HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Public Works/Planning - 04/21/2008Public Works Committee Agenda
Councilmembers: Ron HarmonDebbie RapleeDeborah Ranniger, Chair
Unless otherwise noted, the Public Works Committee meets at 5:00 p.m.
on the 1st & 3rd Mondays of each month
Council Chambers East, Kent City Hall, 220 4th Avenue South, Kent, 98032-5895.
For information please contact Public Works Administration (253) 856-5500.
Any person requiring a disability accommodation should contact the
City Clerk’s Office at (253) 856-5725 in advance.
For TDD relay service call the Washington Telecommunications Relay Service at 1-800-833-6388.
U:PWCommittee\Agendas\2008\04 21 08.doc
April 21, 2008
5:00 p.m.
Item Description Action Speaker Time Page
1. Approval of Minutes Dated April 07, 2008 YES None 03 01
2. Discussion Only/Traffic Impact Fees NO Mooney 50 03
Executive Session -
East Valley Highway LID 362 Right-of-Way Acquisition
This page intentionally left blank.
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MINUTES
FOR APRIL 7, 2008
Page 1 of 2
Committee Members Present: Committee Chair, Deborah Ranniger and
Committee Member Debbie Raplee were present. Councilmember Ron Harmon
was absent, due to a scheduled vacation. The meeting was called to order at
5:00 p.m.
ITEM 1 – Approval of the Minutes Dated March 31, 2008:
Committee Member Raplee moved to approve the minutes of March 31,
2008. The motion was seconded by Ranniger and passed 3-0, with
Harmon’s concurrence.
PULLED FROM THE AGENDA ITEM 2 –Easement Agreement between the
City of Kent and the King County Flood Control Zone District:
Larry Blanchard, Public Works Director notified committee members that this item
is being pulled from the agenda.
ITEM 3 – 228th Street Grade Separation Public Works Trust Fund Loan:
Tim LaPorte, Deputy Public Works Director explained that the City of Kent applied
for a loan for construction of the S 228th Street Grade Separations through the
Washington State Public Works Board in the amount of $10,000,000.00 for
construction beginning in FY 2008. The City’s loan request was successful in
being recommended to the legislature. Mark Madfai stated that in order for the
funds to be dispersed the committee must approve the agreement. It was also
explained that the City competes for these funds statewide, and that the interest
rate is very low, ½ of 1% and that we have 20 years to pay it back. Construction
is slated to begin sometime in June of 2008.
Raplee moved to recommend authorization for the Mayor to sign the
Public Works Trust Fund Loan Agreement, in a sum not to exceed
$10,000,000.00 between the City of Kent and the Public Works Board, for
the South 228th Street Grade Separation project subject to Certification
by the City Attorney. The motion was seconded by Ranniger and passed
3-0, with Harmon’s concurrence.
ITEM 4 – Information Only/2007 Annual Public Works Report:
Tim LaPorte, Deputy Public Works Director and Don Millett, Operations Manager
gave an informative PowerPoint presentation and short video clip of what Public
Works Engineering and Operations have completed in just the past year.
Information Only/No Motion Required
1
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MINUTES
FOR APRIL 7, 2008
Page 2 of 2
ADDED ITEM 5 – Update-Information Only/Drainage Master Plan:
Beth Tan, Sr. Environmental Engineer, P.E., summarized that the City of Kent
staff and their consultants are working toward completing the Drainage Master
Plan for Council Approval in May 2008. At this time, a substantial portion of
identifying the project workload, mandated program needs, and current level of
service has been established.
Information Only/No Motion Required
Adjourned:
The meeting was adjourned at 6:26 p.m.
Cheryl Viseth
Public Works Committee Secretary
2
U:\PWCommittee\ActionPag\04 21 08DisscussionOnlyTrafficImpactFees.doc
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Larry R. Blanchard, Public Works Director
Phone: 253-856-5500
Fax: 253-856-6500
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent, WA 98032-5895
Date: April 14, 2008
To: Chair Deborah Ranniger and Public Works Committee Members
PW Committee Meeting Date: April 21, 2008
From: Cathy Mooney, Senior Transportation Planner
Through: Larry Blanchard, Public Works Director
Subject: Traffic Impact Fee Discussion
Summary: Update on the status of the Transportation Master Plan (TMP) – The TMP
is still being reviewed by the Community Development Department and moving
through a series of processes for being adopted into the Comprehensive Plan. We
started this process when we received the OK from the Public Works Committee on
January 7, 2008. We’ve been working with Community Development Department
ever since then. We just made our first presentation to the Land Use & Planning
Board in Workshop last Monday and will present the TMP and its smaller version, the
Transportation Element, again in a second Workshop on April 28th. It is then
scheduled for a Public Hearing at the next Land Use & Planning Board meeting which
will be on May 12th.
This will put us on schedule for adoption of the Transportation Master Plan by full
Council on June 17, 2008.
After adoption of the TMP, we hope to immediately move into decision making mode
on the Traffic Impact Fee Ordinance. This is why we are trying to keep moving
forward with these discussions and get as much of the groundwork done as we can
while we wait for the Comprehensive Plan amendment process on the TMP to go
forward.
Attached is a memo which reviews some of the items we have covered in previous
discussions and highlights some policy issues we hope to clarify soon.
DISCUSSION ONLY: Staff and TMP consultant team members will present a brief
power point review of the overall Transportation Master Plan funding program and
then lead a discussion of some of the issues relating to Traffic Impact Fees which
will require Council action at a later time but which we hope to get a sense of
direction for further study and research.
3
This page intentionally left blank.
Transportation Impact Fees Update Page 1
Memorandum
To: Cathy Mooney, Kent TMP Project Manager
From: Donald Samdahl, PE, PTP
Subject: Transportation Impact Fees Update
Date: April 10, 2008
We are seeking further council direction on issues related to implementing the
transportation impact fee program that would be included within the overall TMP
funding program.
We have highlighted some key policy decisions that will need to be made by Council
in order for the impact fee program to be put into place. The following information is
provided to assist council in providing this guidance.
Impact Fees in the Context of the Transportation Funding Program
The proposed impact fee program is part of the comprehensive transportation
funding program being considered by Council during the adoption of the
Transportation Master Plan. Council has discussed the overall funding program on
previous occasions. The following information summarizes these findings:
• Total capital project costs (2007 dollars)= $511 to $595 million
o Streets portion of capital costs= $502 Million
• Available funding sources include existing and potential new sources
o Existing revenue sources range from $150 to $308 million
o Potential additional revenue sources range from $164 to $383 million
Impact fee portion = $45 to $180 million
o Total funding sources = $313 to $690 million; average = $502 million
• Transportation impact fees could be applied to the streets portion of the
capital costs
Overall, transportation impact fees could pay between 9 and 36 percent of the total
streets capital needs. The magnitude of impact fees would dictate which other
sources of funding would be needed and the magnitude of those funds.
4
Transportation Impact Fees Update Page 2
Policy Issues
1. Should the Council adopt 100% of the legally eligible impact fee
amount?
Analysis indicates that 35 to 40% of the street project costs are related to Kent
growth. This represents that maximum percent of the costs that could be allocated to
impact fees. The other 60 to 65% of project costs are attributable to existing
deficiencies and traffic impacts from outside Kent. (Note: this percentage is
consistent with values in other jurisdictions).
On this basis, up to approximately $180 Million could be allocated to impact fees. Of
this amount, $50 to $75 Million is related to the six grade separation projects. Using
the maximum eligible amount, the resulting transportation impact fee would be in the
range of $17,000 per single family house ($12,000 per house if the grade
separations were excluded).
A comparison was made to other jurisdictions charging transportation impact fees
within the region. In general, transportation impact fees have been rising steadily in
the past couple of years. Current rates in Auburn, Covington, and Maple Valley are
in the $3,000-$5,500 range. The highest rate is over $14,500 for the City of
Sammamish. Similar ranges exist for other land use types.
The following table provides a comparison of impact fee rates compared to the amount
of transportation revenue that could be generated in the City of Kent by 2030.
Comparison of Transportation Impact Fee Rates and Revenue
Scenario
Impact Fee
Cost per
Single
Family
House
Impact Fee
Cost per
Square Foot
Office Building
Approximate
Impact Fee
Revenue
(2005-2030)
for City of Kent
Revenue
percent of
Total Project
List
Maximum Allowable:
Include all Street
Projects
$17,000
/house
$32.89/sq ft $180 Million 35 to 40%
Include all Street
Projects except for
Grade Separations
$12,000
/house
$23.02/sq ft $130 Million
35 to 40%
(excluding
grade
separations)
Mid to High End $5,500
/house
$10.64/sq ft
$90 Million 16 to20%
Comparative Rates
Lower End
$3,000
/house
$5.81/sq ft $45 Million 8 to 10%
5
Transportation Impact Fees Update Page 3
2. Should the program include exempted land uses?
The GMA exempts land uses that do not generate traffic impacts onto the city street
system. These uses create ‘Deminimis’ impacts. Several cities also exempt other land
use types, among the more typical uses: Low income housing, schools, day care,
economic development zones. The exempted uses are expected to be those that
provide a broad public purpose. Council needs to know that any exempted impact fees
must be paid by other public funds, not by other developers.
3. Should completed street projects be included within the impact fee
program?
The GMA allows cities to charge impact fees for use of the capacity of completed
projects, as long as it can be demonstrated that sufficient capacity remains for new
growth. Since impact fee programs cover several years worth of transportation
investments (for example, we are proposing an impact fee program that goes out to
2030), the program includes a built-in assumption that future development would help
pay its share of projects that had previously been completed. Many jurisdictions retain
completed projects on their impact fee list; most remove them after a few years. Some
cities choose to remove the projects from the list after they are completed. This
becomes both a policy matter and a practical one relating to how any completed projects
might affect the impact fee rates when they are updated.
4. How often should the program be updated?
Most programs update their costs at least every 3 years, with a major update often
tied to the update of the Comprehensive Plan (every 5 years). Many cities now
include an automatic cost index to cover annual inflation costs for the years during
which there are no other changes to the impact fee projects or detailed cost
estimates.
Next Steps
Using the guidance from Council, staff will prepare a draft impact fee ordinance that
addresses the key policy issues and references a rate study that will document the
technical findings. Several other specific policy issues will be brought forward for
Council’s consideration as part of the ordinance.
6