining sensitive areas in the City. Goal LU-26 - Include provisions in the City's land use regulations to preserve reasonable access to solar energy for all lots in the City where access or potential access exists. Goal LU-27 - Ensure the conservation and enhancement of productive agricultural land via regulation, acquisition, or other methods. Policy LU-27.1 - Designate long-term, commercial-agricultural use districts which shall not be considered for urban development. Policy LU-27.2 - Discourage incompatible land uses adjacent to agricultural lands. Policy LU-27.3 - Mitigate development in order to minimize impacts on viable agricultural lands. 4-26 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FOUR LAND USE ELEMENT Policy LU-27.4 - Coordinate with King County to provide for purchasing or transferring the development rights of agricultural land identified as having long- term commercial significance. LAND USE PLAN MAP Along with the goals and policies listed above, the Future Land Use Plan also includes the Land Use Plan Map. This map is a vital part of the land use element and the Comprehensive Plan as a whole because it establishes the framework for amendments to the City's official zoning map. It also establishes the land use and zoning framework to be used as land currently in the Potential Annexation Area is annexed into the City. Description of Map Designations There are several different land use designations. They relate to various types of land uses, such as residential, commercial, industrial, and the like. These designations are found on the Land Use Plan Map (Figure 4.7) and are explained below. Single-Family Residential Single-family residential areas allow single family residential development at varying densities. In the city limits, there are four single-family designations: SF-1, SF-3, SF-6, and SF-8. These designations allow development of up to 1, 3, 6, and 8 dwelling units per acre, respectively. It should be stressed that these designations represent a range of densities, with the designation being the maximum allowable density. For example, the SF-6 designation allows zoning which could accommodate up to 6 units per acre; it also could accommodate less than that. In the unincorporated area, there are two single-family designations: SF-1, which allows 1 dwelling unit per acre; and SF 1-8, which allows development at a range of 1 to 8 units per acre. These designations are compatible with the Soos Creek Community Plan, which was adopted in 1991. The City is incorporating the Soos Creek Land Use Plan Map into the City's Land Use Plan Map on an interim basis, until an interlocal agreement is reached between the City and King County regarding growth targets in this area. Once that is done, the Land Use Plan Map for this area may be revised. Multifamily Residential Multifamily residential areas allow multifamily and single-family residential development at varying densities. There are three designations: Low Density MF and Medium KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) 4-27 LAND USE ELEMENT CHAPTER FOUR Density MF located in the city limits; and MF, which is a general multifamily designation in the unincorporated area. Low Density MF designations allow densities of up to 16 dwelling units per acre, while the Medium Density MF designation allows densities of 17-23 dwelling units per acre. The areas designated multifamily on the land use plan map are areas which are currently zoned for multifamily development. City Center This designation identifies the downtown area as a city center. This designation allows high-density, mixed use development. Retail, office, multifamily residential, and public facility land uses are permitted outright. Mixed Use The mixed use designation allows retail, office, and multifamily residential uses together in the same area. There are two Mixed Use designations: one allows multifamily residential as a permitted use, along with retail and office uses; the other allows multifamily residential uses only if they are part of a mixed use development. Mixed use areas differ with regard to retail uses. In mixed use areas presently zoned for office use, retail uses are allowed on the ground floor of mixed use developments. In other mixed use areas, retail uses continue to be allowed outright. The Mixed Use designation is distinguished from the City Center designation in that the Mixed Use areas do not allow as much density as the City Center area. The Mixed Use areas on the valley floor adjacent to the City Center allow more development intensity than the Mixed Use areas on East Hill. Commercial Commercial areas allow a variety of retail, office, and service uses. Many areas on the Land Use Map which were previously designated for commercial uses now are designated as Mixed Use areas. Manufacturing Center The Manufacturing Center is an area reserved for manufacturing and warehouse uses, or those uses closely related to industrial development. Office uses related to manufacturing/warehouse uses are permitted, but they are otherwise limited. Retail uses are also limited in the manufacturing center. 4-28 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF KENT COMPREHENSIjTE PLAN Bo NORTH a r scan a ANGLE LAKE s` SCALE: 1"=4000' rx ar THIS MAP IS INTENDED AS AN AID IN GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ONLY AND IS NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. rx ani LEGEND POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA CITY LIMIT }' AGRICULTURAL _ OPEN SPACE awx n ® COMMUNITY FACILITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SF-1 ONE UNIT/ACRE MAXIMUM SF-3 THREE UNITS/ACRE MAXIMUM SF-6 SIX UNITS/ACRE MAXIMUM SF-8 EIGHT UNITS/ACRE MAXIMUM MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL x LOW DENSITY MULTIFAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIFAMILY MOBILE HOME PARK e- COMMERCIAL AND MIXED USE ® COMMERCIAL aY CITY CENTER Jr MIXED USE ff•-T ® MIXED, LIMITED MULTIFAMILY *,�® NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES aw. INDUSTRIAL a� n � INDUSTRIAL MANUFACTURING CENTER x COUNTY RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATIONS r ® URBAN RESIDENTIAL 1 UNIT/ACRE URBAN RESIDENTIAL 4-12 UNITS/ACRE ------------ URBAN RESIDENTIAL 12+ UNITS/ACRE BEAR M REVISED ISED JUN E 1997 ,r � MAP]L.AN D U S )E PLAN J CHAPTER FOUR LAND USE ELEMENT Industrial The Industrial designation shows areas for manufacturing and warehouse uses. However, office and business park development is allowed in this area, as are certain types of retail uses, including bulk retail. Agricultural The Agricultural designation is for land reserved for agricultural resource uses. Single- family residential uses may also be allowed, but at very low densities. Community Facilities The Community Facilities designation is placed on properties which are currently developed with some sort of public facility. These include non-passive parks, schools, and fire stations. All of these sites are publicly owned. Open Space The Open Space designation represents publicly-owned land that is undeveloped, either because of environmental constraints or in order to provide areas for passive recreation f or wildlife habitat. These areas provide buffers between uses. The open space corridor along Soos Creek at the eastern boundary of the Potential Annexation Area serves as the City's urban/rural separator. Plan Development Capacity The Land Use Plan Map provides adequate capacity to meet the City's household and employment targets for the next 20 years. Industrial employment and development capacity is not expected to change, because the amount of land which is designated for industrial uses is not changed from the existing plan. Commercial capacity is likely to increase somewhat. In some areas, commercial capacity may be lost in the proposed plan compared to the existing plan, because existing commercial areas are designated mixed use, which allows residential uses in these commercial areas. However, in the large mixed use area on East Hill, residential uses need to be combined with commercial uses; this ensures that commercial capacity will not be displaced by residential development in these areas. Areas which are currently zoned for office uses will allow retail uses, while bulk retail uses will be permitted in the industrial area. Capacity in the unincorporated area is not expected to change in the short term, because the King County !J Comprehensive Plan designations are adopted for this area. The King County Plan KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 4-29 LAND USE ELEMENT CHAPTER FOUR designations provide a wide variation of densities in this area, but the present zoning in this area provides adequate capacity to meet the housing targets in the proposed King County Comprehensive Plan. The major change to development capacity between this proposed plan and the City's existing plan is with regard to residential development in the City. As stated earlier in the element, the City's present zoning can accommodate the City's housing target only if a great deal of housing development (2,500 units) occurs in the downtown area. The reason is one-third of the City's residential capacity is located in the downtown area. The mixed use designations proposed in this plan provide capacity for an additional 3,500 dwelling units. Approximately 90 percent of this capacity is located on the valley floor, because residential development can occur in the mixed use centers on West and East Hill only as part of a commercial development. It is envisioned that this proposed plan, once implemented through changes in the zoning and subdivision codes, will increase potential for single-family residential development. This will be accomplished via a combination of smaller lot sizes, cluster subdivisions, and more flexible development standards. Therefore, this plan not only will meet the City's growth targets, but it will create more flexibility and variety of housing types. At the same time, it will preserve single-family neighborhoods and restrict the growth of stand-alone multifamily zoning. This increased development flexibility and variety also has important implications for affordable housing, as will be discussed further in the Housing Element. 4-30 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FOUR LAND USE ELEMENT Graphic Visualizations Following are several visualizations of what type of development could occur in the City Center. These drawings are conceptual, and are meant only to demonstrate visually the potential effects of adopted the proposed land use plan. Additional graphic illustrations are included in the Community Design Element, which immediately follows this element. IS tilli - - r x .F; ...BE .i:. r J if•' 'r• - - - . i •rr .ri �. _ •''R;�" ' ��• >�. - may..'-^_ a•°Y:�tl.z4 . 4 Scums:Kasprlaln PeMnad Onlyn CITY OF KENT Mixed Use Wsualization-Retail/Office/Residential/Rail Station f j V KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 4-31 i • � _• fi1 • 1 "� �� �,�•� III ;, �� 1+� '`'n i 'mac _- I • ��► 1 1 li r.,�•� aWt����� ( ` � 1 1 1 �t/ ��1� � 1•r '•fl,;r �� � � �,, �� r Al,�„!1 � it :d Kt �1 � . • Ate\ , - �� II / �/ * .ter-�y, s��,�I•.s_,�� ._.a�`�°••�; „�d�o��%''` ti`� 1 _ u r • CHAPTER FIVE COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT CHAPTER FIVE COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT INTRODUCTION The Community Design Element outlines several goals and policies related to the form, function, and appearance of Kent's built environment. The goals and policies of this element were developed using the results of Kent's community participation programs. They seek to build on Kent's unique character, to create distinctive and attractive neighborhoods, and to provide livable, pedestrian-oriented streets with a clear and coherent circulation pattern. Design guidelines can facilitate community acceptance of new projects by clearing potential citizen roadblocks for the developer and adding something to the neighborhood in which citizens take pride. Relationship to State Law Community design is of critical importance to the decisions that are made regarding general growth and development, but is often overlooked in the preparation of comprehensive plans within Washington. Community design elements are not mandated by the Growth Management Act and, when included in comprehensive plans, frequently have a limited focus. In Kent, a slightly different approach has been taken. The energy and focus applied to the Community Design Element is similar to that applied to other elements. However, the element is optional and therefore written in a more flexible manner, using words such as "encourage", "promote", and "where possible." Community design principles can be implemented in a variety of ways. The goals and policies of this element provide a basis from which to develop implementation strategies. Relationship to Other Elements The Community Design Element addresses issues of growth and development in a holistic fashion. It is fairly comprehensive in scope and has implications for other elements in the plan, especially Land Use, Transportation, and Parks. For instance, the Land Use Element expands upon the policies related to the extent of development, the overall density, and the creation of mixed-use districts; the Transportation Element more fully KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN S-I COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT CHAPTER FIVE sets forth the functional characteristics of desired circulation patterns and specifically gives guidance on transit, pedestrian, and bicycle movement; and the Parks Element reinforces policies related to the integration of natural features within the community and the use of open space in shaping the community. Design principles, as expressed by the community, are not only aimed at individual buildings but also relate to the layout of the entire city. Therefore, design principles impact each one of these elements. - BACKGROUND When the Town of Kent was incorporated in 1890, it was established as a small commercial center which catered to the needs of the surrounding agricultural land uses. After World War I1, Kent was still very rural in character and was predominantly an agricultural region. It wasn't until the 1960's, after the construction of the Howard Hanson Dam on the Green River that Kent experienced its first major influx of industrial development. Residential development and annexations pushed the population in Kent from 16,275 in 1970, to 23,152 in 1980. The 1980's were another period of intense development and growth in Kent, as the Green River valley established itself as one of the dominant industrial areas in the state; the population grew to 37,960 by 1990. With the region's rapid growth over the last two decades, citizens have become increasingly concerned about the impacts growth has on their communities. As neighborhood densities continue to rise, issues of privacy and personal space become more urgent. Under Resolution #1318, adopted by the City Council, results from the community forum and visioning sessions were used as a basis for creating goals and policies which reflect community desires. The Community Design Element summarizes the results of Kent's Citizen Participation Program and establishes guidelines and specific recommendations for improving the design of future development. Kent Community Forum In February of 1992, over 400 people participated in Kent's first growth management forum. A twenty-minute video and informative materials were prepared by the City, and an open discussion of issues ensued. After the discussion, citizens were given an Opinionnaire which included 61 questions on topics such as Kent's future, how we should plan for growth, transportation, Kent today, and citizens' visions for Kent. Many Opinionnaire questions had strong urban design implications. A summary of the forum is presented here. 5-2 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FIVE COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT Most respondents described the quality of life in Kent as good. Kent's positive attributes include its central location and recreational amenities, while traffic is the biggest problem. When asked to choose a growth pattern for future residential and commercial growth, most people favored medium- to high-density development in specific areas as opposed to low- to medium-density development throughout the City. Respondents believed that roads and services should be improved at the same time that new development is permitted. The preferred growth pattern would allow medium- to high- density development in areas that currently have roads, sewer, water, public transit, and other public services in place. It would restrict development in areas that are currently undeveloped, in order to preserve their natural or rural character. Most participants agreed that Kent should focus more transportation resources on public transit, and more specifically rail transit. A majority of the participants agreed that the city should plan for high-density areas of residential and commercial development in order to enhance the feasibility of public transit. Future development on a grid system clearly was preferred over a cul-de-sac system for getting around by automobile, foot, or bicycle. Most participants wanted Kent to be known best for its neighborhoods and sense of community. Others wanted Kent to be known for its open green spaces and rural character. Few respondents wanted Kent to be known for its modern industrial and employment centers. Most people wanted to live within a short walk of public transportation in order to get to work, while people were split between wanting to live away from where they accommodated their daily shopping needs and wanted to live within a short walk of shopping areas. Mixed-use development was ranked highest as a means of providing a diverse supply of affordable housing; however, the participants did not prefer this type of development for themselves. Visual Preference Survey On March 11, 1992, Kent conducted the Visual Preference Survey (VPS), which was developed by A. Nelessen Associates of Princeton, New Jersey. The VPS uses slide images to develop a community vision of desirable urban design and development. Slides were shown of neighborhoods, buildings, houses, stores, parks, and streetscapes in Kent and other towns and cities. Subsequent to the VPS survey, A. Nelessen Associates and Kent Planning staff analyzed what characteristics contributed to the positive and negative ratings which participants gave to the slides. The characteristics KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 5-3 COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT CHAPTER FIVE included building form, sense of enclosure, scale, massing, style, texture, materials, landscaping, streetscape elements, types of land use, level of pedestrian activity, and development density. The following summary of the City's vision for future growth is presented from the document Community Forum on Growth Management and Visioning. _ Traffic The City's worst fear is more traffic. However, the traffic problem is a symptom, not the problem itself. The problem lies in the present land use plan which separates uses and promotes sprawl. The answer is to reduce the number of automobile trips by providing alternative transportation modes, such as an effective rail and bus system, and by combining land uses such as housing, jobs and shopping into a more compact pattern so that individuals are less automobile- dependent. Streets Streets, including state highways, will become positive elements of the community. They will continue to move traffic, but also will be made more friendly to pedestrians and bicyclists. In addition, mass transit will share the public right of way. Most streets will feel safer for pedestrians because parallel parking and trees will be placed between the curb and sidewalk. Sidewalks will be broader, and wide streets will become boulevards with landscaped medians. Commercial Areas Commercial areas will become neighborhood focal points with a mix of uses, so that stores, offices, and housing are in close proximity. Parking lots will be at the sides or rear of buildings and will be landscaped intensively. Business and Industrial Development Business and industrial development also will become more pedestrian- and transit-oriented. Industry will be combined with other uses in a more compact, mixed-use pattern, particularly in the area surrounding the rail stop. New buildings like the Centennial Center provide a model for future business and industrial growth. 5-4 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FIVE COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT Downtown A commuter rail stop will be a starting point for turning downtown into a more vibrant urban center. Stores will be on the street level, with housing and offices above. Downtown will be safe because of pedestrian activity around the clock. There will be places for people and places for parking, but people will count first. TYansit Kent will have a new commuter rail station downtown. Bus service will link the new station with neighborhood and employment centers throughout Kent. The new transit stop will reinforce downtown as a center consisting of shopping, housing, and offices. Redevelopment Kent has reached a stage in its evolution where redevelopment is ready to occur. As part of this process, older shopping malls and multifamily areas will be redeveloped. They will be pedestrian-friendly places of two stories which mix housing, stores, and other businesses. Residential Development The percentage of home ownership will increase via a concerted effort to build affordable units for first-time home buyers. Single family neighborhoods will follow more closely a grid pattern, with narrower streets and alleys. There will be traffic circles at intersections. Multifamily housing will be built along streets, not in the middle of parking lots. Apartments will be designed to look more like single-family houses. Buildings will vary in size with four, five, or six units in each building. Stores and offices will be part of residential neighborhoods. Open Space Kent places a high value on open space and parks. Some parks will have more formal gardens and pathways than presently exist. In addition, the Green River will become a recreational center, as will other places located by water. The Visual Preference Survey provides citizens a tool for developing a "vision" to guide Kent's future development. The VPS results indicate one underlying theme; citizens desire a community that is less dominated by automobiles, parking lots, and four-lane KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN S-S COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT CHAPTER FIVE arterials and instead is more accommodating to pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users. By comparing those slides which received positive ratings with those which received negative ratings, City planners can begin to understand and identify building, street, and neighborhood characteristics which the community finds desirable. Identified as desirable are pedestrian-oriented streets, well-designed buildings, parks, town squares, convenient circulation of cars and people, the preservation of Kent's heritage, and the preservation of Kent's rich, natural environment. These characteristics are included in the goals and policies of the Community Design Element. COMMUNITY DESIGN GOALS AND POLICIES STREETS Streets comprise the majority of the open spaces of cities and can be among the liveliest and most memorable public spaces within the community. In recent years, however, street design has focused on accommodating the automobile almost to the exclusion of all other activities and modes of transportation. Goals and policies and design guidelines provided in this element are aimed at balancing the need for auto movement and parking with the need for using streets to create a sense of community. GOAL CD-1 - Establish street and circulation patterns that encourage walking, bicycling, and transit use. Policy CD-1.1 - Where possible, arrange streets in all new neighborhoods, including in multifamily housing projects, in an interconnected block pattern, so that local pedestrian, bicycle, and automobile traffic does not have to use arterial streets to circulate within the neighborhood. a r• _ Ma «a ` 4 5 � < R: Preferred To Be Avoided 5-6 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FIVE COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT Policy CD-1.2 - Encourage major neighborhood streets (e.g., collectors) to converge on neighborhood centers, parks, landmarks, and schools so that people quickly and easily can reach these destinations by foot, bicycle, car, or bus. Policy CD-1.3 - Provide street and trail connections between new residential developments and established neighborhoods. Policy CD-1.4 - Encourage the construction of alleys in new neighborhoods, except where site configuration or other features impede their use. GOAL CD-2 - Incorporate amenities along neighborhood and commercial streets that accommodate pedestrian, bicycle, and transit use. Policy CD-2.1 - In conjunction with new development, establish distinctive crosswalks (e.g., surfaced with scored or colored concrete or brick pavers) at major street crossings in neighborhood mixed-use centers, commercial corridors, transit stops, parks, and school sites. Policy CD-2.2 - Where feasible, separate vehicular and pedestrian traffic along busy streets. eS5 9iFro .. Preferred To Be Avoided Policy CD-2.3 - Design intersections to safely accommodate both pedestrian and vehicular traffic. Construct intersections with the minimum dimension necessary to maintain established levels of service. Policy CD-2.4 - Provide attractive streetscapes with street trees and sidewalks on both sides of all streets, planting strips, attractive transit shelters, benches, and pedestrian scale street lights in appropriate locations. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 5-7 COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT CHAPTER FIVE Policy CD-2.5 - Use traffic-calming techniques where appropriate (e.g. residential neighborhoods, downtown, mixed-use nodes) to reduce vehicular speed and thereby provide a safer and more comfortable environment for pedestrians and bicyclists. - 1 � n Preferred To Be Avoided Policy CD-2.6 - Where possible, modify wide streets into boulevards with landscaped medians to visually and functionally enhance streets for pedestrian use. Preferred To Be Avoided Policy CD-2.7 - In general, construct sidewalks on both sides of all new streets. In industrial districts, sidewalks may not be appropriate, unless significant pedestrian traffic is projected, the absence of a sidewalk poses a public safety risk, or the streets are on existing or planned transit routes. S-8 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FIVE COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT GOAL CD-3 -Establish site design standards that encourage pedestrian and bicycle use. Consider equally during site design all modes of transportation access, including pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and automobile. Policy CD-3.1 - Establish design standards which ensure that commercial, industrial, residential, and public building sites provide convenient, direct access for pedestrians and bicyclists. Policy CD-3.2 - Except where they are necessary to reduce noise or to create private rear yards, discourage fences, walls, and other barriers which inhibit pedestrian traffic, isolate neighborhoods, or separate neighborhoods from main roads. A _ C VF111- r MAI ��CS STOP Preferred To Be Avoided Policy CD-3.3 -Encourage development to orient around new and existing transit stops and to provide easy and direct pedestrian access to the transit stops. COAMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT Most of our commercial areas are auto-oriented with few pedestrian amenities. Traveling by foot in commercial districts is more dangerous than by car. To become more inviting for pedestrian and transit users, the commercial areas need wider sidewalks furnished with benches and street trees; frequent and well-marked crosswalks and transit stops; buildings that are oriented to the streets rather than to parking lots; and compact development patterns which decrease walking distances between retail outlets. GOAL CD-4 - Design new commercial projects for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users, as well as for motorists. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 5-9 COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT CHAPTER FIVE Policy CD-4.1 - Encourage site and building access that considers the needs of pedestrians and bicyclists by providing direct pedestrian access from sidewalks and parking areas to building entrances without conflicting with automobile traffic. - Policy CD-4.2 - Provide sheltered seating areas at heavily-used transit stops, plazas, and other appropriate locations along the pedestrian walkway. �! si",e W ' g Area BikeR ' ' er — Policy CD-4.3 - Encourage awnings and other forms of pedestrian shelter along building faces which front on sidewalks in mixed-use and pedestrian districts. Policy CD-4.4 -Locate parking at the rear of buildings to help block the view of the parking from the street and to enable more convenient access to the front of the buildings. Where it is not possible to provide parking behind a building, parking may be located along the side. 1 ;"'I &I a llll l 11 l llll I \ ❑. p I # e\\\\\\\\O I I \ \ if ul $ $ ZI Preferred To Be Avoided 5-10 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FIVE COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT GOAL CD-5 - Develop mixed-use nodes which are vital and attractive focal points of community activity. Policy CD-5.1 - Enhance sidewalk activity by reducing front-yard setback requirements and encouraging developers to site retail uses facing and opening up onto sidewalks and plazas. When this is not possible, encourage building walls along sidewalks to contain windows or decorative wall treatments in order to maintain the pedestrian's interest. we a i•�i Z> PAKKIN U Preferred To Be Avoided Policy CD-5.2 - Where possible, encourage developers to infill buildings along vacant sections of the street edge to improve the environment for pedestrians. Policy CD-5.3 - Encourage the development of plazas and/or other seating areas within major commercial projects. Preferred To Be Avoided KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 5-11 COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT CHAPTER FIVE Policy CD-5.4 - Encourage the development of public facilities such as museums, theaters, libraries, and recreational facilities within mixed-use activity centers in order to establish these places as community destinations. Policy CD-5.5 - Provide transit stations with attractive shelters and seating in the heart of mixed-use activity centers. Policy CD-5.6 - Encourage sidewalk and retail activity around transit stations by surrounding them with retail, office, and residential uses. Locate parking areas one or two blocks away, with direct pedestrian access to transit stations. GOAL CD-6 - Provide scale, layout, and character of commercial development which is complimentary to the surrounding neighborhood and accommodating to pedestrians. Policy CD-6.1 - Establish connecting streets with short blocks in pedestrian- oriented commercial areas in order to create a pedestrian-scale street environment. Where economically feasible, retrofit existing development into a pattern of small streets and short blocks (around two hundred feet) at the time of redevelopment. Policy CD-6.2 - Encourage developers of large-scale retail stores to provide smaller-scale retail shops with separate entrances along the perimeter of the building to provide interest, easy access, and more diverse shopping opportunities. Policy CD-6.3 - Encourage the appropriate use of balconies, bay windows, pitched roofs, arcades, upper story setbacks, and other architectural features to reduce the perceived building scale. ` Roof Deck Bay Window Balcony. Q y 7 Porches �' 7 �� Shops, c n 7 If 5-12 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FIVE COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT GOAL CD-7 - Work to improve the appearance, function, and appeal of commercial areas. Policy CD-7.1 - Work with the business community and neighborhood residents to make aesthetic and functional improvements to commercial areas. Improved image and appeal will increase sales potential and enhance the character of the City. Policy CD-7.2 - Prepare comprehensive streetscape plans for each commercial area. Include, for consideration in these plans, elements such as street trees, distinctive crosswalks and sidewalks, street lighting, benches, shelters, fountains, bike racks, trash receptacles, and public art. Policy CD-7.3 - Establish additional gateways to Kent, similar to the gateway on the corner of Meeker and Highway 516, which include significant or special landscaping. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT Industrial land uses are a large component of Kent. All of Kent's industrial activity \ occurs on the valley floor, once home to a rich and diverse natural environment. The few remaining undeveloped areas, especially along the Green River, are a valuable resource to Kent. Before developing these remaining undisturbed areas, the City first should promote higher-density development in less environmentally-sensitive areas. Existing industrial development is highly dispersed, separated by vast expanses of paving and landscaping. These industrial areas are forbidding to pedestrians; designed for auto access and site security, they create long walking distances, few shortcuts, and little in the way of amenities. Industrial projects have increased in size and scale over time, with buildings in some projects exceeding several acres. These large-scale, single-use projects present special challenges to design. The following policies are aimed at creating industrial projects that relate more positively to the surroundings and are of a scale and character that are attractive and accessible to pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 5-13 COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT CHAPTER FIVE GOAL CD-8 - Design new industrial developments in consideration of human scale. Policy CD-8.1 -Mitigate the overall size and scale of large projects through such _ means as sensitive massing, articulation, and organization of buildings; the use of color and materials; and the use of landscaped screening. _.bbb bb-bb-b b-b-bb'Lbbt,hJ ~b b b bbb bbbbbb'bbbba .b b- —GDb-_b_hh bb —tlL'17vmlS"hZtttaC D15 -� tr r �C4C,n/✓//lUU77]U 7�- bbb LnFT Preferred To Be Avoided Policy CD-8.2 - Encourage the use of public art, in particular murals, to add visual interest and to break up the monotony of unarticulated walls of large industrial buildings. No z Policy CD-8.3 - Encourage small-scale, pedestrian-oriented retail which serves the industrial district's large employee population. 5-14 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FIVE COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT Policy CD-8.4 - Encourage new developments to incorporate innovative site design and treatment of surface parking areas in order to avoid the appearance of a sea of asphalt. GOAL CD-9 - In the site and building design of new industrial projects, consider the context and potential linkages to surrounding areas. Policy CD-9.1 - Avoid designing new industrial projects exclusively for the convenience of motorists, rather, also consider the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users. Policy CD-9.2 - Arrange streets in industrial districts as an interconnecting network that facilitates automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle access. Policy CD-9.3 -Design industrial buildings to be in scale with neighboring non- industrial buildings. GOAL CD-10 - Design new industrial complexes to be more sensitive to the unique natural environment of Kent's valley floor. Policy CD-10.1 - Maintain high standards for natural environmental quality l through sensitive and flexible environmental review. Policy CD-10.2 - Encourage infzll and intensification of development over time to achieve a greater density of uses and to create focal points of activity, simultaneously discourage development on environmentally-sensitive lands such as wetlands and marshes. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 5-1 S COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT CHAPTER FIVE DOWNTOWN Downtown Kent deserves special attention because it is the heart of the City. A city with a thriving downtown has the potential for bolstering community spirit and providing a healthy local economy. Today, many of downtown Kent's buildings are low-rise and single-story; despite architectural character, they often are underutilized or vacant. Through innovative urban design programs, downtown Kent will be an attractive place for businesses to locate. By encouraging increased development intensity, promoting urban design which enhances the public realm, improving streets and sidewalks, and encouraging better building design, downtown Kent will be reestablished as the cultural, social, and economic center of the Kent area. GOAL CD-11 - Reinforce the role of the downtown as the focus of community life and as a vital, people-oriented place. Policy CD-11.1 - Support the development of new buildings that have a commonality in scale, treatment, and character with the traditional urban buildings that have given the downtown its special character. till 9� \w A, c a 9 5-16 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FIVE COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT Policy CD-11.2 - Maintain and enhance a strong pedestrian orientation within the downtown through the design of buildings and streets. Establish a strong "street wall" that defines the public environment of the downtown. Policy CD-11.3 - Provide for buildings which are more vertical than horizontal in orientation. Encourage a minimum building height of thirty feet to provide a better scale relationship to the street and a greater potential for a vital urban environment. v`3; 2:1 Width to Height Ratio 1:1 Width to Height Ratio Preferred To Be Avoided Policy CD-11.4 - Encourage ground floor building treatments of interest to the pedestrian including,for example, highly transparent facades and the use of large windows, pedestrian entrances, canopies, arcades, and sidewalk cafes. 2 IJH Ewa, nP Policy CD-11.5 - Reduce the perceived scale of downtown arterial streets while allowing for through movement. Encourage wider sidewalks and additional landscaping. Policy CD-11.6-Design streets and other public spaces within the downtown that can be utilized for seasonal celebrations and special events. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 5-17 COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT CHAPTER FIVE GOAL CD-12 - Promote urban design in the City Center which further defines and enhances the character of the City and the established and emerging special activity districts within the City Center. Special districts include but are not limited to the - historic retail district, the civic/cultural area, and future developed areas of office/retail mixed use. Polity CD-12.1 - Define the edges, focal points, and landmarks of the City Center and the special districts. Policy CD-12.2 - Support urban design programs which incorporate public improvements to enhance the identity of the City Center and the special districts. UF r, V Preferred To Be Avoided Policy CD-12.3 - Support urban design programs which incorporate public improvements to enhance the connections among special activity districts. Improvements may include, but should not be limited to, open space such as parks and plazas, pedestrian walkways, and crosswalk definition. GOAL CD-13 - Promote urban design in downtown which expresses Kent's heritage. Policy CD-13.1 - Retain as many historic features as possible in the restoration or renovation of historic buildings. Wherever possible, maintain or restore nriginol proportions, dimensions, and elements. Policy CD-13.2 - Encourage new buildings in downtown to be compatible with neighboring buildings of historical significance. Policy CD-13.3 Preserve and upgrade the physical appearance and usability of buildings with special historic and/or architectural interest. 5-18 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FIVE COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Kent's residential areas are most easily described in terms of older, more traditional residential neighborhoods in the central area and newer, more auto-oriented development on East and West Hill. The central area's older neighborhoods, primarily in the downtown area, have tree-lined streets with alley access, resulting in pedestrian-oriented buildings. This contrasts with the newer single-family neighborhoods which feature a wide, discontinuous cul-de-sac street pattern and homes with garage doors that face the street. Newer two to four-story multifamily complexes usually are large and are surrounded by big parking lots which isolate them from the surrounding community. The bulk and coverage of these complexes are dominating, particularly because they comprise a large proportion of Kent's housing stock. The following policies are aimed at creating neighborhoods that are oriented toward pedestrians, foster social interaction, and create a sense of community. GOAL CD-14 - Attain a wide variety of housing types and densities commensurate with the community's needs and preferences. i Policy CD-14.1 - Allow single family on small lots (e.g., 5,000 square foot conventional lots and 4,000 to 5,000 square foot zero lot line lots). Establish design standards to ensure housing at such densities is a pleasing addition to the neighborhoods. Policy CD-14.2 - Encourage the development of residences above businesses in commercial districts. Provide incentives for buildings that contain residences above commercial uses. Policy CD-14.3 - Allow accessory living units (including garage conversions, apartments within primary residences, and freestanding dwellings) in all residential districts. �c KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 5-19 COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT CHAPTER FIVE a. Establish siting and design controls and parking requirements to ensure that the neighborhood character is maintained or enhanced and no parking problems are created. b. Require that the architecture, window style and spacing, exterior materials, roof form, and other design features of accessory units are similar to the primary structure on the lot and are compatible with other adjoining structures. GOAL CD-15 -Lay out neighborhoods that have a human scale and are oriented to the pedestrian. Policy CD-15.1 - Whenever possible, encourage a land use pattern wherein - churches, stores, services,parks,jobs, entertainment, transportation, and schools are within walking distance of a person's place of residence. Policy CD-15.2 - Limit block lengths and encourage continuity of streets among neighborhoods. To facilitate access, increase connectedness, and support pedestrian and vehicular movement in residential neighborhoods, limit block lengths to no more than 500 feet and encourage four-way intersections. Policy CD-15.3 - Encourage residential building design that fosters a positive, pedestrian-oriented environment along neighborhood streets. For example, certain building designs can decrease the prominence of garages and increase the prominence of pedestrian entries along the street. Residential buildings that incorporate porches, stoops, and windows which face the street add to a positive pedestrian environment. Nwp Y Preferred To Be Avoided 5-20 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FIVE COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT GOAL CD-16 - Encourage creativity and high quality in the design of residential buildings. Policy CD-16.1 - Encourage the use of distinctive architectural features. Policy CD-16.2 - Limit the repetitive feel of new development, but provide for design continuity of major, visible elements. Encourage diversity in the color, massing, and scale of residential buildings to avoid the feeling of a monotonous tract, however, maintain some level of continuity to better define the public realm related to landscape treatment, building orientation, front yard spaces, and the use offences and articulated entries. F=q ® E lam ❑ ❑ �/� L11 ® ® m ® ® � B E !E E93 ® � Preferred Examples :i xx K To Be Avoided KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 5-21 COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT CHAPTER FIVE Policy CD-16.3 - Establish flexible standards for small lot design. Smaller lots have a greater need to address issues related to garage location and treatment. N� v.. Policy CD-16.4 - Reduce front yard setbacks in single-family residential districts to allow for greater design flexibility. GOAL CD-17 - Design for greater surveillance and visibility of public and semi-public places. Policy CD-17.1 - Encourage the placement of windows so that they view onto yards, corridors, entrances, streets, and other public and semi-public places. Policy CD-17.2 - Encourage the use of porches, stoops, and other elements that provide a place to comfortably linger and thereby provide "eyes on the street". helping to maintain a sense of security within neighborhoods. �0 r 00 � o 0 Oo a D : # I I 5-22 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FIVE COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT GOAL CD-18 - Provide multifamily building architecture and site design that reflects a value to the community at least equal to the single-family home. Policy CD-18.1 - Establish development standards which prohibit large expanses of uniform multifamily structures. Policy CD-18.2 - Encourage multifamily housing to incorporate building forms and architectural features common to adjoining single-family houses. Policy CD-18.3 - Where appropriate, maintain neighborhood scale and density in new multifamily buildings. Preferred To Be Avoided Policy CD-18.4-Accommodate vehicular access and parking in a manner which is convenient, yet does not allow the automobile to dominate the site. Policy CD-18.5 - Integrate new multifamily development with the surrounding neighborhood. When the surrounding neighborhood is amicable, orient new multifamily buildings outward towards it rather than inward onto itself. i qx F� ° 0 Preferred To Be Avoided V KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 5-23 COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT CHAPTER FIVE Policy CD-18.6 - Provide open spaces which will accommodate a wide variety of activities, both semi-public and private. Preferred To Be Avoided OPEN SPACE AND NATURAL ENVIRONMENT The preservation and enhancement of the natural environment is of vital importance because Kent will continue to experience periods of sustained growth. Citizens place a high priority on preserving the rural character and believe it is a major component of Kent's identity. The City will continue to protect sensitive environments and habitats as well as provide open spaces for passive and active recreation. The following goals and policies will strengthen and reaffirm Kent's commitment to a healthy and accessible natural environment. GOAL CD-19 - Provide adequate, well-located public lands and facilities. Policy CD-19.1 - Where appropriate, identify and acquire an open space system that links, parks, greenbelts, wildlife habitats, stream corridors, wetlands, and other critical areas. Policy CD-19.2 - Provide town squares, plazas, and small parks, and frame them by commercial, residential, and civic buildings, to allow pedestrians to rest and interact, and to improve the appearance of the city. 5-24 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FIVE COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT GOAL CD-20 - Protect the natural landscapes which characterize Kent. Policy CD-20.1 - To the greatest extent practical, retain scenic views of Mount Rainier, the Cascades, and the Kent valley from public rights-of-way and public areas. Policy CD-20.2 - Encourage the preservation of healthy, attractive native vegetation during land development. Where this is not possible, encourage site landscaping which uses appropriate native plant materials. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 5-25 CHAPTER SIX HOUSING ELEMENT CHAPTER SIX HOUSING ELEMENT INTRODUCTION The housing element is perhaps the most personal component of the Comprehensive Plan; it concerns the immediate environment in which residents live and raise their families. The primary goal of the housing element is to meet the current and future need for housing in the Kent area. The ability to obtain affordable housing is essential to a stable, healthy, and thriving community. Most housing is not built by cities, but by the private sector. However, cities and other entities, such as lending institutions, do impact the supply and affordability of housing. This element focuses on the housing supply and affordability factors which the City can either control or influence. Requirements of the Growth Mangement Act In addition to helping to create a thriving community, the housing element was developed to reflect current conditions, Washington State's Growth Management Act of 1990 (GMA), and GMA-mandated Countywide Planning Policies. Before the GMA, the issues which a city addressed in its optional housing element were determined by the city. Since the GMA, the housing element is a required element of the comprehensive plan. The GMA requires that it include an inventory and analysis of the City's existing and projected housing needs; an identification of sufficient land for a diverse range of needed housing; and goals, policies, and objectives for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing. The Countywide Planning Policies refine the requirements of the GMA. They also require cities to set specific targets for the number of housing units needed by each income group now and in the future. Furthermore, the City must demonstrate how it will meet the housing needs of its residents, especially of its low- and moderate-income residents. For more information on the GMA and the Countywide Planning Policies, see the Framework Policies chapter and the supporting documents of the comprehensive plan. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 6'I HOUSING ELEMENT CHAPTER SIX The purpose of the Growth Management Act, as its name implies, is to assist every city in responsibly planning for growth. Growth will occur. In fact, the Kent area is projected to have the highest growth rate in the region. We can either scramble to _ accommodate this growth or plan for the growth. One reason for Kent's sudden influx of large multifamily buildings in the 80's was that we were unprepared to provide for the population growth in an integrated manner. The housing market's response of simply providing needed housing units in the fastest manner possible underscores the importance of planning for an integrated community, not just numbers of housing units. Before developing policies to create such an integrated community, it is necessary to assess Kent's housing needs. In the proceeding sections, we will evaluate the fit between Kent's population and its housing stock. The Kent Community Profile chapter of the comprehensive plan provides a better overall picture of Kent. However, the following pages briefly summarize the factors that affect Kent's housing situation. Unless otherwise stated, when the text refers to "Kent" or "our community," it is alluding to the Kent Potential Annexation Area (PAA), not merely the City of Kent. KENT AND ITS HOUSING Household and Population Trends Within Kent there are diverse incomes, ages, and household types. The amount and type of housing desired by our residents continue to change due to decreasing household size, increasing number of people living alone, rising number of single-parent households, and our increasing life span. Kent's housing stock must accommodate the various types and costs of housing needed by all its community members. The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) has projected an increase of up to 19,815 households in Kent's PAA from 1990 to the year 2010, for a total of 50,132 households or 118,604 people. While this may seem like a large increase in population, it is less than half the rate of the City's growth during the last decade. However, these new people will require more housing units than they would have required in the past. This is due to the national trend of fewer persons per household. Currently, the average number of persons per household in Kent is 2.6, a number which is projected to decline to 2.4 persons per household by the year 2010. While this .2 drop does not sound large, it accounts for 2,000 of the nearly 20,000 new housing units we can expect to have in 2010. 6"2 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER SIX HOUSING ELEMENT Population by Age The age of our population is an important indicator of housing need. Different types of housing are needed at various stages of people's lives. Kent's citizens are relatively young. Sixty percent of our population is under 35 years of age; almost half of this group is under 20 years old. This statistic reflects young families, individuals, and couples. Those people between 25 and 34 years of age are our new workers and potential first-time homeowners. Kent must provide entry-level homes for this existing and future population if we want to retain them in our community. Figure 6.1 1990 POPULATION BY AGE Potential Annexation Area (PAA) 30 25 20 a 15 0 s � 10 5 0 < 10 10-19 20-34 35-54 55-64 65-74 75+ Source: 1990 U.S. Census There are many land uses that can facilitate affordable and desired home ownership opportunities: smaller lot sizes, townhouses, cluster housing, Planned Unit Developments (PUD), manufactured housing, and accessory housing. Most of the land use techniques mentioned above primarily assist moderate- and higher-income households. Unfortunately, a single parent with two children, working full time for $10 an hour or $26,000 a year, requires more than these land use techniques to purchase a house. Lower-income households require a considerable subsidy and/or innovative financing techniques to become homeowners. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 6-3 HOUSING ELEMENT CHAPTER SIX Other segments of our community often cannot or don't want to buy a house. This may include the 17 percent (9,092 people) of our population who are 19 to 24 years of age, our seniors, and our significant number of single-female heads of household. Therefore, _ while the provision of sufficient and affordable homeownership opportunities is critical, it is equally important to provide a diverse range of rental opportunities. One such rental opportunity is accessory housing. Accessory housing integrates affordable rental housing _ into our existing communities. At the same time, it increases the affordability of homes which have an accessory unit, especially for young families and seniors. However, accessory housing is typically only a small part of a city's total rental stock. Some other desirable rental options are duplexes, triplexes, small-scale apartments, single-room- occupancy housing, and boarding houses. Household Income Understanding the distribution of household income in Kent is a vital step in planning for its housing needs. A household's income dictates its housing decisions and opportunities. Income groups typically are defined as follows: Very Low-Income: 0 to 30% of county median income Low-Income: 30 to 50% of county median income Moderate-Income: 50 to 80% of county median income Middle-Income: 80 to 120% of county median income Upper-Income: 120% or more of county median income King County's 1990 median income for all households, regardless of the number of people per household, was $36,179. Kent's 1990 income breakdown is pictured in the chart below. As the chart indicates, Kent's income groups are distributed in a 60:40 split between middle-income and above, and mudeiate-income and below. 6-4 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER SIX HOUSING ELEMENT FIGURE 6.2 HOUSEHOLDS BY INCOME LEVEL Kent Potential Annexation Area VERY LOW(7.6%) \` LOW(9.6%) ABOVE MIDDLE (38.4%) °1 MODERATE(21.2%) MIDDLE (23.1%) Source: 1990 U.S. Census The income level of a household is determined by the number of people in the household as well as by its annual income. A household whose gross yearly income is $17,000, a typical wage for a service or retail job, is virtually low-income even in a one-person household. Unfortunately, the higher-paying manufacturing jobs are decreasing, and the retail and service jobs are expected to continue to increase. Therefore, the number of low-income households probably will increase. The household projections made in this element assume a distribution of income groups proportionate to what existed in 1990. (Please refer to the Kent Community Profile chapter of the comprehensive plan for more information on income and employment wages and trends.) The sections in this element on housing costs and housing need discuss how income impacts a household's housing choices and needs. Household Types It is not easy to provide sufficient housing for all income groups. To reach that goal requires a diversity of housing types and locations. A diverse housing stock would not only increase housing options, but it also would accommodate Kent's changing types of households. Kent has a significant number of one of the most talked about household KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 6-5 HOUSING ELEMENT CHAPTER SIX type: the single-parent household. Kent School District data for 1993 indicate that approximately 30 percent of the school population in the Kent PAA lives in single-parent households. The U.S. Census puts the percentage at 13 percent, partly because it counts people per household and not merely children. Single parents must run errands and chauffeur children just like two-parent households, but they perform those duties with one less person. Consequently, Kent needs to provide these households with affordable - housing located near essential services,and accessible transportation. As indicated in the land use element, the comprehensive plan does provide goals and policies to increase the opportunities for such housing. The same locational considerations will benefit other special needs populations. Special Needs Populations There are many population groups in Kent who need housing which is directly linked to supportive services. Some groups need this type of housing only for a limited time; others need it on a permanent basis. The housing and service needs of these groups are not met by the private market. The need is independent of a person's income; it is experienced due to a crisis or a disabling condition. Special needs housing is diverse. For example, group homes for developmentally- disabled adults, efficiency apartments for the chronically mentally ill, and assisted housing for the frail elderly are needed on a permanent basis. On a short-term basis, the needs include confidential shelters for domestic violence victims, housing for pregnant teens and/or teen parents, and transitional housing for the homeless. The need for all of these types of housing in Kent is documented in the 1993 Needs Assessment and the 1989 Assisted Housing Needs Study. The combination of housing and support services is essential to helping people live independently and productively in our community. A key factor in ensuring an adequate supply of special needs housing is to eliminate any codes or regulations that may act as barriers to its provision. Housing Stock Composition The housing that is available to the households and workers in the Kent PAA is approximately 55:45 single family to multifamily. The PAA has approximately 37,290 housing units. Included in the single-family housing count are mobile homes. Mobile homes provide one of the most affordable home ownership opportunities available to low- 6-6 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER SIX HOUSING ELEMENT and moderate-income families. Kent has 2,550 mobile homes, which equals almost 7 percent of our housing stock. (Within the city limits, it equals 5 percent.) Compared to other south county cities, the percentage of mobile homes in the PAA is relatively low. In Federal Way, mobile homes make up almost 5 percent of the housing stock; and in Auburn, they represent 15 percent of the stock. HOUSING AFFORDABILITY The term "affordable" is not income-specific; it is used in a relative sense. What is affordable changes from person to person and from item to item. In the case of housing, "affordable" typically is defined as housing costs that total no more than 30 percent of a household's gross income. The dollar amount associated with that 30 percent figure changes depending upon the income level of each household. Unfortunately, housing costs often take a bigger bite out of a household's income than the recommended 30 percent. As Table 6.3 shows, many renter and owner households have excessive cost burdens. It is not uncommon for lower-income households to have cost burdens of 50 percent or more. For example, 65 percent (over 1,800 households) of Kent's very low-income renter households pay more than 50 percent of their income toward rent. When a housing cost burden is that large, homelessness is an impending risk. Housing Costs The cost of housing in Kent is lower than in King County as a whole. However, given the lower household incomes in Kent, the housing is no more affordable to Kent residents than East King County's housing is to their residents. During the 1980s, the City's median household income rose 58 percent, while the median rental cost rose 71 percent and the median value for a house rose 101 percent. Housing costs are consuming a larger and larger chunk of household income. Rental costs are more affordable than ownership costs. According to the March, 1993 Cain and Scott report, Kent's rentals ranged from an average of$481 for a one-bedroom unit to $745 for a 3-bedroom unit. Generally, households in Kent that earn more than $21,000, or 60 percent of median income, can afford an average-priced rental unit. The affordability of home ownership is not nearly as good. In 1990, the median value of housing in Kent ranged from $124,000 on East Hill to $120,000 on the Valley Floor. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 6-7 HOUSING ELEMENT CHAPTER SIX To afford this range of housing requires a household income in excess of$40,000. This is well above the City's 1990 median income of $32,341, as well as King County's median income of$36,179. The high cost of purchasing a home results in limited home ownership opportunities for middle- and moderate-income households and virtually no opportunities for low-income households. HOUSING NEED Table 6.3 illustrates the housing situation for each income group in the PAA. If only the fifth column of the table were considered, one would think there is plenty of affordable housing available to all income groups in Kent. Unfortunately, while this is theoretically true, the reality is very different. Ninety (90) percent of low-income renters overpay for their housing; therefore, they are not living in the housing that theoretically is affordable to them. This situation also is true for low-income owners, almost half of whom are paying too much for their housing. Many lower-income owners are seniors who purchased their housing a long time ago. Lower-income people no longer can afford to purchase housing in Kent without assistance. 6-8 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER SIX HOUSING ELEMENT Table 6.3 1990 and 2010 Housing Need By Income Group 1990 # Percent 1990 1990 #HHs #New Kent overpaying #Hsg units surplus/ added affordable Income Group IIIis' rent/own2 theoretically (deficit) Hsg by Hsg units affordable: units 2010' needed by rent/own' theoretically 20106 affordable Very low-income 2806 84% /65% 944/2208 346 1205 859 IM: 0 to 30% of median income ($0 - $10,854) Low-income HHs: 3507 90% /47% 4534 /736 1763 1506 none 30 to 50% of median income ($10,855 - $18,090) Moderate income 7365 37% /33% 12,279/ 9,330 3163 none HHs: 50 to 80% of 4416 median income ($18,091 - $28,943) Middle Income 8066 7%/21% -- ---- 3464 ----'---' HHs: 80 to 120% of median income ($28,944 - $43,418) Upper Income 13,327 0%/3% - ------ 5723 --- HHS: 120% and above of median ($43,419 plus) 1,2,3Source: These figures are based on a 1990 US Census special report,the CHAS databook,which provides housing (hsg) statistics for households(HHs) earning 0 to 95 percent of median income. The City of Kent was one of the areas included in the report; the City subsequently extrapolated and roughly adjusted the data to include the PAA. For household incomes above 95 percent of median income, the data were obtained from more generalized 1990 US Census data, when the data were comparable. The income figures used in the Income Group column are for 1993. 2 A household is overpaying for housing if the costs are greater than 30% of its gross household income. 3 This is a mutually-exclusive count of housing units affordable to each income group. For instance,the number of units affordable to low-income households do not include those affordable to very low-income households, although those units also would be affordable to low-income households. 'Source: PSRC projections of household growth. The household growth was distributed among each income group in the same proportions as existed in 1990 according to US Census data. 6 These figures assume that the amount of affordable housing stock remains unchanged from 1990. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 6-9 HOUSING ELEMENT CHAPTER SIX One possible reason that the majority of lower-income households are not living in affordable housing is the lack of purchasing power and home ownership opportunities for moderate- and middle-income households. These households either rent but would like to buy, or own a house but would like to move up to a larger house. Consequently, they are living in housing that is affordable to lower-income households. If moderate-income households had adequate opportunities to move out of their current housing, it would free - up rental and owner housing for lower-income households. However, merely increasing the ownership opportunities for moderate-income households never will provide enough affordable housing to all income groups; more proactive measures also are needed. This is especially true for very low-income households. Very low-income households are the only income group which is projected to need more affordable housing units in Kent by the year 2010. (This need is based on PSRC's projected household growth for the PAA and 1990 US Census income distributions). However, given past performances, it is doubtful that the market will provide the new units needed by future lower-income households. The existing housing that theoretically is affordable to these groups is older housing. The rising cost of developing new housing generally puts it out of the reach of lower-income households. Retaining Kent's existing stock of affordable housing is critical to providing the housing required by the community. Some of the existing affordable housing will be lost through redevelopment, deteriorating housing conditions, and other factors. The exact amount of this loss is impossible to predict. The housing stock in Kent is generally in good condition, so loss through deterioration probably will be low. This probability is greatly enhanced given Kent's policies on preservation and its active Home Repair Program for low- and moderate-income City residents. Meeting the Need Substantial capital development subsidies, as well as rent subsidies, are needed to make new construction affordable to very low-income households. The rents affordable to this income group cannot cover the basic operating and maintenance costs of the housing. One way to help provide the necessary rental subsidy is to combine the subsidized housing with market rate units. The rents on the market rate units can subsidize the rents on the units affordable to very low-income households. 6-10 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER SIX HOUSING ELEMENT Low-income households also need capital development subsidies to make new rental development affordable to low-income households. If a sufficient capital subsidy is provided, rental subsidies are not needed. Moderate-income households generally can afford rental housing at this time. Most of Kent's multifamily development that was built in the last decade is affordable to moderate-income households. However, most moderate-income and some middle-income households need assistance in purchasing a home, either via land use or financing techniques. For upper-income households, the market can meet the demand. The proposed land use plan described in the Land Use Element indicates there is a sufficient quantity of land available for and accommodating of a range of upper-income housing and a diverse supply of housing affordable to all other income groups. A small city with few resources cannot predict the specific number of affordable housing units that will be developed for each income group. However, in 1990, Kent's affordable housing stock exceeded the proportions required by the Countywide Planning Policies: 20 percent affordable to households at 0 to 50 percent of median income and 17 percent affordable to households at 50 to 80 percent of median income. Kent is planning for enough affordable housing to meet the needs of all its income groups. Housing Resources and Assisted Housing More financial resources are necessary for Kent to ensure that an adequate number and adequate types of affordable housing units are provided to each income group. The only resources Kent currently has available to develop housing are various federal and state funding sources such as Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), the Federal HOME program, and the State's Housing Opportunity Fund (HOF). Kent distributes its own portion of CDBG funds to various City departments and nonprofit agencies. In 1990, Kent citizens approved a local bond measure to construct Harrison House, a 94- unit housing development for low and moderate-income seniors. Kent also actively participates in a regional process to distribute the other funds listed above throughout the county. There are other funding sources available to housing developers, but none upon which the City has any direct influence. Kent has benefited from a full range of funding sources which have resulted in approximately 1,750 units of assisted housing (not including Section 8 vouchers and certificates) in Kent. This housing is located throughout the community. Some of the KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 6-11 HOUSING ELEMENT CHAPTER SIX units are scattered in single-family housing, others are in developments in which all the units are assisted, and others are in developments where only 5 or 10 percent of the units are assisted. The sources of these assisted units range from federal, state, county, and local governments to various private sources. Active lobbying is needed to replace disappearing funding sources, to enhance existing funding, and to obtain new funding sources. _ FACTORS IN THE COST OF HOUSING The cost of housing is influenced by land costs, construction costs, financing costs, regulations, permits, and fees. The Blueprint for Affordable Housing produced by the King County Housing Partnership asserts that the difference between 1980 and 1990 housing prices is due primarily to land costs. While land costs are not the largest component of housing cost, they are increasing at the fastest rate. Escalating land costs accounted for 46 percent of the price increases in single-family homes and 83 percent of the price increases in rental apartments. The banking industry's requirement that land cost shall be only 25 to 30 percent of the value of a home is dramatically impacting the size of homes, and thus the cost of housing. Rising land costs are driving the market toward large, upper-end housing. In order to survive, developers must pass on the higher costs of these large houses by charging higher prices to buyers. This free-market rule also applies to developers of nonprofit housing. The trend can be counteracted somewhat by allowing smaller lots and higher densities, so that an acceptable ratio of land to housing value can be met with smaller houses. For non-single-family housing, the same financing requirements affect the eventual rents. Reducing the amount of land required for the same-sized development will provide more affordable housing. Design guidelines are the key to easily and pleasantly integrating this housing into the community. In addition, cities can ensure that their permit process, development regulations, and other housing-related regulations and fees do not unjustifiably impact housing costs and supply. Kent has been working actively on reducing these impacts and will continue to do so in the future. 6_I2 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER SIX HOUSING ELEMENT KEY ISSUES As discussed in the land use element, the proposed land use plan provides for sufficient land for the almost 20,000 new housing units which are projected for the Kent area by 2010. However, as the GMA requirements suggest, there are more issues involved in building a strong community than simply providing a certain number of housing units. How this growth is accommodated will determine if Kent is a healthy, integrated, and aesthetically-pleasing community in the future. Integrated Community To ensure a strong sense of community, housing must be integrated into the fabric of the city's community and human services, transportation, and employment centers. There must be local employment at wages that allow our residents to afford the housing they need. Appropriate types of housing in sufficient amounts must be available to meet the needs of the community's broad range of household types, incomes, and ages. From the information on the previous pages, it is clear that Kent requires a diverse range of both home ownership and rental opportunities, especially for its lower-income residents. Home Ownership There are various ways the City can promote home ownership opportunities. For example, the City can do so by enacting effective land use regulations to allow townhouses, smaller lot sizes, manufactured housing on single family lots, and accessory housing. Providing incentives such as density bonuses or direct financial assistance may encourage developers to fully utilize these land use regulations to provide lower-cost housing. Another way to encourage home ownership is to educate potential homeowners and lending institutions on the financial assistance that is available. Rental Opportunities There is a wide range of households, from young workers to seniors, who cannot or don't want to own a home. A diversity of rental housing is needed to meet the varied needs of Kent's population. Some examples are apartments and duplexes for families, accessory housing, single-room-occupancy hotels, boarding homes, and caretaker apartments. Accessory housing will be legal and encouraged by the end of 1994. The State Housing Policy Act, SB 5584, requires all cities with a population of more than 20,000 to allow and encourage accessory housing by December 31, 1994. �.J KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 6-13 HOUSING ELEMENT CHAPTER SIX Special Needs Housing The City must ensure special needs housing in a variety of housing choices is available, - distributed, and integrated into the community. It is crucial that we have housing for everyone in our community. Developing Housing for Low-Income Households As discussed in the Housing Need section, special attention needs to be given to housing for low-income households. Twenty percent of Kent's households make 50 percent or less of King County's median income. In 1993, a 3-person household who earned 50 percent of the median income made $21,600 a year ($10.40 an hour). Given their inability to purchase a house, lower-income residents tend to depend upon rentals as their primary source of housing. The transiency of this population group could be reduced dramatically if affordable housing were available and located close to services and appropriate employment. For these households, more than land use techniques are needed to provide rental and home ownership opportunities. Low-income households require methods to reduce the cost of housing production, to acquire downpayments, and to increase direct subsidies of housing development. Preservation While the production of new units is important, we also need to concentrate on preserving the existing housing stock. By maintaining housing in good repair and allowing flexibility in rehabilitation and adaptations, Kent can obtain an integrated housing supply in a cost-effective manner. By these efforts, many people who would otherwise be forced to leave their dilapidated or oversized housing could remain in their housing and in the community. Forging New Partnerships and Regional Initiatives Providing housing requires a team approach, both regionally and locally. Partnerships must be forged among developers, bankers, nonprofit agencies, governmental bodies, employers, and business people. Our existing system does not provide adequate housing. We need to develop affordable housing, new and expanded funding sources, and innovative solutions if we are to provide housing which meets the need of all of our households. The following goals and policies will guide Kent in accomplishing that goal. 6-14 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER SIX HOUSING ELEMENT HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS AND POLICIES Overall Goal - Ensure opportunities for affordable housing and an appropriate living environment for Kent citizens. CREATE AN INTEGRATED AND HEALTHY COMMUNITY Goal H-1 - Promote healthy neighborhoods by providing a wide range of housing options throughout the community that are accessible to community and human services, employment opportunities, and transportation and by being sensitive to the environmental impacts of development. Policy H-1.1 - Ensure that community and human services, including, but not limited to, fire, police, library facilities, medical services, neighborhood shopping, child care, food banks, and recycling facilities, are easily accessible to neighborhood residents. Policy H-1.2 - Guide new residential development into areas where community and human services and facilities are available, and in a manner which is compatible with the land use element. Policy H-1.3 - Ensure an equitable distribution of housing throughout the community and region. Policy H-1.4 - Encourage a wide range of transportation options from residential areas to low-wage and other employment centers. Policy H-1.5 -Require developments to provide their fair share of on-site and off- site improvements needed as a result of the development. Policy H-1.6 - Continue to permit home businesses that do not change the primary residential character of the neighborhood, do not involve hazardous materials, and do not cause traffic problems. Policy H-1.7 - Continue to utilize regulatory measures to control impacts of residential development on the environment and on water quality. Review these regulations periodically to assess their overall effectiveness and their impact on housing cost and supply. PROVIDE DIVERSE AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING CHOICES Goal H-2 - Provide sufficient, diverse, and affordable housing for the existing and projected population of Kent. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 6-15 HOUSING ELEMENT CHAPTER SIX Policy H-2.1 - Promote a wide range of housing to meet the needs of our diverse population and ensure that this housing is available throughout the community for people of all income levels and special needs. Policy H-2.2 - Provide a sufficient amount of land zoned for current and projected residential needs including, but not limited to, assisted housing, housing for low-income households, single-family housing, small lot sizes, townhouses, multifamily housing, manufactured housing, group homes, and foster care facilities. Policy H-2.3 - Plan for housing to meet the needs of all income groups. As mandated by the Countywide Planning Policies, at least 17 percent of Kent's housing shall be affordable to those making 50 to 80 percent of median income, and 20 percent of Kent's housing shall be affordable to those making less than 50 percent of King County's median income. Annually monitor progress in meeting these targets. Policy H-2.4 - Actively work toward eliminating housing discrimination in Kent. Policy H-2.5 - Review existing and proposed City policies and regulations to ensure compliance with the Federal Fair Housing Act, the American Disabilities Act (ADA), and related legislation and to remove regulatory barriers, redundancies, and inconsistencies. Policy H-2.6 - Encourage affordable housing through the redevelopment of nonresidential buildings such as schools and commercial buildings, when suitable for housing purposes. Policy H-2.7 - Provide a predictable and timely permit process. PRESERVE AND IldPROVE EXISTING HOUSING Goal H-3 - Encourage the preservation, maintenance, and improvement of existing affordable housing. Policy H-3.1 - Review and revise building code requirements as needed to iemove constraints on rehabilitation, on legalization of existing accessory units, and on historic preservation so that usable structures can be rehabilitated to an appropriate level of safety and habitability. Policy H-3.2 - Continue to sponsor a housing repair program and to promote educational and outreach efforts regarding home maintenance and rehabilitation. Policy H-3.3 - Preserve and improve mobile home parks. Promote the provision of a low-interest loan program or other programs for law- or moderate-income mobile home park residents to replace dilapidated mobile homes. 6-16 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER SIX HOUSING ELEMENT Policy H-3.4 - Promote current use taxation for housing affordable to low- and moderate-income households. This method allows property taxes to be based on its current uses as affordable housing instead of its highest and best use. Policy H-3.5 - Conduct a survey of housing and infrastructure conditions and target funds to those areas in most need. Policy H-3.6 - Preserve and maintain buildings of historical significance to enhance neighborhood character. Policy H-3.7 - Maintain a strong code enforcement program. EXPAND HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES Goal H-4 - Expand home ownership opportunities for all income groups via land use regulations, financial strategies, and the removal of barriers to lending. Policy H-4.1 - Revise zoning and development standards to facilitate small lot sizes, manufactured housing on single-family lots, townhouses, condominiums, clustering, and other options which increase the supply of affordable home ownership opportunities. Policy H-4.2 - Work with local lenders to increase their assistance to first-time home buyers, including financial assistance with downpayments and closing costs. Policy H-4.3 - Encourage limited-equity cooperatives, lease purchase ownership programs, self-help housing, and other ownership models to expand home ownership options. Policy H-4.4 - As mandated by state law, implement an accessory housing ordinance as a means to increase the supply of housing units and to help people remain in their housing. REDUCE HOUSING COSTS Goal H-5 - Explore methods and partnerships to reduce the costs associated with developing, purchasing, and renting housing. Policy H-5.1 - Develop new partnerships with public and private lending institutions to find solutions that reduce housing financing costs for both builders and consumers. Policy H-5.2 - Evaluate the cumulative impact of fees, off-site mitigation, and permit processing. Revise current and future regulations (e.g., zoning, building, V KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 6-17 HOUSING ELEMENT CHAPTER SIX fire codes) and fees to reduce negative impacts on housing costs without compromising environmental protection, public safety, design, and public review FACILITATE LOW-INCOME HOUSING Goal H-6 - Provide a wide range of housing choices affordable to low-income households by promoting land use incentives, funding sources, and other options. - Policy H-6.1 - Provide density bonuses, transfer of development rights, and other incentives for the development of rental and purchase housing affordable to low- and moderate-income households. This housing can either be included in a market rate project or the entire development can be dedicated to low- and/or moderate-income households. Include a longevity clause in the incentives. Policy H-6.2 - Explore creating local and regional funding sources to expand housing opportunities for laver-income households in the community. Examples include a trust fund, mortgage revenue bonds, and/or levies. Policy H-6.3 - Provide incentives and work in partnership with nonprofit and private developers to build affordable housing, to subsidize law-income housing, and to implement housing policies. Policy H-6.4 - Explore exempting payment of impact fees and/or expediting plan review for housing units that will serve low- and moderate-income households. Policy H-6.5 - In order to provide lower-income rentals, encourage development of housing units that have shared facilities, such as single-room-occupancy hotels, residential units in mixed-use buildings, and boarding homes. Policy H-6.6 - Where feasible, provide relocation assistance to low-income households, as outlined in the GMA. PROMOTE EDUCATION AND COMMUNITY AWARENESS Goal H-7 - Actively promote community awareness and education regarding available housing resources and needs, as well as populations that require housing assistance. Policy H- 7.1 - Promote education and guidance of low- and moderate-income households on financing assistance, home purchasing techniques, and assistance in locating affordable rentals. Policy H-7.2 - Help create and participate in a local and/or regional resource, education, and lobbying center on housing data, housing programs, design alternatives, and funding sources. 6-18 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER SIX HOUSING ELEMENT Policy H-7.3 - Sponsor and/or promote educational campaigns on low-income and special needs housing in order to engender acceptance throughout the community. FOSTER SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSING Goal H-8 - Assure that the full range of special needs populations are provided with sufficient, appropriate, accessible, and affordable housing and services throughout our community. Policy H-8.1 - Remove unreasonable barriers to siting and operating housing for those with special needs, including, but not limited to emergency and transitional housing. In addition, periodically update the Kent Zoning Code and other development regulations to reflect new types of special needs housing. Policy H-8.2 - Improve coordination among the county, other jurisdictions, housing providers, service providers, and the financial community to identify, promote, and implement local and regional strategies to increase housing opportunities for people with special needs. ENCOURAGE QUALITY DESIGN Goal H-9 - Promote quality design that harmonizes with existing neighborhoods for new development and rehabilitation efforts. Policy 9.1 - Promote diversity in style and cost by allowing innovative mixtures of housing types and creative approaches to housing design and development. Policy 9.2 - Assist in and promote the development of innovative and affordable demonstration housing projects by exploring alternative design, land development, and construction techniques. PARTICIPATE IN REGIONAL PARTNERSHIPS Goal H-10-Actively participate in regional responses to affordable housing development needs and issues. Policy H-10.1 - Participate in and promote the development of countywide resources,funding, and programs to assist low- and moderate-income households in obtaining affordable and appropriate housing. Policy H-10.2 - Work in cooperation with other jurisdictions to ensure an equitable and rational distribution of affordable housing to all income groups vj throughout the county. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 6-19 CHAPTER SEVEN HUMAN SERVICES ELEMENT CHAPTER SEVEN HUMAN SERVICES ELEMENT INTRODUCTION Human services are essential to a healthy and prosperous community. They determine a persons ability to eat, sleep, work, play, socialize, raise children, and to actively participate in the community. This ability involves a broad spectrum of services such as child care, health care, employment, job training, access to transportation, housing, and neighborhood services. Everyone needs most, if not all, of these services. Human services often are segregated into four categories: subsistence services (i.e., food, shelter, clothing, medical assistance, and safety from abuse), preventative services (e.g., case management, job training and counseling); access services (e.g., information and referral, transportation, and translation services), and services for special populations _ (e.g., homeless persons, victims of domestic violence, mentally ill, alcohol and substance abusers, persons with developmental disabilities, and others). Special populations need additional and more specialized human services. For instance, people suffering from mental illness or substance abuse need access to specific treatment programs. Domestic violence victims require specialized shelters and support networks to assist them in permanently leaving abusive situations. Housing combined with intensive care services are required by the frail elderly and people with AIDS. These are just some selected examples of our community's special needs. Viewing human services in the discrete categories mentioned above tends to produce a disjointed and fragmented human services system. A holistic picture of human services is needed -- a picture that includes all the components that allow individuals to live full and vital lives within our community. The Growth Management Act recognizes this need by trying to integrate all aspects of a community in the comprehensive plan. Human services is a key ingredient in the physical, economic, and social fabric of the community; and consequently, in the KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 7-1 HUMAN SERVICES ELEMENT CHAPTER SEVEN comprehensive plan. The countywide planning policies recognize this in part by stating: All jurisdictions shall identify essential community and human services and include them in land use, capital improvement, and transportation plans. Therefore, although this human services element is a guide, it cannot be the only factor in integrating a comprehensive and accessible human services system into the fabric of the City of Kent. Providing these essential services requires a commitment by our community that must be reflected in the City's policies, zoning, funding, and priorities, not simply in goals that are isolated and documented in this element. KENT'S HISTORY IN HUMAN SERVICES Kent is a recognized South King County leader in human services. The City of Kent has consistently demonstrated a strong commitment to the human services needs of Kent residents. This is evidenced by the City's ongoing funding of human services agencies, the development of human services policies, and the establishment of its Human Services Commission and Office of Housing and Human Services. Funding The City funded its first human services agency in 1974 with a portion of its federal revenue sharing dollars. That same year the City created its Housing Repair Services Program to assist Kent's low- and moderate-income homeowners. When the federal revenue sharing money disappeared in 1985, the City took a strong stand by continuing to provide funding through its General Fund budget. At about the same time, the federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program was amended to allow funding of direct human services. Since then, the City always has used the maximum allowable amount of CDBG dollars for human services. The City hasn't stopped there. In 1989, recognizing the growing community need, the City took a major step: committing one percent (1%) of its General Fund revenue budget to fund human services on an ongoing basis. In the first year, this nearly doubled the amount of money Kent normally spent on human services. By 1993, the City's commitment resulted in human services funding of$307,041 from the General Fund and $43,074 from CDBG dollars. 7-2 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER SEVEN HUMAN SERVICES ELEMENT Targeting Needs Funding is crucial to providing human services, but it is not the only factor. The City has made sincere efforts to efficiently and effectively fund and promote those human services most needed by the community. One of the City's first efforts in this regard was in 1986 when it established the Human Services Commission. The Commission provides the focal point for addressing human services needs and issues in Kent. It not only reviews agencies' applications for Kent's human services funding, but promotes community awareness and education on human service issues. Making an even stronger statement in 1992, the City established the Office of Housing and Human Services. This Office, a division within the Planning Department, develops and implements the City's human services policies, including this human services element. CITY'S ROLE IN HUMAN SERVICES City Departments Many City departments, such as Parks and Recreation, Police, and Planning, have a role in human services. For instance, the Police Department offers a drug abuse resistance education program, DARE, that focuses on teaching students in grades K through 12 how to resist peer pressure to experiment with drugs and alcohol. The business community also plays a role by helping to fund the DARE program. The Parks and Recreation Department provides many human services-related programs to Kent residents. One of them, the Senior Center, is an integral part of our community and offers many vital services such as adult day.care, a daily nutritional meal program, a twice-weekly health care clinic, a legal clinic, the Meals on Wheels program, and transportation for seniors within the Kent School District boundaries. Another Parks program, the Special Populations Resource Center, has a number of integrated activities available to the developmentally disabled, physically disabled, and head and stroke injury persons. The Special Olympics is just one of those activities. The Planning Department, especially through its Office of Housing and Human Services, addresses the human services delivery system as a whole. The Office of Housing and Human Services anticipates needs, develops policies, targets funding, and promotes community awareness of specific human services needs and concerns. It also operates KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 7-3 HUMAN SERVICES ELEMENT CHAPTER SEVEN the City's Housing Repair Services Program that assists low- and moderate-income homeowners in Kent with necessary housing repairs. Present and Future Role The City will continue to provide leadership in human services as planner, facilitator, provider, funder, and educator. However, these roles need to be broadened in order to integrate a human services system into the physical, economic, and social aspects of the City. Specifically, human services needs should be reflected in the land use, transportation, capital facilities, economic development, recreation, neighborhood enhancement, and safety goals of the City. The City needs to provide the same leadership on a regional level. Human services cross city borders and must be addressed with that in mind. When jurisdictions combine their efforts, the regional perspective assumes a life of its own, attracting support from other local governments, business communities, human services providers, and the clients they serve. The most compelling argument for the regional approach is the more cost- effective, efficient, and comprehensive human services system it produces. KENT AND ITS HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS As Kent grows, the need for human services also grows and changes. These changes are reported in the City's 1993 Human Service Needs Assessment: A Caring Community. The information in A Caring Community helped shape the goals and policies in this element. This section summarizes some of the salient points of the needs assessment, with data modifications to reflect Kent's Potential Annexation Area (PAA), rather than just the current City boundaries. The focus in this section is on Kent's children and families. While families are not the only significant group in Kent, their assessment touches on a broad range of issues and services which are relevant to many groups. Kent's Children and Families The majority of Kent's population is comprised of families with children. Those children, age 18 or younger, make up almost 30 percent of Kent's population. Roughly two-thirds of these children are under 10 years of age. The City's under-10 population increased over 80 percent during the 1980's. 7-4 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER SEVEN HUMAN SERVICES ELEMENT This increase in the number of young children, combined with an equally dramatic rise in the number of Kent women in the workforce with children under six, imply a tremendous demand for child care. Currently, only 30 percent of children in South King County who need child care can be served by licensed providers. Lack of affordable child care is epidemic. The going rate for infant care of approximately $500 a month requires a family income of at least $60,000 to be affordable. (Affordable child care is typically defined as 10 percent of a household's income.) The typical service needs of young families are exacerbated in Kent by the number of families in poverty. This poverty rate is evidenced by census demographics and student enrollment in free or reduced-cost lunches. In 1993, 25 percent of Kent School District students located within the PAA received free or reduced-cost lunches. This includes a range of assistance among schools, from the two schools that had less than 10 percent of their students on the lunch program to the two elementary schools that had almost 50 percent of their students on the free or reduced-cost lunch program. Families and individuals in poverty are much more likely to experience difficulties in life than those who are more affluent. The following quote indicates how the infamous cycle of poverty develops. Starting life poor often relegates a child to a lifetime of struggle and poverty. Early childhood experiences contribute to poor children's high rates of school failures, dropout, delinquency, early childbearing and adult poverty" as well as health problems. While cities and nonprofit agencies are unable to affect the systemic causes of poverty, they can provide services that help alleviate the symptoms of poverty. These services sometimes are enough to help individuals break out of the cycle of poverty. The youth of Kent, in or out of poverty, are facing urgent problems. For example, Kent has the second highest teen pregnancy rate, and the second highest rate of certain sexually-transmitted diseases of teens in King County, outside Seattle. Kent also has the highest infant mortality rate in all of South King County, inclusive of adults and teens. Kent's high rate of teen pregnancy and the incidence of sexually-transmitted diseases imply an urgent need for sex and parenting education. In addition, the implications for AIDS and other health risks to mothers and the children of those young mothers are obvious. A much needed response is more education and access to health care for our endangered youth. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 7-5 HUMAN SERVICES ELEMENT CHAPTER SEVEN Another school statistic that is indicative of need is the number of children in English-as- a-second-language (ESL) classes. Between 1980 and 1990, the number of children in ESL classes in the Kent School District rose by 600 percent. Interestingly the top five - foreign languages of those children are, in order, Ukrainian, Vietnamese, Russian, Spanish, and Rumanian. This trend illustrates that culturally relevant services, including translators or bilingual staff, are increasingly important in Kent. - Families in Kent also are experiencing significant abuse problems. Domestic violence is the number one crime in Kent, with an average of 100 to 150 domestic violence cases as well as 200 cases of child abuse reported each month. Not only is there a need to get the victims out of abusive situations, but counseling and job training also are needed for the women (the usual victims of domestic violence). Counseling also is crucial for the children who are in a domestic violence situation, victims of child abuse, or both. Unless counseling and/or anger management therapy are received, children who are in abusive homes are likely to become adult abusers or adult victims of abuse. These children also tend to have more health and behavioral problems which require further specialized services. Populations Most in Need of Help The City cannot solve all these problems nor help all residents access necessary services. Therefore, in order to use limited government funding resources more effectively, Kent targets its funding resources to lower-income persons. Low and moderate-income people typically require more help in obtaining a full range of services, although the need for human services extends along the entire income continuum. In 1990, almost 40 percent of Kent's population in the PAA qualified as low and moderate-income. Half of that population is low-income or below. Projection of Future Needs The Puget Sound Regional Council projects that Kent's PAA population will increase 48 percent by year 2010. This alone will increase the demands on our human services delivery system. Furthermore, if the trend of the past decade continues, the percentage of lower-income people in Kent probably will increase faster than the population as a whole. Our increasing diversity, the aging of the populace, and the national trend of a rise in lower-paid service jobs and a decline in higher-paid manufacturing jobs are other factors forcing our human services delivery system to change continually. We need to 7-6 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER SEVEN HUMAN SERVICES ELEMENT keep abreast of these types of fluctuating demographics and try to provide the leadership and incentives to address fully the human services needs of our community. The preceding paragraphs are not intended to convey a comprehensive picture of the human services needs in Kent. They simply cite some key demographics and a few of Kent's most urgent needs. Kent's A Caring Community contains a more detailed assessment of Kent's human services needs. That assessment helped form this element and the following broad goals and policies. HUMAN SERVICES GOALS AND POLICIES Overall Goal - Enable each individual to meet their needs by providing sufficient, affordable, accessible, and appropriate human services throughout the City. THE CITY'S ROLE Goal HS-1 - Play an active role in promoting comprehensive and effective delivery systems for human services, both locally and regionally. Policy HS-1.1 - Provide human services to residents regardless of race, ethnicity, cultural or religious background, national origin, sex, age, family status, sexual or gender orientation, illness, or sensory, mental or physical disability. Policy HS-1.2 -Actively incorporate and encourage others to incorporate human services into the social, economic, and physical aspects of the City and the region. To this end, the City should act as a leader and model employer to the larger community through its policies, including land use, facilities, and personnel policies. Policy HS-1.3 - Continue and enhance the City's support of the Human Services Commission, Housing and Human Services staff, and current 1% allocation of General Fund budget to human services. Policy HS-1.4 - Where consistent with a department's mission, maintain and encourage programs in all City departments to address human services needs. Policy HS-1.5 - Advocate for new and existing human services programs, policies, legislation, and funding on the national, state, regional, and local levels. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 7-7 HUMAN SERVICES ELEMENT CHAPTER SEVEN Policy HS-1.6 - Involve those who use and provide human services in the development of human service policies, funding strategies, and educational programs. Policy HS-1.7 - Promote education throughout the City and the region regarding the full range of human services needs and provision of services. Policy HS-1.8 - Continue the City's active participation in the Regional Human Services Roundtable, the South King Council of Human Services, and other regional groups. MEETING THE NEED Goal HS-2 - Continue to promote a comprehensive, coordinated, and effective system of human services that addresses and anticipates human services needs and provides leadership in the development of community responses. Policy HS-2.1 - Develop work programs on a regular basis, that target specific human service issues and/or goals and policies. Policy HS-2.2 - Give funding priority to preventative and subsistence programs and stress quality of services aver quantity of people served. Policy HS-2.3 - Endeavor to build community support for and awareness of human services in order to create a society that values diversity, responds to the special needs of individuals and families, and appropriately distributes the burdens and benefits of living in this city and region. Policy HS-2.4 - Periodically review the City's General Fund allocation to human services to assess increasing it in proportion to population and need. Policy HS-2.5 - Encourage, facilitate, and assist nonprofit agencies in building capacity to better meet the needs of the community. Building capacity can include increasing an agency's efficiency, creating new nonprofit agencies to address unmet needs, or expanding existing nonprofit agencies' ability to meet the ever- changing human services needs of the community. Policy HS-2.6 - Build new avenues and coalitions to meet human services needs by working in partnership with churches, employers, businesses, schools, and nonprofit agencies in the community. Policy HS-2.7 - Periodically review the needs of the community and update the needs assessment and funding priorities as appropriate. 7-8 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER SEVEN HUMAN SERVICES ELEMENT Policy HS-2.8 - Encourage and enhance access to existing and new human services through effective information and referral systems, culturally-relevant services, translation services, education, physical modifications, and transportation. HUMAN SERVICES AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT Goal HS-3 - Integrate human services into the fabric of the community by addressing human services needs in the physical planning, budgeting, and priorities of the City. Policy HS-3.1 - Consider the impacts on and implications for human services when making land use decisions and other City policies and regulations. Policy HS-3.2-Determine needed locations and locational criteria to ensure that physical space is available to house the full range of human services throughout Kent. Explore methods to enact this physical space requirement. For example, using locational criteria, create a zoning overlay that encourages or requires a developer to accomodate identified human services needs within a new development or its surrounding area. Investigate appropriate incentives. Policy HS-3.3 - Stress access to jobs and services, especially for lower-income people, when planning local and regional transportation systems and economic development activities. Policy HS-3.4 - Conduct a review of all City policies and regulations, existing and future, to ensure compliance with the Federal Fair Housing Act, the American Disabilities Act (ADA), and related legislation. Policy HS-3.5 - Encourage the efficient use and sharing of existing facilities by service providers. Policy HS-3.6 - Serve as an example to private industry and agencies by using surplus City space to house appropriate and essential housing and human services. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 7-9 CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT INTRODUCTION The capital facilities element contains a summary of the Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) for the City of Kent. The element consists of the following information: (1) statements of requirements, level-of-service (LOS) standards, guidelines, and criteria that are used to develop and implement the CFP; (2) inventories of existing facilities; (3) maps showing the locations of existing facilities; and (4) a list of proposed capital projects, including a financing plan, future operating costs, and reconciliation of project capacity and LOS standards. The complete CFP and supporting documents are available for review at the City of Kent Planning Department. The CFP is a required element of the City's comprehensive plan, mandated by the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA). The GMA requires cities and counties to approve and maintain a CFP which includes requirements for specific types of capital facilities, LOS standards, financial feasibility, and assurance that adequate facilities will be provided as development occurs. As required by the GMA, the CFP is a 6-year plan for capital improvements that support the City's current and future population and employment growth. It contains LOS standards for each public facility, and requires that new development is served by adequate facilities. The CFP also contains broad goals and specific policies that guide and implement the provision of adequate public facilities. The capital facilities element is the element that makes real the rest of the comprehensive plan. By establishing LOS as the basis for providing capital facilities and for achieving concurrency, the CFP determines the quality of life in the community. The requirement to fully finance the CFP provides a reality check on the vision set forth in the comprehensive plan. The capacity of capital facilities that are provided in the CFP affects the size and configuration of the urban growth area. The purpose of the CFP is to use sound fiscal policies to provide adequate public facilities in a manner consistent with the land use element and at a time concurrent with KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 8-1 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT (or prior to) the impacts of development. These capital facilities propose to achieve and maintain adopted standards for LOS in order to maintain the quality of life for existing and future development. The plan fulfills the GMA requirement for facilities planning; _ but, in addition, the plan serves as a base for good city management and establishes eligibility for grants and loans. It provides coordination among the City's many plans for capital improvements, including other elements of the comprehensive plan, master _ plans of departmental service providers, and facilities plans of the state, the region, and adjacent local jurisdictions. Requirements of the Growth Management Act The GMA requires the CFP to identify public facilities that will be required during the six years following adoption of the new plan (1997 through 2002). The CFP must include the location and cost of the facilities, and the sources of revenue that will be used to fund the facilities. The CFP must be financially feasible; in other words, dependable revenue sources must equal or exceed anticipated costs. If the costs exceed the revenue, the City must reduce its level of service, reduce costs, or modify the land use element to bring development into balance with available or affordable facilities. Other requirements of the GMA mandate forecasts of future needs for capital facilities and the use of standards for levels of service of facility capacity as the basis for public facilities contained in the CFP [see RCW 36.70A.020 (12)]. As a result, public facilities in the CFP must be based on quantifiable, objective measures of capacity, such as traffic- volume capacity per mile of road and acres of park per capita. One of the goals of the GMA is to have capital facilities in place concurrent with development. This concept is known as concurrency (also called "adequate public facilities"). In the City of Kent, concurrency requires 1) facilities which serve the development to be in place at the time of development (or for some types of facilities, a financial commitment to be made to provide the facilities within a specified period of time) and 2) facilities which serve the development to have sufficient capacity to serve the development without decreasing LOS below minimum standards adopted in the CFP. The GMA requires concurrency for transportation facilities. The GMA also requires all other public facilities to be "adequate" [see RCW 19.27.097, 36.70A.020, 36.70A.030, and 58.17.110]. Concurrency management procedures will be developed to ensure that sufficient public facility capacity is available for each proposed development. 8-2 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT After the CFP is completed and adopted as part of the comprehensive plan, the City must adopt development regulations to implement the plan. The development regulations will provide detailed regulations and procedures for implementing the requirements of the plan. Each year, the City must update the CFP. The annual update will be completed before the City's budget is adopted in order to incorporate into the budget the capital improvements from the updated CFP. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS LOS (SCENARIO-DRIVEN) METHOD OF ANALYSIS Explanation of Levels of Service Levels of service usually are quantifiable measures of the amount of public facilities that are provided to the community. Levels of service also may measure the quality of some public facilities. Typically, measures of LOS are expressed as ratios of facility capacity to demand (i.e., actual or potential users). The following chart lists examples of LOS measures for some capital facilities. Type of Capital Facility Sample LOS Measures Corrections Beds per 1,000 population Fire and Rescue Average response time Hospitals Beds per 1,000 population Law Enforcement Officers per 1,000 population Library Collection size per capita Building square feet per capita Parks Acres per 1,000 population Roads and Streets Ratio of actual volume to design capacity Schools Square feet per student Sewer Gallons per customer per day KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 8-3 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT Effluent quality Solid Waste Tons (or cubic yards) per capita or per _ customer Surface Water & River Levees Design storm (i.e., 100-year storm) Runoff water quality _ Transit Ridership Water Gallons per customer per day Water quality Each of these LOS measures needs one additional piece of information: the specific quantity that measures the current or proposed LOS. For example, the standard for parks might be 5 acres per 1,000 population; but the current LOS may be 2.68 acres per 1,000, which is less than the standard. In order to make use of the LOS method, the City selects the way in which it will measure each facility (i.e., acres, gallons, etc.). It also identifies the amount of the current and proposed LOS standard for each measurement. There are other ways to measure the LOS of many of these capital facilities. The examples in the previous chart are provided to give greater depth to the following discussion of the use of LOS as a method for determining the City's need for capital facilities. Method for Using Levels of Service The LOS method answers two questions in order to develop a financially-feasible CFP. The GMA requires the CFP to be based on standards for service levels that are measurable aird financially feasible for the six fiscal years following adoption of the, plan The CFP must meet the City's capital needs for the fiscal years 1997 through 2002. The two questions that must be answered in order to meet the GMA requirements are: (1) What is the quantity of public facilities that will be required by the end of the 6th year (i.e., 2002)? (2) Is it financially feasible to provide the quantity of facilities that are required by the end of the 6th year (i.e., 2002)? 8-4 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT The answer to each question can be calculated by using objective data and formulas. Each type of public facility is examined separately (i.e., roads are examined separately from parks). The costs of all the types of facilities then are added together in order to determine the overall financial feasibility of the CFP. A detailed explanation of the formulas used is contained in the Capital Facilities Plan. One of the CFP support documents, Capital Facilities Requirements, contains the results of the use of this method. Setting the Standards for Levels of Service Because the need for capital facilities is determined largely by the adopted LOS, the key to influencing the CFP is to influence the selection of the LOS standards. LOS standards are measures of the quality of life of the community. The standards should be based on the community's vision of its future and its values. Traditional approaches to capital facilities planning rely on technical experts (i.e., staff and consultants) to determine the need for capital improvements. In the scenario-driven approach, these experts play an important advisory role, but they do not control the determination. Their role is to define and implement a process for the review of various scenarios, to analyze data, and to make suggestions based on technical considerations. The final, legal authority to establish the LOS rests with the City Council because the City Council enacts the LOS standards that reflect the community's vision. The City Council's decision should be influenced by recommendations of the 1) Planning Commission; 2) providers of public facilities (i.e., local government departments, special districts, private utilities, the State of Washington, tribal governments, etc.); 3) formal advisory groups that make recommendations to the providers of public facilities (i.e., community planning groups); 4) the general public through individual citizens and community civic, business, and issue-based organizations that make their views known or are sought through sampling techniques. The scenario-driven approach to developing the LOS standards provides decision-makers and anyone else who wishes to participate with a clear statement of the outcomes of various LOS for each type of public facility. This approach reduces the tendency for decisions to be controlled by expert staff or consultants, opens up the decision-making process to the public and advisory groups, and places the decisions before the City JCouncil. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 8-5 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT Selection of a specific LOS to be the "adopted standard" was accomplished by a 12-step process: (1) The "current" (1993), actual LOS were calculated. (2) Departmental service providers were given national standards or guidelines and examples of LOS from other local governments. (3) Departmental service providers researched local standards from City studies, master plans, ordinances, and development regulations. (4) Departmental service providers recommended a standard for the City of Kent's CFP. (5) The first draft of Capital Facilities Requirements forecasted needed capacity and approximate costs of two LOS scenarios (e.g., the 1993 actual LOS and the department's recommended LOS). (6) The City Council reviewed and commented on the first draft of Capital Facilities Requirements. (7) The Operations department prepared a follow-up Capital Facilities Level of Service/Cost Options report which identified five alternative LOS options, or scenarios, to forecast the amount of capital facilities that would be most appropriate for the City of Kent during the 6-year growth period 1994-1999. This report complements Capital Facilities Requirements, which was reviewed with the City Council November 30, 1993, and not only identifies LOS options but also includes specific recommendations from the Operations department. (8) The City Council reviewed and commented on Capital Facilities Level of Service/Cost Options and indicated their preferences for LOS and noncapacity capital projects to be included in the first draft of the CFP. (9) Departmental service providers prepared specific capital improvements projects and estimates of related maintenance and operating costs to support the City Council's preferred LOS and noncapacity projects. (10) The first-draft CFP was prepared using the City Council's preferred LOS and noncapacity projects. The LOS in the first-draft CFP served as the basis for capital projects, their costs, and a financing plan necessary to pay for the costs. (11) The draft CFP was reviewed/discussed during City Council and Planning Commission workshop(s) prior to formal reading/hearing of the CFP by the City Council. (12) The City Council formally adopted LOS as part of the CFP. 8-6 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Every year, as required by the Growth Management Act, department service providers reassess land use issues, level of service standards, and projected revenues to determine what changes, if any are needed. CURRENT FACILITIES INVENTORIES CORRECTIONAL FACILITY The Kent Correction Center is managed by the Kent Police Department. The current inventory of the Correctional Facility totals 130 beds. The Center is located at 1201 Central in the City. An intergovernmental contract with the Federal Marshall's Office currently allows the City to provide approximately 20 beds for Federal prisoners. The geographic location of the Correctional Facility is found on Figure 8.1. FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES The Kent Fire Department is responsible for delivering fire protection and emergency medical services to the City, and to the geographic area within King County fire District #37. The City owns six (6) fire stations: Station 71 (south); Station 72 (east); Station 73 (west); Station 74 (east); Station 75 (east); and Station 76 (north). Each station is equipped with at least one fire/aid unit which consists of a pumper truck with emergency medical service/rescue equipment and manpower, and each station has a future capacity for three units. The table below lists each station, fire/aid units in service, total capacity, and average response time: Name of Station Fire/Aid Units in Service Total Capacity (Bays) Location Station 71 1 3 South Station 72 2 3 East Station 73 1 3 West Station 74 1* 3 East Station 75 1 3 East Station 76 1 3 North *Ladder Truck King County Fire District #37 owns one fire station: Station 77 (Kentridge), with one fire/aid unit in service and capacity for two. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) 8-7 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT The geographic locations of the Fire and Emergency Services facilities are found on Figure 8.1. POLICE/FIRE TRAINING CENTER The Police/Fire Training Center is located on East Hill at 24611 116th Avenue SE: The Center, housed in an 8,000 square foot building, provides audio and visual equipment and other facilities for in-service training for City of Kent police officers and fire fighters. Instruction is conducted by Kent Police and Fire Department personnel, and by nationally known instructors from organizations such as the International Association of Police Chiefs and the State Fire Service. In addition to providing a facility for training City of Kent personnel, the training center also accommodates a satellite training program sponsored by the Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission. The geographic locations of the police/fire training facilities are found on Figure 8.1. CITY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES - GENERAL GOVERNMENT The City of Kent Operations Department manages several facilities and buildings necessary to the administrative and maintenance functions of the City. These include City Hall and the City Council Chambers, the Centennial Center, the Municipal Court facility, and City maintenance shops. The table below lists the name, location and capacity of each facility: NAME LOCATION CAPACITY (Square Feet) City Hall 220 4th Avenue South 33,100 Centennial Center 400 West Gowe 71,949 Municipal Court 302 West Gowe 4,251 The geographic locations of the City administrative facilities are found on Figure 8.1. 8-8 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CITY ADMINISTRATION OFFICES - POLICE HEADQUARTERS The inventory of City administrative offices for the Police Department headquarters totals 18,000 square feet, and is located at 232 4th Avenue South in downtown Kent. The geographic location of the Police Headquarters is found on Figure 8.1. CITY MAINTENANCE FACILITIES The total area of city government maintenance facilities totals 22,558 square feet, and includes the Public Works maintenance shops (17,173 square feet) and Park and Recreation Department maintenance shops (5,385 square feet). The Police Vehicle Storage facility (3,600 square feet), which is an open, uncovered yard is not included in this inventory. The geographic location of the City Maintenance facilities is found on Figure 8.1 PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES The City of Kent owns and manages 147.2 acres of neighborhood park land and 972.0 acres of community park land within the current City limits. King County owns 0.5 acres. Within the unincorporated Urban Growth Area (UGA) of Kent, King county owns 720.3 acres of park land. The Park and Recreation Department manages a wide variety of facilities located on park land, including the Senior Center, Kent Commons, Special Populations Resource Center, play fields, and trails. A detailed inventory of current parks and recreation facilities is contained in the Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan. The geographic locations of the parks and recreational facilities are found on Figures 10.1 and 10.2 of the parks element. GOLF COURSES The inventory of current City golf courses includes the following: NAME LOCATION CAPACITY (HOLES) Par 3 Golf Course 2030 West Meeker 9 18 Hole Golf Course 2019 West Meeker 18 8-9 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT The geographic locations of the golf course facilities are found on Figure 10.1 of the parks element. SANITARY SEWER FACILITIES The sewer service area of the City of Kent encompasses 23 square miles, and includes most of the incorporated City, as well as adjacent franchise areas within unincorporated King County. Since the existing collection system already serves most of the City's service area, expansion of this system will occur almost entirely by infill development, which will be accomplished primarily through developer extensions and local improvement districts. In general, the existing sewer system is sized based on existing standards which will carry peak flows which will be generated by the service area for ultimate development. However, the City of Kent Comprehensive Sewerage Plan has identified various undersized lines, as well as others that require rehabilitation. A complete inventory of Sanitary Sewer facilities is found in the City of Kent Comprehensive Sewerage Plan. The Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (Metro) has assumed the responsibility for interception, treatment, and disposal of wastewater from the City of Kent and its neighboring communities. Therefore, the City does not incur any direct capacity-related capital facilities requirements or costs for sanitary sewer treatment. The voluminous inventory of current Sanitary Sewer facilities is on file with the City's Department of Public Works. The geographic locations of the sanitary sewer facilities are found on Figure 8.2. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES The City of Kent lics primarily within the Green River Watershed, which encompasses, 480 square miles and the total drainage area of the City is 25.42 square miles which includes most of the incorporated city, as well as the adjacent franchise areas within unincorporated King County. The eight major watershed areas include (1) Green River; (2) Lake Fenwick; (3) Midway; (4) Mill Creek (Kent); (5) Mill Creek (Auburn); (6) Mullen Slew; (7) Springbrook-Garrison Creek; (8) Star Lake. The City has operated a stormwater utility since 1981 as a means of financing the construction, operation, and maintenance of the surface water management program. Conveyance systems in both the "hillside" and "valley" areas must convey at minimum the 25 year storm event. The 8-10 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) CITY OF KEN T COMPREHENSIVE PLAIN InMM,71iono/Airport f It y .°Baw Lk NORTH S i188 ST IItt aa jF r f It J r -•a° gng'e / , S 201 ss c i S 200 S7yw t k s a � f SCALE: 1"=4000' vi-nj 208 Sr .: <i<.1 ; r" LEGEND LJ. ( + ! i ' "} y.'tF4A" if,;.y.• . Q FIRE STATION S 216 S7...N 3 a yx F ��� ° v i FIRE STATION WITH POLICE SUBSTATION SCHOOL HO KENT CITY LIMITS 0 4 a#c Chi POTENTIAL ANNEXATION BOUNDARY S 240 S7 1 1 f {V 24gyS ,n ,f i ST si �r THIS MAP IS INTENDED AS AN AID IN GRAPHIC J REPRESENTATION ONLY AND IS NOT A LEGAL n DOCUMENT, Nq- -^5 s 1 S 72 ST til Stpr�k�` � r f..a" 7 ..- r x_._. ....... r PUBLIC SERVICES ' w .AND FACILITIES S 288 w ST...,., CITY OF KENT Seall/e—Tacoma COMPREHENSIVE PLAN /nlernabona/Airporl w 'Bow Lk J s 188 ST NORTH le fake c An9 _ r Q � S 200 ST S 200 ST SCALE: 1"=4000' a ! , 2 ST u LEGEND �4— S 208 ST EXISTING ` SANITARY SEWER a P. EXISTING 5 216 ST N ; PUMP STATION i S2 2ST i S 223 ST a' EXISTING i' METRO COLLECTOR "n Q g � FUTURE SEWERMAIN POTENTIAL c �r ` Kent o�y �`i ANNEXATION BOUNDARY S 240 ST I{ENT SEWER a� > FRANCHISE AREA 2 a P. O CIRCLED NUMBERS REFERENCE PROJECTS IN CFP TABLE SS-3 � w i S 282 ST cK .i THIS MAP IS INTENDED AS AN RID IN GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ONLY AND IS NOT R LEGAL w DOCUMENT. a ( J\ S 260 ST Q) S � S 7 S n 72 ST P S. SEATER SYSTEM = S 288 ST u CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT standards include requirements to provide water quality control recommended by the "State Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual". The voluminous inventory of current stormwater management facilities is on file with the City's Department of Public Works. The geographic locations of the stormwater management facilities are found on Figure 8.3. WATER SUPPLY, DISTRIBUTION, AND STORAGE FACILITIES The water service area of the City encompasses 27 square miles. This area includes most of the incorporated City, as well as adjacent franchise areas within unincorporated King County. To the east, the service area boundary coincides with the boundary of Water District No. 111 and Soos Creek Sewer and Water District. To the north, the service area boundary coincides with the mutual Kent/Renton and Kent/Tukwila city limits. To the west, it coincides with Highline Water District's boundary, and to the south, the City's service area boundary coincides with the City of Auburn, and Federal Way Sewer and Water District. The principal sources of water supply for the City's water system are Kent Springs and Clark Springs. During high demand periods, the capacity of these two sources is exceeded, and supplemental well facilities are activated. These sources are adequate to meet peak day demands; however, during an extreme dry/hot spell, the City purchases water from adjacent purveyors. Water system interties are presently available with Highline Water District, Tukwila, and Renton during such emergency situations; however, these sources are not considered to be dependable for meeting long-term demand requirements. A new open storage reservoir is proposed to be located on a site near 124th Avenue SE and SE 304th Street. The City also plans a future intertie with Tacoma's pipeline 5 project. The water distribution system exists throughout most of the City's service area. Expansion will take place almost entirely through infill development, which will be accomplished primarily through developer extensions. Most of the remaining projects in the City's most recent water system Plan consist primarily of water main replacements and upsizing in older portions of the system. A Comprehensive Water System Plan update is required by the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) every five years. The City's most recent Water System Plan (completed in 1988 and amended in 1990) has been approved by DSHS. This plan was completed in conjunction with the Critical Water Supply Plan for the South King County area. An update of the Comprehensive Water System Plan is scheduled in 1997. A detailed inventory of current water system facilities, KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) 8-11 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT and City water rights records are on file with the City's Department of Public Works. The voluminous inventory of current stormwater management facilities is on file with the City's Department of Public Works. The geographic locations of water distribution facilities are found on Figure 8.4. TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES The City's road system current inventory consists of approximately 254.9 total land miles for four major categories of roads; 40.5 miles of principal arterials; 91 miles of minor arterials; 94.4 miles of collector arterials, and 29 miles of local roads. There are nine bridges in Kent. In 1993, transportation networks for pedestrians include: Widened shoulder 19.35 miles Gravel Paths 28.31 miles Asphalt sidewalks 4.69 miles Concrete sidewalks 108.56 miles Pathways 21.01 miles The pedestrian transportation inventory will be updated after a physical inventory of the Meridian Annexation area is completed. The geographic locations of major transportation facilities are found on Figure 9.1 of the transportation element. PUBLIC EDUCATION FACILITIES Most of Kent's residential areas are served by the Kent School District. the Renton School District serves students from an area of Kent near the north City limits, and Kent students from a section of the West Hill of Kent attend Federal Way Schools. Detailed inventories of school district capital facilities are contained in the capital facilities plan of each school district. The capital facilities plans of the Kent and Federal Way School Districts have been adopted as part of the City's Capital Facilities Element. The geographic locations of schools in Kent are tound on Figure 8.1. PUBLIC LIBRARY FACILITIES The City of Kent is served by the King County Library system in the Kent Library building at 212 2nd Avenue West, which was built in 1992. Detailed information regarding the King County Library System is contained in the King County Library System, The Year 2000 Plan, September 1992. The geographic location of the Kent Library building is found on Figure 8.1. 8-12 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) �... CITY OF ]K]E N T COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Seatt/e—Tacoma � ��pp f InternationalAirport �4' Bow Lk23 ,� w NORTH ­1 , r w e �{l8 ._. A ' S„..No ST 'nu SCALE: 1"=4000' LEGEND tn DRAINAGE BASIN CA S 216 ST N�..._ � � �� BOUNDARY r S 2.Z � � :;d � KENT DRAINAGE SERVICE AREA POTENTIAL tt" o ANNEXATION BOUNDARY MIDWAY O CIRCLED NUMBERS REFERENCE PROJECTS IN CFP TABLE SM-3 — �KentO� b ;, ♦LINO., '_� f n co Ty, S•2 8 n a;a 2 8 252 ci THIS MAP IS INTENDED AS AN RID IN GRAPHIC rn b REPRESENTATION ONLY RND IS NOT A LEGAL ...: .._ DOCUMENT. t te•3� ,.� S 260 ST LK, FE'NW / 2 STORM DRAINAGE SERVICE ARE A x ( u �—. - CITY OF KENT Seaff/e Tacoma ¢ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN l; /nfernafiona/Airport r y r � "Bow Lk J S 188 ST NORTH rJl i u An9 i / le ta" l i r F o -c S 200 ST S 200 S SCALE: 1"=4000' o 2 4ST tts 208 ST ]LEGEND Q I� a G! EXISTING WATERMAIN S216ST N _n h I I S 222 Sl EXISTING FACILITY S 223 ST FUTURE WATERMAIN / r 0-------a---s POTENTIAL ANNEXATION BOUNDARY ooy yi ' Kent KENT WATER S 240 ST FRANCHISE AREA P.S. 8 n u \y O CIRCLED NUMBERS REFERENCE a° s. «3 2 PROJECTS IN CFP TABLE WS-3 S 252 ST 1 W af° Y p rn I THIS MRP 15 INTENDED AS RN RID IN GRRPHIC REPRESENTR71ON ONLY RNO IS NOT R LEGRL DOCUMENT. w P a Iv P.S. «4 S 260 ST — wog �y 0 aSh 300,000 G"J W.T. Q II l P.S. a7 a I\rl S 72 S ^ 7 WATER SYSTEM 3 i z S 288 ST J FIGURE 8.4 CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS The following section outlines the capital costs, financing, and levels of service for the public facilities which are provided by the City of Kent. This same information for the Kent and Federal Way School districts is available in the districts' capital facilities plans, which have been adopted by reference as part of the Capital Facilities Element. CAPITAL COSTS Table 8.1 1997 - 2002 Capital Facilities Plan Project Cost Statistics (In 000's) SUMMARY NON UTILITY PROJECTS TRANSPORTATION 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TOTAL Corridors 13,393 13,529 13,163 3,085 5,479 1,180 49,828 Arterials 3,188 2,863 5,962 108 109 2,457 14,687 Intersection Improvements 55 350 149 554 Other Improvements 1,294 1,030 757 848 879 1,530 6,338 SUBTOTAL TRANSPORTATION 17,930 17,771 19,883 4,189 6,467 5,167 71,408 PUBLIC SAFETY Correctional Facility 118 25 143 Fire and Emergency Services 2,985 601 721 521 496 496 5,820 Police / Fire Training Center Police Administrative Offices SUBTOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY 3,103 626 721 521 496 496 5,963 PARKS AND RECREATION Neighborhood Park Recreational Land 200 Community Park Recreational Land 1,200 1,745 Neighborhood Recreational Facilities 1,185 495 735 910 210. 210 3, Community Recreational Facilities 1,069 4,857 30,220 295 479 295 37,215 Golf Complex 100 350 350 800 SUBTOTAL PARKS AND REC 2,354 5,702 32,505 1,205 689 505 42,960 GENERAL GOVERNMENT Information Services / Automation 6,072 6,072 Government Facilities - Buildings / Mtc 2,310 150 8,290 150 1,650 250 12,800 Other 127 55 59 62 66 70 439 SUBTOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT 8,509 205 8,349 212 1,716 320 19,311 TOTAL NON UTILITY PROJECTS 31,896 24,304 61,458 6,127 9,368 6,488 139,642 UTILITY PROJECTS Sanitary Sewer 2,813 1,259 5,589 281 291 303 10,536 Stormwater Management 5,941 4,669 3,154 949 460 478 15,651 Water Supply & Distribution 1,320 11,625 375 286 897 1.184 15 687 TOTAL UTILITY PROJECTS 10,074 17,553 9,118 1,516 1,648 1,965 41,874 TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS 41,970 41,858 70,576 7,643 11,016 8,453 181,516 8-13 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT FINANCING The revenue sources that are available to the City of Kent for capital facilities include taxes, fees and charges, and grants. Some sources of revenue for capital facilities can also be used for operating costs. A comprehensive list of revenue sources and a discussion of limitations on the use of each revenue source is contained in the Capital Facilities Plan. Existing City revenues are not forecast, nor are they diverted to capital expenditures from maintenance and operations. The financing plan for these capital improvements includes the revenues listed in the pie chart below. The chart lists the major categories of Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) revenue sources and the amount contributed by each source. - Table 8.2 City of Kent, Washington Capital Facilities Plan REVENUES BY SOURCE 1997-2002 CIP Revenues 10,457 5.8% Golf&Utility Fees 25,014 13.8% Sale of Property/Misc 2,721 1.5% Transportation 23,528 13.0% Bonds&Grants 104,103 57.3% TOTAL REVENUE: $181,516 TOTAL REVENUES (in 0001s) Detailed project lists and financing plans are contained in the Capital Facilities Plan. 8-14 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE CONSEQUENCES OF THE CFP The CFP will enable the City of Kent to accommodate 15.1% growth during the next 6 years (48,144 people in 1999) while maintaining the 1993 LOS for the following public facilities: Facility LOS Units 1993 LOS CFP LOS PROPOSED Fire/Emergency Services Units/1,000 pop. 0.096 0.096 Neighborhood Rec. Facilities Investment/Capita $151.52 $151.52 Community Rec. Facilities Investment/Capita $496.26 $496.26 Sanitary Sewer Per DOE and METRO Regulations Stormwater Management Per State Regulations/King County Stds. Transportation N/A Water System Per DSHS Regulations/King County Stds The level of service for the following facilities will be increased as a result of the CFP: Facility LOS Units 1993 LOS CFP LOS PROPOSED City Maintenance Facilities Sq. Ft./1,000 pop. 539.0 625.0 The level of service for the following facilities will be reduced as a result of the CFP: Facility LOS Units 1993 LOS CFP LOS PROPOSED Correctional Facility Beds/1,000 pop. 3.11 2.70 Police/Fire Training Center Sq. Ft./Employee 32.5 28.3 City Admin. Offices Sq. Ft./1,000 pop. 1,525.0 1,325.0 - General Government City Admin. Offices Sq. Ft./1,000 pop. 430.0 396.0 - Police Headquarters Neighborhood Park/ Acres/1,000 pop. 2.59 2.53 Recreational Land Community Park/ Acres/1,000 pop. 18.80 18.19 Recreational Land Golf Courses Holes/1,000 pop. 0.65 0.56 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 8-I5 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES GOALS AND POLICIES Goal CFP-1 - As the City of Kent continues to grow and develop, ensure that an adequate supply and range of capital facilities are available to provide satisfactory standards of public health, safety, and quality of life. Goal CFP-2 - Encourage and support patterns of growth and development which are consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan by concentrating capital facilities spending in those areas where growth is desired. Goal CFP-3 - Define types of public facilities, establish standards for levels of service for each type of public facility, and in coordination with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element, determine what capital improvements are needed in order to achieve and maintain the standards for existing and future populations, and to repair or replace existing public facilities. As growth and additional development occur in the City and adjacent growth areas, consistently reassess land use, update the capital facilities data, and use these data as a basis for making financial decisions regarding capital facilities investment. Identify alternatives to spending and establish priorities. Policy CFP-3.1 - Establish and maintain definitions of terms which apply throughout this Capital Facilities Plan and related documents. Place the definitions in the introduction to the Capital Facilities Plan and update them as necessary. Policy CFP-3.2 - The capital facilities provided within the City of Kent are defined in the introduction and categorized below as A., B., and C. facilities. Establish standards for levels of service for Categories A and B public facilities, and coordinate with providers of Category C public facilities. Apply the standards for Category A and B facilities and coordinate Category C facilities as follows: (i) Category A: Capital facilities owned or operated by the City of Kent. Apply the standards for levels of service of each type of public facility in Category A to development permits issued by the City (as set forth in the City's Concurrency Ordinance) after the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, the City's annual budget beginning with the 1995 fiscal year, the City's Capital Improvements Program beginning with the 1995 fiscal year, and other elements of this Comprehensive Plan. 8-I6 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER EIGHT CAPPlAL FACILITIES ELEMENT (ii) Category B: Capital facilities owned or operated by the City of Kent, but not subject to requirements for concurrency. Apply the standards for levels of service of each type of public facility in Category B to the City's annual budget beginning with the 1995 fiscal year, the City's Capital Improvements Program beginning with the 1995 fiscal year, and other elements of this Comprehensive Plan. The standards for levels of service in Category B are for planning purposes only, and shall not apply to development permits issued by the City. (iii) Category C: Capital facilities owned or operated by federal, state, county, independent district, and private organizations. Coordinate levels of service and capacity with other entities who provide capital facilities within the City, such as libraries, Washington State Department of Transportation, school districts, and transit service providers. Policy CFP-3.3 - Provide standards for levels of service according to the following: (i) Category A Public Facilities Transportation facilities: Sanitary Sewer: State DOE and Metro Regulations Stormwater Management: State Regulations and King County Standards Water: DSHS Regulations and King County Standards (ii) Category B Public Facilities Fire and Emergency Services: 0.096 fire aid units per 1,000 population Law Enforcement: Correctional facility: 2.70 beds per 1,000 population Parks: Neighborhood Park/Recreational Land: 2.53 acres per 1,000 population Community Park/Recreational Land: 18.19 acres per 1,000 population Neighborhood Recreational Facilities: $151.52 investment per e capita KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 8-1 7 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT Community Recreational Facilities: $496.26 investment per capita Golf Courses: 0.56 holes per 1,000 population City Administrative Offices: City Hall: 1,325 square feet per 1,000 population Police Headquarters: 396 square feet per 1,000 population City Maintenance Facilities: 625 square feet per 1,000 population City Training Facilities: Police/Fire training center: 28.3 square feet per employee - Policy CFP-3.4 - Determine the needed quantity of capital improvements as follows: The quantity of capital improvements needed to eliminate existing deficiencies and to meet the needs of future growth shall be determined for each public facility by the following calculation: Q = (S x D) - I. Where Q is the quantity of capital improvements needed, S is the standard for level of service, D is the demand, such as the population, and I is the inventory of existing facilities. Use the calculation for existing demand in order to determine existing deficiencies. Use the calculation for projected demand in order to determine needs of future growth. Policy CFP-3.5 - Consider the standards for levels of service to be the exclusive determinant of need for a capital improvement except in the following circumstances: (i) Repair, remodeling, renovation, and replacement of obsolete or worn-out facilities shall be determined by the City Council upon the recommendation of the Mayor. (ii) Capital improvements that provide levels of service in excess of the standards adopted in this Comprehensive Plan may be constructed or acquired at any time as long as the following conditions are met: (a) The capital improvement does not make financially infeasible any other capital improvement that is needed to 8-I8 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT achieve or maintain the standards for levels of service adopted in this Comprehensive Plan, and (b) The capital improvement does not contradict, limit, or substantially change the goals or policies of any element of this Comprehensive Plan, and (c) The capital improvement meets one of the following conditions: The excess capacity is an integral part of a capital improvement that is needed to achieve or maintain standards for levels of service (i.e., the minimum capacity of a capital project is larger than the capacity required to provide the level of service), or The excess capacity provides economies of scale making it less expensive than a comparable amount of capacity if acquired at a later date, or ... The asset acquired is land that is environmentally sensitive, or designated by the City as necessary for conservation or recreation, or .... The excess capacity is part of a capital project financed by general obligation bonds approved by referendum. Policy CFP-3.6 - Encourage non-capital alternatives to achieve and maintain the adopted standard for level of service. Non-capital alternatives, which use programs, strategies, or methods other than traditional "brick and mortar" capital facilities to provide the level of service standards, may include, but are not limited to the following: (1) programs that reduce or eliminate the need for the capital facility; (2) programs that provide a non-capital substitute for the capital facility, (3)programs that reduce the demand for a capital facility or the service it provides; (4)programs that use alternative methods to provide levels of service; (5)programs that use existing facilities more efficiently in order to reduce the need for additional facilities. Policy CFP-3.7 - Include in the "UP Projects and Financing Plan" contained in the Capital Facilities Plan any capital improvement that is determined to be needed as a result of any of the factors listed in Policy UP-3.S. Approve all such capital improvements in the same manner as the capital improvements that are determined to be needed according to the quantitative analysis described in Policy CFP-3.4. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 8-19 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT Policy CFP-3.8 - Assign relative priorities among capital improvements projects as follows: (i) Priorities Among Types of Public Facilities. Legal restrictions on the use of many revenue sources limit the extent to which types of facilities compete for priority with other types of facilities because they do not compete for the same revenues. All capital improvements that are necessary for achieving and maintaining a standard for levels of service adopted in this Comprehensive Plan are included in the financially feasible "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" contained in the Capital Facilities Plan. The relative priorities among types of public facilities (i.e., roads, sanitary sewer, etc.) were established by adjusting the standards for levels of service and the available revenues until the resulting public facilities needs became financially feasible. Repeat this process with each update of the Capital Facilities Plan, thus allowing for changes in priorities among types of public facilities. (ii) Priorities of capital improvements within a type of public facility. Evaluate and consider capital improvements within a type of public facility using the following criteria and order of priority. Establish the final priority of all capital facility improvements using the following criteria as general guidelines. Use any revenue source that cannot be used for a high priority facility by beginning with the highest priority for which the revenue can be expended legally. (a) Reconstruction, rehabilitation, remodeling, renovation, or replacement of obsolete or worn-out facilities that contribute to achieving or maintaining standards for levels of service adopted in this Comprehensive Plan. (b) New or expanded facilities that reduce or eliminate deficiencies in levels of service for existing demand. (c) New public facilities, and improvements to existing public facilities, that eliminate public hazards if such hazards were not otherwise eliminated by facility improvements prioritized according to (a) or (b), above. (d) New or expanded facilities that provide the adopted levels of service for new development and redevelopment during the next six fiscal years, as updated by the annual review of the Capital Facilities Plan. The City may acquire land or right of way in advance of the need to develop a facility for new development. Ensure that the location of facilities constructed pursuant to this policy conform to the Land Use 8-20 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Element, and that specific project locations serve projected growth areas within the allowable land use categories. (e) Capacity of public facilities to serve anticipated new development and applicants for development permits shall be addressed in the City's concurrency ordinance. (fl Improvements to existing facilities, and new facilities that significantly reduce the operating cost of providing a service or facility, or otherwise mitigate impacts of public facilities on future operating budgets. (g) New facilities that exceed the adopted levels of service for new growth during the next six fiscal years by either Providing excess public facility capacity that is needed by future growth beyond the next six fiscal years, or Providing higher-quality public facilities than are contemplated in the City's normal design criteria for such facilities. (h) Facilities not described in policies (a) through (g) above, but which the City is obligated to complete, provided that such obligation is evidenced by a written agreement the City executed prior to the adoption of this Comprehensive Plan. (iii) Evaluate all facilities scheduled for construction or improvement in accordance with this policy in order to identify any plans of state or local governments or districts that affect, or will be affected by, the City's proposed capital improvement. (iv) Include in the project evaluation additional criteria that are unique to each type of public facility, as described in other elements of this Comprehensive Plan. Goal CFP-4 - To ensure financial feasibility, provide needed public facilities that the City has the ability to fund, or that the City has the authority to require others to provide. Policy CFP-4.1 - In the estimated costs of all needed capital improvements, do not exceed conservative estimates of revenues from sources that are available to the City pursuant to current statutes, and which have not been rejected by KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 8-21 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT referendum, if a referendum is required to enact a source of revenue. Conservative estimates need not be the most pessimistic estimate, but cannot exceed the most likely estimate. Revenues for transportation improvements or strategies must be "financial commitments" as required by the Growth Management Act. Policy UP-4.2 - Pay for the costs of needed capital improvements in the following manner: (i) Existing development shall pay for the capital improvements that reduce or eliminate existing deficiencies and for some or all of the replacement of obsolete or worn-out facilities. Existing development may pay a portion of the cost of capital improvements needed by future development. Payments may take the form of user fees, charges for services, special assessments, and taxes. (ii) Future development shall pay its fair share of the capital improvements needed to address the impact of such development. Transportation impact fees, water, sewer, storm water infrastructure fees, and the fee in lieu of parks shall continue as established 'fair share" payments. Upon completion of construction, "future"development becomes "existing"development and shall pay the costs of the replacement of obsolete or worn-out facilities as described above. Payments may take the form of, but are not limited to, voluntary contributions for the benefit of any public facility, mitigation payments, impact fees, capacity fees, dedications of land, provision of public facilities, public/private partnerships, voluntary funding agreements, future payments of user fees, charges for services, special assessments, and taxes. Future development shall not pay impact fees for the portion of any public facility that reduces or eliminates existing deficiencies. (iii) Both existing and future development may have part of their costs paid by grants, entitlements, or public facilities from other levels of government and independent districts. Policy UP-4.3 - Finance capital improvements and manage debt as follows: (i) Finance capital improvements from City enterprise funds by: (a) Debt to be repaid by user fees and charges and/or connection or capacity fees for enterprise services, or 8-22 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT (b) Current assets (i.e., reserves, equity or surpluses, and current revenue, including grants, loans, donations and interlocal agreements), or (c) A combination of debt and current assets. (ii) Finance capital improvements by non-enterprise funds from either current assets (i.e., current revenue, fund equity and reserves), debt, or a combination thereof. Consider in the financing decisions which funding source (current assets, debt, or both) will be a) most cost effective, b) consistent with prudent asset and liability management, c) appropriate to the useful life of the project(s) to be financed, and d) the most efficient use of the City's ability to borrow funds. (iii) Do not use debt financing to provide more capacity than is needed within the "CFP Projects and Financing Plan"for non-enterprise public facilities unless one of the conditions of Policy CFP- 3.5(ii)(c) is met. Policy CFP-4.4 - Do not provide a public facility, nor accept the provision of a public facility by others, if the City or other provider is unable to pay for any planned subsequent annual operating and maintenance costs of the facility. Policy CFP-4.5 - In the event that sources of revenue listed in the "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" require voter approval in a local referendum that has not been held, and a referendum is not held, or is held and is not successful, revise this Comprehensive Plan at the next annual amendment to adjust for the lack of such revenues, in any of the following ways: (i) Reduce the level of service for one or more public facilities; (ii) Increase the use of other sources of revenue; (iii) Decrease the cost, and therefore the quality of some types of public facilities while retaining the quantity of the facilities that is inherent in the standard for level of service; (iv) Decrease the demand for and subsequent use of capital facilities, (v) A combination of the above alternatives. Policy CFP-4.6 - Condition all development permits issued by the City which require capital improvements that will be financed by sources of revenue which have not been approved or implemented (such as future debt requiring referenda) KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 8-23 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT on the approval or implementation of the indicated revenue sources, or the substitution of a comparable amount of revenue from existing sources. Goal CFP-5 - Provide adequate public facilities by constructing needed capital improvements which (1) repair or replace obsolete or worn-out facilities, (2) eliminate existing deficiencies, and (3) meet the needs of future development and redevelopment caused by previously-issued and new development permits. The City's ability to provide needed improvements will be demonstrated by maintaining a financially feasible "UP Projects and Financing Plan" in the Capital Facilities Plan. Policy CFP-5.1 - Provide, or arrange for others to provide, the capital improvements listed in the "UP Projects and Financing Plan" portion of the Capital Facilities Plan. The capital improvements projects may be modified as follows: (i) Pursuant to the Growth Management Act, the "UP Projects and Financing Plan" may be amended one time during any calendar year. Coordinate the annual update with the annual budget process. (ii) The "UP Projects and Financing Plan" may be adjusted by ordinance not deemed to be an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for corrections, updates, and modifications concerning costs; revenue sources; acceptance of facilities pursuant to dedications which are consistent with the plan; or the date of construction (so long as it is completed within the 6-year period) of any facility enumerated in the "UP Projects and Financing Plan. " (iii) Any act, or failure to act, that causes any project listed in the "UP Projects and Financing Plan" of this Comprehensive Plan to be scheduled for completion in a fiscal year later than the fiscal year indicated in the "UP Projects and Financing Plan" shall be effective only if the act causing the delay is subject to one of the following: (a) Accelerate within, or add to the "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" those projects providing capacity equal to, or greater than the delayed project, in order to provide capacity of public facilities in the fiscal year at least equal to the capacity scheduled prior to the act which delayed the subject project. (b) For those projects which are subject to concurrency requirements and which are authorized by development 8-24 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT permits which were issued conditionally subject to the concurrent availability of public facility capacity provided by the delayed project, restrict them to the allowable amount and schedule of development which can be provided without the incomplete project. (c) Amend the Comprehensive Plan (during the allowable annual amendment) to temporarily reduce the adopted standard for the level of service for public facilities until the fiscal year in which the delayed project is scheduled to be completed. Policy CFP-5.2 - Include in the capital appropriations of the City's annual budget all the capital improvements projects listed in the "CFP Projects and Financing Plan"for expenditure during the appropriate fiscal year, except that the City may omit from its annual budget any capital improvements for which a binding agreement has been executed with another party to provide the same project in the same fiscal year. Also include in the capital appropriations of its annual budget additional public facility projects that conform to Policy CFP- 3.5(ii) and Policy CFP-3.8(ii)(D. Policy CF7-5.3 - Adopt a concurrency ordinance to ensure that adequate facilities, as determined by the City, are available to serve new growth and development. Policy CFP-5.4 - Determine the availability of public facilities by verifying that the City has in place binding financial commitments to complete the necessary public facilities or strategies within six years, provided that: (i) The six year "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" is financially feasible. (ii) The City uses a realistic,financially feasible funding system based on revenue sources available according to laws adopted at the time the CFP is adopted. (iii) The six year "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" in this Comprehensive Plan demonstrates that the actual construction of the roads and mass transit facilities are scheduled to commence in or before the fourth year of the six-year "CFP Projects and Financing Plan. " (iv) The six year "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" includes both necessary facilities to maintain the adopted level-of-service standards to serve the new development proposed to be permitted KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 8-25 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT and the necessary facilities required to eliminate existing deficiencies. Goal CFP-6 - Provide adequate public facilities to urban growth areas. - Policy CFP-6.1 -Ensure levels of service for public facilities in the urban growth area are consistent, and where possible, identical for the City of Kent and the - unincorporated portion of the Kent Urban Growth Area (see Policy CFP-3.3). - Policy CFP-6.2 - Declare the primary providers of public facilities and services in the unincorporated portion of the Kent Urban Growth Area to be: Public Facility Before Annexation After Annexation a. Fire Protection and Districts City of Kent emergency medical services b. Law Enforcement King County City of Kent c. Library Library District Library District d. Parks & Recreation King County City of Kent e. Local roads, sidewalks, King County City of Kent lighting f. State roads Washington State Washington State g. Sanity sewer Districts City of Kent h. Schools Districts Districts i. Solid waste disposal King County King County j. Storm Water King County City of Kent k. Transit King County King County 1. Water Districts City of Kent m. General government King County City of Kent offices Policy CFP-6.3 - Make providers of public facilities responsible for paying for their facilities. Providers may use sources of revenue that require users of facilities to pay for a portion of the cost of the facilities. As provided by law, some providers may require new development to pay impact fees and✓or mitigation payments for a portion of the cost of public facilities. (i) Use Policy CFP-4.2 as the guideline for assigning responsibility for paying for public facilities in the Kent Urban Growth Area. (ii) Coordinate with King County and other providers of public facilities regarding collection of fees from development in their respective jurisdictions for impacts on public facilities in other jurisdictions. 8-26 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Policy CFP-6.4 - When possible, enter into agreements with King County and other providers of public facilities to coordinate planning for and development of the Kent Urban Growth Area, including implementation and enforcement of Policies CFP-6.1 - 6.3. Policy CFP-6.5 - The City shall adopt the capital facilities plans of the Kent and Federal Way School Districts by reference as part of this Capital Facilities Element. The City will review these plans on an annual basis to assess the districts' enrollment projections, levels of service, capacity, and financing plan. Goal CFP-7 - Implement the Capital Facilities Plan in a manner that coordinates and is consistent with the plans and policies of other elements of the City Comprehensive Plan, Countywide Planning Policies, the Growth Management Act of the State of Washington, and, where possible, the plans and policies of other regional entities, adjacent counties, and municipalities. Policy CFP-7.1 - Manage the land development process to ensure that all development receives public facility levels of service equal to, or greater than the standards adopted in Policy CFP-3.3 by implementing the "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" contained in the Capital Facilities Plan, and by using the fiscal resources provided for in Goal CFP-4 and its supporting policies. (i) Ensure that all Category A and B public facility capital improvements are consistent for planning purposes with the adopted land use map and the goals and policies of other elements of this Comprehensive Plan. Ensure that the location of, and level of service provided by projects in the "CFP Projects and Financing Plan" maintain adopted standards for levels of service for existing and future development in a manner and location consistent with the Land Use Element of this Comprehensive Plan. (ii) Integrate the City's land use planning and decisions with its planning and decisions for public facility capital improvements by developing, adopting, and using the programs listed in the "Implementation Programs" section of the Capital Facilities Plan. (Note: Plans to implement the Comprehensive Plan elements, including a proposed concurrency ordinance, will be presented to the Planning Commission at a later date.) Policy CFP-7.2 - Ensure that implementation of the Capital Facilities Plan is consistent with the requirements of the adopted Countywide Planning Policies. Goal CFP-8 - The City shall participate in a cooperative interjurisdictional process to determine siting of essential public facilities of a county-wide, regional, or state-wide nature. Policy CFP-8.1 - Proposals for siting essential public facilities within the City of JKent or within the City's growth boundary shall be reviewed for consistency with the City's Comprehensive Plan during the initial stages of the proposal process. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) 8-27 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER EIGHT Policy CFP-8.2 - When warranted by the special character of the essential facility, the City shall apply the regulations and criteria of Kent Zoning Code Section 15.04.200, Special use combining district, to applications for siting such facilities _ to insure adequate review, including public participation. Conditions of approval, including design conditions, conditions, shall be imposed upon such uses in the interest of the welfare of the City and the protection of the environment. Policy CFP-8.3 - In the principally permitted or conditional use sections of the zoning code, the City shall establish, as appropriate, locations and development standards for essential public facilities which do not warrant consideration through the special use combining district regulations. Such facilities shall include but not be limited to small inpatient facilities and group homes. Goal CFP-9 - The City shall participate in a cooperative interjurisdictional process to resolve issues of mitigation for any disproportionate financial burden which may fall on the jurisdiction which becomes the site of a facility of a state-wide, regional or county-wide nature. 8-28 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT INTRODUCTION The Growth Management Act (GMA) mandates that transportation planning is linked directly to land use decisions and to the financial structure of the city. The legislation further requires each city and county planning under GMA to incorporate a concurrency management system into their comprehensive plan. Such a system provides a policy procedure designed to enable the jurisdiction to determine whether adequate public facilities are available to serve new developments at the time development occurs. The transportation plan must include an action plan for bringing into compliance any existing facilities or services that are below established level-of-service (LOS) standards and for providing for expansion of facilities and services to meet future need at established LOS standards. The strategy must be financially sound; planned improvements must be financially feasible and committed for implementation within six years. The future land use plan must be consistent with this action plan; future growth should not cause facilities to fall below the established LOS standards. Lastly, the action strategy must be consistent with the six-year transportation improvement programs adopted by the City, the King County Department of Metropolitan Services (Metro), and the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). If the surrounding land use density is appropriate, jurisdictions have the option to allow capacity to be provided through transit or high-occupancy-vehicle facilities. Other facilities for movement of nonmotorized users and goods also need to be considered. Changes in federal funding of transportation programs at the state and regional level, which funds then are apportioned to the local level, introduce the need to comply with regional air quality goals, in addition to basic goals for transportation capacity. The overall guiding goal of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Kent is to: Provide for a balanced multimodal transportation system KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9-1 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE which will support land use patterns and adequately serve existing and future residential and employment growth within the Potential Annexation Area. Transportation issues are among the top concerns for Kent residents. Much.of this is related to the congestion on cross-valley corridors and on SR 167. Population growth in Kent has been about 5.2 percent annually over the last ten years (based on 1980 and - 1990 census figures). Cities and unincorporated areas around Kent grew at similar rates over the same period, resulting in significant increases in traffic and associated vehicular air pollution. The purpose of the transportation plan is to guide the development and improvement of the City's circulation system. In support of the GMA, the policies in this element address problems such as congestion and travel-time delays, traffic impacts on residential areas, parking, and the improvement of transit, pedestrian, and other nonmotorized facilities. The policies will be used to guide transportation planning within the city. The City of Kent is also part of the Puget Sound region; as such, it is subject to compliance with the regional planning efforts coordinated by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC). This agency oversees not only land use and transportation, but also considers compliance with air quality standards as they interrelate with land use and transportation. Under the Growth Management Act and other legislation, Kent is required to coordinate its efforts with those of adjoining jurisdictions and other agencies to ensure that plans are compatible and consistent. In order to meet the requirements of the federal Clean Air Act and Amendments, the air quality provisions of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), the Clean Air Washington Act and other relevant legislation, Kent will commit to work with the PSRC, the WSDOT, transit agencies, and other jurisdictions in the development of transportation control measures and other transportation and air quality programs where warranted. The transportation plan focuses on transportation improvements that are required by the year 2020. The Growth Management Act requires the plan to address conditions through 2020. However, the City is concerned over conditions in the midterm, so an analysis of 2010 conditions is included as well. State and regional legislation and policies lay a solid foundation for this approach. Land use plans must minimize low-density sprawl, and provide a more concentrated and planned land use pattern to be served more efficiently by transportation systems and services. The land use plan is a critical tool in creating an environment in which transit, ridesharing, and nonmotorized travel modes can 9-2 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT serve travel demand in an attractive, efficient, and cost-effective manner. Land use and transportation planning must be integrated closely and conducted on both regional and local levels in order to find better, long-range solutions for mobility. TRANSPORTATION TRENDS There is one solid transportation trend within the region: automobile traffic is increasing. Information compiled by the PSRC shows that during the 1981-1991 period, vehicle miles of travel increased 82 percent region-wide, while employment increased 35 percent and population increased about 20 percent. The vehicle miles travelled increased four times faster than the population increased! There are a variety of reasons for this increase. There are now more people commuting within the region, and auto ownership per household is at an all-time high. In addition, the location of employment and housing impacts the length and variety of trips made. New housing development is occurring on vacant land in outlying parts of the metropolitan area rather than on land closer to traditional urban centers. Employment centers also are relocating to suburban areas. The general increase in standard of living in the region increases traffic because as the standard of living increases, car ownership and trip-making also increase. In addition, the average length of trips is increasing. The cumulative effect of all of these factors is more cars on the road travelling more miles, and increasing traffic congestion. Kent's history is primarily as a farming community. Transportation systems were based on movement of crops to market, via truck and rail. In the 1950's, there was a shift away from rail toward automobile and truck transportation. The completion of the Howard Hanson Dam in 1961 allowed flooding of the Green River to be controlled. This in turn encouraged developers to convert farmland to urban and industrial uses. The creation of the Boeing Aerospace Center in 1965 is a primary example. Interstate 5 was completed in 1966, I-405 in 1967, and SR 167 in 1969. Other state highways (SR 181, 515 and 516) augmented and replaced the rail system. This road system was developed to provide a regional network allowing access around Lake Washington and to serve the Kent industrial area. During this period, land uses shifted away from agriculture, and the transportation demand shifted from exporting raw materials to importing a major work force. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9-3 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE Kent is home to 43,700 residents (1995 City estimates) as well as 46,520 jobs. This is an increase from 22,961 residents in 1980. In addition, about 42,000 people live in unincorporated areas surrounding the city. These people create much of the local traffic _ on the city's arterial system each day. In addition to being affected by local traffic, Kent is affected by regional traffic. Traffic from south King County and northern Pierce County passes through Kent to destinations in the north. Because of Kent's central location, over one-half of the traffic passing through the City each day has neither an origin nor destination in the City. This regional, "pass-through" traffic often clogs up the local transportation system. When the regional transportation system is congested, local traffic trying to enter the freeways frequently gets backed up onto the local arterials, creating local congestion. In addition, regional commuters looking for a path of least resistance through the area often resort to using the City's already-crowded arterial streets; and local travellers may resort to using neighborhood streets. As a result, when the regional system is congested, local circulation also suffers. Traffic congestion occurs at various locations within the city; however, certain areas experience severe congestion. These highly-congested areas are located primarily near freeway interchanges and employment activity centers. Because of their location near regional freeways and high levels of employment, the central and valley portions of the City experience most of the traffic congestion. Another cause for congestion is the at- grade railroad crossings. Traffic can be backed up for considerable distances due to 5- minute-long closures of the crossings during peak periods. Kent's street system is most crowded in the early morning hours and mid- to late-afternoon when commuters are travelling between their jobs and home. Job-related commuting places a heavy strain on the transportation system in Kent because the city is an employment center. Over 46,000 people work in the city each day. More than 30 percent (about 14,100) work for the 27 employers affected by the City's commute trip reduction ordinance. These include the largest employers, such as Boeing and Heath Tecna. Traffic can become extremely congested around the employment centers, especially the larger ones, when workdays begin or end. Most commuters within Kent still use single-occupant vehicles for their trip to work. Baseline estimates for Commute Trip Reduction planning from the PSRC indicate that 9-4 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT only about 15 percent of the employees with the major employers in Kent use transit or carpooling to commute to work. Even fewer people use these alternative modes of transportation for other trips such as shopping. A recent survey of 600 residents showed that almost 80 percent of those who commute use single-occupant vehicles, while 12 percent carpool, 5 percent vanpool, and 5.8 percent use transit. Metro currently provides both local and regional bus service in Kent. Regional bus service is available at two park-and-ride facilities within the city (Kent-Des Moines Road at I-5, and Lincoln at James), and via some peak-period, commuter routes which serve neighborhood centers. Dial-a-ride service also is available on weekdays and during limited hours on weekends. At this time, the City is conducting a detailed study of transit service and is developing recommendations for service changes. The Regional Transit Authority (RTA) is in the process of finalizing implementation phasing and funding plans, which also will directly affect Kent. Under all of the RTA alternatives, the south King County commuter rail line is included as an implementation activity. This service could be in operation two years after a public vote on funding is approved. ANALYSIS OF FACILITY NEEDS The modelling effort conducted for this transportation plan identified some interesting trends in travel demand that are tied to land use in Kent. This analysis was based on 1991 data and 2010 forecasts, unless otherwise noted. Of the total daily travel demand in the City, about 33 percent is travel within the City. By 2010, this will change to about 34 percent of all daily travel. The total volume of travel will increase by about 30 percent (508,800 daily trips in 1991; 713,900 in 2010). The actual number of internal trips are expected to increase by 45 percent (167,300 versus 242,100). The East Hill area has the greatest number of productions and attractions in Kent (77,600 daily trips). Nearly 40 percent of trips through East Hill (202,200 daily trips) are internal to East Hill. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9-5 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE About 54 percent of total trips to/from the downtown core have the other trip-end in Kent (89,500 daily trips). About 80 percent of trips internal to Kent (167,300 daily trips) do not have a trip- end in the downtown. About 26 percent of all trips internal to Kent (167,300 daily trips) are related to the north industrial subarea. About 60 percent of the total daily travel to the north industrial subarea (155,800 daily trips) is from outside Kent. Travel between East Hill and West Hill is minimal, and the future demand through 2010 is not anticipated to increase significantly (1,400 daily trips). Daily travel between Kent and other nearby Puget Sound cities does not significantly favor one destination over another. In light of these and other trends, as well as of the regulatory requirements at the state and federal level, development of this transportation element required examination of a number of issues. Links Between Land Use and Transportation: The Growth Management Act requires the land use and transportation systems to grow in tandem, so that transportation facilities are in place to serve the needs of new development. The transportation system should be designed to provide adequate capacity for all modes, not just for single-occupant autos. Traffic Congestion and Use of High-Occupancy Vehicles: Due to limited funding and continuing concern for the environment, few new roads will be built. The current and future challenge is to better manage the existing system and to reduce traffic demand as much as possible by encouraging the use of alternatives to single-occupant vehicles. Displaced Regional Traffic on Local Streets: Continuing to accommodate high volumes of "pass-through" traffic now is being questioned by business leaders and 9-6 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT residents of the downtown and centrally-located neighborhoods. Protecting neighborhoods from the impacts of regional and city-wide traffic is desirable. Improvements to the Street System: The designation and improvement of an arterial street system which can adequately serve land uses in the City continues to be an important issue. The design and appearance of transportation facilities and their potential impact on residential and commercial areas should be considered. Improvements to the road system need to be made in a way which will encourage pedestrian activity and improve the quality of neighborhoods. Transit: The lack of convenient bus service from residential areas to the downtown and employment centers is an important issue. Buses provide limited routes between residential neighborhoods and the downtown and link downtown to the major regional centers such as Bellevue and Seattle. Major employment centers are not adequately served at this time. In addition, the routing, frequency, and length of trips often make bus transportation inconvenient. Parking: Adequate to excessive parking is available in most areas of the City. In the downtown, however, parking is more limited. There is a perception on the part of some businesses and citizens that parking is in short supply in the downtown area. Bicycle and Pedestrian Trails: Many areas of the City are not served adequately by either bicycle trails or pedestrian walkways. Existing bike trails run predominantly north-south, and streets which are designated for bicycle use often are not maintained for safe operation of a bicycle. Some areas have a sidewalk network, while other areas have few or no sidewalks. In examining the vision developed by the City through the Community Forum and Visual Preference Survey and the possible transportation outcomes, the following are the possible scenarios for the future: Traffic Congestion and Use of High-Occupancy Vehicles: Four general scenarios can be projected for future traffic conditions in Kent. Congestion could worsen on the existing system; KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9-7 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE New roads could be built and existing roadways improved; A new transit system (bus or rail) could absorb a large number of trips, but congestion would continue on existing roadways; Travel demand could be reduced. In reality, all of these scenarios may occur to some degree. However, it is clear that funding and environmental considerations will limit the state's and City's ability to expand the road system and Metro's ability to provide transit. To prevent overwhelming congestion from occurring, an emphasis should be placed on increasing the efficiency of the existing system. Displaced Regional Traffic on Local Streets: The most feasible way to address this problem is through a combination of neighborhood protection policies and strong incentives supporting HOV alternatives on the arterial system. The City also needs to work with other jurisdictions on regional transportation issues. Improvements to the Street System: Changes in the street system most likely will occur as small improvements to existing streets rather than as the creation of new roadways or major expansions of the arterial network, with the exception of the three new arterials currently under study. These changes increasingly will be a product of public/private partnerships paid by impact fees or other mechanisms allowed by law. Land Use Pattern: Changes in land use patterns will aim to reduce dependence on single-occupant vehicles and to encourage pedestrians, bicycles, and transit use. Transit: Transit may provide the greatest potential change in the Kent transporta- tion system. If a regional high-capacity transit system becomes reality, Kent will need to accommodate a possible commuter rail stop near downtown and bus facilities serving the major residential and employment centers. Parking: As the City seeks ways to support transit and HOV use, the ratio of building area to parking spaces provided in buildings will come under scrutiny. Similarly, as land becomes more intensively developed, large surface parking lots 9-8 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT will become less desirable. Alternatives such as shared parking facilities and structured parking will become realistic as development density increases. Bicycle and Pedestrian Trails: In the future, bicycling and walking to work may become more realistic alternatives for more people. The Green River and Interurban trails provide a safe, well-used commuting route. Expansion of the existing bike and trail systems, especially for east-west travel and north-south travel outside of the valley floor, will make these modes of transportation more convenient, while congestion on the road system will make them more attractive. Land Use Assumptions Population and employment projections were refined by the City's Planning Department, based on PSRC forecasts which were derived from state-wide projections by the Office of Financial Management. Three land use plan alternatives were developed in conjunction with the refined population and employment forecast; these alternatives were used as the basis for calculating trip generation in the transportation model. The model was run using estimated levels of local land use for the years 2010 and 2020 to determine ll estimated traffic volumes on local roadways and places where improvements are I warranted. The three land use alternatives and the results of this analysis are described in the City's Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Existing Inventory and Service Needs The City's transportation resources include about 185 miles of roadway classified as local access or higher and 144 miles of bicycle and pedestrian facilities (excluding sidewalks). Transit service, provided by Metro, includes peak-period, Seattle-oriented commuter routes and some all-day local service throughout south King County. Residents interviewed through various means during the comprehensive planning process all agree that transportation congestion and improvements to transit service should be high priorities in the Kent of the future (See Figure 9.1). The traffic model which was developed using current (1991) land use levels and calibrated to 1991 traffic volumes, showed some significant deficiencies in the SR 516 corridor on East Hill, on Military Road throughout the city, S 212th/SE 208th street, 108th Ave SE in the northern section of the city, James/240th immediately east of downtown, West Valley Road south of downtown, Meeker between SR 516 and SR 167, and virtually all state highway links. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9-9 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE The GMA requires the City to establish service levels for transportation and to provide a means for correcting current deficiencies and meeting future needs. Transportation planners and engineers use the term "level of service," or LOS, to describe availability of a given transportation facility. Generally, LOS is defined relative to demand and capacity; however, average vehicular delay also can be used. The City is proposing a flexible LOS standard for roads, which tolerates higher levels of congestion in the more urbanized area. In residential areas, a better LOS would be considered acceptable; in rural areas, an even higher standard would be required. LOS would be determined using volume-to-capacity ratios determined through modelling efforts. The currently-adopted 6-year Transportation Improvement Plan, along with several additions, are proposed to meet the requirement to correct current deficiencies. Forecast of Traffic Based on Land Use Assumptions The calibrated traffic model was applied to the three land use scenarios which were developed. The number of intersections and roadway links that approach congested levels was tallied, and a qualitative assessment of the severity of anticipated congestion was made for each alternative. The vehicle miles travelled and the vehicle hours travelled do not vary appreciably among the alternatives. The number of intersections and links at Volume/Capacity (V/C) ratios over 0.70 also does not vary appreciably among alternatives. In some cases, the severity of the impact is greater with one alternative than with another; however, the level of accuracy provided by the model can identify order- of-magnitude impacts but cannot provide a detailed capacity analysis. Development of Level of Service Standards Level of service (LOS) is a qualitative estimate of the performance efficiency of transportation facilities in a community. These LOS standards can be based on many measures, including traffic congestion. LOS standards for traffic congestion have been developed and revised over the years by the Transportation Research Board (TRB). One of the TRB systems uses volume on a road and capacity of the road to define a ratio, called a V/C ratio, which can be classified by degree of congestion. The classifications range from A (the best) to F (the worst). 9-10 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN �M r /nternofiono/Airport r` �,w � :� •M l +^ s1sa ST y` NORTH t.__M. r� le Lake , Alg •V � B S S 200 ST ✓ I S 200 ST r r - SCALE: 1"=4000' S 20 t � S 208 ST _ r-r LEGENS S216ST N e + r �� - ' i KENT CITY LIMITS _ - 1 j i En S 223 ST o..•�•�'i 11 ------------- POTENTIAL w µ l ll7 ANNEXATION BOUNDARY r Kan y 0 ST d , OU`JiY (,n!.:. THIS MAP IS INTENDED AS AN AID IN GRAPHIC !" 4 REPRESENTATION ONLY AND IS NOT R LEGAL DOCUMENT. ryry C ^•' i ! S 27 ST �.. .T� iti � S. 7 ,ST y� 1,t 1. ,_ _.� _ �� ._ 1µ.._,_I,��.. PRINCIPAL ARTERIALS ,..,.. C. 5 288 ST i n FIGUR]E 9 . 1 CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT LOS A - Low volume, high speeds, no delay. High freedom to select desired speed and maneuver within traffic stream. LOS B - Stable flow with reasonable freedom to select speed. LOS C - Stable flow, but speed and maneuverability are affected by the presence of others and require care on the part of the driver. LOS D - Approaches unstable flow. Speed and maneuverability are severely restricted. Small additions to traffic flow generally will cause operational problems. LOS E - Represents operating conditions at or near the capacity of the highway. Low speeds. Freedom to maneuver is extremely difficult. Any incident can cause extensive queuing. LOS F - Represents forced-flow operation at very low speeds. Operations are characterized by stop-and-go traffic. Vehicles may progress at reasonable speeds for several hundred feet or more, then be required to stop. Similar LOS classifications have been developed for intersections; they use volume, capacity, and signal phasing to determine average delay at the intersection, and thus a level of service. LOS formulas for pedestrian and transit service also have been developed. However, there is much debate on how effective they are in assessing situations in smaller cities and suburban settings. Under the Growth Management Act, cities and counties are required to adopt LOS standards to determine when growth has consumed available capacity for public services. LOS is the basis for determining whether there is sufficient capacity for development and for analyzing the operating efficiency of transportation facilities. The GMA requires that land use and transportation planning be coordinated so that transportation capacity exists at the time development occurs (or within 6 years). The law is not explicit about how the standards should be developed or applied. To ensure regional consistency in transportation LOS, the county-wide Growth Management Planning Council developed a 12-point framework for developing LOS standards in King County. The LOS standards proposed for Kent follow this framework by including separate standards for different transportation modes, including nonmotorized modes. This is in keeping with the adopted commute trip reduction ordinance, air quality legislation, and policies which support SOV mode reductions. The City is proposing a desirable level of transit service; however, it is not being treated as KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9-11 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE a standard. Metro's proposed service for south King County already has been defined to some extent as part of the Regional Transit Plan (RTP), and it is being revisited as part of Metro's six-year planning process. By adopting an LOS standard when the supply is provided by another agency, such as Metro or Washington State, the City either may be obligating itself to pay for additional _ service or may be required to deny development if such service is not in place. However, the City is including demand-side performance requirements to promote an environment that is supportive of transit and nonmotorized travel. Under the county-wide framework, the PSRC is charged with developing LOS standards for regional facilities, including state highways. These roads are an integral part of the regional transportation network; however, many are currently at or near capacity. In the case of some facilities, such as I-5, the cost of adding new vehicular capacity is prohibitive. Kent acknowledges the importance of state highways in the regional system and has defined a desirable LOS. However, adopting a standard for state-controlled facilities limits the ability of the City to approve new development if state facilities, which are beyond the City's control, are inadequate. Definition of LOS Standards for Kent For the purpose of the Kent LOS standard, 22 subareas of the city were defined. The capacities of each of the arterials crossing the boundary of the zone can be totalled to produce a directional capacity. Similarly, the traffic volumes crossing the boundaries can be totalled by direction. Kent's proposed method of determining arterial LOS standards represents a combination of two methods of estimation and is tied to land use. The proposed measure uses volumes and capacities at the boundary of each zone, with acceptable V/C ratios assigned to each zone. Areas where the land use plan d fects intcnsivc growth, for example, the downtown, would have acceptable V/Cs that are high, while areas such as the Soos Creek plateau would have a lower threshold of acceptability. In addition, several intersections and critical road links have been identified in most every zone as a way to confirm LOS at key locations. Some of these intersections and road segments are on the boundaries, which will allow a more refined estimate of volume and capacity than the model would present across the entire boundary. 9-I2 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT In establishing a standard for each zone in the City, the general focus of future land use - - where activity centers are proposed and where low-density uses are located -- needs to be compared to information generated by the traffic model. As growth occurs, the land use levels in the traffic model need to be updated. The assumption was made, similar to King County and other cities, that high levels of congestion are acceptable in the Central Business District, and possibly in other major activity centers, but that lower levels of service (high V/C ratios) are not acceptable in residential areas and low-density commercial areas. Table 9.1 shows the V/C ratios associated with each LOS for the purpose of this analysis. For planning purposes, the actual V/C for each boundary was not calculated, but was estimated based on reviewing the existing and projected V/C ratios in excess of 0.70, whether the total boundary fell in the <0.7, <0.8, or <0.9 category. Table 9.1 LOS DEFINITION LOS VIC 'RATIO A 0.01-0.60 B 0.61-0.70 C 0.71-0.80 D 0.81-0.90 E 0.91-0.98 F 0.99+ Table 9.2 presents the existing (1991) zone levels of service for the 22 zones in Kent. It was developed using existing land uses and modelled traffic volumes for the mixed-use alternative in the year 2010, assuming that the improvements adopted in the 1993-1999 transportation improvement program (TIP) are funded and completed. A second scenario assumes the current TIP and the proposed east legs of both the 224th/228th corridor and the 196th/200th corridor are built (See also Figure 9.2). As a supplement to the zonal LOS system, the City has identified control intersections and roads in each zone, which also must be at or below the LOS standard for the zone. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9-13 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE Concurrency would be proven using the appropriate HighM Capacity Manual techniques which are current at the time of analysis. Nonmotorized and Transit LOS There are two additional components of the LOS standard: transit and nonmotorized service. The proposed transit service standards are tentative, as the City is working with Metro to implement a transit strategy for Kent. The transit standard considered the arterial structure of the city and land use forecasts to determine whether each zone has a need for fixed-route arterial transit service. Generally it was found that areas that are primarily low-density residential would be best served by peak-period commuter-oriented service and off-peak dial-a-ride service. Areas that are defined as activity centers should have frequent all-day service, and areas such as downtown Kent should fill a role as a transit hub. Nonmotorized service standards also are tied to the types of roadways and land uses in the zones. An examination of the existing road system and proposed new roadways, as related to land uses and densities, helped guide the estimates. Where environmental or topographical constraints do not prohibit such activity, land use standards for new development of larger multitenant sites, either residential or commercial, are encouraged to provide linkages for nonmotorized travel between adjacent sites. The City is developing an inventory of existing sidewalks. While the sidewalk network in downtown appears to be complete, sidewalks in the industrial area north of the CBD and in commercial centers such as East and West Hills are lacking coordination. An initial priority should be to develop sidewalks that would serve as safe walking routes in the vicinity of schools, parks, and playgrounds. Identification of Service Needs Rail Crossings - One of the most significant problems with downtown circulation is the problem created by the at-grade railroad crossings on the east-west arterials. Currently, James, Smith, Titus, and SR 516 (Willis) cross the tracks at grade. Other east-west arterials, such as 212th and 277th Streets also are affected. Traffic backs up on these arterials, and intersections may or may not remain clear for north-south traffic to pass. 9-14 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF KENT Seaft/e—Tacoma _ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN /nternationa/Airport / 11 in Lk J S 188 ST — NORTH 1 1 - 1 x r J Loke a S 200 ST - �- SS2200 ST » SCALE: 1"=4000' s 20r�4-ST sr S 208 ST 7 LEGEND S 216 ST * ,� a ; KENT CITY LIMITS 2 ST 1 it r KENT TRAFFIC 1 ANALYSIS ZONE L_ •••-•-•••••-• POTENTIAL ANNEXATION BOUNDARY Ken S2 OS COUNTY CII (, "- i s 5z ],) THIS MAP IS INTENDED AS AN RID IN GRAPHIC I REPRESENTATION ONLY RND IS NOT A LEGAL / w � DOCUMENT. Jv S(266 ST 41 N — y lS zs 7 � IT- n S 272 ST Z72 ST Stdi�i 1 1 TRAFFICS ZONES V = S 288 ST f� FIGURE 9 . 2 CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Traffic signal cycles are not tied to the crossings and can compound delays and congestion by making east-west traffic queue through several cycles after the train has cleared. Burlington Northern estimates about 40-50 trains per day use the tracks, including a variable number of trains in the 4-6 PM peak period. Union Pacific estimates their track utilization at 10-20 trains per day. This could increase by as many as 20 trains per day and 10 per peak period as a result of the proposed commuter rail operation. Problems associated with railroad grade crossings could be exacerbated with the implementation of commuter rail. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9-15 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE Table 9.2 � b _ a V .ca ca .N. _ v1 O� N o0 M �O o0 CA O� N 00 r t� N to �D Nr W) M '7 f��'1 in "Rt W � e u + + S � a yZp + + + + + + g + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ff �4 k cnn tn ` N c� ON It 0000 N r- c`n t` W N 'ct h V't 1 N 00 00 h f 0 00 V1 O Q` 1c N n C 00 N v1 h C;i 061 Y N 00 S ~ b y o O COD C� Q: .13 W) O O O c o o c 0 v�o C; C? OM con cn O o� m a o'r W - - - o TJ d .C' 1 00 00 00 oc CT h O\ oo O o0 00 00 00 00 h h h h h h h E ^� 0 0 O O C O O o .-: C C O O C O C C O O O O _ CD b .r a, — 'Z 00 h h h h oo h oo h 00 t� h h h oo h h h h h h h 8 N W O O O O C O 0 C C O O O O O O O O C C O C C V V V -H V A V A V V A A V V V V v V v v V V 9 U -0 g 9a e .w F 00 h h h h ao h 00 h o0 0o h h h 00 h h h h h h h N O O O C C O O O O O O O O O O O C C C O C O V V /� { V AV AV V A AV V V V V V Vi Vi Vi v U e A Z5 00 h h h 00 h 00 h h h h h h oo h h h h h h h > ~ a? 0 0 6 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 0 0 0 0 v v +H 4q n V n V V n v V V v v v V v V v V Z78 h D o > O �c Q c c c c c c c d c c a Q a c = N cccc m c c .` U .c n cz WD v a a x D D U D U x D rx a a a a O a A 8 � Aq AUcoy U Uc U m oO N G.� NN.A� sS $ z 9-16 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Proposals to create grade separation at one or more of these intersections and to provide crossing at both the BN and UP tracks have been discussed over the years. The elevated section of SR 167 through the valley floor would make elevated arterial crossings of the UP tracks difficult, if not impossible, because the arterial would need to pass over the freeway as well as over the tracks. Arterial undercrossings would be possible but could eliminate intersections with important north-south streets. Capacity Needs - Currently, Kent has several areas of severe traffic congestion. Other than the downtown intersections, areas of congestion include virtually all of the intersections on SR 516 and on SE 208th/212th Street, Military Road intersections and roadway within Kent, the section of Meeker between SR 516 and SR 167, SR 181, south of Willis, the length of SR 167 in the peak travel direction within Kent, and all of peak direction I-5. p In the future, these problems will be compounded under each of the land use alternatives. Additional intersections and roadway segments will become congested, primarily on the East Hill north of SE 240th Street and in the northern industrial part of the valley. Goods Movement - Kent is a significant center of goods distribution. Much of the industrial area is dedicated to warehousing, and there are several sites along the railroad tracks that are intermodal transfer centers for various manufacturers or transfer companies. Designation of a network of truck routes will help ensure that roads of sufficient design and capacity are available to move materials into and out of the city. The railroads are planning track improvements to improve efficiency on the two main lines that travel through the city. Public Transit Needs - Some significant changes in public transit service will be needed to meet the needs of the regionally-adopted urban centers concept. Focusing commuter service on Seattle as a destination will need to give way to a multidestination peak-period service, regardless of whether a regional rail system is approved. Service improvements for trips internal to Kent also will be needed to support trip reduction and other demand management strategies. Bicycle and Pedestrian Needs - The City has a network of sidewalks and bicycle lanes, mostly on City streets. There are some significant gaps in the sidewalk network, which can be discouraging to pedestrians. Some of these gaps exist in areas where there is a KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9-17 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE high potential for walkers, such as near schools. Kent also is fortunate to be a participant in the development of the Green River and Interurban trails, two nonmotorized trails that see significant commuter and recreational use. _ The Kent Bicycle Advisory Board, a citizens group, has recommended support of three east-west corridors and three north-south corridors. These include 208th/212th Street, Reith/Meeker/Canyon/SR 516, and the planned SE 272nd/277th Street. North- south routes include Military Road, the Interurban Trail, and 116th Ave SE. These main routes need to be supplemented by additional collector routes within neighborhoods and business centers. COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION In January 1993, the City enacted a commute trip reduction ordinance. This ordinance, required by state law, applies to all employers in the City with 100 or more full-time employees who start work between 6AM and 9AM at least two weekdays per week for 12 continuous months of the year. At the present time, this ordinance affects 27 employers at 31 sites and covers about 14,100 employees. The ordinance requires the affected employers to develop and implement commute trip reduction programs such that there is a reduction of 15 percent in the number of single- occupant vehicle (SOV) trips and vehicle miles of travel per employee in 1995. The required reduction is 25 percent in 1997 and 35 percent in 1999. The modelling effort for this transportation plan included an appropriate reduction in SOV trips to account for the law. It also was assumed in the model that the regional rail system would serve 10.4 percent of home-based work and college trips. Assuming that employers are successful in implementing their programs, and that the number of affected employees stays roughly the same over the 1993-1999 time period, the reduction from 1993 SOV trips would be about 1,800 by 1995, 3,000 by 1997, and 4,200 by 1999. The actual number of vehicles removed is related to which alternate modes are selected. For example, if all of the affected employees switched to bicycles or rail transit, the full number of trips would be removed from the network; if they all switched to two-person carpools, only half the number would be removed. Under the assumption that Kent started with an average mode split of 85 percent single- occupant vehicles (SOV) and that the Commute Trip Reduction Act remains in place, 9-I8 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT requiring major employers to maintain an SOV rate of 55 percent or lower after 1999, we may assume about 20 percent of the new trips based on ITE values would not occur. This is because not all new employers would fall into the affected employer category. PM peak trips are generated by many uses, and the proportion of "affected employee trips" is fairly low. Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Support - At the present time, City zoning policies support nonSOV modes; however, there is minimal incentive for a developer or employer to implement any actions beyond the minimum. City codes could provide development incentives, such as more leasable space, if a facility provides permanent incentives for nonSOV use, such as reserving a percentage of employee parking for HOV users. Allowing developers to contribute to off-site parking in trade for reduced on-site parking requirements, or to sponsor a spillover mitigation program (such as a residential parking zone), could encourage developers and businesses to support CTR. The City also should consider requiring employers to charge for parking and encouraging property managers to include parking as a negotiable, chargeable element rather than an inclusive feature in a building lease. Finally, by adopting CTR requirements which are more stringent than the state guidelines, more employers could be forced into complying with CTR. These requirements could include reducing the threshold from 100 to 50 employees, imposing penalties for nonattainment of goals, or requiring a minimum number of specific CTR measures based on site size. TRANSIT PLAN The City has conducted a study of transit service. Major findings and recommendations of this study (in a separate document) will guide the City in working with transit providers to develop service for the Kent area. The King County Department of Metropolitan Services (Metro), currently operates 24 transit routes that serve the Kent area. Twenty of these routes are fixed-route service, one is a dial-a-ride paratransit route, and three are custom-bus routes. Peak period service generally is provided every 30 minutes or less on every route except two. Midday service is provided on seven of the fixed routes. Weekday evening service after 11PM 1 is provided on three routes. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9-19 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE Much of Kent's transit service is focused on the downtown Kent Transit Center/Park-and- Ride. The Kent-Des Moines Park-and-Ride is served by six routes, primarily with Seattle CBD destinations. A third park-and-ride recently opened just outside the City limits, near SR 516 and 132nd, and is served by three routes. Metro also provides commuter vans to 70 vanpool groups with origins or destinations in Kent; this represents about 13 percent of Metro's vanpool fleet. Metro also provides door-to-door, advance- reservation service for elderly or disabled persons. The Regional Transit Authority (RTA) is examining the implementation of a commuter rail line from Tacoma to Everett via downtown Seattle and the Green River valley. This rail line would use one of the sets of existing tracks. Under the current proposal, commuter trains could run in both directions during the morning and afternoon peak periods. Stations would be located in each of the cities along the alignment, and each station would be served by a network of feeder buses from residential centers and shuttles to employment centers. The Kent Transit Advisory Board has recommended to the City Council that commuter rail operate on the Burlington Northern line, with a station in the vicinity of James Street-Smith Street. This is somewhat consistent with previous City positions that the station should be in downtown; this location would encourage commuters to patronize downtown businesses before and after their commutes and would provide easy access for commuters with jobs in the downtown area. The ultimate regional system also includes a proposed light rail or possibly rapid rail line in the I-5 corridor through Kent, with a stop at the Kent-Des Moines Park-and-Ride. This system also would be served by a network of feeder and shuttle buses. Transit Recommendations For the purpose of analyzing transit markets and demand, the City was divided into four areas: East Hill, West Hill, Downtown, and the North Industrial Area. Based on telephone surveys, origin-destination information, key-person interviews, and an evaluation of current services and facilities, recommendations were developed and evaluated. Actions for market areas that are tied to Kent, such as other south King County cities, also were reviewed and recommended. The following is a summary of the recommended actions: 9-20 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT East Hill Action 1 - Implement a combined fixed route/route deviation/demand responsive service to provide circulation among East Hill, Downtown, and the North Industrial Area. East Hill Action 2 - Increase the frequency of service on Route 168 in order to meet future local-travel demand among Covington, East Hill, and Downtown. Route 168 is currently a popular and productive route. West Hill Action 1 - Implement a combined fixed route/route deviation/demand responsive service to provide circulation among West Hill, Downtown, and the SR 99 corridor. The service should focus on midday coverage and provide connections to regional service. Downtown Action 1 - Enhance service coverage and connections in the downtown through the development of local circulators from East and West Hills, and a new local fixed route from Downtown to the North Industrial Area. l North Industrial Area Action 1 - There is currently one transit service corridor in this area. Implement a new fixed route from Downtown Kent which circulates through the area and continues to Renton. Focus on enhancing service coverage. South King County Action 1 - Improve service connections between local Kent routes at the Kent-Des Moines Park-and-ride and routes serving the SR 99 corridor. South King County Action 2 - Enhance service coverage through implementation of a new Renton-to-Kent route via the North Industrial Area, west of SR 167. South King County Action 3 - Provide all-day, bidirectional service on Route 167 through Auburn, Kent, Renton, Bellevue, and the University of Washington. Regional Action 1 - If commuter rail is implemented, reinvest discontinued service hours in local service improvements. If not, provide additional connections to major transit generators/employment centers in the Seattle area (U- District, First Hill, Northgate). KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9-21 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE Regional Action 2 - Improve connections with Pierce Transit, especially if commuter rail is not implemented, to provide a regional bus line from Pierce County to Kent, via Auburn. The recent Downtown Parking Study suggested that there is an imbalance in long- and short-term parking in the downtown area. It is also agreed that the existing downtown park-and-ride is too far from downtown for employees to use, and that existing transit service from that lot to downtown is inconvenient. Conversion of the area near the BN tracks to long-term transit/commuter parking would require relocation of some existing long-term, general-use parking. If the area is not appropriately sized, on-street parking in downtown could be affected by spillover as a result of increased use of transit. System Management Alternatives - The City currently is involved in two projects to improve system operation in the valley. One is a multijurisdictional examination and review of signal timing and coordination for valley arterials that cross jurisdictional bounds. The outcome of this project should be improved flow on major roads and the ability, via computer technology, to adjust signal cycles as demand warrants. The second project is within the City and includes installing a new master computer for the City's signal system. This will allow the City to adjust signal cycles as demand varies. As technology improves over the next 10 to 20 years, a system of surveillance, control, and driver information (SC&DI), similar to that operated by WSDOT on I-5, I-90, and SR 520, would be appropriate for the principal arterials in south King County. This would allow drivers to be notified where back-ups are occurring and what alternate routes may be available. It also would provide a way to meter traffic entering congested facilities. IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS Six-Year Program Every year, the City adopts a transportation improvement program aimed at showing improvements and expenditures over the next six years. The program adopted for 1997-2003 generally provides adequate levels of service and corrects existing deficiencies, as defined by the City's service standard. Elements of this action plan include road widening and development of new corridors, road and traffic signal maintenance, and pedestrian and bicycle path development, and support for neighborhood traffic control. 9-22 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT 2010 Improvements As new development occurs, additional improvements will be needed to maintain the proposed LOS standards. A number of projects have been identified, including road widening for general purpose traffic and for HOV lanes, completion of the regional network, and conversion of lanes for peak-period HOV use. 2020 Improvements A similar project list has been identified for implementation between 2010 and 2020, assuming growth occurs at the rate identified in the land use plan. These projects include more widening, primarily to serve HOV users. TRANSPORTATION FINANCING & IMPLEMENTATION PLAN The creation of a financing and implementation plan is critical to the overall development of the transportation element. In turn the transportation element is a critical element of the comprehensive plan. Development of a financing and implementation plan involves the examination of a number of issues including, improvements to the street system, transit, parking, pedestrian and bicycle facilities. A key tool of the examination was the development of a computer forecast model which simulates the future year travel patterns on the City's transportation system. A key parameter in determining the needs of the system was service levels. Under Growth Management service levels or degree of congestion is a local discretion subject however to consistency at jurisdictional boundaries. The methodology used to develop the financing plan was consistent with that of the countywide planning policies. This section is a critical component of the transportation element, and as such plays a important part in enabling growth to occur in concert with the land use projections. While the transportation element incorporates an improvement program for 2010 and 2020, the critical component is the Six Year Capital Improvement Program. The recommended Six Year C.I.P. is shown on Table 9.3. It is critical because Growth Management mandates that all plans be financially sound and implementable with respect to concurrency. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) 9-23 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE The Six Year C.I.P. outlines over $71,000,000 in improvements, of which approximately $50,000,000 is to be spent on corridor projects, more than $14,000,000 on arterials, almost $500,000 on intersections and over $6,000,000 on non-motorized and maintenance improvements. It should be noted that no new revenue sources are contemplated. The bulk of the revenue comes from Grants ($28,000,000), LIDs ($16,000,000) and existing sources ($27,000,000) such as Cash on Hand, MV Fuel Tax, MV Registration Fee and _ a dedicated 1% Utility Tax. Both project costs and anticipated revenues are shown on Figure 9.4. With respect to Grants, 93% thereof are existing commitments with the balance ($2,080,000) related to highly eligible type projects. Similarly so with respect to LIDs where 90% ($14,147,000) pertains to the corridor projects for which adequate covenants exist. The balance ($1,546,000) involves projects that due to a combination of low assessment level and adjacent high density land use should be supportable. The implementation schedule which is equally important with respect to Growth Management and the assemblage of funds is reflected in Table 9.4. The crucial projects such as the 196th Street Corridor, Orillia to West Valley Highway, and West Valley Highway to East Valley Highway, and the 272nd Street Corridor are anticipated to be opened in 1998, 2000 and 1999 respectively. 9-24 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT FIGURE 9.3 CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON 6 YEAR CIP PROJECT COSTS Non-motorized&Maint Imps(8.88%) Intersections(0.78%) Arterials(20.57%) Corridor Projects(69.78%) CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON 6 YEAR CIP REVENUES LIDS(21.98%) Existing Sources(38.33%) Grants(39.70%) Existing sources include cash on hand,MV fuel tax,MV registration fee and dedicated utility tax. �t KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) 9-25 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE Table 9.3 Six Year Capital Improvement Projects (1997 - 2002) (in Thousands) Corridor Projects 196th Street West (Orillia Road to West Valley Highway) . 11,419 272nd Corridor (Auburn Way North to SR516) 20,190 196th Street Middle (West Valley Highway to East Valley Highway) 17,779 228th Street Corridor (54th Avenue to SR516) 441 Total Corridors 49,828 Arterials 212th St Pavement Rehabilitation (W Valley Hwy to Green River Bridge) 600 Washington Ave Widening (SR516 to Smith Street) 1,000 Pacific Highway HOV - Phase I (Kent-Des Moines Road to 240th) 2,188 SE 256th Improvements (116th - 132nd) 2,985 64th Ave Extension (216th to 226th) 2,200 Pacific Highway HOV - Phase II (240th to 252nd) 2,500 West Meeker Widening (Kent -Des Moines Road to Green River Bridge) 2,566 72nd Ave Extension (194th to 196th) 648 Total Arterials 14,687 Intersection Improvements James & Central Right Turn Lane 350 Military Road Improvements (Kent-Des Moines Road to Reith Road) 149 42nd Avenue &Reith Road Pedestrian Signal 55 Total Intersection Improvements 554 Other Improvements Miscellaneous Asphalt Overlays 2,178 Traffic Signal Operational / Safety Improvements 30 Sidewalk Rehabilitation 1,800 42nd Avenue South Reconstruction 75 Traffic Signal Controller Cabinet Replacements 180 Street Lighting Wiring Upgrades 120 S Central Pavement Rehabilitation 700 Canyon Drive Sidewalk / Bike Lanes 676 Bike Paths 400 Road and Railroad Separation Study 100 Kent Shuttle Service 60 GIS Software Conversion 19 Total Other Improvements 6,338 Total Capital Improvement Projects 71,408 9-26 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision ##1 (10197) CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Table 9.4 Six Year Capital Improvement Program (1997-2002) (in Thousands) Revenues 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Fuel Tax-Unrestricted 928 944 959 975 987 1000 Fuel Tax-Arterial 434 441 448 456 461 467 Motor Vehicle Registration Fee 449 456 464 471 477 484 Utility Taxes 1708 1789 1879 1958 2034 2112 Interest Income 204 166 166 166 166 167 Sale of Land 1000 Total Revenues 4723 3797 3917 4027 4127 4230 Expenditures Debt Service 464 469 462 383 381 379 Street Utility Operations 341 457 162 373 394 396 Total Expenditures 805 820 824 756 766 774 Net Available for Capital Projects 3918 2976 3092 3271 3361 3456 Capital Project Requests Corridors 196th Street West 47 1286 196th Street Middle 1449 1913 1771 272nd Corridor 930 2422 4414 739 228th Street Corridor "I Total Corridor 2426 1286 4335 1771 4414 1180 Arterials West Meeker Widening 109 657 72nd Avenue Extension 194 ]08 SE 256th Improvements(I l6th-132nd) 223 262 212th Street Pavement Rehabilitation 300 Total Arterials 223 756 108 109 657 \ Intersection Improvements 1 Military Road Improvements 149 James&Central Right Turn Lane 70 42nd&Reith Road Pedestrian Signal 55 Total Intersection Improvements 55 70 149 Other Improvements Canyon Drive Sidewalk/Bike Lanes 408 268 South Central Pavement Rehabilitation 3 00 0 Sidewalk Rehabilitation 300 300 100 300 300 10 100 Bike Paths 100 100 100 Miscellaneous Asphalt Overlays 337 347 357 368 379 390 Kent Shuttle Service 60 Street Lighting Wiring Upgrades 60 60 Traffic Signal Operational/Safety Improvements 30 42nd Avenue South Reconstruction 75 Road and Railroad Separation Study 100 Traffic Signal Controller Cabinet Replacements 40 40 20 40 40 GIS Software Conversion 19 Total Other Improvements 1294 1030 757 848 879 1180 Total Street Fund Projects 3775 2609 5848 2876 5402 3017 Revenues over(under)Expenditures 143 367 -2756 395 -2041 439 Beginning Fund Balance Unrestricted 223 731 504 636 563 620 Restricted 79 374 450 3 209 422 Street Utility 226 3242 3760 1320 1582 -730 Corridor Improvement Balance Available 3676 Beginning Fund Balance 4205 4347 4715 1959 2353 312 Ending Fund Balance Unrestricted 731 504 636 563 620 389 Restricted 374 450 3 209 422 91 Street Utility 3942 3760 1370 1582 -730 271 Ending Fund Balance 4347 4715 1959 2353 312 751 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) 9-27 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION GOALS AND POLICIES The transportation plan was developed around one central goal. _ Overall Goal: Provide for a balanced multimodal transportation system which will support land use patterns and adequately serve existing and future residential and employment growth within the Potential Annexation Area. This goal is supported by 10 goals and almost 70 policies. The goals and policies under each goal are as follows: TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE GOALS AND POLICIES Goal TR-1 - Coordinate land use and transportation planning to meet the needs of the City and the requirements of the Growth Management Act. Alternative flexible and creative transportation options that minimize these requirements should also be allowed in the planning process. Policy TR-1.1 - Locate commercial, industrial, multifamily, and other uses that generate high levels of traffic in designated activity centers around intersections of principal or minor arterials or around freeway interchanges. Policy TR-1.2 - Coordinate new commercial and residential development in Kent with transportation projects to improve affected roadways. Policy TR-1.3 - Fund development of the roads necessary for a complete arterial system serving all travel needs in the planning area (inside and outside the City) through fair-share payments by new residential, commercial, and industrial development. Policy TR-1.4 - Along all principal and minor arterial corridors, consolidate access points to residential, commercial, and industrial development. Consider proposals to consolidate access points during development review, as part of road improvement projects, or as part of land use redevelopment projects. Policy TR-1.5 - Ensure consistency between land use and transportation plans so that land use and adjacent transportation facilities are compatible. Policy TR-1.6 - Phase implementation of transportation plans concurrently with growth to allow adequate transportation facilities and services to be in place at the time of occupancy. 9-28 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Policy TR-1.7 - Promote land use patterns which support public transportation. Policy TR 1.8 - Create land uses in the downtown and commercial areas which better support transit and reduce peak-hour trip generation. PARKING GOALS AND POLICIES Goal TR 2 - Promote a reasonable balance between parking supply and parking demand. Policy TR 2.1 -Develop parking ratios which take into account existing parking supply, minimums and maximums, land use intensity, and transit and ride-sharing goals. Policy TR-2.2 - Develop criteria for a network of park-and-ride lots to serve residential areas which feed into the regional transit system/commuter rail line located downtown. Policy TR-2.3 - Incorporate ground-level retail and/or service facilities into any parking structures that are constructed within the downtown DCE, DC, and DLM zones. Policy TR 2.4 - Remove the provisions in the existing zoning regulations that distinguish between parking structures and surface parking lots. Policy TR-2.5 - Provide an option for developers to construct the minimum number of parking spaces on-site or pay an in-lieu fee to cover the cost of the City's construction and operation of parking at an off-site location. Policy TR-2.6 - Evaluate the parking requirements for all other uses, including mixed-use projects, within the DC, DCE, and DLM zones on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the following factors: (a) the potential of shared parking and transit facilities in proximity to the site; (b) the employee profile of a proposed site, including the number and type of employees and the anticipated shifts; (c) the potential for "capture" trips that will tend to reduce individual site parking requirements due to the aggregation of uses within concentrated areas; (d) the Institute of Transportation Engineers Parking Generation report and other publications which provide parking generation indices; and (e) any studies of similar specific uses conducted either by the City of Kent or the applicant. The City of Kent parking coordinator, with the Planning Director's concurrence, will prepare a report recommending specific parking requirements. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9-29 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE Policy TR-2.7 - Recommend no parking maximum ratios for retail or residential. uses. Policy TR-2.8 - Require reduced maximum-allowable-parking ratios for development projects that are in close proximity to intermodal transit/commuter rail facilities. A development project may provide up to 50 percent of the applicable maximum parking standard if the development is located within 250 _ feet of a designated intermodal transit/commuter rail facility. Such project may provide up to 75 percent of the applicable maximum parking standard if the development is located between 250 and 500 feet of an intermodal facility. Policy TR 2.9 - Require a specific ratio of the total parking area for HOV parking. A minimum of two (2) HOV parking spaces for every 25 on-site spaces is suggested. Policy TR 2.10 - Require bicycle parking under the zoning code. Recommended standards are: one bicycle parking space for every 10 motor vehicle spaces in a new development, with a minimum of 10 bicycle spaces for any new development in the DC, DCE, and DLM zones. Policy TR-2.11 - Do not differentiate among the DCE, DC, and DLM zones in terms of parking requirements for the same land uses within Kent's downtown. STREET SYSTEM GOALS AND POLICIES Goal TR-3 - Provide a balanced transportation system that recognizes the need for major road improvements to accommodate many travel modes. Create a comprehensive street system that provides reasonable circulation for all users throughout the City. Policy TR-3.1 -Assign a functional classification to each street in the City based on factors including volumes of motorized and nonmotorized traffic, type of service provided, adjacent land use, and preservation of existing neighborhood traffic characteristics. Policy TR 3.2 - Coordinate implementation of street construction standards for each functional classification with policies in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Community Design Element. TRAFFIC FLOW GOALS AND POLICIES Goal TR 4 - Eliminate disruptions which reduce the safety and reasonable functioning of the local transportation system. 9-30 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Policy TR 4.1 - Maximize traffic flow and mobility on arterial roads, especially on regional through routes, while protecting local neighborhood roads from increased traffic volumes. Policy TR-4.2 - Provide a balance between protecting neighborhoods from increased traffic and reducing accessibility for the City-wide road network. Policy TR 4.3 - Balance the dual goals of providing accessibility within the local street system and protecting neighborhoods. Where overflow traffic from the regional system significantly impacts neighborhoods, protect the residential area. Policy TR-4.4 - Develop a system of level-of-service standards which promote growth where appropriate and preserve the transportation system where appropriate. Policy TR 4.5 - Limit heavy, through truck traffic to designated truck routes in order to reduce its disruptive impacts. Policy TR 4.6 - Minimize the effects of regional traffic congestion and overflow onto the local transportation system. Policy TR 4.7 - Develop strategies to reduce traffic flows in local areas experiencing extreme congestion. Policy TR-4.8 - Enhance the neighborhood Traffic Safety Program to include in neighborhoods a wide range of passive control devices. Policy TR-4.9 - Reduce the disruptive impacts of traffic related to major institutions, activity centers, and employers via trip-reduction efforts, access/egress controls, and provision of alternatives to SOV use. FACILITY DESIGN GOALS AND POLICIES Goal TR 5 - Design transportation facilities to preserve and to be consistent with the natural and built environments. Policy TR 5.1 -Landscape transportation facilities to complement neighborhood character and amenities. Policy TR-5.2 - Maintain and incorporate prominent features of the natural environment into the landscape of transportation facilities. Policy TR 5.3 - Protect neighborhoods from transportation facility improvements that are not in character with the residential areas. Encourage pedestrian and KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9-31 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE bicycle connections among residential developments to serve as an alternative to automobile use. Policy TR-5.4-Arrange streets and pedestrian paths in residential neighborhoods - as an interconnecting network and connect them to other streets. Policy TR-5.5 - Limit the development of new cul-de-sac streets to situations where continuation of the road at some time in the future is unlikely. Policy TR-5.6 - Develop the urban design elements of the street system in accordance with policies in the City's visioning document. GOODS MOVEMENT/RAIL GOALS AND POLICIES Goal TR-6 - Maintain existing rail service to commercial and industrial sites. Policy TR-6.1 - Design transportation facilities in a manner which complements railroads. Policy TR-6.2 - Locate new spur tracks to provide a minimum number of street crossings and to serve a maximum number of sites. Policy TR-6.3 - Minimize adverse impacts of railroad operations on adjoining residential property by limiting nighttime operation and by constructing noise and visual buffers as needed. Policy TR 6.4-Design railroad crossings to minimize maintenance and to protect the street surface. Policy TR-6.5- Provide protective devices, such as barriers and warning signals, on at-grade crossings. Develop traffic signal prioritization that is activated by crossing signals in order to maintain non-conflicting, auto/truck traffic flow when crossings are occupied by trains. Policy TR-6.6 - With the assistance of the railroads, develop grade separation priorities for arterial street crossings . This is supported by state-level plans for high-speed rail between Eugene, Oregon and Vancouver, British Columbia. NONMOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION GOALS AND POLICIES Goal TR-7-Improve the nonmotorized transportation system for both internal circulation and linkages to regional travel, and promote the use of non-motorized transportation. 9-32 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Policy TR 7.1 - Whenever practical, give consideration to pedestrian and bicycle traffic within all residential and development areas of the City. Policy TR-7.2 - Whenever practical, use incentives or regulations to encourage new construction to promote pedestrian and bicycle movements to pathways, transit services and arterials. Policy TR-7.3 - Establish a nonmotorized transportation network within the City to be comprised of the primary routes, collector routes and recreation routes denoted on the nonmotorized facilities map. Policy TR-7.4 - Enhance and promote the safety of pedestrian and bicycle movements across arterial intersections, major street crossings and railroad facilities. Policy TR-7.5 - Provide visibility and promote safe crossings for pedestrians and bicycles where streets intersect with trails, paths and other areas where pedestrians and/or bicycle movements are encouraged. Policy TR 7.6 - Whenever practical, provide safety and safe access for pedestrians and bicyclists to transit stops. Sign street intersections of streets with nonmotorized trails for both trail users and street users. Policy TR-7.7 - Whenever practical, using incentives or regulatory means, encourage bicycle storage facilities with adequate lighting of residential development projects,park and rides, employment and industrial centers, schools, activity centers and retail areas. Policy TR-7.8 - Whenever practical, using incentives or regulatory means, encourage employers to provide clothing change facilities. Policy TR 7.9 - Promote the use of nonmotorized travel through bicycle safety programs. Policy TR 7.10 - Implement a comprehensive pedestrian and bicycle signage program for directional information, identification of on/off street routes, interpretive education and a printed updated trails facility map. Policy TR 7.11 - City standards for transportation facilities shall incorporate bicycle friendly and pedestrian-friendly design elements wherever possible, use standards for public roadways which meet the guidelines of AASHTO (American Association of State Highway Traffic Officials) Guide to the Development of Bicycle Facilities. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9-33 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CHAPTER NINE Policy TR-7.12 - Ensure that trail systems located in sensitive or conservation areas are compatible with the environment in which the trail is located as well as with the intended uses. TRANSIT/HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE GOALS AND POLICIES Goal TR 8.0 - Encourage the development and use of alternatives to single- occupancy vehicles. Policy TR 8.1 - Work with other jurisdictions in the greater metropolitan area toward providing frequent, coordinated, and comprehensive bus service and facilities in all residential and employment areas. Policy TR 8.2 - Promote the establishment of a multimodal transit center in downtown Kent as part of a regional high-capacity transit system. Policy TR 8.3 - Provide the non-CBD, residential portion of the transit system with parking, via either park-and-ride lots or shared-use parking facilities. Policy TR-8.4 - Coordinate park-and-ride facilities located near downtown with downtown parking programs for merchants and shoppers. Policy TR 8.5 - Support the completion of a comprehensive system of HOV improvements and programs on state highways and regional arterials which give high-occupancy vehicles a travel time advantage over single-occupancy vehicles. Policy TR 8.6- Promote measures to increase the use of high-occupancy vehicles among employers located within the City who are not required to comply with commute trip reduction. Policy TR 8.7- Support development of a regional network using rail technology to move people and goods. Policy TR 8.8 - As a means of accommodating new development, mode split goals should be established in each of the 22 transportation zones, that work towards a 50% increase in transit share by the year 2001, and a 100% increase by the year 2010 -- within the imitations of the City being able to request service from METRO. Policy TR 8.9 - Transit priority measures, such as "queue jump" lanes, "traffic signal pre-emption", and "transit only lanes" should be incorporated into the City's Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan, consistent with achieving a significant mode shift away from continued SOV growth. 9-34 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER NINE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT FUNDING GOALS AND POLICIES Goal TR-9 - Pursue funding for transportation improvements from all potential sources in an efficient and equitable manner. Policy TR-9.1 - Allow for funding of growth-related traffic improvements proportionately by impact fees charged to new development. Policy TR-9.2 - Coordinate equitable public/private partnerships, such as Trans- portation Benefit Zones (TBZ) and Transportation Benefits Districts (MD), to help pay for transportation improvements. Policy TR-9.3 - Pursue federal, state and local sources of funding (e.g. loans, matching funds)for transportation improvements. Policy TR-9.4 -Establish a mechanism to provide multijurisdictional cooperation to fund transportation improvements. Policy TR-9.5 - Create a funding mechanism, such as a Transportation Benefit District, which can be applied across boundaries to address the impact on the City's transportation system of growth outside the City limits. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION GOALS AND POLICIES Goal TR 10 - Coordinate transportation operations, planning, and improvements with the county, WSDOT, other cities, and the Regional Transit Authority. Policy TR-10.1 - Design and implement a subregional transportation system in cooperation with neighboring jurisdictions. Policy TR-10.2 - Plan and improve local and regional transit service and facilities in cooperation with the Regional Transit Authority. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9-35 CHAPTER TEN PARKS ELEMENT CHAPTER TEN PARKS ELEMENT INTRODUCTION The Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan was updated last in 1982. Since then, Kent has experienced dramatic urban growth. This expanding population base within Kent's potential annexation area has increased the demand on existing park and recreational facilities and programs, particularly those provided within Kent's city limits. At the same time, City residents have become concerned about protecting and providing public access to the unique environmental resources that make Kent a desirable place in which to live and work. The strategic policies and issues that were outlined in the 1982 Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan have been successful. A variety of new resource-oriented parks and conservancies, trails, local athletic fields, and playgrounds have been acquired and developed using a variety of general funds and state and federal grants. Even so, continued urban development may outpace Kent's ability to maintain and improve the park and recreational experience unless public resources, policies, and funds are coordinated among the City, King County, and Kent's school districts. The policy directions in the 1982 plan are being updated both to accommodate the impacts of current and projected growth and to be consistent with the City's overall planning efforts under the Growth Management Act. This element briefly analyzes the supply, demand, and need for public and private park and recreational facilities and services within Kent's potential annexation area. A more- detailed analysis is provided in the updated Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan. Kent's park system is administered by the Director of the Kent Parks and Recreation department, with the advisement of a 3-member City Council Parks Committee and a 12- member Arts Commission. Members of the Arts Commission are appointed by the Mayor with the consent of the City Council. The members serve 1-5 year terms without compensation or salary. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 10-1 PARKS ELEMENT CHAPTER TEN The mission of the Kent Parks and Recreation department is to encourage and provide opportunities for local citizens to participate in life-enrichment activities. This is accomplished via development of parks and facilities, professional programming, and the optimum utilization of community resources. The department provides a variety of park and recreational programs and services that serve diverse interests in the population. For example, the department: 1) manages recreational programs and athletic leagues, 2) conducts educational classes and workshops, 3) organizes special events like the Balloon Classic, Canterbury Faire, and special arts programs, 4) supports resource programs for special populations, 5) operates youth day camps and before- and after-school care, 6) maintains the golf course, and 7) maintains City parks, street trees, and special planting areas. ANALYSIS OF PARK LAND AND FACILITY NEEDS The need for park and recreational land and facilities was estimated using a variety of methods, including population ratios, participation models, and level-of-service (LOS) measurements. The results of these methods were compared and then synthesized to define a proposed land and facility standard for Kent's potential annexation area. Following is a summary of the findings for each type of land and facility requirement. Proposed Park Land Level-of-Service (PLOS) Standards According to National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) standards, a park and recreational system should provide LOS of approximately 39.3 acres of all types of park land for every 1,000 persons in the population. For Kent, this equals approximately 1,644 acres based on a 1993 City population of 41,833 persons, or 3,366.5 acres based on a 1993 potential annexation area population of 85,662 persons. Currently, the City of Kent owns 1,082.7 acres of park land; this is about 25.9 acres for every 1,000 residents of the City. Kent and King County together own 1,896.6 acres, or about 22.1 acres for every 1,000 persons in the potential annexation area. Looking from another perspective, Kent, King County, and the Kent and Federal Way School Districts together own 2,142 acres, or about 25 acres for every 1,000 persons with the potential annexation area. These latter figures include school district athletic fields and playgrounds, but do not include other school facility property. 10-2 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER TEN PARKS ELEMENT When other nearby state and federal parks are included in the inventory, the City, King County, and school districts provide close to an acceptable amount of land for park and recreational interest. However, while the overall land ratio may be acceptable for local park and recreational agencies, the present allocation among the required types of park land is not necessarily balanced. Currently, the City of Kent, King County, and the Kent and Federal Way School Districts together provide an acceptable LOS in resource conservancy land, resource activity land, linear trail corridors, and special use facilities (golf course). Future park plans need to maintain the same LOS standards. The existing inventory is deficient in LOS standards in athletic fields (particularly competition facilities), indoor recreational centers for special groups within the population, and park support facilities like maintenance yards, restrooms, and the like. Future park plans need to increase the PLOS for these types of lands in order to satisfy existing demands. Proposed Facility Level-of-Service (PLOS) Standards Kent, King County, and the Kent and Federal Way School Districts together provide a generally-acceptable LOS in tennis courts,jogging tracks, local park trails, and horseback riding trails. However, the existing inventory is deficient in LOS standards for soccer and baseball fields (particularly competition level), swimming beaches, fishing facilities, on-road bicycle routes, and indoor recreational centers. Future park plans need to increase the PLOS for these facilities in order to satisfy demands for park and recreational facilities. The inventory of existing facilities provides an adequate number of playgrounds and open play areas, recreational courts (volleyball and basketball), athletic fields (particularly competition level), picnic tables and shelters, and multipurpose trails. However, these facilities sometimes are not properly distributed geographically, sufficiently improved, or otherwise readily available to interested users. Future park plans need to provide these types of facilities in more-accessible locations. Future park plans also need to be coordinated with other public agencies and some private parties to ensure that residents continue to have access to specialized activities like golf courses, gun and archery ranges, and recreational vehicle campsites. V KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 10-3 PARKS ELEMENT CHAPTER TEN IMPLICATIONS OF FUTURE GROWTH The population forecasts for the potential annexation area imply significant demand in the future for all types of park and recreational land and facilities. This has a major impact on the City of Kent because most of the facilities which serve the overall population in the potential annexation area are provided within the current city limits of Kent. Park Land Requirements by 1999 The 6-year population forecast requires an increase in all types of park lands, but particularly in resource conservancies, resource activities, trail corridors, athletic fields and playgrounds, and special enterprise golf courses. Urban development soon may encroach upon or preclude the preservation of, and public access to, the more environmentally-sensitive and appealing sites. Urban development also may encroach upon or otherwise preclude the purchase and development of close-in, suitable lands for athletic fields, recreational centers, and other more land-intensive recreational facilities. The City needs to address these land requirements soon. Otherwise, some sensitive-area lands and potentially all athletic field and recreational center sites may be lost to development, or may not be accessible to future City and area-wide populations. Facility Requirements by 1999 The 6-year population forecast requires an increase in all types of park and recreational facilities, but particularly in playgrounds, picnic facilities, waterfront sites, athletic fields and courts, community and recreational centers, and other more-specialized activities. Urban development soon may preclude the acquisition and development of some of the larger, more-capable properties that could support these types of activities. The City needs to address these special-facility needs soon. Otherwise, residents could be forced to use overcrowded facilities, to commute to facilities in other jurisdictions, or to experience a curtailment in the number of programs in order to prevent severe overcrowding at any one facility. Such actions would be detrimental to the residents of the City who paid the costs of developing and operating the facilities. 10-4 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN /ntema&wa1&port 777 �`,. t o,'Bow Lk w• :M � F 1. s• �- 'I --,",_�..� NORTH _ _.... z ' A !;''✓Jt'�J"ASK f.�_ ^Angle �, e, 4 _S 20a � a SwY SCALE: 1"=4000' 'h S.2.S7 ._..i EA4 _ LEGEND PAI •_ t ... V { r " w•.. ' ,'` KENT FACILITY S216ST N" ? _ }E KING COUNTY E.. _ FACILITY _... 2,2�3 ST ¥ �� i P1 G r vi "-...". ...___. _vL (PROPOSED FACILITY) /TRAIL s • .! , ._ KENT CITY LIMITS _...,< ----------- POTENTIAL ANNEXATION BOUNDARY ji �NEI 1 ) f S 2 0 ST. '�-r^IT •'�'^�•• •� = f NOTE: REMAINDER OF PROPOSED ACOUISITION ' f. INDA a j� = 0 ....... ~", SITES NOT YET IDENTIFIED. .. iEIGH i P K , ,PARK a { � � PROPOSED REPAIR AND IMPROVEMENTS 24 dt• '••� �y` GD TO BE DONE TO MOST EXISTING PARKS. E _ 4 75 RONI • r —+ w D THIS MR? IS INTENDED AS AN RID IN GRAPHIC "' °• ... REPRESENTATION ONLY AND IS NOT A LEGAL ry� H w 3a � ' NY CI DOCUMENT. S 26U ST L JC4 ��(y .y i GLENN N �:" PAR w .; ' }� P � q _ r t-•P . PARKS AND RECR]EATI®ITT vS 2613 ° ISTT _11. CITY OF K]ENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Seattle-Tacoma - w lnternotional Ai ore 1 c� ff Bow LA, 1,T :! S�188 ST ;,} ! NORTH ij^ ' take E__)p S 200 ST if ' t`1'"° �^ S 200 S t.T M ?-.. ? SCALE: 1"=4000' S 208 LEGEND 3 "u, I >t EXISTING TRAIL - _.� ,� I { f{ F. 1 PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE S 216 ST _N �_ T ..__ i TRAIL- SHARED WITH r MOTOR VEHICLES S 222 S1t �..� *•t f223 ST w - i� �•�••�•®•�®®® POTENTIAL ANNEXATION BOUNDARY 6 saw KENT CITY' LIMITS S 240 ST t d COUNTY . _ N Sr 24a f °�• ^ L -+L ` �?�521$Tt`K THIS MAP IS INTENDED AS AN RID IN GRAPHIC µ) = r REPRESENTATION ONLY AND IS NOT R LEGAL DOCUMENT. L_ _s 26-0 STVd { F S 7 M 7 > ST P` �., vi EXISTING TRAILS S 288 M _ ST CHAPTER TEN PARKS ELEMENT PUBLIC PARTICIPATION In addition to the public participation process that was undertaken for the overall Comprehensive Plan, the City of Kent conducted a telephone survey in the spring of 1994 on the proposals in the Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan. The survey targeted registered voters who reside within City limits. The sample was collected from 200 households which were randomly drawn from voter registration lists for the City's incorporated area. The survey is statistically accurate within a range of +/- 8 percent. Following are the general results of the survey. General Evaluations Approximately 77 percent of the participants rate Kent's parks good to excellent, 4 percent rate them fair to poor, and 11 percent give them a rating considered to be neutral. On the other hand, 69 percent of the participants rate Kent's recreational programs good to excellent, 3 parcent rate them fair to poor, and 16 percent give them a rating considered to be neutral. Park Priorities All respondents assign the highest priorities to proposals to preserve woodlands, steep hillsides, and other sensitive wildlife areas; to preserve wetlands, flood plains, and other sensitive aquatic areas; to develop a teen and youth center, and to develop area-wide walking and biking trails. Respondents also assign high priorities to proposals to develop unique natural resource areas for picnics and other group uses; to conserve unique historical and cultural sites; and to develop baseball and soccer playing fields of the highest quality for youth and adult leagues. Growth Management Over one-half (58 percent) of the respondents do not believe existing park and recreational facilities are sufficient to meet projected population growth in the potential annexation area. This compares to 34 percent of the respondents who believe existing facilities are adequate and 7 percent who don't know. 1 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 10-5 PARKS ELEMENT CHAPTER TEN Facility Standards Less than 7 percent of all respondents believe the LOS for park and recreational land and facilities should be reduced to accommodate population increases. On the other hand, over two-thirds of the respondents (69 percent) believe the LOS should not be reduced. Several participants (16 percent) provided a response to this section which was considered neutral. - Growth Impact Fees Almost two-thirds of the respondents favor collecting growth impact fees from new developments in order to finance the additional park and recreational facilities which would be required by the project. However, 10 percent of the respondents disagreed with this means of financing park and recreational facilities. General Obligation Bonds All respondents were advised that growth impact fees, if used, may fund only those facilities which are needed due to the increase in population from new development. Growth impact fees may not be used to expand or improve facilities which serve existing residents; those projects must be funded by other methods, including the use of voter- approved bonds. Approximately 61 percent of all respondents indicate a willingness to finance a general obligation bond for park and recreational improvements. However, 20 percent of the respondents are unwilling to fund a bond. Recreational Program Priorities Respondent households assign highest priorities to recreational programs for seniors, teens, special populations, athletics, and day care. All respondent households were advised that growth impact fees and voter-approved bonds may not fund recreational programs. The respondent households prefer an increase in user fees or an increase in the City budget to finance recreational programs over a reduction in the number or quality of programs. 10-6 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER TEN PARKS ELEMENT CONCLUSION Results of the statistically-valid telephone survey indicate there is significant support for park and recreational programs which preserve sensitive wildlife and aquatic areas and which develop area-wide walking and biking trails, teen and youth centers. The results also indicate City residents generally support growth impact fees, city-wide bonds, and higher user fees as means of funding the projects and programs they favor. The following goals and policies outline the strategies by which the need for park land and facilities will be resolved. PARK AND RECREATION GOALS AND POLICIES Overall Goal: Encourage and provide opportunities for local citizens to participate in life-enrichment activities via the development of park land and facilities, professional programming, and the optimum utilization of community resources. WILDLIFE RESOURCE GOALS AND POLICIES The Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan provides for incorporation of unique ecological features and resources into the park system in order to protect threatened species, preserve habitat, and retain migration corridors for local wildlife. Goal P&R-1 - Designate critical wildlife habitat resources and areas. Policy P&R-1.1 - Identify and conserve critical wildlife habitat including nesting sites,foraging areas, and migration corridors within or adjacent to natural areas, open spaces, and developed urban areas. Policy P&R-1.2 - Acquire and preserve especially-sensitive habitat sites that support threatened species and urban wildlife habitat, such as the Green River Natural Resource Enhancement Area (AWEA), North Meridian Park, and Riverview Park. Goal P&R-2 - Preserve and provide access to significant environmental features. Policy P&R-2.1 - Preserve and protect significant environmental features including unique wetlands, open spaces, woodlands, shorelines, waterfronts, and other characteristics that support wildlife and reflect Kent's natural heritage. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 10-7 PARKS ELEMENT CHAPTER TEN Policy P&R-2.2 - Acquire and provide public access to environmentally-sensitive areas and sites that are especially unique to the Kent area, such as the Green River, Soos Creek, Garrison Creek and Mill Creek corridors, the Green River Natural Resource Enhancement Area (AREA), and the shorelines of Lake Meridian, Panther Lake, Lake Femvick, and Clark Lake. OPEN SPACES AND PRESERVES The Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan provides for development of a high- quality, diversified park system that preserves and enhances significant environmental resources and features. Goal P&R-3 - Establish an open space pattern that will provide definition of and separation between developed areas, and provide open space linkages among park and recreational resources. Policy P&R-3.1 - Define and conserve a system of open space corridors or separators to provide definition between natural areas and urban land uses within the Kent area. Policy P&R-3.2 - Increase natural area and open space linkages within the developed area, particularly along the Green River, Mill Creek, Garrison Creek, and Soos Creek corridors, around Lake Fenwick, Clark Lake, Lake Meridian, Panther Lake, and Lake Young, and around significant wetland and floodways such as the Green River Natural Resource Enhancement Area (AREA). Policy P&R-3.3 - Acquire and/or preserve environmentally-sensitive areas as natural area linkages and urban separators, particularly along the steep hillsides that define both sides of the Green River valley and the SE 277th/272nd Street corridor. Goal P&R-4 - Set aside significant recreational lands before they are lost to development and preserve unique environmental features as public resources. Policy P&R-4.1 - Cooperate with other public and private agencies and with private landowners to set aside land and resources for high-quality, convenient park and recreational facilities before the most suitable sites are lost to development. Suitable sites include wooded, undeveloped, and sensitive lands along the Soos Creek, Garrison Creek, and Mill Creek Canyon corridors, and lands adjacent to the Bonneville Power Administration (BRA) powerline rights of way. I D-8 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER TEN PARKS ELEMENT Policy P&R-4.2 - In future land developments, preserve unique environmental features or areas and increase public use of and access to these areas. Cooperate with other public and private agencies and with private landowners to set aside unique features or areas as publicly accessible resources, particularly along the Green River, Soos Creek, Garrison Creek, Mill Canyon, and SE 277th/272nd Street corridors. HISTORICAL RESOURCES The Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan provides for development of a high- quality, diversified park system that preserves significant historical areas and features. Goal P&R-5 - Preserve, enhance, and incorporate historical features and interests into the park and recreational system. Policy P&R-5.1 - Identify, preserve, and enhance Kent's multicultural heritage, traditions, and cultural features including historical sites, buildings, artwork, views, and monuments. Policy P&R-5.2 - Identify and incorporate significant historical and cultural lands, sites, artifacts, and facilities into the park system to preserve these interests and to provide a balanced social experience. These areas include the original . alignment for the interurban electric rail service between Seattle and Tacoma, the Neely Soames historical home, the James Street historical waterfront site, and the downtown train depot, among others. Policy P&R-5.3 - Work with the Kent Historical Society and other cultural groups to incorporate community activities into the park and recreational program. and features into the ark and Goal P&R-6 - Incorporate man-made environmentsP Go rp recreational system. Policy P&R-6.1 - Incorporate interesting, man-made environments, structures, activities, and areas into the park system to preserve these features and to provide a balanced park and recreational experience. Examples include the earthworks in Mill Creek Canyon Park and art in public places. Policy P&R-6.2 - Work with property and facility owners to increase public access to and utilization of these special features. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 10-9 PARKS ELEMENT CHAPTER TEN TRAIL AND CORRIDOR ACCESS SYSTEMS The Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan provides for development of a high-quality System of multipurpose park trails and corridors that provide access to significant environmental features, public facilities, and developed neighborhoods and business districts. Goal P&R-7 - Create a comprehensive system of multipurpose off road and on-road trail systems that link park and recreational resources with residential areas, public facilities, commercial, and employment centers both within the immediate Kent area and within the region. Policy P&R-7.1 - Where appropriate, create a comprehensive system of multipurpose off-road trails using alignments of the Puget Power rights-of-way, Soos Creek Trail, Mill Creek Trail, Lake Fenwick Trail, Green River Trail, Interurban Trail, Parkside Wetlands Trail, Green River Natural Resource Enhancement Area (NREA), and Lake Youngs. - Policy P&R-7.2 - Create a comprehensive system of on-road trails for bicycle- commuter, recreational, and touring enthusiasts using scenic, collector, and local road rights of way and alignments. Policy P&R-7.3-Link residential neighborhoods to community facilities like Kent Commons, the Senior Activity Center, Special Populations Resource Center, and King County's Kent Swimming Pool. Policy P&R-7.4 - Work with Renton, Auburn, Federal Way, King County, and other appropriate jurisdictions to link and extend Kent trails to other community and regional trail facilities like the Green River, Interurban, and Soos Creek Trails. Policy P&R-7.5 - Link trails with elementary and middle schools, the downtown business district, and other commercial and retail activity centers on East and utest Hills. Policy P&R-7.6 - Extend trails through natural area corridors like the Green River, Mill Creek, Garrison Creek, and Soos Creek, and around natural features like Lake Fenwick, Clark Lake, Lake Meridian, and Lake Young in order to provide a high-quality, diverse sampling of the area's environmental resources. Goal P&R-8 - Furnish trail corridors, trailheads, and other supporting sites with convenient and emergency furnishings and improvements. 10-10 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER TEN PARKS ELEMENT Policy P&R-8.1 - Furnish trail systems with appropriate trailhead supporting improvements that include interpretive and directory signage, rest stops, drinking fountains, restrooms, parking and loading areas, water, and other services. Policy P&R-8.2 - Where appropriate, locate trailheads at or in conjunction with park sites, schools, and other community facilities to increase local area access to the trail system and to reduce duplication of supporting improvements. Policy P&R-8.3 - Install telephones, emergency call boxes, or other means by which trail users can summon fire, emergency aid, police, and other safety and security personnel should the need arise. Policy P&R-8.4 - Develop trail improvements of a design and development standard which is easy to maintain and easy to access by maintenance, security, and other appropriate personnel, equipment, and vehicles. RECREATIONAL FACILITIES The Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan provides for development of a high- quality, diversified recreational system for all age and interest groups. Goal P&R-9 - Work with other agencies to preserve and increase waterfront access and facilities. Policy P&R-9.1 - Cooperate with King County, Kent and Federal Way School Districts, and other public and private agencies to acquire and preserve additional shoreline access for waterfront fishing, wading, swimming, and other related recreational activities and pursuits, especially on the Green River, Lake Femvick, Clark Lake, Lake Meridian, Panther Lake, and Lake Young. Policy P&R-9.2 - Develop a mixture of opportunities for watercraft access, including canoe, kayak, sailboard, and other nonpower-boating activities, especially on the Green River, Lake Femvick, Clark Lake, Lake Meridian, Panther Lake, and Lake Young. Goal P&R-10 - Work with other public and private agencies, including the Kent and Federal Way School Districts, to develop a high-quality, competitive system of athletic facilities. Policy P&R-10.1 - Develop athletic facilities that meet the highest quality standards and requirements for competitive playing for all age groups, skill levels, and recreational interests. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 10-11 PARKS ELEMENT CHAPTER TEN Policy P&R-10.2 - Concentrate on field and court activities like soccer, football, baseball, basketball, tennis, and volleyball that provide for the largest number of participants. Policy P&R-10.3 -Develop, where appropriate, a select number of facilities that provide the highest standard for competitive playing, possibly in conjunction with King County, Kent and Federal Way School Districts, and other public and private agencies. Goal P&R-11 -Develop, maintain, and operate a high-quality system of indoor facilities that provide activities and programs for the interests of all age, physical, and mental capability groups in the community. Policy P&R-11.1 -Maintain and expand multiple-use indoor community centers, such as the Senior Activity Center, Special Populations Resource Center, and Kent Memorial Park Building, that provide arts and crafts, music, video, classroom instruction, meeting facilities, eating and health care, day care, latch key, and other spaces for all age groups, including preschool, youth, teens, and seniors on a year-round basis. Policy P&R-11.2-Maintain and expand multiple-use indoor recreational centers, such as Kent Commons and King County's Kent Swimming Pool, that provide aquatic, physical conditioning, gymnasiums, recreational courts, and other athletic spaces for all age groups, skill levels, and community interests on a year- round basis. Policy P&R-11.3 - Support the continued development and diversification by the Kent and Federal Way School Districts of special meeting, assembly, eating, health, and other community facilities that provide general support to school-age populations and the community at large at elementary, middle, and high schools within the potential annexation area. Policy P&R-11.4 -Develop and operate special indoor and outdoor cultural and performing arts facilities that enhance and expand music, dance, drama, and other audience and participatory opportunities for the community at large. SPECIAL PURPOSE FACILITIES The Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan provides for development of high-quality facilities that meet the interests of all segments of the community. Goal P&R-12 - Where appropriate, develop and operate specialized park and recreational enterprises that meet the interest of populations who are able and willing to finance them. 10-12 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER TEN PARKS ELEMENT Policy P&R-12.1 - Where appropriate and economically feasible (self- supporting), develop and operate specialized and special interest recreational facilities like golf and archery ranges. Policy P&R-12.2 - Where appropriate, initiate with other public and private agencies joint planning and operating programs to determine and provide for special activities like golf, archery, gun ranges, and camping on an area-wide basis. RECREATIONAL PROGRAMS The Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan provides for development of high-quality recreational programs and services that meet all community group needs. Goal P&R-13 - Develop and operate recreational programs, including historical and cultural activities, that interest all age, skill level, and income groups in the population. Policy P&R-13.1 - Provide arts and crafts, classroom instruction in music and dance, physical conditioning and health care, meeting facilities, day care, latch key, and other program activities for all cultural, age, physical and mental capability, and income groups in the community. Policy P&R-13.2 - Provide soccer, baseball, softball, basketball, volleyball, tennis, and other instruction and participatory programs for all age, skill level, and income groups in the community. Policy P&R-13.3 - Assist historical and cultural societies to develop and display artifacts, reports, and exhibits; and conduct lectures, classes, and other programs that document and develop awareness of Kent's heritage. CULTURAL ARTS PROGRAMS AND RESOURCES The Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan provides for development of high-quality, diversified cultural arts facilities and programs that increase community awareness, attendance, and other opportunities for participation. Goal P&R-14 - Work with the arts community to utilize local resources and talents to increase public access to artwork and programs. Policy P&R-14.1- Support successful collaborations among the Arts Commission, business community, service groups, schools, arts patrons, and artists to utilize artistic resources and talents to the optimum degree possible. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 10-13 PARKS ELEMENT CHAPTER TEN Policy P&R-14.2 - Develop strategies that will support and assist local artists and art organizations. Where appropriate, develop and support policies and programs that encourage or provide incentives to attract and retain artists and artwork within the Kent community. Goal P&R-15 -Acquire and display public artwork to furnish public facilities and other areas and thereby increase public access and appreciation. Policy P&R-15.1 - Acquire public artwork including paintings, sculptures, exhibits, and other media for indoor and outdoor display in order to expand access by residents and to furnish public places in an appropriate manner. DESIGN AND ACCESS STANDARDS The Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan provides for the design and development of facilities that are accessible, safe, and easy to maintain, with life-cycle features that account for long-term costs and benefits. Goal P&R-16 - Design park and recreational indoor and outdoor facilities to be accessible to all physical capabilities, skill levels, age groups, income levels, and activity interests. Policy P&R-16.1 - Design outdoor picnic areas, fields, courts, playgrounds, trails, parking lots, restrooms, and other active and supporting facilities to be accessible to individuals and organized groups of all physical capabilities, skill levels, age groups, income levels, and activity interests. Policy P&R-16.2 - Design indoor facility spaces, activity rooms, restrooms, hallways, parking lots, and other active and supporting spaces and improvements to be accessible to individuals and organized groups of all physical capabilities, skill levels, age groups, income levels, and activity interests. Goal P&R-17 - Design and develop park and recreational facilities to be of low- maintenance materials and requirements. Policy P&R-17.1 -Design and develop facilities that are of low-maintenance and high-capacity design to reduce overall facility maintenance and operation requirements and costs. Policy P&R-17.2 - Where appropriate, use low-maintenance materials, settings, or other value-engineering considerations that reduce care and security requirements, while retaining the natural conditions and environment. 10-14 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER TEN PARKS ELEMENT Policy P&R-17.3 - Where possible in landscaping parks, encourage the use of low maintenance flowering plants, working toward a landscape that is colorful year-round. Goal P&R-18-Identify and implement the security and safety provisions of the American Disabilities Act (ADA) and other standards. Policy P&R-18.1 - Implement the provisions and requirements of the American Disabilities Act (ADA) and other design and development standards that will improve park facility safety and security features for park users, department personnel, and the public at large. Policy P&R-18.2 - Develop and implement safety standards, procedures, and programs that will provide proper training and awareness for department personnel. Policy P&R-18.3 - Define and enforce rules and regulations concerning park activities and operations that will protect user groups, department personnel, and the public at large. Policy P&R-18.4- Where appropriate, use adopt-a park programs, neighborhood park watches, park police patrols, and other innovative programs that will increase safety and security awareness and visibility. FINANCIAL RESOURCES AND COORDINATION The Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan provides for the creation of effective and efficient methods of acquiring, developing, operating, and maintaining facilities and programs that accurately distribute costs and benefits to public and private interests. Goal P&R-19 - Investigate innovative methods of financing park and recreational requirements, including joint ventures with other public and private agencies. Policy P&R-19.1 - Investigate innovative, available methods, such as growth impact fees, land set-a-side or fee-in-lieu-of-donation ordinances, and interlocal agreements, to finance facility development, maintenance, and operating needs in order to reduce costs, retain financial flexibility, match user benefits and interests, and increase facility services. Policy P&R-19.2 - Where feasible and desirable, consider joint ventures with other public and private agencies such as King County, Kent and Federal Way School Districts, regional, state, federal, and other public and private agencies including for profit concessionaires. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 10-15 PARKS ELEMENT CHAPTER TEN Goal P&R-20 - Coordinate public and private resources to create among agencies a balanced local park and recreational system. Policy P&R-20.1 - Create a comprehensive, balanced park and recreational system that integrates Kent facilities and services with resources available from King County, Kent and Federal Way School Districts, and other state, federal, and private park and recreational lands and facilities, in a manner that will best serve and provide for the interests of area residents. Policy P&R-20.2 - Cooperate, via joint planning and development efforts, with King County, Kent and Federal Way School Districts, and other public and private agencies to avoid duplication, improve facility quality and availability, reduce costs, and represent interests of area residents. Goal P&R-21 - Create and institute a method of cost/benefit assessment to determine equitable park and recreation costs, levels of service, and provision of facilities. Policy P&R-21.1 -In order to effectively plan and program park and recreational needs within the existing city limits and the potential annexation area, define existing and proposed land and facility levels of service (LOS) that differentiate requirements due to the impacts of population growth as opposed to improvements to existing facilities, neighborhood as opposed to community nexus of benefit, requirements in the City as opposed to requirements in the potential annexation area. Policy P&R-21.2 - Create effective and efficient methods of acquiring, developing, operating, and maintaining park and recreational facilities in manners that accurately distribute costs and benefits to public and private user interests. This includes the application of growth impact fees where new developments impact level-of-service (LOS) standards. Policy P&R-21.3 -Develop and operate lifetime recreational programs that serve the broadest needs of the population and that recover program and operating costs using a combination of registration fees, user fees, grants, sponsorships, donations, scholarships, volunteer efforts, and the use of general funds. Policy P&R-21.4 - Where appropriate, provide recreational programs, like golf and archery ranges, for those interested groups who are willing to finance the cost of the programs through user fees, registration fees, volunteer efforts, or other means and methods. 10-16 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER ELEVEN UTILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER ELEVEN UTILITIES ELEMENT INTRODUCTION The Growth Management Act (GMA) of 1990 requires the City of Kent to update its Comprehensive Plan and include elements pertaining to land use, capital facilities, transportation, housing, and utilities. As one of the required elements, the Utilities Element of the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan is intended to provide a framework for the efficient and predictable provision and siting of utility facilities and services within the City of Kent and the Potential Annexation Area, consistent with the public service obligations of the utility providers. The Utilities Element must be consistent with the other elements of the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with countywide planning policies and Growth Management Planning Goals which were adopted by the Kent City Council. This Utilities Element includes discussion of private utilities, those utilities which are not provided by the City of Kent. Discussion of public utilities and facilities is included in the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The Utilities Element is required to include an inventory of all existing and proposed service lines and facilities. The plan also must include an analysis of capacity and the potential impacts of expected growth in the City and the Potential Annexation Area. The utilities included in this plan are electricity, natural gas, and telecommunications. Telecommunications include conventional telephone, cellular telephone, and cable television services. All of these utilities are considered important because they are necessary to preserve the health, safety, and welfare of the community, as well as to insure a desirable level of quality of life. Planning for private utilities should be recognized as the primary responsibility of the utility providers. Investor owned utilities in the State of Washington are regulated by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC). Utilities under the jurisdiction of the WUTC must provide suitable facilities to supply service on demand. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 11-1 UTILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER ELEVEN State law regulates the rates and charges, services, facilities and practices of utilities. Any change in policy regarding customer charges or the provision of services provision policy requires WUTC approval. ELECTRICITY Introduction Electricity is provided in the Potential Annexation Area by the Puget Sound Power and Light Company. Puget Power is a private, investor owned utility which provides electrical service to approximately 1.7 million people who work and live in the State of Washington. Puget Power builds, operates, and maintains an electrical system consisting of generating plants, transmission lines, distribution systems, and substations. Hydroelectric power is generated from the Columbia, Nooksack, Baker, Snoqualmie, White, and Puyallup rivers, as well as from other sources including coal fired, gas, and oil fired plants. Descriptions, maps, and inventories of existing, in progress, and future electrical transmission facilities improvements to serve local and regional needs are presented more fully in Puget Power's King County Draft GMA Electrical Facilities Plan, February 1993. After power is generated, it is transmitted along high voltage or high tension transmission lines to transmission substations. Transmission substations transform the power to lower voltages, and they also distribute it to distribution substations which are located in neighborhoods or within large industrial/commercial developments. From these substations the power is carried over distribution lines toward businesses and residential users. Voltage is reduced further by pole mounted transformers or pad mounted transformers for individual use. Power is transmitted over the regional main grid's high voltage transmission lines at approximately 500 Kilovolts. Transmission substations can flurther step down the power to approximately 115 KV. Voltage usually is regulated to between 35 and 40 KV by distribution substations, before it is finally stepped down to between 240 and 120 volts for regular users by the local pole or pad mounted transformers. Description and Capacity of Eidsting Facilities Most of the Potential Annexation Area is included in two geographic electrical subareas. The Highline/Green River and Benson/Tahoma/Raven Heights electrical subareas contain 11-2 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER ELEVEN UTILITIES ELEMENT facilities which provide service to an area covering approximately 203 square miles. These facilities are connected to the regional transmission grid at the Talbot and O'Brien substations. There are fourteen distribution substations located in the Potential Annexation Area. The nameplate capacity and load of these distribution substations is rated in megavolt amperes (MVA). The 1990 rating and winter load figures for each distribution substation are as follows: DISTRIBUTION NAMEPLATE RATING 1990 WINTER LOAD SUBSTATION MVA (MVA) Boeing Aerospace 42.4 24.8 East Valley 25 24.1 Falcon 25 new Harvest 25 23.2 Kent II 25 26 Kent III 25 26.2 Lake Meridian 25 23.5 Liquid Air 18.8 13.6 Norpac 25 17.1 Orchard 25 14.6 Orillia 25 20.4 Panther Lake 25 17.6 Sequoia 25 17.1 Soos Creek 25 22.2 Totals 361.2 MVA 270.4 MVA Utilization Factor = 74.86% The 1990 winter load was approximately 270.4 MVA within the Potential Annexation Area. Using the growth targets established for this plan, and formulas which Puget Power uses to estimate potential load, it is possible to project the increase in winter load due to growth to the year 2010. The City of Kent is planning for approximately 38,656 new residents and 11,881 new employees in the City and Potential Annexation Area by the year 2010. The basic Puget Power formula for computing winter peak loads with an ambient temperature of 13 degrees fahrenheit is as follows: KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 11-3 UTILITIES ELEMENT CHAI"TER ELEVEN Existing load = X Population increase times 1.63 kVA times 1.17 = Y1 Employment increase times 2.21 kVA times 1.17 = Y2 High voltage industrial addition = Y3 Demand side reductions (10% times X) = Z1 Additional Conservation (6.94% times X) = Z2 TOTAL (kVA) = X+Y1+Y2+Y3-Z1-Z2 Total (M) Potential Annexation Area = 270400+73720.86+30720.7-27040-18765.8 = 329,036 kVA or 329.036 MVA 329.036 -270.40 20 Year Forecasted Load Increase 58.636 WA Industrial load increases are difficult to predict, so they were not included in this forecast. However, it can be assumed that there will be an increase in industrial load, and a subsequent increase in the 20 year forecasted load. Since the forecasted load is expected to increase to near the current rating capacity of the distribution substations, it is necessary for Puget Power to plan for new facilities and enhancements to the electrical systems. 11-4 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF KENT WATTS� W LAKE N �- �att Tv�omo _ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN a /ntomofionof Airport +.,gow t_k y J S 188 ST — L NORTH I u A / lB �dke i + 41 - r c S 200 S 200 ST SCALE: 111=4000' SEA < MEMO { \\ S 208 ST LEGEND V) POTENTIAL ANNEXATION 1 �.... AREA St Lol 0 M01ls22 AV Y •.•,;, `, ', 0 CITY LIMITS EXISTING t ,+, TRANSMISSION LINES PROPOSED " ......••^••• TRANSMISSION LINES y 14RI04 Uf?'( 1 lullEXISTING SUBSTATIONS Kent EN ! PROPOSED S 240 Sr vim. ?y IIIIII SUBSTATIONS c c THIS MAP IS INTENDED AS AN RID IN GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ONLY AND IS NOT R LEGAL L� DOCUMENT. 252 ST o R 5 ST co 1 5 7 N a - `-I PUGET POWER -v - ELECTRICAL SYSTEM d S70 P, 7A FIGURE 11 . 1 SOURCE: PUGET POWER CHAPTER ELEVEN UTILITIES ELEMENT Future Expansion Puget Power plans to construct ten new distribution substations in the City and Potential Annexation Area. DISTRIBUTION DISTRIBUTION SUBSTATION CAPACITY SUBSTATION CAPACITY Cambridge 25MVA Kangley 25MVA Glencarin 25MVA Lake Fenwick 25MVA Grandview 25MVA Meeker 25MVA Highridge 25MVA Russell 25MVA Jason 25MVA Thomas 25MVA A distribution substation can serve an area ranging from one square mile in a commercial zone to four square miles in a residential district. Therefore, a portion of the capacity in both existing and planned distribution substations serves customers outside of the Potential Annexation Area. A utilization factor of 75%-85% is desirable because it allows for additional capacity in the event of extreme weather conditions, equipment failures and maintenance, and other backup scenarios. In conjunction with station additions, Puget Power plans to improve its transmission system. New transmission lines will eliminate single sources and create redundancy in the system. This results in better system reliability because a failure in one location can be compensated by an alternate loop. Electrical Issues As development intensifies and expands, a proportional increase in area load will occur. Due to the service on demand requirements of this utility, it is vital that the City and the utility maintain open lines of communication regarding siting new facilities. The timing of construction of new facilities will be driven by the rate of growth in an area. It also is important to consider that the local transmission system is designed around a regional system. Therefore, development occurring elsewhere may have local impacts. Conversely, growth in the City will contribute to the electrical load of the regional power system and to the need for facilities outside of the City. Puget Power is following closely the scientific research on electromagnetic fields. In addition to monitoring growth patterns, Puget Power follows design guidelines which KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 11-5 UTILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER ELEVEN reduce electric and magnetic field levels. Puget Power was a part of a task force created by the Washington State Legislature to establish and evaluate ways of managing EMF levels. The City will promote the siting of new facilities in a way which has the least - impact on the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Kent. NATURAL GAS Introduction Washington Natural Gas Company provides natural gas service to the Kent area. Washington Natural Gas is an investor owned company which provides service to more than 390,000 customers in King, Lewis, Pierce, Snohomish, and Thurston counties. In the south Seattle area, which includes the cities of Tukwila, Sea-Tac, Des Moines, Kent, Normandy Park, Renton and West Seattle, Washington Natural Gas had 79,008 customers as of December 1992. Sixty percent (60%) of the natural gas used in the Pacific Northwest comes from British Columbia and Alberta, Canada. The remaining forty percent (40%) comes from U.S. sources. Natural gas is supplied to the region via the Northwest Pipeline. Its system within the State of Washington consists of two large pipelines of 26 and 30 inches in diameter respectively. Gas is delivered from the pipeline to gate stations which regulate gas pressure to between 200 and 300 pounds per square inch (psi). Supply mains transport gas from the gate stations in pipes which are from 4 to 20 inches in diameter. Supply main pressures are reduced by limiting stations to between 60 and 200 psi. Limited supply mains transport gas to district regulators which regulate gas to pressures between 20 and 60 psi. At this point, the gas finally is ready for the intermediate pressure distribution systems. Distribution main sizes can range from 1.25 to 8 inches in diameter. Individual residential service lines are typically 5/8 inch in diameter, while individual commercial and industrial service lines are typically 1 1/4 or 2 inches in diameter. Washington Natural Gas estimates that there were approximately 17,800 natural gas customers in the Kent area as of July, 1993. Commercial customers comprised 2,255 or 12.6% of these, while 15,545 or 87.3% were residential users. According to their rates department, the average house which uses natural gas for heat and hot water consumes approximately 1,000 therms per year. Ten therms equals approximately one 11-6 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER ELEVEN UTILITIES ELEMENT thousand cubic feet (mcf) of gas, so 1,000 therms equals approximately 100,000 cubic feet of gas consumed each year per household. Washington Natural Gas estimates that Kent households consume approximately 1.3 million cubic feet per hour (cfh) of natural gas on a cold winter day. At times of peak demand, weak spots in the distribution system are measured and easily corrected by raising pressure, looping feed, or reinforcing the system. Location and Description of Existing Facilities Two gate stations distribute natural gas from the Northwest Pipeline to the Potential Annexation Area. The South Seattle Gate Station, located in Renton, has a capacity of 13 million cubic feet per hour. The Covington Gate Station, located east of Kent, has a capacity of 1.25 million cubic feet per hour. There are approximately 40,000 feet of combined 6, 8, and 16, inch high pressure supply mains and approximately 150,000 feet of combined 2, 4, and 6, inch intermediate pressure supply mains serving the Kent area. These lines are able to provide approximately 3.6 million cfh to Kent. Washington Natural Gas estimates they have approximately 80 miles of mains servicing the City of Kent. They also maintain 7 district regulators within Kent's corporate limits. In December, 1982, there were 44,435 natural gas customers in the south Seattle area. In ten years that number grew to 79,008. Washington Natural Gas estimates there will be approximately 125,000 customers in this same region by the year 2000. The existing supply system is capable of serving approximately 200,000 customers in southwest King county. Future Expansion Washington Natural Gas plans to improve the existing system in order to achieve greater capacity. Looping lines provides an alternative route for gas to travel to an area needing additional supply. This type of improvement can require the construction of high pressure lines, intermediate pressure lines, and district regulators. Additional capacity can be achieved by the laying of parallel lines, and by replacing existing lines with those able to handle a larger capacity. Washington Natural Gas plans to rebuild the South Seattle Gate Station to allow for an outlet pressure of 250 psi. Currently this gate station provides gas at pressures of 200, KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 11-7 UTILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER ELEVEN 205, and 240 psi. A new gate station is planned to serve the Auburn/Black Diamond area; this also will serve part of the Potential Annexation Area in the future. Washington Natural Gas is exploring the possibility of providing a 16 inch main from the new _ Auburn/Black Diamond Gate Station to the Vashon Crossing. Natural Gas Issues Natural gas is considered a cost effective alternative to other types of fuels. Washington Natural Gas estimates that 99% of new residential developments use natural gas if it is available as an option. Although it is often considered an exhaustible resource, there are many sources of natural gas which have not been fully exploited. Most of our landfills and sewage facilities provide an abundant source of methane (natural) gas. Methane is a natural byproduct of the breakdown of organic material. Both cogeneration and hydrofirming use natural gas as a fuel. Cogeneration uses heat which is a by product of the production of electricity, for space heating or other activities. Hydrofirming is the back up to the regions intermittent excess spring hydro generation. Gas fired combustion turbines provide back up when hydroelectric power is insufficient. These activities provide less expensive alternatives to the production of fuel as well as to the efficient use of resources. TELECOMMUNICATIONS Introduction Telecommunications include a wide range of rapidly expanding services. Those services which are to be discussed in this element include conventional telephone, cellular telephone, and cable television. Because of advances in technology and the subsequent changes in transmission equipment and capabilities, it is vital that the City and those who provide services maintain open lines of communication. CONVENTIONAL TELEPHONE Conventional telephone service is provided in the Potential Annexation Area by US West Communications, which is a subsidiary of US West. US West Communications offers telecommunication services to 25 million customers in 14 western states. Telecommunications regulations require US West Communications to provide adequate telecommunication services on demand. 11-8 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF KENT C� COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Seattle-Tacoma - S tntemationat.Airport \ \ " Qow ~~S 188 ST _ \\�-� — c NORTH I f I r l/~ take Angle r— a — S 200 ST S 2O0 ST SCALE: 111=40001 1 lit I � I C r S 208 ST-� 7 'JM1LG36.E 11 ._I _ Gt� CITY LIMITS S 216 ST N i �1 POTENTIAL ANNEXATION 5 S �i' AREA 222 _. s2�ST a .: 6" LP. GAS LINES Ln r%. 30-45 PSIG S 4" HIGH PRESSURE •'"` i7 - 60+ PSIG 1 - 8" HIGH PRESSURE � y _ �`��,. � • • • • 60+ PSIG �� •� ">� REGULATOR -� - N „ - a Ci J; THIS MAP IS INTENDED AS AN RID IN GRAPHIC a REPRESENTATION ONLT AND IS NOT R LEGAL DOCUMENT. 52 rn - S 260 ST�( C CO ) s r Lo Sto`r I _ 11 - _ NATURAL GAS _ J Q _ 1 — _ S_288 ST N FIGURE 11 .E SOURCE: WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS CHAPTER ELEVEN UTILITIES ELEMENT Telephone exchange areas define the area within which US West Communications is permitted to transport their services. These areas are called Local Access and Transport Areas. Calls outside of the Local Access and Transport Area require long distances carriers such as AT&T, US Sprint, or MCI. There are 94 US West exchanges located in the State of Washington. The facilities in which calls are switched are called Central Offices. From each Central Office there are four main cable routes generally heading North, South, East, and West. Connected to these main feeder routes are branch feeder routes from which service is routed to all subscribers through local loops. These types of facilities may be aerial or buried, and copper or fiber. Technology such as fiber optics allows for multiple paths over a single wire. Location and Description of Existing Facilities There are three exchanges which cover most of the Potential Annexation Area. These exchanges are Kent Ulrich, Kent O'Brien, and Kent Meridian. The Des Moines and Federal Way exchanges cover a small portion of the Potential Annexation Area. The Central Office which serves most of the City is located in the general vicinity of downtown. There are also Central Offices located near Lake Meridian, and West Valley Highway north of South 198th Street. The capacity of each Central Office is dependent on the type of switch it uses. A single area code and prefix can carry 10,000 phone numbers. Digital transmission allows US West to increase the capabilities of switches. Due to the competitive nature of the telecommunications business, US West is unable to provide figures on the number of customers they currently serve. However, with an increase of approximately 19,814 new households in the Potential Annexation Area by the year 2010, there will be a significant impact on existing facilities and the need to plan for new ones. Future Expansion The construction of new conventional telephone facilities is driven by customer demand. As a utility which must provide adequate services as they are requested, facilities and services must be constantly upgraded. US West states that their engineers regularly evaluate the capacity of plants to insure that new facilities are installed on a timely basis to meed demand. New technology allows the enhancement of many existing facilities without having to build new ones. However, it is important that the City cooperate with KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 11-9 UTILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER ELEVEN the provider in planning for new facilities in order to facilitate the timely and efficient - provision of services. CELLULAR TELEPHONE Cellular telephone service is provided in the Potential Annexation Area by Cellular One, a unit of McCaw Cellular Communications, Inc., and by the US West Newvector Group. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) limits to two the number of licensed cellular providers in each Cellular Geographical Service Area (CGSA) in order to insure there is market competition. Service must be available to all customers within a service area, but there are no level of service standards. Cell sites must be located so that radio signals from the system stay within the boundaries of the CGSA. - Signals to and from mobile phones are handled by a system of low powered transmitting antennas which are called cell sites. The signal coverage radii is called a cell. Cells meet in a hexagonal grid pattern, so calls are in effect handed from one cell to another over an area. Calls are routed through a central computer called a Mobile Telephone Switching Office (MTSO) and are connected to their destinations. Cells can provide continuous coverage over an urban area, or they can provide coverage along well traveled transportation corridors. Because all cellular systems are compatible, callers can travel from one system to another and still be able to use their cellular phones. Location and Description of Existing Facilities Cellular One currently has two cell sites located in the Potential Annexation Area. One site is located at 20826 68th Avenue South on the valley floor, and the other is located at 24423 142nd Avenue SE on East Hill. These cell sites contain low powered transmitting antennas. US West Newvector currently has three cell sites located in the potential annexation area. Sites are generally located at SR 167 and S. 234th Street, Kent-Kangley and 116th Ave SE, and SE 240th Street and 132nd Ave SE. These cell sites consist of low powered transmitting antennas. Future Expansion The combination of a high growth rate and an increasing proportion of the population becoming cellular users correlates to increased demand for cellular facilities. The South 11-10 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF KENT Sedtt/e-Tocoina _ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN /ntemationa/.4ywq�� r i t, � /_k _ L Q: J s 188 sr NORTH �. I� 1 I Lake -� Angfe _ i - o S 200 ST - S 200 ST SCALE: 1"=4000' � T o S 208 s7 —1 LEGEN POTENTIAL ANNEXATION 1 AREA s216ST N itt CITY LIMITS I i s2 s — �[ 0 1, US NEST _s 223 ^r TRUNK LINES US NEST CENTRAL OFFICE ,1 „y ® US NEST EXISTING CELL SITE US NEST ® PROPOSED CELL SITE 240 CELLULAR ONE CELL SITES n - THIS MAP IS INTENDED AS AN RID IN GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ONLY AND IS NOT A LEGAL 7_52 .. a. t. DOCUMENT. ST 26 S - c) + ra, II WA 11 S 7. I. -r Q Sfor ._ Ck tof�I >` / - - � TELECOMMUNICATIONS C \ S Q 2.88 ST In Tfil -� FIGURE 11 . 3 SOURCES: US WEST, CELLULAR ONE CHAPTER ELEVEN UTILITIES ELEMENT King County area will attract a high number of new residents, and it also is the location of several major transportation corridors. Those areas which are planned for growth and new high capacity transportation corridors, as described in the Land Use, Housing, and Transportation Elements of this plan, will be likely locations for new cellular facilities. As the number of users in a region grows, it becomes necessary to split cells to allow greater capacity. Although this creates a larger number of cells, it allows for a smaller transmitter because each cell now serves a smaller territory. Cellular One is planning to locate a third cell site in the area by the middle of 1995. The general area of this new site will be East Hill. US West Newvector also plans to add one cell site in the Potential Annexation Area. The site they have selected is in the vicinity of S. 212th Street and East Valley Highway. Cellular Issues The collocation of telecommunications facilities using existing structures is desirable because it is an efficient use of land and potentially has less of an impact aesthetically. As more cell sites are located within an area, the transmitting antennas which are required become smaller. Even though it is desirable to collocate facilities, the City is aware that there may be circumstances where collocation is impossible. However, it is a policy of this element to promote collocation wherever feasible. In recent years, considerable discussion has occurred on whether there are adverse effects from radio frequency (RF) energy. Electromagnetic fields (EMF) produced by cellular telephones are known as non-ionizing, as opposed to ionizing sources such as x-rays. Cellular telephones use frequencies (UHF) which previously have been used by UHF television stations, so their presence is not new. The American National Standards Institute has established a standard for exposure to EMF. The standard recommends that the specific absorption rate (SAR) is less than 1.6 Watts/Kilogram for an exposure of thirty or more minutes. The maximum output from a portable cellular phone is .45 Watts/Kilogram, well below this threshold. The RF energy from a cellular phone is less than from a hand held CB radio or from standing one foot away from a typical microwave oven. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 11-I1 UTILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER ELEVEN CABLE TELEVISION Cable television services are provided in the City of Kent via a franchise agreement with TO Cablevision of Washington. Areas within the Potential Annexation Area which are not within the City of Kent also receive service from TCI, but those services are provided by a separate King County franchise agreement. The Kent franchise agreement states that cable service must be provided on demand in all areas which are within, or which become a part of the City of Kent. Located at the origin of a cable system are a receiver and headend. The headend includes electronic equipment such as antennas, frequency converters, demodulators, and preamplifiers. The headend processes signals in a manner which allows them to be distributed to the network. Trunk lines carry this signal, and its strength is maintained by amplifiers located along the system. Amplifiers allow for feeder line connections and the eventual hookup of individual customers. The franchise agreement allows the provider to use City rights of way for their equipment. _ Description of Services and Facilities TO Cablevision estimates they provide service to approximately 11,100 subscribers within the Kent city limits. TO provides a basic package which gives customers access to 14 channels, and an extended basic package which provides 33 channels. TO also offers five pay channels; this pushes total system capability to 38 channels. Per agreement with the City, TO is required to upgrade to 54 channels by the end of 1997. TCI's signal is transmitted along both coaxial and fiberoptic cables. There are currently 52.8 miles of aerial cable, and 41.9 miles of underground cable in service within the city limits. TCI is involved in a program to replace 3,000 miles of its current network with fiberoptic lines. Future Expansion TCI will provide the City of Kent with the capability to broadcast live from City Hall on the government access channel. Upon completion of the 54 channel upgrade, Kent will have one additional education channel and possibly an individual public access channel. The City's fire stations will be provided with a system that allows programming to be originated in coded form from the East Hill fire station and to be received by decoding devices in each fire station. 11-12 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER ELEVEN UTLUTIES ELEMENT Digital compression allows the transmission of multiple signals to a single channel. Upon the completion of the fiberoptic upgrade, the system potentially will have the capability to provide 500 channels. In addition, interactive services such as addressability, security, computer interaction, banking, shopping, voice and data transmission, and High Definition Television (HDTV) will be possible. UTILITIES GOALS AND POLICIES GENERAL Goal UT-1 -Designate the general location and capacity of existing and proposed utility facilities. Policy UT-1.1 - Add utility corridor and facility information to the GIS system. The City shall consult periodically with private utility providers to obtain up to date system information. Policy UT-1.2 - Coordinate with utility providers to ensure that the general location of existing and proposed utility facilities is consistent with other elements of the Comprehensive Plan. Goal UT-2 - Make decisions regarding utility facilities within the Potential Annexation Area in a manner consistent with, and complimentary to, regional demand, resources, and systems. Policy UT 2.1 - Accommodate those additions and improvements to utility facilities that enhance the capacity and reliability of regional resources, particularly when multi jurisdictional benefits within the region can be achieved. Policy UT 2.2 - Coordinate with adjacent jurisdictions and regional planning agencies to formulate a periodic update of the Utilities Element and relevant implementing development regulations. Policy UT 2.3 - Encourage the designation and development of utility corridors and facilities, consistent with local and regional needs and resources. The City shall encourage the joint use of utility corridors, including with transportation rights of way, where applicable. The City understands that some utilities may have unique safety and maintenance requirements which limit their inclusion in joint use corridors. t Policy UT 2.4 - Coordinate with utility providers to promote the joint use of utility corridors as pedestrian and nonmotorized trails and/or wildlife habitat. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 11-13 UTILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER ELEVEN Goal UT-3 -Accommodate improvements and additions to utility facilities at a time and in a manner sufficient to serve planned growth and/or desirable levels of service. Policy UT 3.1 - Work to assure predictability in the permit process and to issue permits in a fair and timely manner. Policy UT-3.2 - Periodically provide utility providers with current information on development patterns and permit activity within the City of Kent. Provide relevant information on population, employment, and development projections. Policy UT 3.3 - Coordinate efforts among the City and service providers to improve facilities located along, within, or on rights of ways and to limit disruption of service. Consider the needs and requirements of both the City and utilities shall be considered when commencing improvements to utilities. ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION Goal UT-4 - Facilitate and encourage conservation of natural resources to prevent the unnecessary consumption of land and to improve regional air quality. Policy UT 4.1 - Promote the conservation of energy and resources through both public education and land use policies which do not encourage inefficient and costly sprawl development. Policy UT-4.2 - Provide opportunities for alternative energy sources, such as solar power, through development regulations and energy building codes. Policy UT 4.3 - Encourage utility providers to seek methods such as cogeneration to make efficient use of energy opportunities. Cogeneration is the use of heat, as a byproduct of power generation,for industrial processes or for space and water heating. Policy UT 4.4 - Promote and encourage the development of regional policy regarding electromagnetic fields and other peripheral effects of utility service transmission. ELECTRICAL Goal UT-5 - Promote the delivery of electrical service, on demand, within the City and the Potential Annexation Area, consistent with the utility's public service obligations. 11-14 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER ELEVEN UTILITIES ELEMENT Policy LJT-5.1 - Feasible, encourage the undergrounding of all new electrical distribution and communication lines. Where it is possible, encourage the undergrounding of all existing electrical distribution and communication lines. Policy UT-5.2 - The City recognizes Puget Power as the primary supplier of electricity in the Potential Annexation Area and understands its responsibility, as a public service company, to provide services on demand. The WUTC provides a forum for consideration and determination of matters involving appropriate levels of service and the allocation of cost associated with providing that service. Policy UT 5.3 - Work with electrical utility providers and neighboring jurisdictions to meet regional service needs and to accommodate future facility improvements. Policy UT 5.4 - Ensure there are sufficient electric utility facilities that are sufficient to support economic development. Foster cooperation among private enterprise, the City, and the utility provider. NATURAL GAS Goal UT-6 - Promote the expansion and delivery of natural gas service within the Potential Annexation Area in order to allow access to alternative sources of fuel. Policy UT-6.1 - Promote the extension of distribution lines to and within the Potential Annexation Area. Coordinate land use and facility planning to allow eventual siting and construction of natural gas distribution lines within rights of way which are being dedicated or within roads which are being constructed or reconstructed. Policy UT-6.2 - Encourage system design practices intended to minimize the number and duration of interruptions to customer service. TELECOMMUNICATIONS Goal UT-7 - Promote the expansion of telecommunication services to all locations within the Potential Annexation Area. Provide access by future development to a variety of telecommunications choices. Policy UT-7.1 - Expand the City's use of the government access channel provided by 7Cl Cablevision through its cable television communications franchise agreement. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 11-I5 UTILITIES ELEMENT CHAPTER ELEVEN Policy LJT-7.2 - Work with the cable television provider in undergrounding new fiberoptic lines which are necessary to take advantage of new technology and to expand available services. Policy UT 7.3 - In recognition and encouragement of the expansion of cellular communications, work with the utility provider to find desirable locations for future facilities. Goal UT 8 - Review the location of new telecommunication facilities to ensure that proposed locations promote the efficient distribution of services and minimize impacts on adjacent land uses and the environment. Policy UT 8.1 - Promote, where possible, the collocation of telecommunication facilities on existing structures or in existing corridors without causing an undue burden on any single utility provider. 11-16 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER TWELVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER TWELVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INTRODUCTION The economic base of the City of Kent has changed quite dramatically over the past 30 years. Once a relatively small agricultural community of truck farms and dairying, the City is now the 12th largest in the state and boasts over 40,000 employees and 3000 businesses. Some of the region's largest employers are located here, and the heart of the City's economic base is now manufacturing, distribution, wholesale and retail trade. Many factors have contributed to the City's economic vitality. Primary among these is the City's location in the Puget Sound region midway between Seattle and Tacoma along the Interstate 5 corridor. In addition, the Valley Freeway (SR 167) traverses Kent north- south, while Interstate 405 and SR 516 run east-west through the Kent valley. Located just northwest of the City, the Seattle Tacoma International Airport provides access to domestic and international markets for local goods and services. Just as important as accessibility and location are Kent's natural and cultural amenities, good schools, strong neighborhoods, diverse housing, and overall quality of life; all of these factors contribute to the economic vitality of the community. PAST ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS The City of Kent historically has been, and continues to be, heavily committed to economic development. Slightly more than one-half of the City's area (51%) presently is designated for industrial and commercial uses. At the same time, the City has committed to provide the infrastructure and public services necessary to sustain this development, and provide a high quality of life for its residents. While zoning and infrastructure improvements are indirect ways of promoting economic development, the City also has promoted it more directly. 1. Downtown Revitalization. Revitalizing the downtown area long has been a priority with the Kent City Council and Mayor. As early as 1968 with the "John Graham Plan," the City completed studies and plans for downtown. In 1974, the KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 12-1 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER TWELVE City adopted a Central Business District Plan which focused on design objectives in the downtown. A Local Improvement District was formed in 1983 to implement a number of downtown beautification and infrastructure improvements - recommended by the MAKERS plan for downtown. Finally, in 1990, a new land use plan for downtown was adopted by the City Council. That plan and the subsequent zoning established a type of "enterprise zone" in the downtown area. - Today, high intensity, mixed-use development is permitted in the downtown area within a context of flexible zoning standards and administrative design review. The City also helped to fund organizational efforts aimed at revitalizing downtown. Currently, the City commits matching funds to the Kent Downtown Partnership (KDP). Formed in 1992, the KDP is staffed by a downtown coordinator and maintains programs for business retention, development, and recruitment. KDP also sponsors several special events in the downtown area and oversees the Saturday Market, an open-air market of crafts and seasonal farm- goods vendors. 2. Economic Development Corporation. The City of Kent established an Economic Development Corporation (EDC) for the purpose of issuing industrial revenue bonds. Pursuant to state approval of such public corporations in 1981, Kent acted upon its commitment to provide industrial development financing opportunities to potential investors. The revenue bonds can be issued for new development as well as for expansion of the operations of established firms. The program thus can help to create new jobs and to strengthen the local economy. The EDC also funded other efforts aimed at achieving public/private economic development goals. At different times, the EDC committed funding to international trade programs, downtown revitalization, infrastructure studies, and other local economic development programs. 3. Partner with Kent Chamber of Commerce. The City has maintained a close relationship over the years with the Kent Chamber of Commerce. Many of the capital facility projects and service delivery systems of the City impact the business climate of the City. On several occasions, the Chamber was asked to advise the City on economic, organizational, and management tasks related to these projects and services. 12_2 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER TWELVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Together, the City and Chamber of Commerce have undertaken to promote international trade. Recently, the Mayor of Kent traveled with representatives from the Chamber of Commerce and Trade and Development Consortium, Inc. (TRADEC) to several Asian countries. The purposes of the economic sojourn were to interest international companies in buying local, American-made products; in partnering in joint ventures with local companies, and in shipping goods through the Kent Valley's distribution system. FUTURE CHALLENGE OF ECONOMIC DLNTWPIVIE]T With rapid industrial and commercial growth in the 1970's and 1980's, the City did not have to take an active role in economic development programs. Growth seemed to come effortlessly. The 1990's are different. Much of the industrial and manufacturing area already is developed. Many of the undeveloped parcels have special challenges, such as sensitive areas. Suburban shopping centers have relatively high vacancy rates and are connected poorly to the residential areas they serve. The regional economy has become more global in its perspective, and Kent now must market its goods and services on a broader scale. The challenge of maintaining a healthy local economy is perhaps more difficult than ever before. To best face this challenge, the City is committed to participate actively with the private sector in economic development efforts which enhance the local economy and e community ty goals. DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY In drafting the economic development policies for the Comprehensive Plan, City staff members were assisted by a committee composed of business, industry, and real estate representatives. The Economic Development Committee, as it was called, discussed a variety of economic issues and then drafted policy statements addressing the areas of concern. The committee identified a wide range of economic issues, including international trade, downtown revitalization, infrastructure funding, development permitting, and land use policy, Committee members reached consensus on all final policy statements. IJ KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN I2-3 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER TWELVE The framework policies of this element are but a first step, albeit an important one, in the development of a more comprehensive local approach to economic development. Within the context of these policies, the City will work with other jurisdictions, agencies,and the private sector to develop more specific economic development strategies which together will help to strengthen the local economy. ECONOMIC DEVELOPNUM GOALS AND POLICIES CITY'S ROLE IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Goal ED-1 Maintain a strong, proactive position toward economic development that promotes a positive civic image. Policy ED-1.1 Encourage public/private partnerships which further public goals while advancing economic development opportunities. Policy ED-1.2 Promote partnerships with other cities and organizations to advance mutual economic development goals. Policy ED-1.3 Promote Kent as a center for international trade opportunities. Policy ED-1.4 Develop programs to encourage recruitment of new businesses. Policy ED-1.5 Develop programs to encourage expansion and retention of existing businesses. Policy ED-1.6 Where feasible and appropriate, assist the business community in the collection of data relative to economic development, where feasible and appropriate. Policy ED-1.7 Establish a permit process system that is fair and timely while promoting the health, safety, and general welfare. Policy ED-1.7.1 Work with adjacent cities and King County on consistency among regulatory codes. Policy ED-1.7.2 Encourage predictability and consistency in the City's land use regulations, while also allowing for flexibility and creativity in the site development process. Policy ED-1.7.3 Promote a results-oriented permit process, which consolidates review timelines, eliminates unnecessary steps, and maintains a strong customer service approach. 12-4 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER TWELVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HOUSING Goal ED-2 Maintain a strong policy toward balanced community development. Policy ED-2.1 Encourage home ownership to foster stakeholders in the community. Policy ED-2.2 Encourage condominiums and private cluster housing as alternatives to stacked apartment units. Policy ED-2.3 Discourage further large-scale multifamily residential projects outside of the downtown. Policy ED-2.4 Encourage new housing development to locate closer to existing public services. Policy ED-2.5 Encourage a land use pattern that integrates housing with natural amenities, shopping opportunities, and recreational facilities. COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT Goal ED-3 Promote commercial development to provide employment for citizens and residents and maintain Kent's position as an economic center in South King services for County. Policy ED-3.1 Allow for small-scale commercial establishments in neighborhood areas to provide services for residents. Policy ED-3.2 Promote regional office and commercial enterprises in core areas of the City. Policy ED-3.3 Discourage auto-oriented commercial development along identified transit arterials and encourage more intensive commercial development at major nodes in the street/transit network. Policy ED-3.4 Promote alternative transit opportunities between commercial and residential areas. Policy ED-3.5 Encourage mixed use zoning to provide opportunities for residential use in commercial areas. Policy ED-3.6 Increase opportunities for walking between commercial development and residential neighborhoods. KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 12-5 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER TWELVE MANUFACTURING/INDUSTRIAL AREAS Goal ED-4 Protect the existing inventory of industrial parcels from conversion to non- industrial uses. - Policy ED-4.1 Coordinate the Capital Facilities Plan to ensure the maintenance and expansion of infrastructure to support manufacturing/industrial areas. - Policy ED-4.2 Designate a portion of taxes generated from manufacturing activity to be reinvested in infrastructure improvements that support manufacturing. Policy ED-4.3 Develop an area-wide, programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) which will serve to streamline and simplify the environmental review of individual industrial projects. Policy ED-4.4 Expedite the permitting process for environmental remediation to enhance timely redevelopment of manufacturing sites. Policy ED-4.5 Provide for certain commercial/retail uses that directly support manufacturing and industrial uses. DOWNTOWN (CITY CENTER) Goal ED-5 Promote downtown as the primary center for commerce in Kent. Policy ED-5.1 Continue public/private partnerships for downtown vitalization. Policy ED-5.2 Pursue regional capital improvement opportunities that will benefit downtown. 12-6 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN APPENDIX A SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS APPENDIX A SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS The following documents, reports, and statutes have been instrumental in the preparation of the Comprehensive Plan. These documents are incorporated by reference in the Plan. All documents are available for public review at the City of Kent Planning Department, 400 West Gowe Street, Kent, Washington, (253) 859-3390. GENERAL Washington State Growth Management Act -EHSB 2929 (1990) -RSHB 1025 (1991) King County Countywide Planning Policies -King County Council Ordinance #10450 (Adoption) -Kent City Council Resolution #1326 (Ratification) City of Kent Growth Management Strategy Inter-Departmental Work Program (December 1991) Kent Growth Management Planning Goals -Resolution #1325 (September 1992) Interim Urban Growth Area Boundary -Resolution #1334 (November 1992) Interim Potential Annexation Area -Resolution #1360 (May 1993) LAND USE ELEMENT 1989 Downtown Kent Plan Land Use Goals and Policies West Valley Industrial Study (September 1986) Green-Duwamish Watershed Nonpoint Action Plan (January 1991) Kent Land Use Inventory--Final Report and supporting documents (November 1991) Residential, Commercial/Industrial, Urban Center, and Mixed Use Capacity Estimates (October 1991, April 1992, September 1992, and June 1994) Proposal to the King County Growth Management Planning Council for Urban and Manufacturing/Industrial Centers (September 1992) KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) A - I SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS APPENDIX A Adoption of Critical Areas Regulations -Ordinance #3109 and Resolution #1354 (May 1993) Establishment of Kent Household and Employment Targets for the Countywide Planning Policies - (October and December 1993) HUMAN SERVICES ELEMENT - Human Services Needs Assessment (December 1993) HOUSING ELEMENT Housing Data Analysis (March 1994) CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Capital Facilities Requirements 1994 - 1999 (and to 2013): Capital Facilities Plan Support Document (February 1994) Revenue Sources for Capital Facilities 1994 - 1999: Capital Facilities Plan Support Document (February 1994) Capital Facilities Level of Service and Cost Options 1994 - 1999 (May 1994) Kent Capital Facilities Plan (July 1994) Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan (April 1995) Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plan (April 1995) Public Works Operations Space Study (1989) Kent Fire Department Master Plan (1984) Kent Drainage Plan (1986) Kent Water System Plan (1993) Kent Water Quality Program 1992 - 1996 (1991) Kent Comprehensive Sewerage Plan (1980) TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Comprehensive Transportation Plan (June 1994) A - 2 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) APPENDIX A SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Kent Transit Study (June 1994) Downtown Kent Parking Study (March 1994) PARKS ELEMENT Comprehensive Parks and Recreation Plan (June 1994) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Mayor's Committee on Growth Management--Final Report (May 1991) Report of the Mayor's Advisory Committee on Impact Fees: General Policy Issue Recommendations (November 1991) Kent Community Forum and Visual Preference Survey -Final Report (June 1992) - Resolution #1318 Supporting VPS Results and Directing Implementation Program (July 1992) - Visioning Program Implementation Plan (Approved by the City Council November 1992) Public Forums on Kent Growth Management Planning Goals (August 1992) Public Open Houses on Comprehensive Plan/EIS Scoping (October 1993) Video/Questionnaires on Comprehensive Plan Alternatives (March/April 1994) STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT Determination of Nonsignificance for Critical Areas Regulations--ENV-92-13 and ENV-92-75 (March and October 1992) Determination of Nonsignificance for Kent Planning Goals--ENV-92-70 (September 1992) Determination of Significance and Notice of Scoping for the Comprehensive Plan-- ENV-93-51 (October 1993) Comprehensive Plan Draft Environmental Impact Statement (July 1994) Comprehensive Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement (January 1995) Comprehensive Plan Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (February 4, 1997) - adjunct to the Downtown Strategic Action Plan KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN-Revision #1 (10197) A - 3