Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
5615
ORDINANCE NO. 5 6 15 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO PLANNING; ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AND TEXT AMENDMENTS PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF R.C.W. CHAPTERS 36.70A AND 35A.63 OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON; DESIGNATING THESE AMENDMENTS AS GUIDELINES FOR EXERCISING THE CITY'S AUTHORITY UNDER THE WASHINGTON STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA); DIRECTING THAT THIS ORDINANCE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS IT ADOPTS AND APPROVES BE FILED WITH THE AUBURN CITY CLERK AND BE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION. WHEREAS, the City of Auburn on August 18, 1986 adopted a Comprehensive Plan by Resolution No. 1703 which includes Map establishing the location of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations throughout the City; and WHEREAS, the City of Auburn on April 17, 1995 adopted Comprehensive Plan amendments by Resolution No. 2635 to comply with the Washington State Growth Management Act; and WHEREAS, the City of Auburn on September 5, 1995 reaffirmed that action by Ordinance No. 4788; and WHEREAS, Draft Comprehensive Plan map and text amendments were prepared by the Planning Department as proposed revisions to the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan; and ------------------------ Ordinance No. 5615 November 27, 2001 Page 1 WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan map and text amendments were transmitted to the Auburn City Planning Commission in August 2001, September, 2001, and October, 2001; and WHEREAS, the environmental impacts of the Draft Comprehensive Plan text amendments were considered in accordance with procedures of the State Environmental Policy Act; and WHEREAS, prior to adoption the proposed amendments were transmitted to the Washington State Office of Community Development and other State agencies for the 60 day review period in accordance with RCW 36.70A.106; and WHEREAS, after proper notice published in the City's official newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to the date of hearing, the Auburn Planning Commission on October 2, 2001 conducted a public hearing on the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, at its October 2, 2001 public hearing, the Auburn City Planning Commission heard public testimony and took evidence and exhibits into consideration of said proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, thereafter the Auburn City Planning Commission recommended approval by the City Council of certain Draft Comprehensive ------------------------ Ordinance No. 5615 November 27, 2001 Page 2 Plan map and text amendments and denial of a certain Comprehensive Plan map amendment; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Community Development Committee of the Auburn City Council reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendations; and WHEREAS, within sixty (60) days from the receipt of the Auburn City Planning Commission recommendation for the proposed amendments the Auburn City Council on November 5, 2001 held a duly noticed public hearing and considered the proposed amendments as recommended by the Auburn City Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, on November 5, 2001 and December 3, 2001 the Auburn City Council further considered and voted on the proposed comprehensive plan amendments; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The 2001 Comprehensive Plan amendments are herewith adopted and approved and it is herewith directed that they be filed along with this Ordinance with the Auburn City Clerk and be available for public inspection. ------------------------ Ordinance No. 5615 November 27, 2001 Page 3 Section 2. The 2001 Comprehensive Plan amendments modify the Comprehensive Plan adopted on August 18, 1986 by Resolution 1703 and adopted by Ordinance No. 4788 on September 5, 1995. Section 3. The Comprehensive Plan and amendments is herewith designated as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority under the Washington State Environmental Policy Act by the City's responsible environmental official in accordance with R.C.W. 43.21C.060. Section 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance or any of the Comprehensive Plan amendments adopted herein, is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any Court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5. The Mayor is hereby authorized to implement such administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directions of this legislation to include incorporating into one document the adopted Comprehensive Plan map and text amendments, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and preparing and publishing the amended Comprehensive Plan. Section 6. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force five days from and after its passage, approval, and publication as provided by law. ------------------------ Ordinance No. 5615 November 27, 2001 Page 4 INTRODUCED: Decenber 3, 2001 PASSED: Decenber 3, 2001 APPROVED: December 3, 2001 act a, A' q3--- CHARLES A. BOOTH MAYOR ATTEST: •_ .. City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Z Michael J. Rey olds, City Attorney p(�,G`,c.c� 7 'Loo i ------------------------ Ordinance No. 5615 November 27, 2001 Page 5 EXHIBIT "A" Approved Year 2001 Comprehensive Plan Map (CPM) and Policy/Text (P/T) Amendments CPM #2 201h Court SE, "N" and "O" Court SE area (City -Initiated) To amend the Comprehensive Plan map from "High Density Residential" to "Single Family Residential" for properties generally located in the area of "O" Court SE, "N" Court SE, and 20th Court SE so that the comprehensive plan map reflects the single family uses in this area. . I1— ME ©© cc ©m eo 2p a OIYNNC JYNNNI NNN 1CIIR0. s v L� A a M� a 1 1 1• •I. INIYWLCS 1110 100. � I • • �� . •O4w z o�y " � s "/l ITTH 8T. 8E 1 � a n e Ia1• R \ ^ s • y� R \ P \ T. w r H SO Amend the Comprehensive Plan Map from « .• Y 'High Density Residential• to •Single " - - - Family Residential" xl • os 1 �•I-" ~ \ \ st w •• viii. ��° .:::aic : :: , � 20TH ST- SE • Y 00 .. ••.. �� SO Y 1• D N 1 '�• .: rw ••• q C Is FIONWW EUIL I 1CNOK F N 8T. oulliIIIIIIIIIIIII 11111111�1� r!• I z .. __. UT. 8E .. 2 1 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment #2 " N p ]a a1 '�—T 1� w l i N ! s 1 tl • Y • D • Y T w N tl�p •�• O e w p N a p N N w N M la 1 a �7/N • { �y l • • N N <i p N • N I z .. __. UT. 8E .. 2 1 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment #2 " N p ]a a1 '�—T 1� w uw N w Dq N N D D L w N M la 1 a a • { �y l • • NI N 6 p N • N I z .. __. UT. 8E .. 2 1 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment #2 " N p ]a a1 '�—T PIT #1 Amendment to Auburn North Business Area Plan (Applicant: Barghausen Engineers on behalf of Fred Meyer) Amend the Auburn North Business Area Plan to allow, for those properties zoned C- 3 (Heavy Commercial), retail gasoline dispensing facilities subject to performance standards. P/T #1 Applicant - Barghausen Engineers on behalf of Fred Meyer Auburn North Business Area Plan Amendment AN 1.7 Except as allowed by Policy AN 1.11service stations and automobile sales and/or leasing will not be permitted within the Planning Area. Automobile drive-in facilities (the person remains in the vehicle to conduct their business at a drive-in facility) shall only be permitted when clearly incidental and subordinate to pedestrian access to the building. The drive in facility shall be attached to the building which must be a minimum of 5,000 square feet in size and not interfere with pedestrian access. AN1.11 Retail gasoline dispensing facilities will be permitted in the C-3, Heavy Commercial zone subject to the following design criteria. These facilities are not intended to be the same as or allow for an automobile service station as defined by section 18.04.140 of the Zoning Code 1. The facility must be accessory to an existing retail/service establishment in which the priincipal tenant has .a minimum floor area of at least 25,000 square feet The principal tenant must own and/or manaae the facility. The facility must be located on the same parcel of property as the principal tenant and the property must be at least 100,000 square feet in area PIT #1 Auburn North Business Area Plan Amendment 2. The facility must be located on the property that provides the least amount of conflict to the pedestrian traffic 3. The facility must be located on and have direct access to an arterial using existina curb cuts and driveways whenever practical. If the curb cuts and driveways do not meet current city standards then they shall be brought up to such standards 4. The facility cannot interfere with the existing parking and/or traffic circulation on the property. There shall be enough room on the oropertv to allow for adeauate stacking space for vehicles waiting for fuel in order to avoid cars interfering with vehicles on the street. The facility cannot reduce the amount of parking required by the Zoning Code 5. The facility shall have a roof that covers all activities including the pay window, refuse containers fuel pumps and the adiacent oarkina area for the cars being fueled The area that is covered by the roof of the facility shall be no larger than 6,000 sauare feet. The number of pumps shall be limited to five (5) such that no more than ten f 10 vehicles may be fueled at any one time. 6. Columns or similar architectural features shall be provided that screen the visibility of the pump islands as well as give the visible impression of enclosing the structure If necessary, provisions must be made to avoid a safety issue of PIT n1 2 Auburn North Business Area Plan Amendment enclosing any fumes associated with the fueling of the vehicles The overall height of the facility shall not exceed twenty (20) feet. 7. The design, architectural treatment and streetscape features of the facility must provide design continuity between the facility and primary structure 8. A five (5) foot width of Type III landscaping shall be provided alona the street frontage(s) that the facility is oriented to. 9. Any other products for sale shall only be displayed within the building containing the pay window and any such products shall be incidental to automobile care/maintenance or snacks and beverages. No sales of alcoholic beverages will be allowed. 10. Signs shall be limited to permanent wall signs only and health, safety and operational signs as required by local state or federal law. PR #1 3 Auburn North Business Area Plan Amendment P/T #2 Kent School District No. 415; Capital Facilities Plan Years 2001-2002 to 2006-2007 Incorporate Kent School District's updated Capital Facilities Plan into the City's Comprehensive Plan. PLAN 2001-2002 - 2006-2007 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 Serving Unincorporated King County Kent, Covington, Aubum, Black Diamond, Renton, SeaTac, Washington APRIL 2001 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 12033 SE 25e Street Kent, Washington 98031-6643 (253) 373-7000 SIX-YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2001-2002 - 2006-2007 April 2001 BOARD of DIRECTORS Bill Boyce Sandra Collins Scott Floyd Mike Jensen Linda Petersen ADMINISTRATION Barbara Grohe, Ph.D. Superintendent Daniel L. Moberly Assistant Superintendent of Business Services Fred H. High Executive Director of Finance Margaret A. Whitney Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources & Special Services Carla Jackson Executive Director for School Improvement of Kent -Meridian Strand Gwen Dupree Executive Director for School Improvement of Kentlake Strand Mem Rieger Executive Director for School Improvement of Kentridge Strand Janis McBrayer Executive Director for School Improvement of Kentwood Strand Gary Plano Executive Director of Curriculum & Instructional Services Valerie Lynch, Ed.D. Executive Director of Special Services Donald Hall Executive Director of Information Technology Keil School Diatrkt Six -Yew Capita Faali ies Plan April 2001 Kent School District No. 415 Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan 2001-2002 - 2006-2007 April 2001 For information on the Plan, please call the Finance & Planning Department at (253) 373-7295. Capital Facilities Plan Contributing Staff Gwenn Escher-Derdowski, Planning Administrator Joe Zimmer, Finance Department Bonnie Catton, Transportation Department Clint Marsh, Director of Facilities & Construction Karla Wilkerson, Facilities Department Ked Scholl DMkt Six Yew COPIW FwAln Pim Apil 2001 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 SIX-YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN TABLE of CONTENTS Section Page Number I Executive Summary 2 11 Six -Year Enrollment Projection 4 III Current District "Standard of Service" 8 I V Inventory and Capacity of Existing Schools 12 V Six -Year Planning and Construction Plan 15 V I Relocatable Classrooms 18 VII Projected Classroom Capacity 20 VIII Finance Plan, Cost Basis and Impact Fee Schedules 25 I X Appendixes 31 Kent School DMict Sbc-Yew Cep1W FacARba Plan Aprl 2007 Page t I Executive Summary This Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") has been prepared by the Kent School District (the "District") as the District's facilities planning document, in compliance with the requirements of Washington's Growth Management Act, King County Code KC.C. 21A.43 and Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn and Black Diamond. This annual plan update was prepared using data available in the spring of 2001 for the 2000-2001 school year. This Plan is consistent with prior long-term capital facilities plans adopted by the Kent School District. This Plan is not intended to be the sole planning document for all of the District's needs. The District may prepare interim and periodic Long Range Capital Facilities Plans consistent with Board Policies, taking into account a longer or shorter time period, other factors and trends in the use of facilities, and other needs of the District as may be required. Prior Capital Facilities Plans of the Kent School District have been adopted by Metropolitan King County Council and Cities of Kent, Covington and Auburn and included in the Capital Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive Plans of each jurisdiction. The first ordinance implementing impact fees for the unincorporated areas was effective September 15, 1993. This Plan update has also been submitted to Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn, Black Diamond, SeaTac, and Renton. A financing plan is included in Section V I I I which demonstrates the District's ability to implement this Plan. This Capital Facilities Plan establishes the District's "standard of service" in order to ascertain the District's current and future capacity. While the State Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes square footage guidelines for capacity, those guidelines do not account for the local program needs in the District. The Growth Management Act, King County and City codes and ordinances authorize the District to make adjustments to the standard of service based on specific needs of the District. Beginning in 1998, the District standard provides for class size reduction for grades K - 3 from 1:26 to 1:22 students, and grade 4 from 1:26 to 1:25. The District's standard Gass size for grades 5 - 9 should not exceed 29 students, and class size for grades 10 - 12 should not exceed 31 students. These standards are currently under review by the Board and community pending implementation of voter -approved Student Achievement Initiative 728. (sees lion Til for mom specific info~ ion.) Kent Sdpal District Sbt-Yew Capital FacOn Plan April 2007 Pop 2 Executive Summary (CW&ANO The capacities of the schools in the District are calculated based on this standard of service and the existing inventory, which includes some relocatable classrooms. The District's 2000.2001 program capacity of permanent facilities is 25,314 which reflects program changes and the reduction of class size in grades K - 4. Relocatables provide additional transitional capacity until permanent facilities are completed. Kent School District is the fourth largest district in the state. The actual number of individual students per the October 2000, head count was 26,543. Full Time Equivalent (FTE) enrollment for this same period was 25,237.88 (Kindergarten at .5 and excluding Early Childhood Education [ECE] and Running Start students). The District's standard of service, enrollment history and projections, and use of transitional facilities were among subjects studied by the Citizens' Concurrency Task Force. The Final Report of the Concurrency Task Force was approved by the Board of Directors on March 10, 1993. Findings and recommendations of the Concurrency Task Force are discussed further in Section I I I of this Plan. Our plan is to continue to satisfy concurrency requirements through the transitional use of relocatables as recommended by the Citizens' Concurrency Task Force. The Concurrency Task Force reaffirmed that, as has been the practice and philosophy of the Kent School District, portables are NOT acceptable as permanent facilities. Portables, or, using the more accurate but interchangeable term, "relocatables" may be used as interim or transitional facilities: To prevent overbuilding or overcrowding of permanent school facilities. 2. To cover the gap between the time of demand for increased capacity and completion of permanent school facilities to meet that demand. 3. To meet unique program requirements. Use of relocatable and transitional capacity and specific recommendations by the Concurrency Task Force are further discussed in Section V I of this Plan. Pursuant to the requirements of the Growth Management Act, this Plan will be updated annually, with changes in the fee schedules adjusted accordingly. Kat SdmW Dbhbt SIK YW CeP W FacAMbs PM Apri 2001 Peps 3 I I Six - Year Enrollment Projection For capital facilities planning, growth projections are based on student yield from documented residential construction projected over the next six years. (See Table 2) The student generation factor, as defined on the next page, is the basis for the growth projections from new developments. King County live births and the District's relational percentage average were used to determine the number of kindergartners entering the system. (see Tawe 1) Based on the percentage for 2000, 8.25% of King County live births, together with proportional growth from new construction, is equivalent to the number of students projected to enter kindergarten in the district for the next six-year period. (See Table 2) Early Childhood Education students (sometimes identified as °Preschool Special Education ISE] or handicapped') are calculated and reported separately on a .5 FTE basis. The first grade population is traditionally 7 - 8% larger than the kindergarten population due to growth and transfers to the District from private kindergartens. Near term projections assume some growth from new developments to be offset by current local economic conditions. With a few notable exceptions, the expectation is that enrollment increases will occur District -wide in the long term. District projections are based on historical growth patterns combined with continuing development of projects in the pipeline dependent on market and growth conditions. The District will continue to track new development activity to determine impact to schools and monitor conditions to reflect adjustments in this assumption. The six-year enrollment projection anticipates moderate enrollment growth from new development currently in some phase of planning or construction in the district. Information on new residential developments and the completion of these proposed developments in all jurisdictions may be considered in the District's future analysis of growth projections. Within practical limits, the District has kept abreast of proposed developments. The Kent SchoolDistrict serves six permitting jurisdictions: unincorporated King County, the cities of Kent, Covington, and Auburn. The west Lake Sawyer area has been annexed to the City of Black Diamond and Kent Leaming Center is located in the small portion of the City of SeaTac served by Kent School District. Kent School DbU{ct Sk-Year capital Facilities Plan April 2001 Page 4 11 Six - Year Enrollment Projection cc«ithx«td) STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR "Student Factor" is defined by code as "the number derived by a school district to describe how many students of each grade span are expected to be generated by a dwelling unit' based on district records of average actual student generated rates for developments completed within the last five years. Following these guidelines, the student generation factor for Kent School District is as follows: Single Family Elementary .504 Junior High .211 Senior High .183 Total .898 Multi -Family Elementary .273 Junior High .114 Senior High .076 Total .463 The student generation factor is based on a survey of 3,352 single family dwelling units and 2,262 multi -family dwelling units with no adjustment for occupancy. Please refer to Appendix E on Page 34 for details of the Student Generation Factor survey. The actual number of students in those residential developments was determined using the Districts Education Logistics (EDULOG) Transportation System. In 3,352 single family dwelling units there were 1,691 elementary students, 707 junior high students, and 612 senior high students for a total of 3,010 students. In 2,262 multi -family dwelling units, there were 617 elementary students, 257 junior high students, and 173 senior high students, for a total of 1,047 students. Ked Sdwd DWW Sk-Year Capital FacANks Plan April 2001 Page 5 7, h.l G: r N y�j N Op O OD r r O N N O N 8 r N Orn O N m N N tcm O N Cl) N N � O N Cl) N N P. r N V* O r (D V r N d, A N N a0 WaR N yD ■pa m aWO 0 n O N r r C%l NC� N N M N N r N a0 O O N co r N N O N O OD .- a00 h Or N D r Cl)N M eD N Op OD r {.ap- O N c N sr N N O N (C% O N O^D r Q W r r m r O N m N ED x� to to r co C O N 0 �- N 0 N 0 N 0 0 fV W a r .rp a W r m r A r N n r Cb h coNp N N Op r N r N 440 0 N O N r �N aD 0 r N 0 trV O 0 r ('9 0 r r 0 r vOi OD r CD r W q* co N o N 0 r CD Op n Of r n 0 r r 0 N h 0 �" r 0 N N W Grpp 0 OD r N 0 r M r N 000_ r co rrp P m ��.. V r R N N r � ph ED (O N Op Op■ OD r �ap0 CO r 0 r �Np OD r M r Or W 00 r 0 r aOa Q r coM O r O OD r OMD CD r e9 N r W M r N f� r N O m n N N0 aR p {00 cm r O c N r OD r 000 at r O at r h to r m at r S a0: r 0 h r G P� r N r 0 �p t�f r r r O N r r O OD N !V Oj N Q r N O N W 0 r h 0 r O 0 r r Q r OND OD r a0 r P n r O m r t�pp (O r O V r M N r C N N M N Y Hi M 0 iR r N W ■D N A�p aD m O N�p as M r: N r: N b r CD aN0 +f O f �N�pp N co � N Op N N P, N WOp `o�p 0 O r r r r r n r r r m r N m r �fI Y 0 Y Grp 1'7 r N N N O r 0 'W N (+1 W 46 OD Op r N r r OrD r � n r e0) r 0) r N r OOD Oppp OD Grpp N N r co 0 N r O r A N CMC0 W r 0 CD r f: r m m r O V) of r rpo N r 40 Y e: O Y COO CO ��p 1+/ V) r ��p N O v pp V �- r N �% M M � r D m N 9 M 46 Y 0 r N r h r r VJ r M r 1(1 (V r M r r M r r r f�V_ r M O t00 O COO O r N M a N 0 O` OD 0 Or ' N 10 m CD CD CD CD CD m m m m m CD C7 C7 (� C7 C7 C9 C7 C7 (7 0 0 0 r N m a King County Live Births' Increase / Decrease Kindergarten/ Birth % ' KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 SIX-YEAR FTE ENROLLMENT PROJECTION 21,817 21,573 21,646 22,212 21,929 21,750 21,825 ' -155 -244 73 566 -283 -179 75 8.25% 825% 8.25% 825% 8.25% 8.25% 825% ' E" Chk1hood Educsam 0.5 62 67 77 78 79 80 61 ' Kindergarten FTE C.5 900 890 930 952 939 938 937 Grade 1 2,068 1,966 1,888 1,970 2,015 1,987 1,984 Grade 2 2,015 2,114 2,039 1,959 2,041 2,086 2,057 Grade 3 2,098 2,047 2,171 2,094 2,013 2,094 2,139 Grade 4 2,086 2,105 2,085 2,208 2,130 2,048 2,128 Grade 5 2,251 2,117 2,168 2,147 2,270 2,191 2,107 Grade 6 2,056 2,241 2,157 2,207 2,185 2,307 2,227 Grade 7 2,208 2,121 2,333 2,245 2,295 2,272 2,397 Grade 8 2,033 2,144 2,099 2,307 2,219 2,268 2,244 Grade 9 2208 2219 2,357 2,306 2,533 2,436 2,488 Grade 10 2,113 2,118 2,177 2,311 2,260 2,481 2,385 Grade 11 1,770 1,779 1,850 1,900 2,015 1,970 2,161 Grade 12 1,432 1,477 1,566 1,627 1,670 1,769 1,729 Total FTE Enrollment 25,300 25,405 25,697 26,311 26,664 26,927 27,064 e Y:] Yearly Increase 197 105 492 414 353 263 137 Yearly Increase % 0.80"/0 0.42% 1.94% 1.60% 1.34% 0.99% 0.51% Cumulative Increase 197 302 794 1,208 1,561 1,824 1,961 ' Klndsrgwtan projection basad on Kro County actual We birth percargage and proportional W&Alh from new oonstructbn. ' IOndayartan FTE arraarsxt projection at .s la calculated by us'rg the Disaicra percer Age of King County We births 5 years earlier compared to actual Idridergenen erroarm t in the previous year. (ECE - Early Childhood Education) ' KWXIK9 ten projection Is st .5 FTE although many schools have Ful Day Kudergeden at 1.0 FTE with alternebm f rdbq 4 Oct. 2000 P223 Hmico rt la 26,277. Full shrderd headcamt indudag 123 Preschool 8 311 Running Start - 26,543. G J E C T 1 O N S - For facilities planning purposes, this six-year enrollment projection anticipates moderate enrolment growth from new development currently in some phase of planning or construction in the district. Kent School DWM S& -Year Capital FacUklm Plan Table 2 April 201 Pape 7 III Current Kent School District "Standard of Service" In order to determine the capacity of the District's facilities, the King County Code refers to a "standard of service" that each school district must establish in order to ascertain its overall capacity. The standard of service identifies the program year, the class size, the number of classrooms, students and programs of special need, and other factors determined by the District which would, in the District's judgment, best serve its student population. This Plan includes the standard of service as established by Kent School District. Relocatables included in the capacity calculation use the same standard of service as the permanent facilities. (see Appendix A, e & c) The standard of service defined herein may continue to change in the future. Beginning in 1998, the District's standard class size for grades K - 3 was reduced from 26 to 22 and grade 4 to 1:25. Kent School District is continuing a long-term strategic planning process combined with review of changes to capacity to meet the requirements of Student Achievement Initiative 728. This process will affect various aspects of the District's "standard of service" and future changes will be reflected in future capital facilities plans. Current Standards of Service for Elementary Students Class size for grades K - 3 should not exceed 22 students. Class size for grade 4 should not exceed 25 students. Class size for grades 5 - 6 should not exceed 29 students. Program capacity for regular education classrooms is calculated at an average of 25 students per classroom because there are five grade levels at K - 4 and fluctuations between primary and intermediate grade levels (i.e. third/fourth or fourth/fifth grade split classes, etc.). Students may be provided music instruction and physical education in a separate classroom or facility. Students may have scheduled time in a special computer lab. Special Education for students with disabilities may be provided in a self- contained classroom with a capacity of 10-15 depending on the program. Kant School District Sbc Yew Capital Facrilies Plan AM 2007 Paps 8 III Current Kent School District "Standard of Service" cid) Identified students will also be provided other educational opportunities in classrooms for programs designated as follows: English As a Second Language (ESL) Self-contained Special Education Programs Integrated Programs & Resource Rooms (for special remedial assistance) Education for Disadvantaged Students (Title I) Gifted Education Other Remediation Programs Leaming Assisted Program (LAP) School Adjustment Programs for severely behavior -disordered students Hearing Impaired Mild, Moderate and Severe Developmental Disabilities Developmental Kindergarten Early Childhood Education (3-4 yr. old preschool handicapped students) Some of the above special programs require specialized classroom space, as well as music and physical education classrooms, computer labs, etc.; thus, the permanent capacity of some of the buildings housing these programs is reduced. Some students, for example, leave their regular classroom for a short period of time to receive instruction in these special programs and space must be allocated to serve these programs. Some newer buildings have been constructed to accommodate most of these programs; some older buildings have been modified, and in some circumstances, these modifications reduce the classroom capacity of the buildings. When programs change, program capacity fluctuates and is updated annually to reflect the change in program and capacity. Current Standards of Service for Secondary Students The standards of service outlined below reflect only those programs and educational opportunities provided to secondary students which directly affect the capacity of the school buildings. These are subject to change pending review for Student Achievement Initiative 728. Class size for grades 7 - 9 should not exceed 29 students. Class size for grades 10 -12 should not exceed 31 students. Special Education for students with disabilities may be provided in a self- contained classroom with a capacity of 10-15 depending on the program. Kent School DWWd Sit -Year Caput Facilities Plan AM 2001 Paye 9 III Current Kent School District "Standard of Service" () Identified students will also be provided other education opportunities in classrooms for programs designated as follows: Computer Labs English As a Second Language (ESL) Integrated Programs & Resource Rooms (for special remedial assistance) Preschool and Daycare Honors (Gifted) and Advanced Placement Programs Basic Skills Programs Traffic Safety Education JROTC - Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps Variety of Technical & Applied Programs (Vocational Education) i.e. Home & Family Life (Cooking, Sewing, Child Development, etc.) Business Education (Keyboarding, Accounting, Business Law, Sales & Marketing, etc.) Woods, Metals, Welding, Electronics, Manufacturing Technology, Auto Shop, Commercial Foods, Commercial Art, Drafting & Drawing, Electronics, Careers, etc. Many of these programs and others require specialized classroom space which can reduce the permanent capacity of the school buildings. In addition, an alternative home school assistance, choice and transition program is provided for students in grades 3-12 at Kent Learning Center. Soave or Classroom Utilization As a result of scheduling conflicts for student programs, the need for specialized rooms for certain programs, and the need for teachers to have a work space during their planning periods, it is not possible to achieve 100% utilization of regular teaching stations. Based on the analysis of actual utilization of classrooms, the District has concluded that the standard utilization rate is 95% for elementary schools and 85% for secondary schools. In the future, the District will continue close analysis of actual utilization. Kent School District Citizens' Concurrency Task Force The Kent School District Board of Directors appointed a Citizens' Concurrency Task Force, made up of a cross section of the community, to assist in defining the District's Standard of Service. To accomplish this task, the Task Force was directed to study Kent School District enrollment history and projections, demographics and planned new developments, land availability for new schools, facility capacities and plans, frequency of boundary changes, and portable (relocatable) vs. permanent facility issues. A meeting for public input was conducted and the Final Report of the Citizens' Concurrency Task Force was approved by the Board of Directors on March 10, 1993. () Kent School District Six -Yew CapRal Fackles Plan April 2001 Page 10 III Current Kent School District "Standard of Service" (oortrMM The Final Report of the Citizens' Concurrency Task Force included Findings and Recommendations and provision for the following long term goals: A Seek to reduce classroom utilization rates to allow more flexibility on the building level. B. Seek to lower average class size from that established for the 1992-93 school year. C. Seek to minimize boundary changes. D. Ensure that new permanent facilities are designed to accommodate portables: 1) to resolve current quality concerns 2) to provide for sites for portables to meet increased demand. E. Pursue modernization of current permanent facilities to resolve current quality concerns and to provide for additional sites for portables to meet increased demand. F. Pursue modernization or replacement of current portables to resolve quality concerns. G. Ensure that new portables meet current concerns of quality. H. Ensure that all sites for portables be modernized and utilities be installed to meet quality concerns. I. The quality of facilities, when using relocatable facilities, is a major concern of citizens of the Kent School District. Use of relocatable and transitional capacity as well as more specific concerns and recommendations by the Task Force are further discussed in Section V I of this Plan. The Task Force also states that it has reviewed and accepted the explanation of methodology and the conclusions reached in the enrollment Forecasting System report and recommends that methodology not be changed without Board approval. Keit Scholl DWW Sbc Year Capital FWWJn Plan Aprl 2001 Page 11 IV Inventory and Capacity of Existing Schools Currently, the District has permanent program capacity to house 25,314 students based on the District's Standard of Service as set forth in Section I 11. Included in this Plan is an inventory of the Districts schools by type, address and current capacity. (See Table 3 on Page 13) The program capacity is periodically updated for changes in programs and the addition of new schools. It also reflects the reduction in class size from 26 to 22 in grades K - 3 and 1:25 for grade 4. which was implemented in 1998. The class size reduction received voter approval in the Educational Programs and Operations Levy to continue through 2002. The District is currently reviewing recommendations to meet the requirements of Student Achievement Initiative 728. Since 1997, Kent Learning Center has served grades 3 through 12 with transition, choice and home school assistance programs. It is located in the former Grandview School in the western part of the District in the city of SeaTac. This school was designed and is currently configured as an elementary school. Calculation of Elementary, Junior High and Senior High School capacities are set forth in Appendices A, B and C on pages 30 and 31. A map of existing schools is included on Page 14. Keit School Disirld Six -Year Capital Facilltlea Plan April 2001 Page U KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 INVENTORY and CAPACITY of EXISTING SCHOOLS YM 2000-2001 Program Cardpe Cred Erwtary 1990 CC 19236 -140th Avenue SE, Renton 98056 485 Cedar vaMyElementary 1971 CV 26500Twnh«aneWay SE. Coukow 90M2 437 Cowman Elementary 1961 CO 17070 SE Ww Rued, Cwxgwn 98W 519 Creetwood Eamenmry, 1960 CW 25225 -160th Avenue SE. Cawmion 96042 451 Der"EMmenWy 1992 DE 11310SE248M9tree, Ked 99031 450 End NO Elementary 1953 EH 9925 S 240th Street, Ked 91131 437 Erwaid Park 1909 EP 11000 SE 216th Street. Ked 90031 475 FAvowd Elementary 1999 FW IMM -148th Avemr SE, Renton 98058 442 Gderaidw Elea dry 1996 GR 19406 -1201h Avenue SE, Radon 980611 461 GreeLaksElm m6my 1971 GL 26700-191stPaoe SE, Ked 90M 470 Harive Ern«wry, 1990 HE 27641 -144th Ayer SE. Ked 96M2 432 Jerddm Creek Elementary 1967 JC 26915 -186th Avemre SE, Cortrgan 9WQ 447 Ked Errrrrlry 1999 KE 24700 - S4M Austere South. Ked 98032 456 Lahe Youngs Elementary 1965 LY IBM -142nd Avenue SE, KSd 98042 570 Menlo Screw Eammwy 1967 MS 12711 SE 218th Street, Kent 0=1 476 Meadow Rides Eanrnmry 1994 MR 27710 -100th Austere SE, Ked 96031 451 1 - M Eanweary 1939 IE 25621 -140th Avenue SE, Ked 9BM2 580 Miller -*A Elementary 2000 ML 11919 SE 270thShred, Ked 98031 461 Nsey,Oldsn ElenrMry 1990 NO 8300 South 238th Street. Ked 98032 437 Pwihw Lett Errwdry 1936 PL 20831 -108M Awmue SE Ked 96031 380 Park Crowd Eanredry 1963 PO 11010 SE 232nd Street, Ked 95MI 404 Pkr Troy Element" 1997 PT 27825 -118M Avenue SE, Kat 98MI 499 Ridwwood Elen-Awy 1987 RW 16030 -162nd Pace SE. Redac 96056 523 Sawyr Waods Elumew" 1904 SW 31135 -226th Avenue SE Keel 96M2 499 Sortie HE Elm wdry 1980 SH 28025 Wooded Way South, Ked 98031 437 Soos Creek Earrwdary 1971 SC 12651 SE 218th Paw, Kent 96031 400 Sprap8rook ENrwdary 1900 Sit 20035 -100th Avenue SE, Krd 90131 423 Sunrise Flowery 1992 SR 223W -132nd Averse SE. Ked all= 506 Elarwdey TOTAL 13.181 Carter Hdyas Jrdr High 1993 CH 19640 SE 272 Street. Cowman 98012 955 Ked MAN High 1952 KJ 620 North Cednl Avner. Ked 98031 623 Medium Jrdr High 1961 MA 164M SE 251st Slr d. Cadrom 96642 615 Maekr Judo High 1970 MIC 12600 SE 192nd SlreedRedw 90966 909 Mwldan Jmsdr High 1960 MU 234M -120th Avenue SE, Kw 96931 764 Nodtmwd Junior No 1906 NW 17007 SE 1641h Skeet. Iterate 96666 951 Sequoia Jurdor No Judo High TOTAL Ked#addlsn Ssrdr High "Mehs Sadr Hipp School Kenhictr Ssdar High KWOMW Ssdor High Senlor NO TOTAL Ked Lerrim Crdr (GrrdNW4 2 DISTRICT TOTAL 1956 SJ 11000 SE 264th Strad, Ked NMI 1951 KM 10020 SE 25811h Served. Ked NMI 1997 KL 21401 SE 300th Street, Ked 98042 1980 KR 12430 SE 208th Skw. Ked 98031 1961 KW 25600 -164th Am musSE, Cainpbn 98042 1985 LC 22420 Mary Road. Dn Makro 98196 r Changes to wpadty, reseed program dwmes and wnWresd redudan In K-3 can aim from M to 22. 2 Ked LwnhV Center serves grades 3 -12. The building; was fonrwy kwvr as Grandview Ele entory. an 6,043 1,427 1,632 1,311 1,301 5,671 416 Kerb School Dk Md Six Yew Capita Fe lks Pan Table 3 Apt 2001 paw 13 LO �, N o° Z y O c U c o v E m a YY >p y Y oQ�0 m o my°Ow- o���om p NG y y Y � I Kent School District Six Yew CaPM FaNiUas Plan Page 14 N V) m y y y 0 p NG y y C U L _ = E E `o 0 0 W C C J N 1` V Y Page 14 V The District's Six -Year Planning and Construction Plan At the time of preparation of this Plan in spring of 2001, the following projects are recently completed or in the planning phase in the District: • Millennium Elementary #30 opened in the fall of 2000. It is in the city of Kent at 11919 SE 27e Street. • Construction funding for Elementary #31 and Junior High #8 did not receive voter approval. A Citizens' Facilities Planning Committee will review recommendations for capital construction needs, potentially to be presented for future voter approval. • Junior High #8 was previously planned to fill future needs for grades 7 through 9. The Board authorized purchase of a site for this school east of 124 Avenue SE at SE 28e Street. That site was determined not to be feasible and the property is for sale. • A new site has been purchased at 15435 SE 2560' Street in Covington, but timing, size, and grade level configuration will be reviewed by the citizens' committee. Other potential future sites and facilities are listed in Table 4 and shown on the site map on page 17. • Some funding is secured for purchase of additional portables as needed. The sites have not been determined. Each of the elementary schools has capacity planned for approximately 540 students each, depending on placement of special programs. Junior high schools are planned for a program capacity of approximately 1,065 students and Kentlake Senior High (#4) has a current program capacity of 1,632. County and city planners, decision -makers and school districts are encouraged to consider safe walking conditions for all students when reviewing applications and design plans for new roads and developments. This should include sidewalks for pedestrian safety, pull-outs and tum-arounds for school buses. Included in this Plan is an inventory of potential projects and sites identified by the District which are potentially acceptable site alternatives in the future. (s•• Tabs I) The voter approved 1990 Bond Issue for $105.4 million included funding for the purchase of eleven sites for some of these and future schools, and the sites acquired to date are included in this Plan. Funding is secured for purchase of additional sites. Not all undeveloped properties meet current school construction requirements and some property may be traded or sold to meet future facility needs. Based on voter approval of $130 million in construction funding in February 1994, Millennium Elementary #30 is the last school to be constructed that has received voter approval. At the time of preparation of this Plan in the spring of 2001, input is being collected from the community as to the best use of Student Achievement Initiative 728 funds. Since most of I-728 funds focus on reduced class size and extended learning opportunities, Board decisions could dramatically alter class size and school capacity. Because of the timing of this report, those decisions will be reflected in the next update of the Capital Facilities Plan. Kant SdW DWrIU Sb( Year capital FacWiee Plan AqA 2001 Paye 15 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 Projects Planned, Under Construction, or Providing Additional Capacity Site Acquisitions included SCHOOL/ Compkdan I Program I naw Data CtDtdN Growth ELEMENTARY m webws assigned tofuwm whoas may mit eonaw@ we, mwr w of awswg sclm&) EWrwtwy/ 31 (Udundsd)' To be dderni ed t JUNIOR HIGH JunW High • S (Unturnded)' To be ddanakred 2 SENIOR HIGH Kw*Wm Senior High opened In 1907 and continues to provide capacity. TEMPORARY FACILITIES Relecatables For pMcwmt as needed SUPPORT FACILITIES Satellite Bus Facility (Unhanded)' To be ddemiined OTHER SITES ACQUIRED CwAroon erea (New Mdam JH) Cowoon area (S) Cavkgtm area Wed (Hdsaan) Ham Lab ane (Pollard) HorsaehowVmwles Lala area (Wed) Shady lake area (Sowers, etc.) So. King Co. Activity Cuter (Nkae eke) New pWainp TBD' Now PWaig TBD2 NOW SE 251 S 164 SE, CoWn0m 99042 SE 290 S 156 SE, Kant 96042 15435 SE 256 Street, Covkgtonn 98042 16820 SE 240, Ken 96042 SE 332 8 204 SE, Kut 98D42 17425 SE 192 Street, RSMon 98086 SE 167 S 170 SE, Renton 98058 540 75% 1,065 75% Addklmd Ce Plennkg 20D1 + n -m ewh 109% PWWrg TBD' N/A Charge: R wAoua Junior High I8 site SE 2869n Strad S 124th Ave. SE, Kent Site was /atwn*wd to be'unbui1dabis' for a junior high and property is now for sale. Notes: ' Unhanded hcAy meads are pending Wow. 2 TBD -To be ddanrined - Some she ere scgtrsd but pWm.m "ardor oanepustion have not bean determined. Kut School District Sbn-Yew Capital Facilities Pan Table 4 " 2001 Paye 16 80 Land Uss Type Juds EWmwdwy City ofCovkgton EWnentary King Coady TBD 2 City or Co*om Elenwtary KkV County Junior High Kiril County EWrwtary ng Cc" TBD' tong CM* Notes: ' Unhanded hcAy meads are pending Wow. 2 TBD -To be ddanrined - Some she ere scgtrsd but pWm.m "ardor oanepustion have not bean determined. Kut School District Sbn-Yew Capital Facilities Pan Table 4 " 2001 Paye 16 to 1LNr .......... rz I TL fit - f KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 0. 415 Li.rarer. air Sites Acquired or Under Construction 8 a Senior High site syr r J a Junior High site E a Elementary site X a Support Facility site 216 MV sours: MV County ftnnft & C*ffonu* DrnbVr*m DMWm SEE 6ftW=dW by Kat ScW DIEM I a Kent School OMM Sbt-Year CapRW Fad ffim Plan Pap 17 411 S� to 1LNr .......... rz I TL fit - f KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 0. 415 Li.rarer. air Sites Acquired or Under Construction 8 a Senior High site syr r J a Junior High site E a Elementary site X a Support Facility site 216 MV sours: MV County ftnnft & C*ffonu* DrnbVr*m DMWm SEE 6ftW=dW by Kat ScW DIEM I a Kent School OMM Sbt-Year CapRW Fad ffim Plan Pap 17 VI Relocatable Classrooms Currently, the District utilizes 158 total relocatables. Of this total, 87 are utilized to house students in excess of permanent capacity, 63 are used for program purposes at school locations, and eight for other purposes. (see Appendices A e c o) Based on enrollment projections and funded permanent facilities, the District anticipates the need to purchase some relocatables during the next six-year period. In the Final Report approved by the Board of Directors on March 10, 1993, the Kent School District Citizens' Concurrency Task Force reaffirmed that, as has been the practice and philosophy of the Kent School District, portables (or "relocatables") are NOT acceptable as permanent facilities. In addition to the Findings and Recommendations regarding portables listed in Section I I L "Standard of Service," the Task Force also listed some specific concerns in regard to use of portables as interim or transitional capacity: I. The quality of facilities, when using relocatable facilities, is a major concern of citizens of the Kent School District. [And,) that the Kent School District should consider the following factors and priorities when using, purchasing and modernizing portables: A. HIGHEST CONCERNS 1. Adequate heat 2. Portable covered walkways, where practical 3. Adequate ventilation 4. Fire Safety B. MODERATE CONCERNS 1. Adequate air conditioning 2. Security 3. Intercoms / Communication 4. Restroom facilities 5. Storage facilities 6. Crowding / Gass size 7. Noise 8. Availability of equipment (i.e. projectors, etc.) 9. Lack of water (use bottled water/portable tanks for drain) Kent School DIWkt Sbc Year CapRW Fadlkks Plan April 2001 Page 18 VI Relocatable Classrooms (ued) For the purpose of clarification, the term "portables" and the more descriptively accurate term, "relocatables" are used interchangeably in this Plan as well as in the Concurrency Task Force Report. The reports also reference use of portables or relocatables as interim or transitional capacitytfacilities. During the time period covered by this Plan, the District does not anticipate that all of the District's relocatables will be replaced by permanent facilities. During the useful fife of some of the relocatables, the school-age population may decline in some communities and increase in others, and these relocatables provide the flexibility to accommodate the immediate needs of the community. Although the Citizens' Concurrency Task Force has reaffirmed that portables are not acceptable as permanent facilities, they did recommend that portables, or relocatables, may be used as interim or transitional facilities: 1. To prevent overbuilding or overcrowding of permanent school facilities. 2. To cover the gap between the time of demand for increased capacity and completion of permanent school facilities to meet that demand. 3. To meet unique program requirements. Portables, or relocatables, currently in use will be evaluated resulting in some being improved and some replaced. Quality concerns will be among those addressed by the next Citizens' Facilities Planning Committee in review of capital facilities needs for the next bond issue. The Plan projects that the District will use relocatables to accommodate interim housing needs for the next six years and beyond. The use of relocatables, their impacts on permanent facilities, life cycle and operational costs, and the interrelationship between relocatables, emerging technologies and educational restructuring will continue to be be examined. Kent School DMMd Sk-Year Capita FacANks Plan April 2001 Page 19 VII Projected Six -Year Classroom Capacities As stated in Section I V, the program capacity study is periodically updated for changes in special programs and reflects class size reduction in Grades K - 4. As shown in the Inventory and Capacity chart in Table 3 on Page 13, the program capacity is also reflected in the capacity and enrollment comparison charts. (Sao Tablas 5 d 5 A -8-C m papas 21-24) Enrollment is reported to OSPI on Form P-223 on a monthly basis and funding apportionment is based on Annual Average FTE (AAFTE). The first school day of October is set by OSPI as the enrollment count date for the year. Full Time Equivalent (FTE) student enrollment for October 2, 2000 was 25,237.88 with kindergarten students counted at .5 and excluding Early Childhood Education students (ECE - preschool special education) and College -only Running Start FTEs. (Sas ToNes 5 6 5 A -B -C on papas 21-24) A headcount of all students enrolled on October 2, 2000 totals 26,543 which continues to rank Kent School District as the fourth largest district in the state of Washington. Based on the enrollment forecasts, current inventory and capacity, current standard of service, relocatable capacity, and future planned classroom space, the District anticipates having sufficient capacity to house students over the next six years. (sae TOW 5 and TaMM 5 A -&C on Papas 21.24) This does not mean that some schools wil may be significant need for additional accommodate growth within the District under Student Achievement Initiative 728 opened with relocatables on site. Bou relocatables, zoning changes, market co will all play a major role in addressing facilities in different parts of the District. I not experience overcrowding. There portables and/or new schools to and class size reduction mandated Some schools, by design, may be ndary changes, limited movement of nditions, and educational restructuring overcrowding and underutilization of Kant School Dtrbt Sk-Ymr Capt FuWUn Pim " 2001 Pays 20 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY TOTAL DISTRICT SCHOOL YEAR 01 2001-2002 goat -2003 2003-2004 ZU04 2006 2006-2006 20Ec�] th;Wh!P R O J E C T E 406 464 754 841 1015 0 29 Permanent Program Capacity' 1 24,853 25,314 25,314 25,314 25,314 25,314 26,379 New Permanent Construction ' Millennium Elementary* 30 461 Junior High * 8 (Unfunded)4 Elementary * 31 (Unfunded)' 1,065 540 Pwnwwtnt PmWw Pipacky 3ublohl 25,314 25,314 25,314 25,314 25,314 28,379 28,919 Interim Relocatable Capacity EWOW" RelWWbW Cq=k Rwp*od 375 375 350 450 500 550 0 "olor HO RM009 a Cepeeay Re**W 406 464 754 841 1015 0 29 SWAN Exch ReImW Wk Cepecsy RegW d 0 0 0 186 279 558 620 T06W Rebcatable Cape* Required' 1 781 839 1,104 1,477 1,794 1,108 649 TOTAL CAPACITY' 26,095 1 26,153 1 26,418 1 26,791 1 27,108 1 27,487 1 27,588 748 444 KIM ' Capacity is based on standard of service for program capacity and updated periodically to reined program changes. 2 FTE = Full Time Equivalent Enrollment (is. ECE Preschool Handicapped & 1/2 day Kindergarten student =.5). 2000-2001 total classroom relocatable capacity is 1,767. 4 Unfunded facility needs are pending review. Kent whoa District Six Year Cspllal Faaaies Pia, Table 5 Apry 2001 Pegs 21 KENT -SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY ELEMENTARY IEWnwitaryPermarieniProwm 12,307 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,184 KerdLearnkvCenier-SpecWPW m 415 New Permanent Mennarftry Ca Wnictlon Millennium Elementary # 30 Elementary # 31 (Unfunded)' 461 540 Subl oml 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,724 Relocatable Capactty Required 2 375 375 350 450 500 550 0 TOTAL CAPACITY 2 13,559 13,559 13,534 13,634 13,664 13,734 13,724 FTEENROLLMENT/PROJECTKNI a 13,536 13,547 13,515 13,615 13,672 13,731 13,860 SURPLUS (DEFICM CAPACITY 1 23 12 19 19 12 3 64 Number or Retoeatawas Required 7s 7s u is 20 22 a ' Kent Leaming Center is a special program at Grandview School serving students in Grades 3 through 12. The school was designed and is currently configured as an elementary school. 2 Capacity is based on standard of service for program capacity and is updated periodically to reflect program changes. $ FTE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment or Projection (ECE & Kindergarten = .5) 4 Unfunded facility needs are pending review. Ked Sdaol DMict ShaYw C%" Facases Plan Table 5 A AMM 2Oa7 Paps 22 SCHOOL YEAR 2000-2001 =I-2002 2002-2003 20032004 1 20042005 1 2005.2006 I 2006.2007 AcbW P R O J E C T E D IEWnwitaryPermarieniProwm 12,307 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,184 KerdLearnkvCenier-SpecWPW m 415 New Permanent Mennarftry Ca Wnictlon Millennium Elementary # 30 Elementary # 31 (Unfunded)' 461 540 Subl oml 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,184 13,724 Relocatable Capactty Required 2 375 375 350 450 500 550 0 TOTAL CAPACITY 2 13,559 13,559 13,534 13,634 13,664 13,734 13,724 FTEENROLLMENT/PROJECTKNI a 13,536 13,547 13,515 13,615 13,672 13,731 13,860 SURPLUS (DEFICM CAPACITY 1 23 12 19 19 12 3 64 Number or Retoeatawas Required 7s 7s u is 20 22 a ' Kent Leaming Center is a special program at Grandview School serving students in Grades 3 through 12. The school was designed and is currently configured as an elementary school. 2 Capacity is based on standard of service for program capacity and is updated periodically to reflect program changes. $ FTE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment or Projection (ECE & Kindergarten = .5) 4 Unfunded facility needs are pending review. Ked Sdaol DMict ShaYw C%" Facases Plan Table 5 A AMM 2Oa7 Paps 22 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL YEAR 12000.2001 12001-2002 1 2002-2003 F;, J E 2005-2006 [: Junbr High Pwman«k 6,043 6,043 6,043 6,043 6,043 6,043 7,108 New Permanent Junior Corgtruc0on Junior High * 8 (Unfunded)' 1,065 Subtotal 6,043 6,043 6,043 6,043 6,043 7,108 7,108 Relocatable Capacity Required408 464 754 841 1015 0 29 TOTAL CAPACITY' 6,449 6,507 6,797 6,884 7,058 7,108 7,137 FTE ENROLLMENT/ PROJECTION 2 6,449 6,484 6,789 6,858 7,047 6,976 7,129 SURPLUS(DEFICIT) CAPACITY 0 23 8 26 11 132 8 Number of Reloeatables ReWkad 14 to 28 20 30 0 1 Capacity is based on standard of service for program capacity and updated periodically to reflect program changes. 2 FTE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment / Projection Approximately 10 Junior High students are served part of the day at high schools for advanced placement. Unfunded facility needs are pending review. Kent sa,oa olmkt ft year t apm Facades Plan Table 5 B AM 2001 Pape 23 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY SENIOR HIGH sudor High Permanent 5,671 5,671 5,671 5,671 5,671 5,671 5,671 Nsw Pamunsd Sailor High Construction subiotat 5,671 5,671 5,671 5,671 5,671 5,671 5,671 Relocatable Capacity Required' 0 0 0 186 279 558 620 TOTAL CAPACITY 5,671 5,671 5,671 5,857 5,950 8,229 8,291 FTE ENROLLMENT/PROJECTION 5,315 5,374 5,593 5,838 5,945 8,220 8,275 SURPLUS(DEFICIT) CAPACITY 1 356 297 78 19 5 9 16 Number of Raioeraw.s Required 0 0 o t ! Is 20 1 Capacity is based on standard of service for program capacity and updated pd periodically to reflect program changes. Y FTE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment, excluding full time Running Start students. Approximately 10 Junior High students are served part of the day at high schools for advanced placement. Ked School lxarrR:t Six -Yew Capilal Facillibs Plan Table 5 C pip 2001 Pop P4 VIII Finance Plan The finance plan shown on Table 6 demonstrates how the Kent School District plans to finance improvements for the years 2001 - 2002 through 2006 - 2007. The financing components include secured and unsecured funding and impact fees. The plan is based on voter approval of future bond issues, collection of impact fees under the State Growth Management Act and voluntary mitigation fees paid pursuant to State Environmental Policy Act. Kent Elementary #27a, replacement for the original Kent Elementary School, was the last school for which the District received state matching funds under the current state funding formula. Millennium Elementary #30 is the last school that has received funding approval from voters. Some funding is secured for additional portables. Planning for future schools is in progress by the District Citizens' Facilities Planning Committee. For the Six -Year Finance Plan, costs of future schools are based on estimates from Kent School District Facilities Department. Please see page 27 for a summary of the cost basis. Kent Sdwol DWW StK YW Capita FacNw Plan " 2001 Page 25 M N M N M LU b d LU YX � u.. N. p N i g i3 M fX � iii » 8 � W W C a e g U LL bv L « 444[[[ > yiIx _ _ W CL N 0 F VIII Finance Plan - Cost Basis Summary For impact fee calculations, construction costs are based on the average costs of the last six elementary schools, and the average costs of the last two junior high schools and the next junior high school. Elementary Schools Cost Average Meadow Ridge #26 $6 996 325 Sawyer Woods #27 $6 463 054 Glenrid a #28 $8,032,895 Kent Elementary #27a $10,122,095 Emerald Park #29 $10,957.114 Millennium Elementary #30 $12,027,809 Average Cost of 6 elementaschools Junior High Schools Cost $9,099,882 Average Cedar Heights $14,488.028 Northwood $17110-01049 Junior High #8 $38,78-0,438 Average Cost of 3 junior high schools $23,456,172 The site acquisition cost is based on an average cost of sites purchased or built on within the last ten years. Please see Table 7 on page 27a for a list of site acquisition costs and averages. The impact fee calculations on pages 28 and 29 include a "District Adjustment' which is equal to the amount of increase that the impact fee formulas drive out for this year. The reasons for this adjustment include: 1) the district's long-term commitment to keep impact fee increases as minimal as possible, and 2) our community's overwhelming support of Initiative 695. Kart SdW DWW Six Year Capkal FwW a Plan Aprk 2001 Pape 27 m^m �rg0 P� m��o � er ao ao a o to ao ai co a a r vi ' z o f r o n n ao n �n a� ao o nNN ��pp �W) W° v) n n� 401, N h O r N lh H H H N a eq Oct N N H rp N N N 01, N H H N H $ g o ro a m r- o n It o a ro o 1 o g v N 4 C N 'f N N vi1f> Y C °i O C !O m w V Y cow ur < y y N p N N yN 3 NQ V F <' <' <' > H P 9 S 9 F 9 a 1 Y w � $ < co WW N 8 N a N N < N N tl N N N b ' N a : 8 Is S MI11---- w Y Y Z00 Y N( cm t < y m M H S H S r W n ao N v> M �YNy N pip W co iD h C± ED O N =� W CO in V n .- aD V b W° E C m U m co �p�p pgNp spy N N N y N W N H M N �[R �aN2 M K N N 4 N m m U 8 z U m 0 N m co N 7 e y x W Y m^m �rg0 P� m��o � er ao ao a o to ao ai co a a r vi ' z o f r o n n ao n �n a� ao o nNN ��pp �W) W° v) n n� 401, N h O r N lh H H H N a eq Oct N N H rp N N N 01, N H H N H $ g o ro a m r- o n It o a ro o 1 o g v N 4 C N 'f N N vi1f> Y C °i O C !O m w V Y cow ur < y y N p N N yN 3 NQ V F <' <' <' > H P 9 S 9 F 9 a 1 Y w � $ < co WW N 8 N a N N < N N tl N N N b ' N a : 8 Is S MI11---- w �` E iu O Nr Eo W E W E W m W O m -we pp C m 6 E W o �e a m W W° E C m U m co E x (A m 0)) m y o to m co m m U 8 z U m 0 N m co N 7 e y x W Y x � Ap x LL LU � KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT FACTORS FOR ESTIMATED IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS Student Generation Factors - Single Family Elementary 0.504 Junior High 0.211 Senior High 0.183 Total 0.898 Projected Student Capacity per Facility Elementary 540 Junior High 1,055 Senior High 1,650 Required Site Acreage per Facility Elementary (required) 11 Junior High (required) 21 Senior High (required) 27 New Facility Construction Cost / Average e Elementary $9,099,882 Junior High $23,456,172 Senior High $0 See awaga a cukilora on Pg. 27 Temporary Facility Square Footage Elementary 86,212 Junior High 25,256 Senior High 21,736 Total 4% 133,204 Permanent Facility Square Footage Elementary 1,460,033 Junior High 743,063 Senior High 849,464 Total 96% 3,052,560 Total Facilities Square Footage Elementary 1,546,245 Junior High 768,319 Senior High 871,200 Total 3,185,784 Developer Provided Sites / Facilities Value 0 Dwelling Units 0 Student Generation Factors - Mufti -Family Elementary 0.273 Junior High 0.114 Senior High 0.078 Total 0.463 SPI Square Footage per Student Elementary 80 Junior High 113.33 Senior High 120 Average Site Cost / Acre Elementary $0 Junior High $0 Senior High $0 Temporary Facility Capacity & Cost Elementary (M 25 $78,504 Junior High Q 29 $78,504 Senior High C 31 $78,504 State Match Credit Current State Match Percentage 0.00% Previous State Match 55.64% Boeckh Index Factor Current Boeckh Index $103.34 District Average Assessed Value Single Family Residence $192,198 District Average Assessed Value Mufti -Family Residence $61,255 District Debt Service Tax Rate Current / $1000 Rate $2.32 General Obligation Bond Interest Rate Current Bond Buyer Index 5.07% KW t SdW DWb Six Year C*W Fadifim Plan AprN 2001 Page 28 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT IMPACT FEE CALCULATION for SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE Site Acquisition Cod per Shale Family Residence Formals: ((/lens x Cod Aero / F x Sluleni Cenoratlorl Factor Ratio F Cat Pettily C�pecay Sedee Fodor Construction Cod Regaled SIM Avarape SIN Ceq/Aw Fftftcm Foanepe Relb Sludels Feobr B 1 (EJenentany) A 1 (F.lanleniry) 11 $65,213 540 0.504 $889.62 A 2 (Juin High) 21 $45,694 1,055 0.211 $190.11 A 3 (Senior High) 27 $0 1,650 0.183 $0.00 $2.32 0.1196 8 —> 0.898 5.07% Discast Pat (10 Years) A —> $859.63 Peanunmt Facility Condnwdion Cod per ShgN Famey Residence Farrnals: ((Frilly Cad / Facility Capeft z Student Fedor x otN F Ratio F Cat Pettily C�pecay Sedee Fodor Construction Cod FeWily CopeWy chides Fedor Foanepe Relb 0.04 B 1 (EJenentany) 89,099,882 540 0.504 0.96 $8,153.48 B 2 (Ju for High) $23,456,172 1,065 0211 0.96 $4,451.30 B 3 (Senior High) $0 1,650 0.183 OJi6 $0.00 Current Debt Service Ta Rde $2.32 0.1196 8 —> $12,614.79 Temporary Facility Cod per Ski& FamOy Residence For ils: ((Fae ft Cod / F x 22T Factor x / Taal F Ratio 0.504 F Cat Pettily C�pecay Sedee Fodor Footage ROW 0 C 1 (F-WnwtaM $78,504 25 0.504 0.04 $63.31 C 2 (Ju for High) $78,504 29 0211 0.04 $22.85 C 3 (Senior High) $78,504 31 0.183 0.04 $18.54 Tax Cndk per S(ngN Family Residence 0.898 C —> $104.69 Side Match Credit per Shngle Family Reddenee Average Residential Assessed Value $19$198 Form dm: R, 1 ,—t Index x SPI Some Foohoe x District Mefrh % x Studerd Feder Current Debt Service Ta Rde D 1 (Eleneriery) $103.34 80 0 0.504 $0.00 D 2 (Junior High) $103.34 113.33 0 0.211 $0.00 D 3 (Sada High) $103.34 120 0 0.183 $0.00 D —> $0.00 Tax Cndk per S(ngN Family Residence Average Residential Assessed Value $19$198 Current Debt Service Ta Rde $2.32 Bad Buyer Index lift Rats 5.07% Discast Pat (10 Years) 10 TC— $3,431.44 Develops Provided Facility Croft F / Site ValueUnto 0 0 FC —> 0 Fee Recap A - Sae AcgAaklon per SF ReaWeros $859.63 B e Permanent Facility Cod per Rsaldernee $12,614.79 C e Temporary Facility Cod per Resk% nce $104.89 Suhlotal $13,579.12 D e Stab Matdl Croft per Residence $0.00 TC a Tax Cradle per Raidews $3,431.44 Subtotal $3,431.44 Total Unfunded Need $10,147.67 Developer Fee Obligation $5,073.84 FC - Fatilily Credt (if gVileable) 0 Distrial Aqu*nw t (— Peas 27 tar WOWNlion) Not Fee Obligation per Single inly FaResidenceence $1,291.36 $3.782.46 Ked School District Sk Yew Capital Fatalities Plan April 2001 Pape 29 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT IMPACT FEE CALCULATION for MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENCE Site Acquisition Coat per MuM4Famiy Residence Unit Form uls: ((Acres x Coal Dr Acre) / Facifry Ca0aclMi x Sllidrlt Generation Factor A 1 (Ebmenfary) 11 $65,213 54D 0.273 $382.66 A 2 (Junior High) 21 $45,694 1,065 0.114 $10271 A 3 (Senior High) 27 $0 1,650 0.076 $0.00 0.463 A $465.37 Pemtanrlt FwJft Construction Cost par Multifamlty Residence Unit Famuls: ((FacRy Cast / Facility CapwW x Student F x (PenroWt /Total oars F Ratlo C e Tamporry Facility Cost per MF Una $54.33 Cenabuclion Cost FodNly Capodly Student Factor Foobps Raub TC a Tax Credit per MF Unit 81 (Elementary) $9,099,882 540 0.273 0.96 $4,416.48 B 2 (JoNa High) $23,456,172 1,055 0.114 0.96 $2,410.37 B 3 (Sella High) SO 1,650 0.078 0.96 $0.00 0.463 B —> $6,828.85 Temporary FacWty Coat per Muk4Family Reskknes Unit Formula: ((F*c Wy Cat / F ) x Sluderd F x /Total uere F Ratio FaeMy Coat Pedley Capacay Student Fedor Foolsps Raub C 1 (ENman wy) $78,504 25 0.273 0.04 $34.29 C 2 (Junior High) $78,504 29 0.114 0.04 $12.34 C 3 (Senlor High) $78,504 31 0.076 0.04 $7.70 0.463 C —> $54.33 Stab Match Cr*M per Mulltfrrdly Residence Unit Fomrub: Bowkt Index x SPIF x District Match % x Stulerd Factor Bosexh Mndsx 1 SPI Foolap &;rid Me" % Sludra Facbr D 1 (ENrnwdery) $103.34 80 0 0.273 $0.00 D 2 (Junior High) $103.34 113.33 0 0.114 $0.00 D 3 (Senor Hips) $103.34 120 0 0.076 $0.00 D —> $O.DO Tax Credit per Multifamily Reckence Unit Average Reaker" Assessed Value $61255 Current Debt Service Tax Rate $2.32 Bond Buyer Ind Annual Interest Rats 5.07% DiscountPrfod (10 Years) 10 TC $1,093.70 Developer Provided Facility Credit F / Site Value I DwWq Units 0 0 FC— 0 Fee Recap A e Sao Anion per Mult-FarNy Unk $465.37 B e Prnwtrlt Facility Cat per MF Unit $6,826.85 C e Tamporry Facility Cost per MF Una $54.33 Subtotal $7,345.55 D a Stats Match Crag per MF Unit $0.00 TC a Tax Credit per MF Unit $1,093.70 Subtotal $1,093.70 Total Unfunded Need $6,252.85 Developer Fee Obligation $3,125.43 FC a Facility CreA (If applicable) 0 DMiet AdAmbne d (Sea Pape 27 for explermlion) 4796.94 Net Fee Obligation per Multi -Family Residence Unit 1 $2,329.49 Kent School DWM Sb( -Year Capital Facilities Plan Apra 2001 Page 30 IX Appendixes Appendix A: Calculations of Capacities for Elementary Schools Appendix B: Calculations of Capacities for Junior High Schools Appendix C: Calculations of Capacities for Senior High Schools Appendix D: Use of Relocatables Appendix E: Student Generation Factor Survey Appendix F: Summary of Changes to 2000 Capital Facilities Plan Ked SehW DWWd Sbt-Yea CaPN Fades PW 4N 2001 c W CL I s m Lj m �■ a § || |k [ !`m�■m® ! -|a • -- .!� �] ■°■§ ■ E) |■� n■;��� ■\■�■■I) m e e m - ui a a _�r� ■■� || |k [ -|a • -- .!� �] E) |■� n■;��� ■\■�■■I) || |k [ � ) U) � m co) LU0 o oLu to � to he R � � � � w IL [ | � ° m ■ ! § • . . a ! | ( � A � | ■ ■ | \, ■ ■ � . ■ � m | I §. ! ■ � § � | N � # ■ « ! § � | 7 ■ ■ � } e § I I I a § I 7 o CL ■ .° 2 2 7 d 7 ff � \ R � � � � w IL [ W 0 Z LU a U �0oc--- 0 0 0 o dc o e e e o c e c c c c c c c o c c o o c c a C G G G O G C e e e e o C p coi��a$��g��^s�ma� o ti c o o c G O O d C G O o C o o d o mf Oy m G ob o c 0' C C o 6 0 o d 6 C e O G Oy pp wa lfg {n R m Op y om (n y CI m P 0 0 f d 6 m$ d f Y f g d N d d n cl 6 A ci � �n o (e y pq W O O O O 00 G O O O O O O G G G C O O O O O O G O O d C 0' W GG G C G Cd o 0 d 0 0 0 0 0 0) y y 3 yy �o g �+ 2e��rgsy�9Q yn �g d bt:%go1�XLe ?f 3S0 e b @S,7n8S i.�n^iXg 1- ,^g, do o o e c o o c e o e o 6 o e e .: o 0 o o p F- .N e e e c o 0 o e e e e e c p n •'^ ro • • pr c c • � _ o �€t$R^8S$RS.^SgRro Liu��R�s:p:988m�aSCR��g:g�$�r� y to g g S SSS F3gSR�E8£t�$��p^�o�r�'toiag$:i88+�pgg N p ft 52 N A ~ 7 N yy11 JJ UU pp 22 po 2 22 >> UU 0 Z W 7 1 0 0 3 W M 3 LL ~ g coW � W W 0 Z LU a U Appendix F - Summary of Changes to April 2000 Capital Facilities Plan The Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan') is updated annually based on previous Plans in effect since 1993. The primary changes from the April 2000 Plan are summarized here. Millennium Elementary #30 opened in August, 2000. Property for Junior High #8 was determined not feasible and is for sale. An additional site was purchased and is in the Plan, but grade configuration for that site has not yet been determined. Changes to capacity continue to reflect reduction in class size for grades K - 4 as well as annual program changes. Further reduction in Gass size for Student Achievement Initiative 728 will be reflected in the update for next year. Changes in portables or transitional capacity reflect purchase, sale, surplus and/or movement of portables between facilities. Permanent facility costs have been adjusted to reflect averages of costs for schools built most recently. The district expects to receive no state matching funds for schools in this Plan and tax credit factors are updated annually. Unfunded facility needs are pending review. Impact fee calculations include a "District Adjustment" which is equal to the amount of increase that the impact fee formulas drive out for this year. See page 27a for further explanation. Student enrollment forecast is updated annually. The student generation factor survey was updated to reflect developments added or deleted and changes in student yield. Changes reflect no adjustment for occupancy. Survey data is included as Appendix E. Changes to Impact Fee Calculation Factors include: ITEM GradeRrpe I FROM TO Comments Student Generation Factor Eleni 0.515 0.504 Updated In 2001 Plan Single Family (SF) Jr 0.197 0.211 Sr 0.180 0.183 Tolal 0.892 0.898 Student Generation Factor Eleni 0.279 0273 Updated In 2001 Plan Multi -Family (MF) Jr 0.096 0.114 Sr 0.063 0.078 TOW 0.428 0.463 State Match 0% 0% No change ohm 1990 Plan Boeckh Index (Cost per square foot) $10127 $103.34 Par SPI Average Assessed Valuation SF $176,547 $192,198 Per Puget Sound ESD AV - Average of Condominiums & Apts. MF $56,029 $61,255 Per Puget Sound ESD Debt Service Tax Rate $2.32 $2.32 Per long county Assessor General Obligation Bond Interest Rate 5.94% 5.07% Market Rate Impact Fee - Single Family SF $3,762 $3,782 No change to fee Impact Fee - Multi -Family MF $2,329 $2,329 No change to fee Keit School Diatrkt Sbk-Year capital Facilities Plan APPENDIX F April 2001 Page 35 P/T #3 Auburn School District Capital Facility Plan (CFP) 2000-01 through 2006-07 Incorporate Auburn School Capital Facilities Plan Comprehensive Plan. District's into the updated City's AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 408 Unincorporated King County Unincorporated Pierce County City of Auburn City of Algona City of Pacific CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2000-01 through 2006-07 Adopted by the Auburn School District Board of Directors June 25, 2001 AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 408 915 Fourth Street NE Auburn, Washington 98002 (253)931-4900 BOARD of DIRECTORS Ray Vefik Donna Foxley Craig Schumaker Therald Leonard Janice Nelson Linda S. Cowan, Superintendent Table of Contents Section I Executive Summary Section II Enrollment Projections Section III Standard of Service Section IV Inventory of Facilities Section V Pupil Capacity Section VI Capital Construction Plan Section VII Impact Fees Section VIII Appendices s(,ao, Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2000-01 through 2006-07 Executive Summary This Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") has been prepared by the Auburn School District (the "District") as the District's principal planning document, in compliance with the requirements of Washington's Growth Management Act and the adopted ordinances of the counties and cities served by the District. This plan was prepared using data available in the spring of 2001. This Plan is consistent with prior long-term capital facilities plans adopted by the District. However, this Plan is not intended to be the sole plan for all of the District's needs. The District may prepare interim and periodic Long Range Capital Facilities Plans consistent with Board Policies and actions, taking into account a longer or a shorter time period, other factors and trends in the use of facilities, and other needs of the District as may be required. However, any such plan or plans will be consistent with this Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan. To enable impact fees to be collected in the unincorporated areas of King County and Pierce County and within the City of Auburn, the King County Council, the Pierce County Council, and the City of Auburn must adopt this Plan by reference as part of its comprehensive plan. To enable impact fees to be collected in Cities of Algona and Pacific these municipalities must also adopt this Plan and adopt school impact fee ordinances. Pursuant to the requirements of the Growth Management Act, the Plan will be updated on an annual basis, and any changes in the fee schedule(s) adjusted accordingly. The Plan establishes the District's "standard of service" in order to ascertain the District's current and future capacity. While the State Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes square footage guidelines for capacity, those guidelines do not account for the local program needs of the District. The Growth Management Act and the school impact fee ordinance authorizes the District to define it's standard of service based on the District's specific needs. In general, the District's current standard provides that class size for grades K-2 should not exceed 25 students, class size for grades 3-4 should not exceed 27 students, Gass size for grade 5 should not exceed 30 students. When averaged over the six elementary grades, this computes to 26.5 students per classroom. Class size for grades 6-12 should not exceed 30 students, with some subject areas restricted to lesser numbers. (See Section III for more specific information.) The capacity of the schools in the District is calculated based on this standard of service and the existing inventory of facilities including transitional classrooms. The district's 2000-01 capacity was 13,561 whereas Full Time Equivalent ("FTE") enrollment for this same period was 12,575.67. The actual number of individual students was 13,135 as of October 1, 2000. (See Section V for more specific information.) The capital construction plan shown in Section VI addresses the modernization of and additions to the District's existing facilities currently underway and provides for a new high school, a new elementary school, and the acquisition of a new middle school site. The new facilities are required to meet the projected student population increase to be generated from the large development area within Pierce County at the southern border of the Auburn School District as well as all other areas of the District. The Pierce County area includes most of the Lakeland South development and some adjacent undeveloped properties. The School Impact Fee Ordinances adopted by King County, Pierce County, and the City of Auburn provide for the assessment of impact fees to assist in meeting some of the fiscal impact incurred by a district experiencing growth and development. Section VII sets forth the proposed school impact fees for single family and multi -family dwelling units. Auburn School District No. 409 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2000-01 through 2006-07 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN CHANGES FROM 1999-2000 TO 2000-01 Listed below is a summary level outline of the changes from the 1999.2000 Capital Facilities Plan that are a part of the 2001.01 Plan. The changes are noted by Section for ease of reference. Section I Executive Summary Updated to reflect new information within the Plan. Summary level list of changes from previous year has been added. Section II Enrollment Projections Updated projections. See Appendices A.1 & A.2. Section III Standard of Service A. Increase in English as a Second Language program required 3 additional classrooms at the elementary level and 1 at the senior high. B. Increase of 5 Special Education Resource Rooms due to program expansion. Section IV Inventory of Facilities Updated to reflect addition of 2 relocatable units at Ml. Baker and 4 at ARHS. Section V Pupil Capacity Updated to reflect addition of 2 relocatable units at Mt. Baker and 4 at ARHS. Section VI Capital Construction Plan A. One year delay in the Senior High #4 project due to bond proposition failure. B. One year delay in the Elementary #13 project due to reduced enrollment projections. C. Removes Senior High #4 site purchase - project complete and paid for. D. Lists property acquired for Elementary #13 fi6anced from surplus property sale. E. Deletes one elementary site due to reduced enrollment projections. F. Lists site purchase for Middle School #5 and shows no funds are available for acquisition. G. Updates cost estimate based on current data for Senior High project. H. Updates cost estimate based on current data for Elementary project. 5119101 01IMPFEEComp.xls 3.1 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2000-01 through 2006-07 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Section VII Impact Fees CHANGES TO IMPACT FEE DATA ELEMENTS 2000 to 2001 DATA ELEMENTS CPF 2000 CPF 2001 EXPLANATION Student Generation Factors Single Family Consistent with Ordinance 11621, Student Elementary 0.2939 0.3227 Generation Factors are from adjacent Mid School 0.1530 0.1525 Federal Way School District. Sr. High 0.1548 0.1454 Multi Family Elementary 0.0656 0.0840 Mid School 0.0246 0.0266 Sr. High 0.0656 0.0626 New Facility Cost Sr. High $51,500,000 $56,400,000 1 Sr. High Cost Estimate, as of May 2001, is computed from completed construction documents as submitted to DDES. Elementary $10,000,000 $13,000,000 2 Elementary cost estimate from architects recent project experience and OSPI facility records. Site Cost/Acre $114,416 $131,545 Updated from final cost for recent purchases escalated to anticipated 2004 purchase date. Boeckh Index $101.63 $101.63 Updated to current SPI schedule. Match %- Slate 54.21% 53.89% Updated to current SPI schedule. Match %- District 45.79% 46.11% Computed District Average AV Single Family $156,172 $169,239 Updated from February 2001 King County Dept of Assessments data. Multi Family $48,065 $48,747 Updated from February 2001 King County Dept of Assessments data using weighted average. Debt Sery Tax Rate $2.38 $2.11 Current Fiscal Year G. O Bond Int Rate 5.92% 5.32% Current Rate Section VIII Appendices Appendix A.1 - Updates Non -Lakeland enrollment projections Appendix A.2 - Updates Lakeland enrollment projections. 5/18101 01IMPFEECompAs 3.2 M Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2000-01 through 2006-07 ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS The Auburn School District uses a modified cohort survival model to project future enrollment for all of the district's operations. Table 11.1 is an extract from the comprehensive projection model found in Appendix A.2 titled "CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Enrollment Projections". This Table shows the anticipated enrollment for the next six years based on the previous 13 year history of the District under the assumptions set forth in the comprehensive projections, Appendix A.1, and the projection for additional students generated from the Lakeland South area as shown in Appendix A.2. TABLE ASD ENROLLMENT 01/02 11.1 PROJECTIONS June 2001 04/05 05/06 ACTUAL PROJ PROJ PROJ PROJ PROJ PROJ GRADE 00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 KDG 912 932 947 968 983 996 1009 1 905 975 990 1011 1026 1039 1052 2 914 928 993 1014 1029 1041 1055 3 1031 937 946 1017 1032 1044 1057 4 1071 1045 946 961 1026 1038 1051 5 1 1011 1085 1055 1 961 970 1032 1046 K-5 5844 5901 5877 5932 6068 6191 6270 6 998 1030 1099 1074 975 981 1044 7 979 1048 1075 1150 1119 1017 1024 8 1003 985 1049 1081 1151 1117 1016 6-8 2980 3062 3223 3305 3246 3116 3085 9 1222 1171 1148 1214 1244 1313 1279 10 1157 1198 1145 1124 1188 1217 1286 11 1067 1130 1169 1118 1095 1159 1188 12 865 977 1 1039 1 1079 1 1027 1003 1066 9-12 4311 4476 4501 4535 L 4554 4692 4820 TOTALS 13135 13440 13601 13772 1 13868 13999 14176 GRADES K-12 00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 K-5 w/K @ 1/2 5388 5436 5404 5448 5577 5693 5766 6-8 2980 3062 3223 3305 3246 3116 3085 9-12 4311 4476 4501 4535 4554 4692 4820 K-12 w/K 1/2 12679 12974 13128 13288 13376 13501 136- 5/14/01 Aubum School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 1999-00 through 2005-06 STANDARD OF SERVICE The School Impact Fee Ordinances adopted by King County, Pierce County, and the City of Auburn indicate that each school district must establish a "Standard of Service" in order to ascertain the overall capacity to house its projected student population. The Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes square footage capacity" guidelines for computing state funding support The fundamental purpose of the SPI guidelines is to provide a vehicle to equitably distribute state matching funds for school construction projects. By default these guidelines have been used to benchmark the district's capacity to house its student population. The SPI guidelines do not make adequate provision for local district program needs, facility conrrgurations, emerging educational reform, or the dynamics of each student's educational program. The Auburn School District Standard of Service addresses those local considerations that require space in excess of the SPI guidelines. The effect on the space requirements for both permanent and relocatable facilities is shown below for each grade articulation pattern. Conditions that may result in potential space needs are provided for information purposes without accompanying computations. OVERVIEW The Auburn School District operates twelve elementary schools housing 5,856 students in grades K through 5. The 954 Kindergarten students attend 1/2 days throughout the year. Grades 1 through 5 attend on a full day basis. When converted to a full time equivalence the K - 5 enrollment is 5,536. Four middle schools house 3,049 students in grades 6 through 8. The District operates two comprehensive senior high schools and one alternative high school housing 4173 students in grades 9 through 12. CLASS SIZE The number of pupils per classroom determines the number of classrooms required to house the student population. Class sizes are subject to collective bargaining. Changes to class size agreements can have significant impact on available space. The current pupil leacher limit across all elementary programs is an average of 26.5 students per teacher. Consistent with this staffing limit room capacities are set at 26.5 students per room at grades K - 5. At grades 6 - 12 the limit is set at 30 pupils per room. The SPI space allocation for each grade articulation level less the computed reduction for the Auburn School District Standard of Service determines the District's capacity to house projected pupil populations. These reductions are shown below by grade articulation level. ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SELF CONTAINED SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAM The Auburn School District operates a self contained program for handicapped students at the elementary school level which currently uses eleven classrooms to provide for 87 students. The housing requirements for this program are provided for in the SPI space guidelines. No loss of capacity is expected unless handicapped population grows at a disproportionate rate compared to total elementary population. 5/17/01 Auburn School District No. 406 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 1999-00 through 2006-06 STANDARD OF SERVICE SPECIAL EDUCATION RESOURCE ROOMS The Auburn School District operates a resource room program at the elementary level for special education students requiring instruction to address their specific disabilities. One standard Classroom per each of the twelve elementary schools is required to house this program. The housing requirements for this program are provided for in the SPI space guidelines. No loss of capacity is expected unless the special education population grows at a disproportionate rate compared to total elementary population. HEAD START The Auburn School District operates a Head Start program for approximately 108 youngsters in six sections of 1/2 day in length. The program is housed at Evergreen Heights Elementary School and utilizes three standard elementary classrooms and auxiliary office space. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 3 rooms @ 26.5 each = 80 Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss 80 PRE-SCHOOL SPECIAL EDUCATION The Auburn School District operates a pre-school program for handicapped youngsters below age five. This program is housed at six different elementary schools and currently uses six standard classrooms. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 6 rooms @ 26.5 each = (159) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 room @ 26.5 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (159) READING LABS The Auburn School District operates a program for students needing remediation and additional language arts instruction. These programs utilize non-standard classroom spaces if available in each elementary school. Four elementary schools do not have non-standard rooms available, thus they are housed in a standard classroom. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 4 rooms @ 26.5 each = (106) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss _ (106) ELEMENTARY COMPUTER LABS The advent of technology requires one classroom per elementary school devoted the use as a computer lab. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 12 rooms @ 26.5 each = (318) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (318) 5/17/01 Aulwm School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 1999-00 through 2005-06 STANDARD OF SERVICE MUSIC ROOMS The district elementary music programs require one acoustically modified classroom at each elementary school for music instruction. The housing requirements are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 12 rooms @ 26.5 each = (318) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (318) ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE PROGRAM The Auburn School District operates a pullout program at the elementary school level for students learning English as a second language. This program requires six standard classrooms that are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 6 rooms @ 26.5 each = (159) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (159) MIDDLE SCHOOLS SPECIAL EDUCATION RESOURCE ROOMS The Auburn School District operates a resource room program at the middle school level for special education students needing remedial instruction to address their specific disabilities. Two or three classrooms per school are required to provide for approximately 210 to 250 students. The housing requirements for this program are provided for in the SPI space guidelines. No loss of capacity is expected unless the special education population grows at a disproportionate rate compared to total middle school population. MIDDLE SCHOOL COMPUTER LABS The Auburn School District operates a minimum of one computer lab at each middle school. This program utilizes two standard classrooms per middle school. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 4 rooms @ 30 each = (120) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (120) ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE The Auburn School District operates pullout program at the middle school level for students learning English as a second language. This program requires two standard classrooms that are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 2 rooms @ 30 each = (60) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (60) 5/17/01 Auburn School District No. 406 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 1999-00 through 2006-06 STANDARD OF SERVICE ROOM UTILIZATION The Auburn School District provides a comprehensive middle school program that includes elective options in special interest areas. Facilities to accommodate special interest activities are not amenable to standard classroom usage. The district averages 95% utilization of all available teaching stations. SPI Report #3 dated 11/16/99 identifies 158 teaching stations available in the mid-level facilities. The utilization pattern results in a loss of approximately 8 teaching stations. Loss of Permanent Capacity 8 rooms @ 30 each = (240) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (240) SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SR. HIGH COMPUTER LABS The Auburn School District operates at least two computer labs at each of the senior high schools. This program utilizes two standard classroom per high school and one at the alternative high school. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 5 rooms @ 30 each = (150) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (150) ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE The Auburn School District operates pullout program at both comprehensive high schools for students leaming English as a second language. This program requires two standard classrooms that are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 2 rooms @ 30 each = (60) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (60) SPECIAL EDUCATION RESOURCE ROOMS The Auburn School District operates a resource room program at the senior high level for special education students requiring instruction to address their specific disabilities. The current senior high school program requires twelve classrooms to provide for approximately 375 students. The SPI space guidelines provide for three of the twelve teaching stations. Loss of Permanent Capacity 9 rooms @ 30 each = (270) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (270) 5/17/01 10 Autwm School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 1999-00 through 200646 STANDARD OF SERVICE PERFORMING ARTS CENTER Auburn High School includes 25,000 square feet used exclusively for a Performing Arts Center. The SPI Inventory includes this space when computing unhoused student capacity. This space was never intended for nor is it usable for classroom instruction. It was constructed to provide a community center for the performing arts. Using SPI capacity guidelines, 25,000 square feet computes to 208 unhoused students or 8.33 classrooms @ 25 per room. Loss of Permanent Capacity 8.33 rooms @ 30 each = ROOM UTILIZATION (208) The Auburn School District provides a comprehensive high school program that includes numerous elective options in special interest areas. Facilities to accommodate special interest activities are not amenable to standard classroom usage. The district averages 90% utilization of all available teaching stations. SPI Report #3 dated 11/16/99 identifies 150 teaching stations available in the senior high facilities. The utilization pattern results in a loss of approximately 7.5 teaching stations. Loss of Permanent Capacity 15 rooms @ 30 each = (450) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (450) STANDARD OF SERVICE COMPUTED TOTALS ELEMENTARY Loss of Permanent Capacity = (981) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 Total Capacity Loss (981) MIDDLE SCHOOL Loss of Permanent Capacity = (420) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 Total Capacity Loss (420) SENIOR HIGH Loss of Permanent Capacity = (1,138) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 Total Capacity Loss (1,138) TOTAL Loss of Permanent Capacity = (2,539) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 Total Capacity Loss (2,539) 5/17/01 11 5/,4/0, Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 1999-00 through 2006-06 INVENTORY OF FACILITIES Table IVA shows the current inventory of permanent district facilities and their SPI rated capacities. Table IV.2 shows the number and location of each relocatable unit by school. The district uses relocatable facilities to: 1) provide interim housing in school attendance areas uniquely impacted by increasing school populations that would otherwise require continual redistricting, 2) make space available for changing program requirements and offerings determined by unique student needs, and 3) provide housing to cover our needs until permanent facilities can be financed and constructed. Relocalable facilities are deemed to be interim, stop gap measures that often place undesirable stress on the existing physical plants. Core facilities, (Le. gymnasiums, restrooms, kitchens, tabs,A31 lockers, libraries, etc.) are not of sufficient size or quantity to handle the increased school population served by adding relocatable classrooms. TABLE PERMANENT FACILITIES IVA @ SPI Rated Capacity June 2001 A. Elementary Schools B. C. Building 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 Washington 553 553 553 553 553 553 553 Terminal Park 441 441 441 441 441 441 441 Dick Scobee 618 618 618 618 618 618 618 Pioneer 449 449 449 449 449 449 449 Chinook 552 552 552 552 552 552 552 Lea Hill 498 498 498 498 498 498 498 Gildo Rey 596 596 596 596 596 596 596 Ever Heights 512 512 512 512 512 512 512 Alpac 554 554 554 554 554 554 554 Lake View 685 685 685 685 685 685 685 Hazelwood 639 639 639 639 639 639 639 Ilalko 648 648 648 648 648 648 648 ELEM CAPACITY 6,745 6,745 6,745 6,745 6,745 6,745 6,745 mraare scnows Building 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 Cascade 897 897 897 897 897 897 897 Olympic 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 Alternative JH 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Rainier 902 902 902 902 902 902 902 Mt.Baker 903 903 903 903 903 903 903 MS CAPACITY 3,702 3,702 3,702 3,702 3,702 3,702 3,702 Senior nrgn Building2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 West Auburn Auburn Auburn Riverside 250 2,447 1,503 250 2,447 1,503 250 2,447 1,503 250 2,447 1,503 250 2,447 1,503 250 2,447 1,503 250 2,447 1,503 SH CAPACITY 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,200 COMB'D CAPACITY 14,647 14,647 1 14,647 14,647 ! 14,647 14,647 14,647 5/16/01 13 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 1999-00 through 200546 INVENTORY OF FACILITIES TABLE TEMPORARY/RELOCATABLE 2001-02 IV.2 FACILITIES INVENTORY I 2004-06 2005-06 (June 2001 Cascade Elementary Location 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 Washington 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Terminal Park 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Dick Scobee 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Pioneer 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Chinook 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Lea Hill 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Gildo Rey 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Ever Heights 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Alpac 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Lake View 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Hazelwood 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ilalko 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 TOTAL UNITS 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 TOTAL CAPACITY 742 742 742 742 742 742 742 Middle School Location 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-06 2005-06 2006-07 Cascade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Olympic 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rainier 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Mt. Baker 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 TOTAL UNITS 5 7 7 7 7 7 7 TOTAL CAPACITY 150 210 210 210 210 210 210 Sr. High School Location 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 West Auburn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Auburn 12 12 12 12 12 2 2 Auburn Riverside 8 12 12 12 12 8 8 TOTAL UNITS 20 24 24 24 24 10 10 TOTAL CAPACITY 600 720 720 720 720 300 300 COMBINED TOTAL UNITS 1 53 59 59 59 59 45 45 COMBINED TOTAL CAPACITY 1,492 1,672 1,672 1,672 1,672 1,252 1,252 5116/01 14 5/14/01 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 1999-00 through 2006-06 PUPIL CAPACITY While the Auburn School District uses the SPI inventory of permanent facilities as the data from which to determine space needs, the District's educational program requires more space than that provided for under the formula. This additional square footage is converted to numbers of pupils in Section III, Standard of Service. The District's capacity is adjusted to reflect the need for additional space to house it's programs. Changes in the capacity of the district recognize new unfunded facilities and the elimination of the facility that formerly housed the Alternative Jr. High. The combined effect of these adjustments is shown on Line B in Tables VA and V.2 below. Table VA shows the Distict's capacity with relocatable units included and Table V.2 without these units. Table VA Capacity 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 WITH relocatables A. SPI Capacity 14,647 14,647 14,647 14,647 14,647 15,297 15,297 A.1 SPI Capacity -New Elem 650 A.2 SPI Capacity -New Sr. High 1,500 B. Exclude Alt JH (40) (40) (40) (40) (40) (40) (40) B.1 Include Relocatables(p. 14 1,492 1,672 1,672 1,672 1,672 1,252 1,252 B.2 Exclude SOS . 11 (2,539) (2,539) (2,539) (2,539) (2,984 2,984 2,984 C. Net Capacity 13,561 13,741 13,741 13,741 15,445 13,525 13,525 D. ASD Enrollment 13,135 13,440 13,601 13,772 13,868 13,999 14,176 E. ASD Surplus7Defrcit 426 301 139 (31) 1,577 (474) (651) 1/ 1/ 2/ 3/ Table V.2 Capacity 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 WITHOUT relocatables A. SPI Capacity 14,647 14,647 14,647 14,647 14,647 '15,297 15,297 A.1 SPI Capacity -New Elem 650 A.2 SPI Capacity -New Sr. High 1,500 B. Exclude Alt JH (40) (40) (40) (40) (40) (40) (40) B.2 Exclude SOS . 11 2,539 2,539 2,539 2,539 2,984 2;984 2,984 C. Net Capacity 12,069 12,069 12,069 12,069 13,773 12,273 12,273 D. ASD Enrollment 13,135 13,440 13,601 13,772 13,868 13,999 14,176 E. ASD Surplus/Deficit (1,067) (1,371) (11533) (1,703) (95) (1,726) (11903) 1/ New facilities shown in 2004-05 are not funded under the current Capital Facilities Plan. 2/ Alternative JH is required by OSPI to be carried on our inventory even though it has been demolished. 3/ The Standard of Service represents 17.55% of SPI capacity. When new facilities are added the Standard of Service computations are increased by 17.55%. 6/15/01 16 5/14/01 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2000-01 through 2006-07 CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN The formal process used by the Board to address current and future facility needs began in 1974 with the formation of a community wide citizens committee. The result of this committee's work was published in the document titled 'Guidelines for Development'. In 1985 the Board formed a second ad hoc citizens committee to pick up from the work of the first and address the needs of the district for subsequent years. The work of this committee was published in the document titled 'Directions for the Nineties'. In 1995 the Board commissioned a third ad hoc citizens committee to make recommendations for improvements to the district's programs and physical facilities. The committee recommendations are published in the document titled 'Education Into The Twenty -First Century - - A Community Involved'. The 1995 ad hoc committee recommended the district develop plans for the implementation, funding, and deployment of technology throughout the district's programs. The 1996 Bond proposition provided funding to enhance the capacity of each facility to accommodate technological applications. The 1998 Capital Levy provided funding to further deploy technology at a level sufficient to support program requirements in every classroom and department. In addition to the technology needs of the district the ad hoc committee recognized the district must prepare for continued student enrollment growth. As stated in their report "the district must pursue an appropriate high school site as soon as possible." The ad hoc recommendation included commentary that the financing should be timed to maintain consistent rates of assessment. A proposition was approved by the voters on April 28, 1998 that is providing $8,000,000 over six years to address some of the technology needs of the district, and $5,000,000 to provide funds to acquire school sites. During the 1997-98 school year a Joint District Citizen's Ad Hoc Committee was appointed by the Auburn and Dieringer School Boards to make recommendations on how best to serve the school population that will come from an area that includes a large development known as Lakeland South. Lakeland South is immediately adjacent to the southern boundary of the Auburn School District. On June 16, 1998 the Ad Hoc Committee presented its recommendation at a joint meeting of the Auburn and Dieringer Boards of Directors. On June 22, 1998 the Auburn School Board adopted Resolution No. 933 authorizing the process to initiate the adjustment of the boundaries of the district in accordance with the Ad Hoc Committee's recommendation. On June 23, 1998 the Dieringer School Board adopted a companion Resolution No. 24-97-98 authorizing the process to initiate the adjustment of the boundaries in accordance with the Ad Hoc Committee's recommendation. These actions resulted in the transfer of an area from Dieringer to Auburn containing most of the Lakeland South development and certain other undeveloped properties. Development in this area is progressing at an aggressive rate. The district is projecting an additional 1041 students within the six year period including the Lakeland area. This increase requires the construction of a new high school, a new elementary school, and the acquisition of a new middle school site during the six year window. A new middle school is anticipated just beyond the six year time frame for this plan. 18 5118/01 V 11 Auburn School District No. 406 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2000-01 through 2006-07 CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN The table below illustrates the current capital construction plan for the next six years. The exact timelines are wholly dependent on the rate of growth in the school age population. 2000-01 Capital Construction Plan (June 2001 Funded Projected Fund Project Timelines Project as of Cost Source Jun -01 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07 All Facilities Yes $37,268,354 1998 XX XX Modernization Bonds All Facilities - 1998 Technology Yes $8,000,000 6 Year XX XX XX XX Modernization Cap Lev Impact Portables Yes $350,000 Fees XX Property Purchase Surplus New Elementary Yes $2,750,000 Property XX School Sale Property Purchase New Middle No $3,300,000 XX School New Elem #13 No $13,000,000 XX XX open New Sr. High No $56,400,000 XX XX XX XX XX open 1! These funds may be secured through local bond issues, sale of real property, impact fees, and state matching funds. The district currently is not eligible for state assistance at the elementary school level. 19 5116/01 / §§ N I�11/a] UI\� 888 98 a#� j/6 |�\ d §$ 6-B94 ��§§7 ao � � ! ! � �!!# 4"L k 272;;; ` %{Iƒ ! t ut% 7 ®r : k� ©�■■■ - �� ,iC \!!0 I�11/a] UI\� 888 98 a#� j/6 |�\ d §$ 6-B94 ��§§7 272;;; ��� ®r ©�■■■ - �� ,iC 2a�BNN ■ � x\!§RR /$�,�R k ) �7- a2la2a ��■t`v lGmB - s _ §_�_ \xi t .) \\ m � § a B § a 8.n8998 k2a ■�q :s }F OCs :3 k: U. t(�§ ui @ks#4r #ka 22, . ,ate `# W ! ! ® !, 2 a�R R # ©§m.a{»=k !§ ��a �a2 A°$ A ZOo |� ! ul � !& 32 » / IL /0 ` k B § a 8.n8998 `89 @ � :s }F ( ui @ks#4r #ka a§a&�R ,ate ! ©§m.a{»=k !§ ��a �a2 A°$ °-|■!kw ZOo ul B § a Z g Ill J_ (i LL Q IL Q U N H H J pp p A N .1-]Etl J Qg O A i�l A �qL 7�t A wui M J 8 C C p y� A o omfV p p ul p Z N FVC N yg{ !p� 8 N p $ N s q yNp Y O� (p Q EO M N H � M N Pp Y v v LU v o 'a o N N g �9iv a g a $$p&o 44 o o'o8 W S r y� U y N o po t o LL w U H po�$ x an a �& Zpa 3 m s a E E LL p 0 O S 8 yr' p C C N N N m P L F gO = a m' O o a =m 2 O am 8. E E LLE m�N'a� E E E E � W n E y V) LU o Ec�ci � W j LL LL � IL Q j C dl O G f 9 E NaNdE 4Jm dWLL '£E a d QU �^ NLZaR 98 Q KO Nzz 0 H tON a f°-f'-:R� uaimi� o cod 5114101 Appendix A.1 - Student Enrollment Projections 5/14V, Auburn School District No. 408 STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS Projective techniques give some consideration to historical and/or current data as a basis for forecasting the future. In addition. the "projecboe must make certain assumptions abort the operant variables within the data being used. These assumptions are "judgmentar by definition. Forecasting can be defined as the extrapolation or logical extension from history to future—or from the known to the unknown. The enclosed tabular data reviews the history of student enrollment, sets out some quantitative assumptions, and Provides projections based on these numerical factors. The projection logic does not attempt to weigh the individual sociological, psychological, economic, and political factors which are present In any demographic analysis and projection. The logic embraces the assumption that whatever these Individual factors have been In the past, they are present today. and will be In the future. it further moderates the irnpact of singular factors by averaging data over thirteen years and six years respectively. The results provide a trend which reflects a long (13 yr.) and a short (6 yr.) base from which to extrapolate. Two methods of estimating the number of kindergarten students have been used. The first uses the average increase over the past 13- and 6 -year time periods and adds it to -each succeeding yearpercentage Auburn been of the five and the second four King County fes what the average r the �pad 5 years and uses this two project the rten students have subsequent four years. The degree to which "actuals" deviate from "projections" can only be measured after the fact. This deviation provides a point of departure to evaluate the effectiveness of the assumptions and logic being used to calculate future projections. Monitoring deviation is critical to the viability f-ind credibility of the projections derived from these techniques. TABLE t - Thirteen Year History of October 1 Enrollments - Page 3 The data L;hown in this table Is the baseline Information used to project future enrollment. This data shhowswst the past record of enrolment for the district on October 1 of each year. TABLE 2 - Historical Factors Used In Projections - Pace 4 This table shows the three basic factors derived from the data in TABLE 1. These factors have been used in the subsequent projections. The three factors are: DII:Ft , : , : 1 J = �, : , This factor is sometimes referred to as "holding power" or "cohort survival." it is a measure of the number of pupils gained or lost as they move from one grade level to the next. This factor Is the average change at each grade level over the 13 or 6 -year period. For example, the kindergarten population increased an average of 7.92 pupils over the 13 -year period, and declined by 9.00 pupils over the most recent 6 -year period. 3) This factor calculates what percent each kindergarten class was of the King County live births 5 years previous. From this Information has been extrapolated the number of kindergarten pupils expected for the next 4 years. TABLE 3 - This set of tables found on pages 5 through 12 utilizes the previously mentioned variables and generates several projections. Spedficatf. Table 3.13 (p. 5) - shows a projection based on the 13 -year average gain in kindergarten (Factor 2) and the 13 -year average charge between grade levels (Factor 1). The data Is shown for the district as a whole. Table 3.6 (p. 5) - shows a projection. using the same scheme as TABLE 3.13 except it shortens the historical to 20k the most recent 6 years. Tables 3.13A 3 3.6A (p. 6) - Uses the same factors as above except Factor 3 Is substituted for Factor 2. That Is, the kindergarten pupils are derived from the long County birth rates instead of the average gain. Tables 3EA3. 3EA, 3E.1 3A. 3E.6A (pp. 7,8) - Breaks out the K-5 grades from the district projection. Summary level data Is provided for percentage gain and pupil gain by grade articulation. Tables 3MS.13, 3MS.6, 3MS.13A, 3MS.6A (pp. 8, 9) - Breaks out grades 6.8 from the district data. Summary level data Is provided for both percentage gain and pupil gain by grade articulation. Tables 3SH.13. 3SH.6. 3SHA3A. 3SHAA (pp. 9.10) - Breaks out grades 9-12 from the district data. Summary level data Is provided for both percentage gain and pupil gain by grade articulation. Table 4 (p. 11) - Collects the four projection models by grade group for ease of comparison. Table 5 (pp. 12, 13. 14) - shows how well each projection model performed when compared to actual enrollments. Data Is provided in both number and percent formats for the past 13 years. Enroll <m � J riclelsivieir�v i�vv�evaY�♦ mvi li44 0'a LU< `}Y N M♦ m W h 0 0 a SJ i o n CL 1'rlrPaIR—O RE-11� ert'ri'm���m���m��'� N N N iV N (V FI FI a0 � ---------------------------------- 8g58R888I �N10Ym0l� Ow � � ,.: j iimlii83l 999 —N W ammrrmw ol�N, v O 0o O CL R d O CL Woil `}Y N M♦ m W h 0 0 a Y$ aas a a a a 8 8 a a p 8 S#888 t�8�$� ¢ $$910 NPlOmbhOwO'' „assasssssaas 8g58R888I �N10Ym0l� Ow � � ,.: j iimlii83l 999 —N W ammrrmw ol�N, v O 0o O CL R d O CL 0 A 0 yp� pp {per aA� A (py app yp� 0 8 pp (py IL 30 at IL 888?g CL?oo##S##6F=#F ILa#s�d�8�8g Sl323S2StS23���oAi bip2S�' KdOPL{d�S�f1f ;sss823,Ri�iritS°� rcSSw3�G2St38$Qi �o d o n 0 CM co X66 kgs#� a F1� rcdg6Emem HCWL #$�S88s�os dL8$?�0l3 CL�&�StSsFi36 �Ss8$i6Fi� dL�##i8SS�°,i3i�Si� 90 �NAlYtltlh00� ��Fp O W 7 tl a C <p Q �N(O�btl f�000 ��F O 11 Q F f O Y OH a M co a De 23�--- rc- Si 7i6tSiC8� CL 31 cc d �p rcg �,aitSiGi38 iii 3s�iSiG75 ��Gdca8S3�?G� a� 3���8ddiSi��d H "CL A A O S S O H CL S G ,TN W OpOhOAcc'NO W J ` D <!'1 O a M co a N W V I E i a Ull .- N 19 Y NInI I Im Y a� ��n a N a� �a a # a� a A. Y.- N p Y N N a w L O Y 0 O a a O T-1 a r Sjg I I ig E �g�o ate- CL caw n�� a 0 .o �= �m n gao�om o Sjg I I ig E IL'"s� IL � - ! co a: a ^ CL rc^$BFA x . CL . g + M IL ^ 8 ^ R 4 a rc�igG�$ CL agog ILIs^ d as ��SlSib���♦ �0 o 0 0 a a a a S3i6s o mill o 03: a � o aII8g yyyyyy P D♦ Q tpl �j 'O r } o i 8 yC !V O 19 1A G d I p N f� rH O pO � � p O i l n idmile CL OL IL C4 IL z�s rc73�$ �2Sa�� 6CL �8MgMIL fil, gs�a� 0 J's ily 711 C,q 1 150 3d51% -iw3 1 It I NO 0 d 0 CL IL 13L CWL IL 0 0 a T a T v 'L d ? 03 gp g 'o d�iti� a'� IL �' d a a E$ IL 0 aw 0 ¢ a o� a Oc IL4 0. Eligg SG S� iO i� g r T a a S a. 0. gg��gg_��gg_ �$i81� g 03$ gg �$!X E a � i$ 0. IL B G G R w or w 3 as gg oSSb 0 a 2 M.. � ggggg$gg w `` 05;s n ..; v- aD � P M �3 K t O o 6 n J 0 G < 0 <w O in w [9 a _ o` 11 I fits <c66 fill a.sb.s HER i==4 in' 10 go'sq NA$*4 00o Ell t4e�; o 9iag CL'CL a a 0 d z CL W gig m +fs'cj l v91l N6 �b8l3 11 NI Nor ui 0 a a m a 0 r n fill 1 fill of ,s e y rx�>W>0-: Hil n ��j o m rrur ds Ot **VtF s off= < y, ;o :No w�rf o�,00 � f- a as $,moo 0 oil I Im Egg q, L 8 L to law Mg O frill <:2m0� of W ui ul `3J Ab � F � M A A <EFa F Ot **VtF s off= < y, ;o :No w�rf � a as $,moo 0 oil I L 8 L to law Mg O frill <:2m0� of W ui ul `3J Ab � F � M A A A O r Q A n A <�aa IFt s < y, ;o :No w�rf � R $,moo 0 oil I L 8 L to ss O frill <:2m0� of W ui ul `3J Ab � F � M A A m IL 33 0 O T -- OL � R $,moo 0 000g O die �$As All I !I `3J Ab � F � M A A m IL 33 0 O T -- OL Appendix A.2 - CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Enrollment Projections 5/1401 Z m000 mw0 QM Wp� aDMy � O W N g�Z d n m � W o CL � M 0 aaoa N 4 d A co M W F = p o aaa F t/0FF Z m000 mw0 QM Wp� aDMy � O W 4 g�Z p n m ay10 4 M 0 W M O M N W M MMMMInn A co M W F = p O) C a0000000 G J 0 a a cla azZ O 0 O M W r N r �ILFW S m N N E Q m Z a pO b m �f"rc a Q w m Q U C o 3 5 w CM O! �.+ o U m Z y 0 52 O m o O !� 3: V m I W OOD OMD O (p w O N pO! q r n~ OD m O 0-0 EI a 3 CZ aoc°>;�o L �(B�M�MMmm�moe-� O pO m it C N m im a } o O d' In 1�+ E a c=a <= IRI o ". O H a 2 o c W a a a QIm���� O t c m £ E 0 0 V U c E +d M In A •� I� N q a o 0 G C d W O C ` YO C W M rod cmc„ate°' w n t y m E 0 0 0 Y Y Y cr CL O m �Ip m S S Ol J J ..1 N N v£ 0 n n d 0 J J J - - - E o a w C- C Z U U p W W c a h L e L N M a d ofc+n 00CL o W 3 o o 0 o va` 4 m U 6 O� m000 mw0 QM Wp� aDMy � O W 4 O 0 N (MV p n m 4 M 0 O O M O M N W M MMMMInn A co M O r` m V- (, a0000000 0ooC4 cla d 0 O M W r N r V V O 0000 O O O q 00 O N N O(� Nfp NM r(p (p fC N 00 N b n N N W A mA m Q o (La- i .- CM O! �.+ y 0 52 O W N h A m O N 1A N N Q 0 0 0 0 0 0� O !� m b .� N f0 r O O O w m I W OOD OMD O (p w O N pO! q r n~ OD m O 0-0 cl 10 �(B�M�MMmm�moe-� a O d' In O O O O O F IRI a n a a a QIm���� v a a a- Qlmm o$ 3 mCl f0 W N M m O O) m +d M In A I� N q a M G M O 0 0 0 0 N O Vn Yqq 0 o M C m O Y�p M 0 0 0 Y Y Y cr CL O m �Ip m S S Ol J J ..1 N N W V N O O J J J `-. •' r N S J J J ao M J J J - - - - tppoC4---- O�m�-Q 4.QQO + h e�op�— ofc+n 00CL o W 3 o o mq 4. eye--. eye eee ePe Oov lb aoo�wwo�oio�iZ W W ev'N�� u-00rnnan�« « C000�=« u -b -6 4; GM�Z ua e a y o « c I n+$ it p O N N M N N w J O co N I' (V p J e• M O r cnM��.IIO m l wq. J F, ::I?F- O w C J e aowrrn�moo�IO cco°M'lemmnl~� N"o M m U O M O Oi 0 0 0 W O O N o.MI M W mI IODI YO N M O Y1 Y M 1� mI� 1 NI'� phi x O s a W a m N V OO W 0:0:0.0 W... W. ©� r O..Qy M m m � O qOq W M m' V N ,.y.:m o�co di�W W..aim mac � o w (V �p #K.' D �W N N 14..0. W to CO OAC m W W �jj W Omi m MH:.N c;: 0 0� 40. Owl W D (p m N CO m M +r.:O (N W W- �'O'm m 0) 5 W CD OMi N n M C4 N 00 r (�V fM(pp m1(��pp (`6%1 rN i � n V n M M O N O m m W N N CO 1A m N M N n m Co O r m O m r m N� N pVj _ O W O M V N O m 0 N m W N L i N m -M M N 20 N w h N O O W W� W W m O/ m 0 m m m n n r N N O O e n • W a O W r r � M C omomm mm��nnn� O W O M m O N N N N M o n m o n W co co W W m W m m m m t� m m O O M m n N CO V V V W W O W n N h O m W m W m N m m M n m N W nI m W W m m m n n n n n n m O m N G N Y p r n W m W O V N m m 0 n m m 4D m N V W N N W N n m� m W m m m n n n m m n n n O q N y� g= r 1 C m m m m n n m m o , I a m.-QQ�NM V m mr m W ��NF i W a QZ �J n Z a o z LU -5 F 0 oUoa LLwF r W y J I�- O Q w v �`*moaocimm nmN mmn�n �e`e _ O mmmmv vnm n�cn 0vm �in000000- o0o cv� o Qno Ih O N 'T r, •s- O1 OD ? m OD m n O e� O a 0 0 0 0 e- n 0 N m w" a m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 °i m C4 OD o v 0 m CL C CO m r m In N m O N m N ao W 00000 000 �'�$� Nin o (omomn mmo O o 0 0 0 0 N CD o 0- 0 0mN N m 0 O i7 ' m m N m 100—, I. Q' O O O O O O O O O O I N N 0 O n O N O O W N N O O N W to N N O a V 0' y O O n M �O, W I0 ad Oi �'.C_.� rn 0) b OOi 0>. H `N N ?.O RIM ^ m r I g It 0) �'.O. NO m m N mh00-C W,mmn 7 �. PN nom.mmmmmb W o'o N:R� 4 p » ° a v a o) O'oom(pOo.ovmnoo.�nm0 �collpp ami d v aD c0 W aD N N m c7 n N' m O O m a.:mm.mmm�. m�r:.�. N'.�o � c c" coo c) U C o o O 0 ' "O m m O m �p n O' t O CO Op co m N n t o R _� to n.m m N N M O o 6 a M o p 0_m o..� m m My1p 0. m �}-.a N cv..M 1^-2^ O� N n l� N N �O n N N b d f0 (+1 m t0 d N 4 ZOa c -mm mmm�y•--e0m�� o w 3 3 o il H = ui �• O O f1p9: m a N` (0.40 n- N F 10 01 ro m 0y0oam-mmooN"OOr`e M.toa �0) inN�'Y ago_ � Ze J j d' O a N _W) m Co 0)6 Q O .O U 00) m. N N .-- m n ~O mui i F N Q Q r N m o m to n m m C4 Y 0 w a Q z J n Z a�o z H 0 W w 0 C) J MM O U�Z g LL W H J QQ�Q C f O < Q W V a C3 1rzz `c t o m a e$ 0 w b j d Q D aa 9 Y` (V to n m Vi V N et O N n N G d a:y r�r�nr�nnnoi auntd� M p = W O cO D O(o< N(p O m M W V rn rn 7 .S-0. as d a W N N M 7 C N m n m W N F Y 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O N N 0 N O f0 O m m O N 0 0 0� 0 O V N C (N a0 t0 IA N . N N N m a 3 � 5 o m ` a�} O 00 O O n N d•- N M O N m n m W� ��-- r r o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o Y 0 0 (� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d d O i O) Co N N� m 0 (7 n w lU O m " N N M V N n f,7 d �• Qo 0 t V q b b V) NO A 0 A m N 4 >L mI�AAbtiNNNNN�MNA ¢UJI d a R i6 Z IN mm O m f0 (N gnZ a,2 o G O O z ' � 0 W ti O O O r W ;3 LL. O O o G O l N p bq q N cm W) ON LL E e �FjQQjQQ�� a N Z a A m (O c M LL O o a 0 0 Qb as •Oj w `A g� r 83 � N q n r q tt j N O 0000 O O: O 0000 mu 40 N `o zo N O O Op q � o m V N NNIL W y W'2 (010- Z IN mm gnZ a,2 o G O O z ' � 0 W ti a W ;3 m O Q O l N p IL A 8 IN U �FjQQjQQ�� a N Z a A q U Q W U R O J`A '10 M 0 Qb as •Oj N `A g� O O O O O".O 0 83 � N q N 1--1 r q tt j N O 0000 00 O 'oG O: O 0000 mu 40 N `o zo N N 4. A E e 0 W y q th NIO OIN 3 n to o m> V OO 000OI Y V N �O N n V. .- Q m -m m OI�WI N N N N N.IoI y Z U a N C q J �o yJtnO�� i L..1 i Q Q N n1 V O IN mm O N' O O OC4 W' N n aD Q O Q O l N p o 10 K IN I o f00 N N N O 0 N O ' O O C O O O O O".O 0 0 O O O. O I O N � N 1--1 I O N O 0000 00 O 'oG O: O 0000 MIO N `o n cNo N OD e 0 00 th NIO OIN n O N Me -O7 n n N '� �. V OO 000OI M"oa r C4 V N �O N n V. .- n U)Oh On: m -m m OI�WI N N N N N.IoI ON N J �o vniNN i L..1 i O f0 f0 NO' Ol l m O m N. m Ql' vl < r N. OOi n n w ((4 cli N O m' O� � M' M �� � V O N � � � N M o o ro yr m m O. O n an N m- O N 't00 NI N m M N_I ^ � W ! f oom m NN.ciV NOm N aN-N�wI O r M m N+ N N"N NII N^ F ISI j I I m a L LL UIL AO W m LL OA •C .q.. W C 9.2 C b LL w I D y$ q CLL r m V)3:V LL m r.fp .Z: h Y L O 'm C v Y L_ O �y 'gyp C A A m. D W Ir. 15 JO a W �NF JO O. W�(AH W fAIF r a A a Ml M_, Ol O cli aD Q N p o 10 IN I o m N N N 0 N M m t O � N 1--1 I I Y -1 h 1 i O MIO z a `o n cNo N e 0 th NIO OIN Io��oN N O O N 0 �o vniNN 7 'w - Z S A Z o� Z _W N W o J a a0 L Q = Z ptL FW EQl� 0 f z <a W W U J b 9 u W J QA F - j O m c Io 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O N Go �- O N A O cp Im m m m m m m m m M N N N O NO iQ N N N N N N N N M N N N i M 0 O Im m m m m m m m m m M M O N N O p Im m m A m m m m m M N N m NNlml IU 02 vE e2 w c Y Q ro a n c O CL e e e 2'�Le to ���pp 3L�vE gE �e Nbn000 Io V Nd OhhN a AAAAAAfhAA W aD lh aG y ppN O mOm�00100 NmV.V mmNn a W Q O) O W m W W ^ m W Y � � I m p N N N N N N N N N N N N NIA N I 0 W- N N N N N N N N N m N IA In A N m ON N N N N N N N N N N N Q n N m QN N M M Q N N m 0 A N m N I A 9 O O O N N M M co 01 A N MIM N N N N N N N N N Q Q Q M m O N I j _-O I i N Q I V N O A A A A A Q a1 m N O I Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q M ch N I N N I , i I O OO N M M N N N A W V O) m O IQ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q M NN I O � M IN M Q Q I M Q V Q M m A Nlm O ; M M M M M M M M M N M o N W O O O O m N m A N O N N N N N N N N N I Ni 0 N N^ eM- N N N Q7 N N V m O I� N i 0 0 m O m A m m m m m M Cl N N m N W 'O •' N M V N'm A m W N 0 Y P/T #4 Dieringer School District Capital Facility Plan (CFP) Update Information Incorporate Dieringer School capital facilities information Comprehensive Plan. District's updated into the City's ATTACHMENT #2 For the purposes of the 2001 amendments to the Capital Facilities Element of the Pierce County Comprehensive Plan, we would like each school district to use the format as outlined in the tables below. Table IX PS 1 Complete -this table as in Pierce County's 2000. Capital Facilities Plan, listing each elementary, each intermediate/middle/junior high, and each high school (see attachment #1). Table IX -PS -1. Current Facilities Inventory Public Schools The inventory of current Public School capital facilities includes the following: Capacity Name (Number of Students) Location Dieringer School District Lake Tapps Elementary 500 1320-178 Ave. E., Sumner. Dieringer Heights Elementary 475 21727-30 St. E., Sumner North Tapps Middle School 510 20029-12d' St. E., Sumner High School 0 TOTAL 1485 Dieringer School District 2001 Capital Facilities Plan Table IX -P 5.2. You do not need to provide any information regarding this table from attachment #1. Table IX -PS -2A. Complete this table by indicating the level of service in square feet per student which has been established at each level (elementary, intennediate/middle/junior high, high school) for your school district. Table IX-PS.2A. School District Service Standards Public School Facilities (Sq uare Feet pmaer Student Name Elementary Middle Junior High Senior High District Name Schools Schools Schools Schools Dieringer 88.4 116.6 NA NA ATTACHMENT IX -PS -2-1 Complete this table as in Pierce County's 2000 Capital Facilities Plan. List proposed individual capacity projects for 2002 -2007. ATTACHMENT IX -PS -2-1 Public- School Facilities INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY PROJECTS Name Capacity Dieringer School District 0 Elementary 0 Intermediate/Middle/Jr. High ------- 0 Senior High NA Table IX -PS -3. Please provide the information for one time period, 2002-2007. Table IX -PS -3. CFP Projects and Financing Plan Sources and Uses of Funds (x $1,000) Public School Facilities Sources/Uses 2002-2007 Sources of Funds Existing Revenue: Bond Proceeds, Reserve S 125 New Revenue: Bonds, Levies, Fees, State Matching Funds, Dedications, Mitigation Payments $45 Total Sources $170 Uses of Funds Capacity Projects: -0- -0- Subtotal Non-Capacity Projects: $170 Subtotal $170 Total Costs $170 Balance Surplus or (Deficit) $o Table IX -PS -5. The "total Cost" in the following table shows the total cost of capacity projects needed to meet the level of service standards for school facilities. To calculate "Total Cost," you can use the following formula: Total Cost Net Deficiency (from "Net Reserve or Deficiency" column) x School District Cost per Student (from Table IX -PS -5A.) Because "School District Cost Per Student" (from Table IX -PS -5A.) differs among the elementary, intermediatelmiddle/jumior high, and high schools, separate calculations need to be trade for each, and then added together to obtain the "Total Cost" figure. If the "Net Reserve or Deficiency" column shows a new reserve, the "Total Cost' column will be zero. Table IX -PS -5. Capital Facility Requirements, to 2007 Public School Facilities See Table IX -PS -5A for individual rates at each level. Time Period Student Student Net Reserve Total Cost Population/ Capacity or (Cost/Student Student Demand (Deficiency) x Net Deficiency) 2001 Actual 1,110 1,485 375 2002-2007 Growth 1,178 1,485 307 Non -Capacity Costs 170 Total Cost as of 2007 170 Table IX -PS -5A. Complete this table as in Pierce County's 2000 Capital Facilities Plan. If possible, use 2001 dollar;. If you are using dollars from a different year, indicate the year. Table IX -PS -5A. School District Cost Per Student Public School Facilities 2001 Dollars District Name Elementary Middle Junior High Senior High Schools Schools Schools Schools Dieringer 22,578 24,920 PIT #5 City of Auburn Comprehensive Sewer Plan 2001 Comprehensive Sewer analyzing the future sewer system and to anticipate and plan improvement to the for the next 20 years. Plan documenting and needs of the sanitary be used as a tool to for maintenance and sanitary sewer system The City of Auburn Comprehensive Sewer Plan 2001 consists of two documents including the "Comprehensive Sewer Plan 2001" and its separately bound "Comprehensive Sewer Plan 2001 Appendices". NOTE: A complete copy of the approved City of Auburn Comprehensive Sewer Plan 2001 consisting of the "Comprehensive Sewer Plan 2001° and its separately bound "Comprehensive Sewer Plan 2001 Appendices" is available for public inspection at the Office of the City Clerk, Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main Street, Auburn Washington. P/T #6 City of Auburn Comprehensive Water Plan 2001 Update of the Comprehensive Water Plan to comply with the requirements of Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 246-290-100 and the Washington State Department of Health provisions on water system planning. Among other items, the proposed Comprehensive Water Plan provides a description of existing conditions and analyzes future demand. The City of Auburn Comprehensive Water Plan 2001 consists of three documents entitled "Comprehensive Water Plan 2001 ", "Comprehensive Water Plan 2001 Appendix —Volume 1" and "Comprehensive Water Plan 2001 Appendix —Volume II". NOTE: A complete copy of the approved City of Auburn Comprehensive Water Plan 2001 consisting of a document entitled "Comprehensive Water Plan 2001", as well as a "Comprehensive Water Plan 2001 Appendix - volume r and a Comprehensive Water Plan Appendix - Volume II", is available for public inspection at the Office of the City Clerk, Auburn City Hall 25 West Main Street, Auburn Washington. P/T #7 Miscellaneous Text Amendments Miscellaneous text amendments affecting Chapters 3 (Land Use Element); 5 (Capital Facilities Element); 7 (Transportation Element); Chapter 9 (Environment Element); Chapter 14 (Comprehensive Plan Map Element); and Chapter 15 (Implementation) for the purpose of updating information, making policies consistent with State law, referencing the newly adopted Downtown Sub -area Plan etc. P/T #7 MISCELLANEOUS TEXT AMENDMENTS A. Chapter 3. Land Use Element Page 3-31 P011cv LU -86 Amend LU -86 as follows, B. Chapter 5. Capital Facilities Element Page 5-3 P01ICV CF -5 Delete Policy CF -5 as follows. C. Chapter 7 Transportation Element Page 7-8 POIICV TR -13 See following pages for amending language. 0. Chapter 7 Transportation Element Page 7-20 Update the TIP summary page with this years adopted TIP summary page. (see following pages for amended summary page.) Insert 4500" in place of °300" to maintain consistency with state law. some clarifying revisions as well. "EN -48 Mineral resource areas or lands are those lands which have high quality resources that can be commercially mined for a minimum of twenty years (Map 9.3A). Properties around which urban growth is occurring should not be considered as mineral resource areas. As required by RCW 36.70A.060, the City shall require notification on all plats, short plats, development permits and building permits issued for development within 300 500 feet of these lands than: on which a variety of commercial activities may occur on these —lands that are not compatible with residential development for certain periods of limited duration." "Appropriate Implementation" section states that the "Downtown" plan designation can be Implemented by "five" possible zoning districts yet only four are listed. include C-1 (Light Commercial) District. "Downtown Purpose: To create a vibrant people oriented downtown which serves as the business, governmental and cultural focal point of the Community that includes multifamily residential development. Appropriate Implementation: This designation can be Implemented by five possible zoning districts, depending upon the specific character of that portion of the downtown: 1) The Main Street retail core should be implemented by the C-2 Central Business District. 2) The area around Auburn General Hospital should be designated with the RO-H (Residential Office -Hospital) District. 3) For some portions the C-3 (Heavy Commercial) district may be appropriate. 4) For primarily residential areas, the R-4 (Multiple Family Residential) district may be appropriate." 5) For some Portions the C-1 (Light Commercial) district may be appropriate. G. chapter 15. Implementation Element Page 15-7 Update text to reflect adoption of Auburn Downtown Plan in 2001. "Downtown Plan The future of the downtown area Is a key concern of this Comprehensive Plan. Consequently the psRsiese€ the War) call a detailed subarea- plan for the downtown area that outlines strateoles and 2 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Policy/Text (P/T) #7C Transportation Element Policy TR -13 A. Definitions 1. Dead e 2. not require a temporary cul de sac. AB. Access in new development: ssheels OF par4s. 2. 3. City Council Mating December 3, 2001 Comp. Plan Amend. VC (Policy 1R-13) 4. RC. Access to existing areas: Nii arises. D. Acceptable Traffic Volumes Projected trip generation shall be calculated based on the current edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers fiTE) Trip Generation Manual. E. Community Notification measures. City Council Mewing December 3, 2001 Comp. Plan Amend. OC (Policy TR -13) I �111111�11MI�r1A11r1�1