HomeMy WebLinkAbout1286r
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the
City of Kent, washington, relating to
transportation planning, programming and
coordination requirements for using Local
Option Transportation Revenues authorized by
Chapter 82.80 RCW.
WHEREAS, Chapter 82.80 RCW Local Option Transportation
Taxes requires that, as a condition of levying or expending any of
the local option transportation revenues authorized by that
legislation, counties and cities over 8,000 population must meet
certain planning, programming and coordination requirements as
provided in RCW 82.80.070; and
WHEREAS, King County has enacted the Local Option Vehicle
License Fee authorized by RCW 82.80.020 effective July 1, 1991;
and the revenues from this new fee will be distributed by the
State Treasurer to King County and each of its cities, pursuant to
the formula established by RCW 82.80.080; and
WHEREAS, on February 5, 1991 the Kent City Council passed
Resolution 1270 reflecting their intentions to form a Street
Utility; and
WHEREAS, on May 16, 1990, at the King County
Post-Legislative Session Transportation Forum, King County and
city elected officials agreed that there should be a common,
interim process for meeting the planning, programming and
coordination requirements of RCW 82.80.070, and that the interim
process should be in effect until reorganization of the Countywide
and multicounty land use and transportation coordination agencies
is accomplished; and
·.
WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act of 1990 establishes
certain requirements for land use and transportation planning and
coordination among local jurisdictions, which requirements exceed
the scope of the requirements in RCW 82.80.070, and for which new
planning and coordination procedures may have to be established;
and
WHEREAS, King County and all cities within the County
would benefit from a common framework within which to respond to
the requirements of RCW 82.80.070; and
WHEREAS, the intent of the 1990 legislature in
authorizing these new local option transportation revenues was to
foster coordinated local and regional transportation planning and
to focus the use of these new revenue sources on addressing
multijurisdictional commuter congestion problems and other
priorities deemed appropriate by cities and counties;
WHEREAS, transportation planning and coordination among
local jurisdictions in King County is already occurring through
varied mechanisms and forums which can accomplish the intent of
RCW 82.80.070 until such time that other applicable procedures are
established by a new countywide andjor multicounty planning
organization; and
WHEREAS, the Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle and the
Washington State Department of Transportation should also be
involved in coordinated land use and transportation planning; NOW,
THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
- 2 -
;,
1. The City of Kent shall use the interim process
described in Attachment A to meet the transportation planning,
programming and coordination requirements of RCW 82.80.070 until
such time that other applicable planning and coordination
procedures are established by a new countywide and/or multicounty
land use and transportation planning organization.
2. With respect to the "specific transportation
programs" required by RCW 82.80.070 to be adopted by each
jurisdiction over 8,000 population, the City of Kent's 1991-1996
Transportation Improvement Program as adopted by City Council per
Resolution 1251 on July 19, 1990 shall constitute same; three
specific projects {corridor improvement) shown therein will be
financed, in part, by Vehicle License Fee Revenues and Street
Utility revenues.
3. In conformance with RCW 82.80.070{3) Attachment B
describes the various elements of the City's Specific
Transportation Program as it relates to the Local Vehicle License
Fee revenues and the Street Utility revenues.
Passed at a regular
City of Kent, Washington this
day of
ATTEST:
Concurred in by the
--~~~~---' 1991.
meeting of ~~ouncil of the ~ day of 1991.
Mayor f th ity of Kent, this ~
ELLEHER, MAYOR
~-,____,~:...,__-~_,;:;....._ __ _
- 3 -
,. " ..
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGE
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of
Resolution No. JCJ.. t!fo , passed of the City of
Kent, Washington, the I( day
·. /
---.... --
9520-340
- 4 -
~(SEAL)
EPUTY CITY CLERK
Attachment A
INTERIM TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND COORDINATION PROCESS
(For Implementing RCW 82.80 Local Option Transportation Revenues)
SECTION I. DEFINITIONS
The "Eastside Transportation Program" or "ETP" is a
transportation planning and coordination effort which includes
King County, the cities of Bellevue, Bothell, Issaquah, Kirkland,
and Redmond, Metro, and WSDOT.
"Local Option Transportation Revenues" include the vehicle
license fee, local option gas tax, street utility and commercial
parking tax authorized by Chapter 82.80 RCW.
"Metro" is the Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle.
A "Metropolitan Planning Organization" or "MPO" is an
organization designated jointly by local jurisdictions and the
Governor as the agency responsible for carrying out the
cooperative, continuing and comprehensive transportation planning
activities required by Section 134, Title 23 USC.
"Regional Transportation and Land Use Plans" refers to those
multicounty and Countywide transportation and land use plans, such
as VISION 2020, adopted by the Puget Sound council of Governments
as the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for the Central
Puget Sound Region, until such time that a new agency is
designated as MPO and develops new regional plans.
The "South County Area Transportation Benefit District" or
"SCATBD" Steering Committee is a transportation planning and
coordination effort to establish a transportation benefit district
and includes representatives from King County, the cities of Kent,
Renton, SeaTac and Tukwila, Metro and WSDOT and the Valley Area
Transportation Alliance.
A "Transportation Plan" is a functional plan describing the
existing and proposed transportation facilities and services
within a jurisdiction. Such plans may be jurisdiction-wide or may
encompass a smaller geographic area.
"Transportation Program" refers to the specific
transportation program described in RCW 82.80.070 (3), and
required to be developed by each jurisdiction (with population of
8,000 or more) that levies or expends any of the local option
transportation revenues.
"WSDOT" is the Washington State Department of Transportation.
Interim Transportation Planning and
Coordination Process
SECTION II. PURPOSE AND APPLICABILITY
Attachment A
A. Applicability. The forums and processes described herein
shall be the interim method by which King County and the cities
within King County comply with the transportation planning,
programming and coordination requirements specified as a condition
of using the local option transportation revenues authorized by
Chapter 82.80 RCW, including the Vehicle License Fee which has
been implemented by King County effective July 1, 1991. This
interim method shall be used by King County and the cities within
King County until such time as superceding procedures are
established by a new Countywide and/or multicounty planning
organization with transportation planning and coordination
responsibilities.
B. Purpose.
1. The general purpose of the Interim Transportation
Planning and Coordination Process is to ensure that the
transportation planning, programming and coordination requirements
of RCW 82.80.070 are complied with in an orderly and efficient
manner until such time that the process is replaced by new
processes as may be established by new intercounty and intracounty
transportation planning and coordination organizations.
2. The specific purpose of this process shall be to
respond to the statutory requirements that:
(a) The Transportation Program of each jurisdiction
over 8,000 population indicate how the jurisdiction's
Transportation Plan (upon which the Transportation Program is
based) is coordinated with applicable Transportation Plans for the
region and for adjacent jurisdictions (RCW 82.80.070(3}(b)}, and
(b) Jurisdictions over 8,000 population periodically
review and update their Transportation Programs to ensure
consistency with applicable local and regional transportation and
land use plans (RCW 82.80.070(4)).
-2 -
Interim Transportation Planning and
Coordination Process
SECTION III. INTERIM PLANNING AND COORDINATION
Attachment A
Coordination among jurisdictions to ensure consistency
between Transportation Plans of adjacent jurisdictions and between
local plans and regional transportation and land use plans shall
be accomplished as follows:
A. Subregional Coordination.
1. To the extent possible, transportation planning,
coordination and dispute resolution shall be pursued through
existing subregional transportation planning groups such as the
ETP and SCATBD. Each such group will determine how this is best
accomplished within its geographic area.
2. In geographic areas of the County where such groups
do not exist and when necessary, King County shall take the lead
in establishing such additional subregional transportation
planning forums.
B. Transportation Plans and Programs: Notification. Review
and Comment.
1. The County and each city shall notify adjacent
jurisdictions, applicable regional transportation planning
agencies, WSDOT, and Metro at the earliest possible stage of
development of (a) a new regional, subregional, county community
land use andjor transportation plan or (b) revisions to such
plans, in order provide timely opportunities for review and
comment prior to adoption by the legislative authority.
2. Prior to legislative adoption of a Transportation
Program, as required by RCW 82.80.070(3), King County and each
city shall submit to applicable regional transportation planning
agencies, adjacept jurisdictions, WSDOT and Metro: (a) the
proposed Transportation Program; and (b) the Transportation Plan
upon which the proposed Transportation Program is based. The
Transportation Program shall be transmitted to adjacent
jurisdictions and applicable regional agencies no later than the
same time it is transmitted to the jurisdiction's legislative body
for adoption in order that those agencies have opportunity to
formally comment on the Transportation Program before adoption.
3. The County and each city should notify adjacent
jurisdictions, applicable regional transportation planning
agencies, WSDOT and METRO at the earliest possible stage of
development of a project to be included in their Transportation
- 3 -
Interim Transportation Planning and
Coordination Process
Attachment A
Programs which will serve a multijurisdictional function or is
necessitated by existing or foreseeable congestion.
c. Transportation Program. The Transportation Program shall
be developed as an integral part of each jurisdiction's six-year
transportation capital improvement program. At a minimum, the
Transportation Program shall consist of a narrative report on the
specific points required to be addressed by RCW 82.80.070
including identification of the transportation improvements and
services intended to be funded in whole or in part by local option
transportation revenues.
SECTION IV. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
A. Notification of appropriate jurisdictions at the earliest
stages of a transportation planning process shall be practiced in
order to identify potential problems and concerns and to seek
early resolution of any dispute.
B. Until such time that a specific procedure for resolving
transportation planning disputes is established as part of Growth
Management Act implementation, any party may use existing
processes for resolving disputes including, but not limited to:
(1) Appeal processes provided through the State Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA), the Shoreline Management Act or other
regulatory measures; (2) Binding Arbitration; and (3) Voluntary
Mediation. Where subregional forums such as ETP or SCATBD exist,
those bodies may establish an appropriate dispute resolution
mechanism for their member jurisdictions.
9520-340
- 4 -
Attachment B
CITY OF KENT LOCAL OPTION REVENUE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM:
Summary of Elements
Geographic Boundaries
The City of Kent will expend its distributions of the Local Option
Vehicle License Fee revenues and revenues from a City implemented
street Utility for transportation improvement uses within its
incorporated limits and within portions of unincorporated King
County described as follows:
Area 1:
Area 2:
An area having a westerly boundary at 100 feet
westerly of the westerly right-of-way line of
Orillia Road, a southerly boundary of s. 204th
Street, a northerly boundary at 200 feet
northerly of s. 200th Street northerly
right-of-way line and an easterly boundary of
the city corporate limits.
An area having a southerly boundary of what
would be an eastjwest projection of S.E. 287th
Street, a westerly boundary of the Burlington
Rail Road, an easterly boundary of S.E. 132nd
Avenue and a northerly boundary, a combination
of s.E. 256th street and the city of Kent's
corporate limits.
Adopted Transportation Plan
The city's Six Year Transportation Improvement Program is based
upon the City's Comprehensive Transportation Plan (adopted in
1984}. The Capital Improvement Program identified therein is
annually reviewed and amended to assure its currency with the
needs (capacity and safety) of the City's transportation system
and the City's financial capability.
The City's Transportation Plan includes the following elements:
(a) Policy Elements
(b) An Arterial Plan
(c) Policy Constraints, Performance Standards
(d) A capital Improvement Program
(e) A Financing and Implementation Report
The City's Comprehensive Transportation Plan establishes the
framework for public facility and service funding priorities by
stipulating that the first priority should be to maintain or
upgrade existing facilities and services where necessary to serve
existing development; financing improvements to serve new
development is a secondary priority. This policy is reflected in
:
Local Option Revenue Transportation Program Attachment B
the transportation program through the Public Works Department's
annual development of both the street maintenance and operation
budget and the street projects fund budget.
since the City has traditionally funded its street maintenance and
operation program out of its general fund revenues, its dedicated
street revenues such as the gas tax, vehicle registration fees,
street utility, etc. are used to help finance the City's Street
c.I.P. The City's street capital improvement program includes all
street related projects, whether maintenance or enhancement,
exceeding $100,000 in costs. The projects are prioritized by the
Public Works Department upon considering existing levels of
service and congestion, operational deficiencies, number of
accidents, system continuity and whether a project supports
adopted policies and plans. Maintenance of the existing
transportation system is, however, the Public Works Department's
first priority.
Each year, new projects are added to the six-year street CIP based
on their relative level of priority, as determined through the
Public Works Department's annual needs review of its
transportation system. The 1990 review served as the basis for
adding new improvement projects in developing the 1991-96 street
CIP.
In preparing the annual Transportation Needs Review the city's
Public Works Department provides adjacent cities and the county
with a list of its anticipated six-year project list for comments
and/or concurrence with any multijurisdictional projects. The
city's annual update of its six-year street program is completed
by June of each year and serves as a key tool in making the street
capital budgeting decisions for the coming year.
In recent years, the development of the city's six-year street CIP
has incorporated the multijurisdictional transportation planning
efforts of the proposed South County Area Transportation Benefit
District (SCATBD). This subregional planning effort has provided
the City a useful forum with which to work with King County,
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), Metro and
the cities of Auburn, Renton, Tukwila, Seatac and Des Moines per
identifying critical transportation improvement needs in the South
King County area.
The city's existing Transportation Priority Process, its annual
transportation review process, its street CIP budgeting policies,
and its participation in subregional transportation planning
- 2 -
;
Local Option Revenue Transportation Program Attachment B
forums {SCATBD) promote the statutory priorities for the use of
the local option transportation revenues, which are:
(1) Project serves a multijurisdictional function;
(2) Project necessitated by existing or reasonably
foreseeable congestion;
(3) Project has the greatest person-carrying capacity;
(4) Project is partially funded by other government
funds; and
(5) Any other criteria the local government deems
appropriate.
Coordination with Other Plans
The city of Kent's Transportation Plan (KTP) is the product of a
rigorous planning process, including continual coordination with
other local jurisdictions and regional planning agencies. A key
element of the KTP is the annual review of the city's Six-Year
Transportation Needs, which reflects an update of transportation
improvement needs based upon changing conditions. Integral tasks
in developing the City's Six-Year Capital Improvement Program
include public meetings, input from other local governments and
WSDOT, and joint planning efforts with other government agencies
on multijurisdictional projects.
The SCATBD forum mentioned above is an example of a coordinated
transportation planning effort, the results of which provide input
to the City's six-year street program. The City is involved in
other planning studies with individual government agencies on a
broad range of issues --from project specific corridor analyses
to regional programmatic actions.
six-Year Funding Plan
As noted earlier, the City's specific transportation program for
the use of the new Local Option Vehicle License Fee and the Street
Utility revenue is primarily reflected in the 1991-96
Transportation Improvement Program as adopted by City Council
Resolution 1251. Within that program said local option revenues
will be spent over the next six years on the following three
specific projects: 272nd/277th Corridor (Auburn Way North to
SR516), 196th/192nd Corridor (West Valley Highway to East Valley
Highway) and 200th/196th Corridor (Orillia Road to West Valley
Highway) .
A six-year funding plan identifying the specific public and
private revenue sources and amounts of revenue necessary to fund
these projects as well as a schedule for design, right-of-way
acquisition and construction therefor is summarized in Exhibit A.
- 3 -
Local Option Revenue Transportation Program Attachment B
Annual Review
The City will review its specific transportation program for local
option transportation revenues annually as part of the annual
transportation system planning and budgeting process.
Non-Diversion
None of either the City Local Option Vehicle License Fee revenues
or its Street Utility revenue will be used to replace, divert, or
loan any revenues historically used for transportation purposes to
nontransportation purposes.
Intergovernmental Cooperation
The City will continue to work cooperatively with WSDOT, Metro,
King County, adjacent cities and regional planning agencies to
coordinate transportation planning efforts on projects of regional
significance. once new inter-and intra-county planning agencies
are in place (as a result of regional governance reform and/or
efforts to replace the Puget Sound Council of Governments), the
city will work with the other jurisdictions to establish
appropriate mechanisms and practices to promote this planning and
coordination.
9520-340
- 4 -
272nd/277th Corridor
(Auburn Way N. to SR516)
196th/200th Corridor
(Orillia Rd. to WVH)
!96th Corridor
(WVH to EVH)
CORRIDOR FINANCIAL PLAN
EXPENDITURES
Corridor Improvements
Total
REVENUES
TIA (State Grants)
Local Improvement Districts
Gas Tax Increase
Vehicle Registration Fee
Councilmanic Bond Issue
Street Utility
Cash on Hand
Total
91
Total
Funded
42,802
42,802
13,967
14,137
1,606
1,932
3,000
5,360
2.800
42,802
EXHIBIT A
PROJECT SCHEDULE
92 ..... 93 ..... 94 ..... 95 •.... 96
ENG
RW
CONST
ENG
RW
CONST
ENG
RW
CONST
(Amounts in Thousands of 1991 Dollars)
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
450 5,340 8,908 15,346 10,204 2,554
450 5,340 8,908 15,346 10,204 2,554
1,454 2,964 5,251 3,561 737
3,928 6,878 3,331
309 315 321 327 334
161 340 347 354 362 368
1,470 1,530
1,030 1,050 1,072 1,093 1' 115
289 2.207 304
450 5.340 _8,9_08 15. 3_46 10. 2_04 2.554
J
t '~.._