Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6138ORDINANCE NO. 6 1 3 8 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 RCW CHAPTER 36.70A WHEREAS, the City of Auburn on August 18, 1986 adopted a Comprehensive Plan by Resolution No. 1703 which includes a Map establishing the location of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations throughout the City; and WHEREAS, on April 17, 1995 the City of Auburn 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, Comprehensive Plan map and text amendments were processed by the Planning, Building, and Community Department as proposed Year 2007 amendments to the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the environmental impacts of the Year 2007 Comprehensive Plan amendments were considered in accordance with procedures of the State Environmental Policy Act; and WHEREAS, 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 Ordinance No. 6138 December 4, 2007 Page 1 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 September 5, 2007 and October 2, 2007 conducted public hearings on the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, at the public hearing the Auburn City Planning Commission heard public testimony and took evidence and exhibits into consideration; and WHEREAS, thereafter the Auburn City Planning Commission made recommendations to the City Council on the proposed Year 2007 Comprehensive Plan map and text amendments; and WHEREAS, the Auburn City Council considers school impact fees under a separate ordinance; and WHEREAS, on November 26, 2007 the Public Works Committee of the Auburn City Council reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendations; and WHEREAS, on December 10, 2007 the Planning and Community Development Committee of the Auburn City Council made a recommendation to the City Council; and WHEREAS, on December 17, 2007, the Auburn City Council considered the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments as recommended by the City of Auburn Planning Commission; and NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Ordinance No. 6138 December 4, 2007 Page 2 Section 1. The 2007 Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments and Map Amendments are herewith adopted and approved as set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference and it is herewith directed that they be filed along with this Ordinance with the Auburn City Clerk and be available for public inspection. Section 2. The 2007 Comprehensive Plan amendments modify the Comprehensive Plan adopted on August 18, 1986 by Resolution No. 1703 and adopted by Ordinance No. 4788 on September 5, 1995. Section 3. The Comprehensive Plan and amendments are 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 RCW. 43.21 C.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. Ordinance No. 6138 December 4, 2007 Page 3 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. INTRODUCED: PASSED: APPROVED: ATTEST: A"z7L"Lj_ Da 'elle E. Daskam, City Mork APPROVED 1};�(niel B. Heid; City Attorney TO FORM: Peter B. MAYOR Published: 11- - Z -t - Ordinance No. 6138 December 4, 2007 Page 4 DEC 1 7 2007 DEC 1 7 2007 EXHIBIT A Ordinance No. 6138, Exhibit A 2007 PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE AUBURN Mau ��T PLAN AMENDMENT AREA 1 WASH INGTpN Q W MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL HANGE M HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL a HEAVY INDUSTRIAL E LIGHTCOMMERCIAL PUBLIC AND QUASI -PUBLIC SIDENTIAL M HEAVY COMMERCIAL N 2007 PROPOSED111001 COMPREHENSIVE AUBURN `.Tl. PLAN AMENDMENT AREA 2 WASHINGTON SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LIGHT COMMERCIAL CITY LIMITS PUBLIC AND QUASI -PUBLIC ® PROPOSED AREA CHANGE MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL -OPEN SPACE �_ EXISTING LAND USE HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL : COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP `I"'°` * ' AMENDMENT #4 — B ST NW WA$HING70N M, tDm ]]l,,a� Q CITY LIMITS HEAVY COMMERCIAL PUBLIC AND QUASI -PUBLIC PROPOSED AREA CHANGE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL r� u AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Construction progress of Arthur Jacobsen Elementary • Adopted by the Auburn School District Board of Directors April 23, 2007 AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 408 915 Fourth Street NE Auburn, Washington 98002 (253) 931-4900 Serving Students in: Unincorporated King County City of Auburn City of Algona City of Kent City of Pacific BOARD of DIRECTORS Carol Helgerson Craig Schumaker Janice Nelson Clarissa Ruston Ray Vefik Linda S. Cowan, Superintendent '-(-Avenue to Excellence" • • Table of Contents • Section I Executive Summary ....................... Page 1 Section II Enrollment Projections ..................... Page 6 Section 111 Standard of Service ........................ Page 8 Section IV Inventory of Facilities ....................... Page 15 Section V Pupil Capacity ................................ Page 18 Section VI Capital Construction Plan ................. Page 21 Section VII Impact Fees .................................. Page 24 Section VIII Appendices ................................... Page 28 Appendix A.1 -Student Enrollment Projections Page 29 Appendix A.2 - Capital Facilities Plan Projections Page 43 Appendix A.3 - Student Generation Survey Page 48 0 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007 through 2013 1. 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 pian was prepared using data available in the spring of 2007. 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 the collection of impact fees in the unincorporated areas of King County and within the City of Auburn and City of Kent; the King County Council, the City of Auburn and the City of Kent will adopt this Plan by reference as part of each jurisdiction's respective comprehensive plan. To enable the collection of impact fees in the 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 authorize the District to define its 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; class 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 2006-07 capacity was 13,168 whereas Full Time ("FTE") u Eq "FTE") enrollment for this • same period was 13,734.66. The actual number of individual students was 14,418 as of October 1, 2006. (See Section V for more specific information.) The capital construction plan shown in Section VI addresses the additions to the District's existing facilities. This provided for a new high school approved by the voters in February 2003 and opened in September 2005 and the addition of two new elementary schools approved by the voters in February 2005. Also, the acquisition of a new middle school site and construction of a new middle school and the acquisition of a new elementary school site is needed to accommodate growth. The new facilities are required to meet the projected student population increase to be generated from the large development areas within the Auburn School District. Three areas that have significant impact on the school district are the Lakeland South, the Lea Hill, and the north Auburn valley areas of the district. There are other pockets of development that impact the District as well. The City of Kent has an area of approximately 158 acres that was sold to developers in 2004. The School Impact Fee Ordinances adopted by King County, the City of Auburn and the City of Kent 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. The student generation factors have been generated using the students who actually attend school in the Auburn School District from single family and multi -family • developments constructed in the last five years. The method of collecting the data is with the use of GIS mapping software, data from King County and Pierce County GIS; and to integrate the mapping with student data from the District data system. This method gives the District actual student generation numbers for each grade span for identified developments. This data is contained in Appendix A.3. 0 Auburn School District No. 408 • CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007 through 2013 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN CHANGES FROM 2006 TO 2007 Listed below is a summary level outline of the changes from the 2006 Capital Facilities Plan that are a part of the 2007 Plan. The changes are noted by Section for ease of reference. Section I Executive Summary A. Updated to reflect new information within the Plan. B. Summary level list of changes from previous year. Section 11 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 1 additional classroom at the elementary level. • B. Increase of 1 learning specialist classroom at elementary level C. Increase of 1 early childhood classroom at elementary level D. Reduction of 1 second grade TOSA program at elementary level E. Increase of 4 full day kindergarten programs at elementary level F. Increase of 2 special education resource rooms at elementary level G. Increase of 1 structured learning classroom at middle school level H. Reduction of 2 special education resource rooms at high school level • Section IV Inventory of Facilities Updated to include Arthur Jacobsen Elementary School in inventory, opening 2007. Section V Pupil Capacity Updated to include Arthur Jacobsen Elementary School in inventory, opening 2007. 4 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007 through 2013 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Section VII Impact Fees CHANGES TO IMPACT FEE DATA ELEMENTS 2006 to 2007 DATA ELEMENTS _T CPF 2006 CPF 2007 EXPLANATION Student Generation Factors Single Family Consistent with King County Ordinance 11621, Elementary 0.3010 0.3120 Student Generation Factors are calculated Mid School 0.1510 0.1270 by the school district based on district Sr. High 0.1660 0.1610 records of average actual student generation Multi -Family rates for new developments constructed Elementary 0.0611 0.0460 over the last five years. Mid School 0.0317 0.0190 Sr. High 0.0452 0.0340 School Construction Costs Elementary $16,900,000 $21,500,000 Updated project estimated costs. Middle School $30,000,000 $42,000,000 Updated project estimated costs. High School $58,500,000 $0 High School in full operation Site Aquistion Costs Cost per acre $146,000 $228,269 Updated estimates on land costs Boeckh Index $154.22 $154.22 Updated to projected SPI schedule.(G. Beck) Match % - State 55.71% 58.11% Updated to current SPI schedule. Match % - District 44.29% 41.89% Computed District Average AV Single Family $237,281 $257,404 Updated from February 2007 King County Dept of Assessments data. Multi -Family $57,530 $69,427 Updated from March 2007 King County Dept of Assessments data using weighted average. Debt Sery Tax Rate $2.39 $2.14 Current Fiscal Year GO Bond Int Rate 4.39% 4.08% Current Rate (Bond Buyers 20 Index 3-07) Section VIII Appendices Appendix A.1 - Updated enrollment projections from October 1, 2006 Appendix A.2 - Updates enrollment projections with anticipated buildout schedule. Appendix A.3 - Student Generation Surrey • 0 • Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007 through 2013 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 and Lea Hill areas as shown in Appendix A.2. TABLE ASD ENROLLMENT 2007-2008 11.1 PROJECTIONS Oct 2006 2010-2011 2011-2012 ACTUAL PROJ PROJ PROJ PROJ PROJ PROJ GRADE 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 KDG 941 960 978 1000 1022 1037 1053 1 1012 1013 1032 1056 1079 1095 1111 2 1002 1041 1042 1065 1088 1104 1120 3 1031 1040 1079 1084 1107 1124 1140 4 1049 1060 1069 1112 1118 1135 1152 5 998 1084 1095 1109 1153 1152 1169 K-5 6033 6197 6295 6424 6567 6647 6745 6 1058 1028 1114 1130 1145 1181 1181 7 1014 1096 1066 1156 1172 1179 1216 8 1072 1043 1125 1099 1190 1198 1206 6-8 3144 3167 3305 3385 3506 3559 3602 9 1372 1385 1362 1456 1439 1527 1542 10 1400 1322 1332 1311 1402 1372 1458 11 1322 1326 1244 1255 1231 1310 1277 12 1147 1248 1249 1169 1178 1144 1221 9-12 5241 5281 5188 5192 5250 5353 5497 TOTALS 14418 14645 14787 15001 15323 15558 15844 GRADES K-12 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 K-5 w/K @ 1/2 5563 5717 5806 5924 6056 6128 6219 6-8 3144 3167 3305 3385 3506 3559 3602 9-12 5241 5281 5188 5192 5250 5353 5497 K-12 WK @ 1/2 13948 14166 14298 14501 14812 15040 15318 7 • • • Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007 through 2013 STANDARD OF SERVICE The School Impact Fee Ordinances adopted by King County, the City of Auburn and the City of Kent 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 configurations, 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 thirteen elementary schools housing 6,033 students in grades K through 5. The 905 of the 955 Kindergarten students attend 1/2 days throughout the year. Grades 1 • through 5, plus 125 kindergartners, attend on a full day basis. When converted to a full time equivalence the K-5 enrollment is 5,563. Four middle schools house 3,144 students in grades 6 through 8. The District operates three comprehensive senior high schools and one alternative high school housing 5,241 students in grades 9 through 12. The District opened the fourth high school in the fall of 2005. 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/teacher 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 STRUCTURED LEARNING AND BEHAVIOR AND DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED SPECIAL EDUCATION The Auburn School District operates a structured learning program for students with moderate disabilities at the elementary school level which currently uses eight classrooms to provide for 96 students. The housing requirements for this program are provided for in the SPI space guidelines. No loss of capacity is expected unless population with disabilities grows at a disproportionate rate compared to total elementary population. 0 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007 through 2013 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. Seventeen standard classrooms are required to house this program. The housing requirements for this program exceed the SPI space guidelines by eleven standard classrooms. The loss of capacity is expected as growth in program is larger than the total elementary population. Loss of Permanent Capacity 11 rooms @ 26.5 each = (292) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (292) NATIVE AMERICAN RESOURCE ROOM The Auburn School District operates one resource room to support the education of Native American students at the elementary level. One standard classroom is fully dedicated to serve these students. Loss of Permanent Capacity 1 room @ 26.5 each = (27) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (27) HEAD START The Auburn School District operates a Head Start program for approximately 118 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) EARLY CHILDHOOD SPECIAL EDUCATION The Auburn School District operates a pre-school program for young children with disabilities below age five. This program is housed at seven different elementary schools and currently uses nine standard classrooms. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 7 rooms @ 26.5 each = (186) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (186) EIe7 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007 through 2013 STANDARD OF SERVICE 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) 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 14 rooms @ 26.5 each = (371) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (371) 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 fourteen standard classrooms that are not • provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 14 rooms @ 26.5 each = (371) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (371) SECOND GRADE TOSA PROGRAM The Auburn School District provides a TOSA reading specialist program for nine highly impacted elementary schools. This pullout model provides direct instruction to students who are not at grade level and do not receive other services. This program requires eight standard classrooms that are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 8 rooms @ 26.5 each = (212) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (212) ELEMENTARY LEARNING SPECIALIST PROGRAM The Auburn School District provides a learning specialist program to increase literacy skills for first and second graders. This program model has been created from the 1-728 funds and currently has the specialist going into existing teacher classrooms, as well as pulling out students into designated classrooms. The district is utilizing classrooms at all fourteen elementary schools. Loss of Permanent Capacity 14 rooms @ 26.5 each = (371) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (371) • 11 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007 through 2013 • STANDARD OF SERVICE MIDDLE SCHOOLS STRUCTURED LEARNING CENTER AND DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED SPECIAL EDUCATION The Auburn School District operates three structured learning classrooms at the middle school level for students with moderate disabilities. One developmentally disabled classroom for students with profound disabilities. The housing requirements for this program are provided in the SPI space allocations. ACCESS SPECIAL EDUCATION The Auburn School District provides a transition program for students with behavioral disorders. The program is housed at one of the middle schools and uses one classroom. The housing requirements for this program are provided in the SPI space allocations. SPECIAL EDUCATION RESOURCE ROOMS The Auburn School District operates a resource room program for each grade at the middle school level. This is to accommodate special education students needing remedial instruction to address their specific disabilities. Three classrooms per school (twelve total) are required to provide for approximately 300 students. The housing requirements for this program are not entirely provided for in the SPI space guidelines. MIDDLE SCHOOL COMPUTER LABS The Auburn School District operates a minimum of one computer lab at each middle school. This program • utilizes a standard classroom 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 (1 20T_ ENGLISH ASA SECOND LANGUAGE The Auburn School District operates a pullout program at the middle school level for students learning English as a second language. This program requires four standard classrooms that 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 (1 20)_ 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 11/08/06 identifies 151 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) 12 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007 through 2013 STANDARD OF SERVICE SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SENIOR HIGH COMPUTER LABS The Auburn School District operates two computer labs at each of the senior high schools. This program utilizes two standard classrooms at comprehensive high schools and one at West Auburn. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 7 rooms @ 30 each = (210) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (210) ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE The Auburn School District operates a pullout program at three comprehensive high schools for students learning English as a second language. This program requires five standard classrooms that 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) STRUCTURED LEARNING CENTER PROGRAM The Auburn School District operates four structured learning center classrooms for 46 students with • moderate to severe disabilities. The housing requirements for this program are provided in the SPI space guidelines. 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 learning disabilities. The current senior high school program requires thirteen classrooms to provide for approximately 404 students. The SPI space guidelines provide for one of the thirteen teaching stations. Loss of Permanent Capacity 12 rooms @ 30 each = (360) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (360) PERFORMING ARTS CENTERS 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 not 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. Loss of Permanent Capacity 8.33 rooms @ 30 each = (250) • 13 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007 through 2013 • STANDARD OF SERVICE ROOM UTILIZATION 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 95% utilization of all available teaching stations. SPI Report #3 dated 11/08/06 identifies 148 teaching stations available in the senior high facilities. The utilization pattern results in a loss of approximately 10 teaching stations. Loss of Permanent Capacity 10 rooms @ 30 each = (300) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (300) STANDARD OF SERVICE COMPUTED TOTALS ELEMENTARY Loss of Permanent Capacity = (2,014) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 Total Capacity Loss (2,014) MIDDLE SCHOOL Loss of Permanent Capacity = (480) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 Total Capacity Loss (480) SENIOR HIGH Loss of Permanent Capacity = Loss of Temporary Capacity (1,270) 0 Total Capacity Loss (1,270) TOTAL Loss of Permanent Capacity = (3,764) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 Total Capacity Loss (3,764) • 14 • • • Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007 through 2013 INVENTORY OF FACILITIES Table IV.1 shows the current inventory of permanent district facilities and their OSPI rated capacities. Table IV.2 shows the number and location of each portable 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 district needs until permanent facilities can be financed and constructed. Relocatable facilities are deemed to be interim, stop gap measures that often place undesirable stress on existing physical plants. Core facilities (i.e. gymnasiums, restrooms, kitchens,.labs, lockers, libraries, etc.) are not of sufficient size or quantity to handle the increased school population served by adding relocatable classrooms. Table Permanent Facilities IV.1 @ OSPI Rate Capacity (November 2006) District School Facilities Building Capacig Acres Address Elementary Schools Washington Elementary 492 5.40 20 E Street Northeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Terminal Park Elementary 401 6.70 1101 D Street Southeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Dick Scobee Elementary 550 10.50 1031 14th Street Northeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Pioneer Elementary 415 8.30 2301 M Street Southeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Chinook Elementary 485 8.75 3502 Auburn Way South, Auburn WA, 98092 Lea Hill Elementary 459 10.00 30908 124th Avenue Southeast, Auburn WA, 98092 Gildo Rey Elementary 531 10.00 1005 37th Street Southeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Evergreen Heights Elem. 456 8.09 1 5602 South 316th, Auburn WA, 98001 Al ac Elementary 494 10.60 310 Milwaukee Boulevard North, Pacific WA 98047 Lake View Elementary 595 16.40 16401 Southeast 318th Street, Auburn WA, 98092 Hazelwood Elementary 578 12.67 11815 Southeast 304th Street, Auburn WA, 98092 Ilalko Elementary 585 12.00 301 Oravetz Place Southeast, Auburn WA, 98092 Lakeland Hills Element 585* 12.00 " 1020 Ever een Way SE, Auburn WA,98092 Arthur Jacobsen Element 585* 10.00 29205 132nd Street SE, Auburn, WA 98092 ELEM CAPACITY 7211 Middle Schools Cascade Middle School 836 17.30 1015 24th Street Northeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Olympic Middle School 898 17.40 1825 K Street Southeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Rainier Middle School 849 26.33 30620 116th Avenue Southeast, Auburn WA, 98092 Mt. Baker Middle School 845 30.88 620 37th Street Southeast, Auburn WA, 98002 MS CAPACITY 3,428 Senior High Schools West Auburn High School 231 5.10 401 West Main Street, Auburn WA, 98001 Auburn Senior High 2,261 18.60 800 Fourth Street Northeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Auburn Riverside HS 1,388 33.00 501 Oravetz Road Auburn WA 98092 Auburn Mountainview HS 1,431 40.00 28900124w Ave SE, Auburn, WA 98092 SH CAPACITY 5,311 TOTAL CAPACITY 15,950 *Estimated - Not included in November 2006 OSPI Report 16 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007 through 2013 INVENTORY OF FACILITIES TABLE TEMPORARY/RELOCATABLE 2007-08 IV.2 FACILITIES INVENTORY 2010-11 2011-12 March 2007 Cascade Elementary Location 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 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 5 5 2 2 2 2 2 Gildo Rey 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Evergreen Heights 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 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 llalko 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 Lakeland Hills Elementary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Arthur Jacobsen Elements - 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL UNITS 33 30 29 29 29 29 29 TOTAL CAPACITY 875 795 769 769 769 769 769 Middle School Location 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 Cascade 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 Olympic 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 Rainier 5 5 8 8 8 8 8 Mt. Baker 4 4 6 6 8 8 8 TOTAL UNITS 9 9 16 18 20 20 20 TOTAL CAPACITY 1 270 1 270 1 480 1 540 1 600 1 600 1 600 Sr. High School Location 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 West Auburn 0 0 1 1 -1 1 1 Auburn 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Auburn Riverside 10 13 13 13 13 13 13 Auburn Mountainview 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL UNITS 22 25 26 26 26 26 26 TOTAL CAPACITY 660 750 780 780 780 780 780 (COMBINED TOTAL UNITS 64 73 75 75 COMBINED TOTAL CAPACITY I 1 805 1 1.815 12 029 1 2.089 I 2149 12.149 I 2.149 I 17 • • • 1, 3� Z Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007 through 2013 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 its programs. Changes in the capacity of the district recognize new unfunded facilities. The combined effect of these adjustments is shown on Line B in Tables VA and V.2 below. Table V.1 shows the Distict's capacity with relocatable units included and Table V.2 without these units. Table VA B. Capacity Adjustments Capacity 3,764 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 WITH relocatables A. SPI Capacity 15,365 15,365 15,950 15,950 15,950 16,750 16,750 A.1 SPI Capacity -New Elem 15,558 585 E. ASD Surplus/Deficit (3,057) (2,459) (2,601) (2,815) A.2 SPI Capacity- New MS CAPACITY ADJUSTMENTS 800 B. Capacity Adjustments 2,199 1,949 1,735 1,675 1,615 1,615 1,615 13,166 14,001 14,215 14,275 15,135 15,135 15,135 C. Net Capacity D. ASD Enrollment 14,418 14,645 14,787 15,001 15,323 15,558 15,844 E. ASD Surplus/Deficit (1,252) (644) (572) (727) (188) (424) (710) CAPACITY ADJUSTMENTS Include Relocatable 1,805 1,815 2,029 2,089 2,149 2,149 2,149 Exclude SOS (pg 14 4,004 3,764 3,764 3,764 (3,764) (3,764 3,764 Total Adjustments (2,199) (1,949) (1,735) (1,675) (1,615) (1,615) (1,615) Table V.2 Capacity WITHOUT relocatables 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 A. SPI Capacity 15,365 15,365 15,950 15,950 15,950 16,750 16,750 A.1 SPI Capacity -New Elem 585 1/ A.2 SPI Capacity- New MS 800 19 (3,764) 12,986 15,844 (2,858) 764 • • B. Capacity Adjustments 4,004 3,764 3,764 3,764 3,764 3,764 11,361 12,186 12,186 12,186 12,986 12,986 C. Net Capacity D. ASD Enrollment 14,418 14,645 14,787 15,001 15,323 15,558 E. ASD Surplus/Deficit (3,057) (2,459) (2,601) (2,815) (2,337) (2,572) CAPACITY ADJUSTMENTS 2/ Exclude SOS p14 41004 3,764 3,764 3,764 3,764 3,764 (4,004) (3,764) (3,764) (3,764) Total Adjustments 1/ New facilities shown in 2010-11 are not funded under the current Capital Facilities Plan. 2/ The Standard of Service represents 26.05% of SPI capacity. When new facilities are added the Standard of Service computations are decreased to 23.95% of SPI capacity. 3/ Students beyond the capacity are accomodated in other spaces (commons, library, theater, shared teaching space). 19 (3,764) 12,986 15,844 (2,858) 764 • • • PERMANENT FACILITIES @ SPI Rated Capacity (March 2007) �i A_ C. Elementary Schools Aubum School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007 through 2013 PUPIL CAPACITY Building 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 Washington 492 492 492 492 492 492 492 Terminal Park 401 401 401 401 401 401 401 Dick Scobee 550 550 550 550 550 550 550 Pioneer 415 415 415 415 415 415 415 Chinook 485 485 485 485 485 485 485 Lea Hill 459 459 459 459 459 459 459 Gildo Rey 531 531 531 531 531 531 531 Ever Heights 456 456 456 456 456 456 456 Alpac 494 494 494 494 494 494 494 Lake View 595 595 595 595 595 595 595 Hazelwood 578 578 578 578 578 578 578 Ilalko 585 585 585 585 585 585 585 Lakeland Hills Elementar 585 585 585 585 585 585 585 Arthur Jacobsen 0 585 585 585 585 585 585 Elemenarty #15 ELEM CAPACITY 6,6261 7,211 1 7,211 1 7,211 7,211 7,211 .7,211 Middle Schools Building 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 Cascade 836 836 836 836 836 836 836 Olympic 898 898 898 898 898 898 898 Rainier 849 849 849 849 849 849 849 Mt. Baker 845 845 845 845 845 845 845 Middle School #5 0 01 0 0 8001 800 800 MS CAPACITY 1 3,4281 3,4281 3,4281 3,4281 4,2281 4,2281 4,228 Senior Hiqh Schools Building 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 West Auburn 231 231 231 231 231 231 231 Auburn 2,261 2,261 2,261 2,261 2,261 2,261 2,261 Auburn Riverside 1,388 1,388 1,388 1,388 1,388 1,388 1,388 Auburn Mountainview 1,431 1,431 1,431 1,431 1,431 1,431 1,431 SH CAPACITY 5,311 5,311 5,311 5,311 5,311 5,311 5,311 COMBINED CAPACITY 1 15,365 1 15,950 1 15,950 1 15,950 1 16,750 1 16,750 1 16,750 20 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN • 2007 through 2013 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 2005 a replacement technology levy was approved to continue to support technology across all facets of the District's teaching, learning and operations. 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. In April of 2002, the Board formed a fifth citizen's Ad Hoc committee to address the following two items and make recommendations to the board in the Fall of 2002: a. A review of the conclusion and recommendations of 1985 and 1995 Ad Hoc Committees related to accommodating high school enrollment growth. This includes the review of possible financing plans for new facilities. b. Develop recommendations for accommodating high school enrollment growth for the next 10 years if a new senior high school is not built. This committee recommended the board place the high school on the ballot for the fifth time in February 2003. The February election approved the new high school at 68.71 % yes votes. The school opened in the Fall of 2005. In the Fall of 2003 the school board directed the administration to begin the planning and design for Elementary #13 and Elementary #14. In the Fall of 2004, the Auburn School Board passed resolution #1054 to place on the ballot in February 2005 two elementary schools. The voters approved the ballot measure in February of 2005 at 64.72%. Lakeland Hills Elementary (Elementary #13) opened in the Fall of 2006. • Arthur Jacobsen Elementary (Elementary #14) is under construction in the Lea Hill area on a 10 acre site and is scheduled to open in the Fall of 2007. MRA 1/ 1/ Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007 through 2013 CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN In the 2004-05 school year, the Board convened a sixth Citizen's Ad Hoc committee to again study and make recommendations about the future impacts in the District. One of the areas of study was the need for New Facilities and Modernization. The committee made a number of recommendations including school size, the need for a new middle school, and to begin a capital improvements program to modernize or replace facilities based upon criterion. The committee also recommended that the District have Middle School #5 on-line by Fall of 2009. During the 2005-06 school year, a Joint District Citizen's Ad Hoc Committee was appointed by the Auburn and Kent School Boards to make recommendations on how best to serve the school population that will come from an area that includes a number of projected developments in the north Auburn valley. On May 17, 2006 the Ad Hoc Committee presented its recommendation at a joint meeting of the Auburn and Kent Boards of Directors. On June 14, 2006 the Kent School Board adopted Resolution No. 1225 authorizing the process to initiate the adjustment of the boundaries of the District in accordance with the Ad Hoc Committee's recommendation. On June 26, 2006 the Auburn School Board adopted a companion Resolution No. 1073 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 Kent to Auburn effective September 29, 2006. The District is projecting 1358 additional students within the six year period including the Lakeland, Lea Hill, and north Auburn valley areas. This increase in student population will require the acquisition of a new middle school and new elementary school sites and construction of a middle school and elementary school during the six year window. 0 - Based upon the District's capacity data and enrollment projections, as well as the student generation data included in Appendix A.3, the District has determined that approximately seventy-two percent of the capacity improvements are necessary to serve the students generated from new development, with the remaining • additional capacity required to address existing need. 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 and passage of bond issues. 2006-13 Capital Construction Plan March 2007 Projected Fund Project Timelines Project Funded Cost Source 06-07 07-08 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 All Facilities - 2006 Technology Yes $12,000,000 6 Year XX XX XX XX XX Modernization Cap Lev Impact Portables Yes $700,000 Fees XX XX XX XX Property Purchase Impact New Middle School Yes $5,000,000 Fees XX XX New Elementary Yes $2,500,000 State Mat XX XX XX Bond XX Lakeland Hills Elem Yes $16,900,000 Impact Fee open Bond XX XX Arthur Jacobsen Elem Yes $21,500,000 impact Fee const open Bond XX XX XX XX Middle School #5 No $42,000,000 impact F plan const const open Bond XX XX -Elementary #15 No $24,000,000 impact Fee plan const 1/ These funds may be secured through local bond issues, sale of real property, impact fees, and state matching funds. The District currently is not eligible for state assistance at the elementary school level. 23 z J d IL W N w Jp 3 U c o Q r M LL r N J c `o N Q a ^ O N U N tm a o x � C n N_ Qa C O C D n � 2 m r T co U C L LT LL Q C L L 41 n 3 co (j LUQ 3 a O T y cc y� f0 7 Z ND_ C W N ':3 C Q U N p 0 m E cg t0ju v w W _d d u� y Lm c•y*k� N P) 4) �"',o oo aQ V C ' N U)C f0 a m D�� z C=a a N E F. o _p1 Q WVA LL c (D a V) x N E. aLL 'p � O LL W = h N M 75 Vi V) 69 2 f0'T00co LL V: C� y rn v r M � V9 V) V) t O O O LL v R M O Y O O O O Cl O cu m LL p y O co m R T ON C W O O _O LL N a) m c: or000 3 m C U) N � O Q LL �m c_rn rn _rn T o E O O o Qa! po0o E F a x LL N (D O O LL CO N M M x O O O O O O OO O O 0% O O O V) V9, V) �cv � m � Rlcla m O O r p LL M W U �, n O O) M M 69 Vf Vf R � O TO%n N r LO N a0 N 64 Vi H t I O OO N w O M �R LL O Y R. 0 75 O O O LL O LL p H ad p a N x U ca 2 o mo coo _ CO a o rn V1 O LL x a x N N N N N N xamava v p C to r X m H d) V3 c t U m r0 co io y t U E E p = m LL w c) • N • 0 1. � z co« ¥ _j �2/ /r" 3 Zi g �0<{ _ # { a & # IL « U 0 /$ J J j LL � |j \ \�£ y ££R co ¥a �k ; mk _wwdw �� ) Efie Ia toco $ a Co 6e k ID k%� LL \4) o� 3 \\ uj w~ w}k w\k ) @ S a e &)C ^ o UA to oa ��k Sm s @ o 0 Ix � ) 'wk E . LL �/ — / j/ S — E. § 5[ uj §gip o± w § j LL � |j \ CP U�S ¥a �k _wwdw k ) Efie toco $ 6e LL 3 w~ # . � A #q kk_�k&%t- 40 � �- _ C" 3J \ 0\. c �\ )_ f y § �k �$$_��� � � CD LLw �ao�°f33 00 e»7 �aEE x ter: aƒi-aPLL ±LL )k Z vJ IL ? w `c c J O aO v LL V) J E Q c 7 Qa a U • Q N r W m U N m Q J 0 C O` C U 17 LL o m , p O 0t0 "o a o v TcO r o • T tO O 00 tp m m�oc�ror r y O N (0 It W) m N to U T O r N N 49 V .al- 69 (A 49 — y N 7 a col LqVi�o m � U.) o r_ Ci °) In TtO M M o m m vi v� r 00 ` a u9 69' � 7 CL O T O O N m T T T O O } N T T T T O M tO OIM O N tO O a0 t[j w; � N N — N .- t0 a a C O y y C y a y 3 o E= ami o U J � N a N~ U Q a a •y Cj T MO OT C N to M c'!V ` 00 O N 4M N o O O t0 O M tO O V N M N T c0 M4 m w T O W) coW T CO cm 0 O O O N c0 tO c0 p p W c0 09 69 T fA 69 O _ Q; = O CO UJ O OO O O 0) co N to M T O S T R 00 N o o N R o ti: t _ p OO W Cpl t0 N W N t0 N T t0 M M T O O �T �- co 00 N O tD tO O O a0 U')H c0 to 7 Y in e 09 O O O T tO M E t0 O p 0C. O n! CD Cl! N O 00 T N C) r N m UJ Y M tO N tO Cl N t0 N ai c0 c") 1 O O O w M T _ sT O O t7 N M (0 cc O O � N 'tt N dv ! N Vi Vi '- O OO) O co N M cmW � T O rq N 0 S t O m LO O M LO O O N N � c) co cr co p r O O m Lo .- 00 C4 N (n T O N m W) cO O O N fH 7 6q M r FA u 40 O O O OU') p c0 M N 00 T N o o O "�f - LL. W V) v G N O O O C, M to N coMCD N T O M T o O a r W r 00 o O N O N c0 t0 co 0 0 _ tOO � N W 6s 69O E M O O O co N N M CIJCli0 T co T N 0 T v _N th M t0 N p N .-" N N O M O M c0 a? O O T tO . W N O O lO O O a0 LO v to E9 •t to w c t m y m R O E o o p n O O LL LL N N O O N n m COco` rn o a m > Y Rcc o w Z `°p o Cl) .0 12E x 7 N N L y y E� C O N m U C W W O = m U n LL m _ U .N-" Z .` O 3 2 m L O y y n O r N O uyi N p N m Q m `6 c0 «� O m O N m = N L Q m O m W LL U m m m V) O y V) m>> ~ ` 4 G T 7 U �� E C O v 00 m m m m m o� m E v W W N oto V a a U o ,ate Z o m m v r :? `m c d j C O c0 C N 7 C 0 0 00 m LL LL tM N 7 m m L n W o m op V) O 0 V) C _m V) m C m m m Q 7� n O) _ 0) y} t T _ U O E t17 y y € V) d "C V LL y CO C Y m O_ a m m a a a 7 E LL 2 Q m _y U y _y 0 m n� O m O V) V) 7 V w C C w CL € o 0 0 aEi 0 to ami a y 0 E 5 V) Q W Q C7 a' Q V) co co W a Lt. LL LL U Y U U m U p m m n U m m T _ '� m m c v m, d x N U Q ,m LL 0 LL LL a V) Q Q FN C V� LL — E "U CM m a ti LL nom. C t t Z C C LL LL a LL U O V) cn (n E Q y=_ > VCD 0 ) m m 3 3 n E n E QU n aF E V) o m Q U an d ;; o cnzz F- H in in a_F)-12 o vaim�� D Q(7 • Q N r W m U N m Q J 0 C O` C U 17 LL o m , p O 0t0 "o a o v TcO r o • T tO O 00 tp m m�oc�ror r y O N (0 It W) m N to U T O r N N 49 V .al- 69 (A 49 — y N 7 a col LqVi�o m � U.) o r_ Ci °) In TtO M M o m m vi v� r 00 ` a u9 69' � 7 CL O T O O N m T T T O O } N T T T T O M tO OIM O N tO O a0 t[j w; � N N — N .- t0 a a C O y y C y a y 3 o E= ami o U J � N a N~ U Q a a •y Appendix A.1 - Student Enrollment Projections L • • Auburn School District #408 Student Enrollment Projections October 2006 Introduction The projective techniques give some consideration to historical and current data as a basis for forecasting the future. In addition, the `projector' must make certain assumptions about the operant variables within the data being used. These assumptions are "judgmental" by definition. Forecasting can be defined as the extrapolation or logical extension from history to the future, or from the known to the unknown. The attached 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 that are present in any demographic analysis and projection. The logic embraces the assumptions that whatever these individual factors have been in the past are present today, and will be in the future. It further moderates the impact of singular factors by averaging data over thirteen years and six years respectively. The results provide a trend, which reflects a long (13 -year) and a short (6 -year) base from which to extrapolate. • Two methods of estimating the number of kindergarten students have been used. The first uses the average increase or decrease over the past 13 and 6 -year time frame and adds it to each succeeding year. The second derives what the average percentage Auburn kindergartners have been of the live births in King County for the past 5 years and uses this to project the subsequent four years. • The degree to which the actuals deviate from the 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 and credibility of the projections derived by these techniques. Tables Table 1 — Thirteen Year History of October 1 Enrollments — page 32 The data shown in this table is the baseline information used to project future enrollment. This data shows the past record of enrollment in the district on October 1 of each year. Table 2 — Historical Factors Used in Protections - page 33 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: 1. Factor 1— Average Pupil Change Between Grade Levels This factor is sometimes referred to as the "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. 30 2. Factor 2 - Average Pupil Change by Grade Level • This factor is the average change at each grade level over the 13 or 6 -year period. 3. Factor 3 — Auburn School District Kindergarten Enrollment as a Function of King County Live Births. This factor calculates what percent each kindergarten class was of the King County live births in the 5 previous years. From this information has been extrapolated the kindergarten pupils expected for the next 4 years. Table 3 — Projection Models — pages 34-42 This set of tables utilizes the above mentioned variables and generates several projections. The models are explained briefly below. ❑ Table 3.13 (pg 34) — shows a projection based on the 13 -year average gain in kindergarten (Factor 2) and the 13 -year average change between grade levels (Factor 1). The data is shown for the district as a whole. ❑ Table 3.6 (pg 34) — shows a projection using the same scheme as Table 3.13 except it shortens the historical to only the most recent 6 years. ❑ Table 3.13A and 3.6A (pg 35) — uses the same factors above except Factor 3 is substituted for Factor 2. The kindergarten rates are derived from the King County live births instead of the average gain. • ❑ Tables 3E.13, 3E.6, 3E.13A, 3E.6A (pg 36) — 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 (pg 37) —breaks out the 6-8 grades from the district projection. Summary level data is provided for percentage gain and pupil gain by grade articulation. ❑ Tables 3SH.13, 3SH.6, 3SH.13A, 3SH.6A (pg 38) —breaks out the 9-12 grades from the district projection. Summary level data is provided for percentage gain and pupil gain by grade articulation. ❑ Table 4 (pg 39) —Collects the four projection models by grade group for ease of comparison. ❑ Table 5 (pgs 40-42) — shows how well each projection model performed when compared with actual enrollments. Data is provided in both number and percent formats for the past 13 years. 31 • to 0 40 N d O v 0 Z _0 U W i 0 w a Z W J � L-A Z W 0 D H U) U F- J 0 0 U U) Z w D m M Q • 7 0 N M 'W V N:;IV O N, �; r O M V r n,i"4 O N., °� 0 M 0 n M n n N (O W M co n N V N n W M N N W n M N co M M N K? N' Iz N N M N m to M M N Dy O V co n M co N tD.. M C�f1 0--v W c_ N S co yj O W OWi Om O. � O O O M T 'O' -O M V M M co N co w V M co O � j M NC) W n CD Lo LO M O n co M N h U:) an U 9 C. cli _Cjo . M W c? uni N N con W m "I ,-rZ 10 N O f? V a0 M M O) O M O a- •- V N O co... M N O 04 4m to I-0, N T .r W b O O M O 04 � W 0 O 7 o G t0 W M tD. O N'. O O n G7P. CD tD 4. p pOj W ea w 'D c > m Q > pM N n n N C V M n� O N W o V V o cc N. O N m O M M M O O O M M c0 • M m W O O O M r r L. L O M (o (O V N M (n .V N N (D N CO O o M. O . CD CO C O O O m W M W . ( O c a d Q V N N M M (D O (n M n W W M Ln W M N w -(b: R M O O Q 1O W M r N N roo W W (Ov (O cO M M CO n�t7 nM W N .� 10 c lL M M M M M M r W N N M (7 £i M co O O CD V M V M (O V G W O W M n M CO :. � M M M MmM M M M W W N N M >.. d. d 6 mn W M V OV M W n n co M (O V co n M M N (D (D co CD N �_ Z M M M M M M M M W M W n N to M N } C N -. d; Lo W W M N N W CO W N M N n co co O W r— O W .0 >. � M M M M M M M co M M M oD tD � C A (7 LU w C N W N .-1 M r D 0 r N co V N Co n co (D N -j Q z 0 N _ •Q 0 ` ~ a a m I- co N CD M (O V N Cl) O W co M N M Cl) W W V M CO M W 00 co M M M CO O CD N (O co N V h M N M M M V (O CO O Cl) Cl) V V LO Cl) N W n n co W W N Nn W N N CO co N V w)M N M V Cl) N M V O n N cM V M CD V N n co W W co M W to M (O M W n W co a0 M N CO co N (O (D N V CO Cl) N M V M O (D LO (D O n co LO V O CO V V O M V _� V co M M M N (O (D N V W M N C.) V M W Cl) V N M 00 W M CD co M m c000 oo� �o N O (O N O W Cl) N M V co NM V V CO M M W W O .- W M N (O co N V tn N M V M M n co n N n W O M (O M V O to M O W n WM N N O W c0 co O O M M M N O N (O co M O N N M V M N n M n M w O ao V (O M n M M N co V CD M (O V co W W n O M M co W O N O N (O (O M V In N M V M W M co n O CO M r o M M I'- N V W N W O nm V M O M W O M M W W O O W M (c) W M V (O N M V N V N cnN CD N a (1 M (c) M M MO co co N M N M Cl) V M co V Cl) N V co N CO M n n N (O W M co n N V N n W M N N W n M N co N N co N V W N N M N to c_ N S co Cl) M W co W M •N- 9 0 V M M co N co w V M co O � j M NC) W n CD O n M M n W LO M O n co M N h U:) an U M N M CD N V -n N N M N V N cnN CD N a (1 n W (O M V W N O (D V n M N a (D W O co W (D O N W M n co co M O . n W W CO co M M co N N co N V W N N M N C7 mQ N S co Cl) M W co W M •N- Qo V N cnN CD N a (1 ZLL w Oo O 0. 4. C7 m C3 F- a) a) 0) 0) tO M C4 r� LC) CO CD CD C-4 CD W W W W W M C) M M M M r- W V E E E E X Z z -j 2 W 0 m Ln co m M W) LO -qr r— w (v M CD Lf) M (a 10 M 0) C4 4) 4) 4) 42) P�: 0� W� 'l: C4 oq W� C4� cl CR cl U� cp 0� CR (3! oq r�: P,: 7 CR cl > > > > 0❑ 2 w < < < < -6 4xi z m Z: LLI -j (1) 0 D -) (1, .o M -j -j co W :) Z 0 W < E CL CL 0- q- 1 1 1 , 0 < v v v v w ZW W va > 0 o CIJ w w CD w co w w w M w M C) 0 t- v m w v M C�! w LO Ln to 'n t'-* Z W w N&0 r-- M Ow M o " M C14 CD Ln C) " Cl) C4 LO (D P- W'T > q , v C) 0) W) (D (D to if)w (D LO (D (D r- r.- 00 r -co co co C) 0) M M CD M CF) co co 0) Go 0) 0) 00 (3) a) z CL Z❑ W < W o I-- w C) w U.) M w v r- to w w w C) f- �! m w m m M m to r- U.) Lo W W= > F- m r- t- co Oor- '02 r- to v " w oo v co Lo V u� co cl) m cl F-- C� C4 co co to co co co 0 m r a) to r C) r- cAD c� c) L 'D w r- r- 0 Z Z :5 Ir ❑ 43i 1-: .47 vi C6 vi vi i v: C6 (d r-: Go C6 cd 0) 40i -7 -7 ci C4 C4 Q ci C'i C,4 - - r- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - cm . . . . . . . . . N cli C-4 ID ,a < 0 -j o F.- w M C� m V W) W r-- W 0) C) M q Lo (D r-- co m c:) V %0 W I OD M C) t:. tz E:� -ce Eo- Eo- !22 !e T fe O !22 0 C� C, C> (r" ,z w 0 w -o Lo w r- co w d " M V W) W r-- ao M C) N M V &n w r- w m O N M 4 W) CD f-- W M O gip'} ri) z rl rr r-- F- r- Go co CD co co 00 co 00 0) cy) (3) 0) M 0) 0) 0) 0) C) C) C> C) Ck C) C. C) C) C) - 23 8 w > -i Z 0v ,�2 v CO m M co r- C) w M OD LO M M M M W r- V " W O O C> V) (D Ln O r- M M LO L C) rl rm M m CI C) CD r- M LO C) w v v m CD m 0) Ln w r- m 0 '": '"I C14 m Oct q q V: w! cc! q %q cq p -: NC'! w! Ow! IR Iq 'I,: C'! MC'! v! C't CNI V : cq Lq to to Lin IT v IT v v IT LO W) Lo LO V m to co co co CD r- rl- OD co r� co r 1- co rl f- r- rl r, r- P- r- r- r - w M co S z P- I'- �o co W) P� -V co v co C) Co �w W) 0) W) CN cq V) 0) Cl) r- CD CD cl) ;; 00 �D LC) IT 00 C) �; LO 0) cli w c> C) LO v C) Csi m F, co co r, co C) 1� Lf) to ID �: F.- C� C14 It W) 'T to Lc) 0) C4 - M M M C:S Cl) CD C4 C> Go m Go co co Cl) I co - - - CD D - C6 - 6 M cd .6 ci 0; 0; cq C4 m m wi f r- r�: to vi V7 .i (6 q: 'T --i 'T 'T 'T -i V� W; wi - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - r-aJ - - < w wwwwmmc�G"Wv O (D M V MM VWMMCDC3 Mtn MW r- r- co m " C> co Ci m v M v w M " C, �2 m r-- r-- W) C> m r- v M w m " CD r- v C) w r- w C) w > Q n IV W) -W le v 1Oco C> LO Go LO M r- M Go C> W) t- t- O Cl) C) C) Ln CD N C) -V I- co v 0) co 6C6 C6 m vi C6 vi m --i to Q6 (6 r- co 06 06 c; cri C'i -: to (6 C4 C; C4 C4 w; ': ': C4 C4 -: -: C4 C4 N— .- .- - - - - - - - - - - - - .-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (D Z m c) N m v LO w r- w M C) v w w f- w M C) m v LO w r- 00 M C) m IV to M M M M M M M M M o C) CD (D C� c) N < W 0) M M CD 0) 0) 0) (7) C" 0) m a) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) M 0) m 0) m cr) (" 0) CY) C) C) 0 0 C� LL z ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - r— - - - - - - W Oo O 0. 4. c. 4xi m rD to c) (D LLUJ ID ,a > C14 m -It Lo w r- w M LIJ (D U Cj I It lu') C-4 C, (D r co 0) 7 N8 0) Z E LL LL 9 • F9 `,A • -1,, 0) a0 t0 � m co v O to O I )` N O M y to 0 O m r 0 0 cn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ! C, '- o cy) c0 r u7 v n co M o to O M m O O M y to w w m x 0 0 0 .- 0 w 0 v N w (n N m v m N n (O o O O M v Z 0 O 0 n m 0 0 O' n m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0`" v - o O --------- C', O m y Lococvo oo 000 n m N O M a W M O O O O O O O O m cn OO 1n cD v M O v M m r N to m (D O" N O M y an O n C) n m N M -- --000000---� -t c; M N O m m N 0 co m to m vHC"—V- O � tLn 0 M M O c0 n w O m O�a m o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 C, N — m 0 N n M co y r 00 - o v 0 cD r 0 cD O M N n p m 0 0N M to 0 0 0 0 0 N O v 0 e- �-- O CO n O m v Cl) 00 N '- 00 "P,m 0 0 N M to cor O O 1n m m p (v o0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cn c v r 1(:5 7 N m n u7 m n v N O co (D m o O O N M v n n m 0 v O v m w � m m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m.N- O v CL o r cD v t0 O v O O w m w m o O 0 0 0 N M w to O O N m m m 0 M w o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o oo v O O v N cD 0 N v 0 N m O 0 0 O 0 r O N 1n v to m M r M w (D m rn arn m m o 0 0 0 0 o O m o 0 v c:, fD h N u:> v cD m v (Dc:, O v M 1n r N v O 0 (D N a0 o) O O O O O O O m N. N a0 ' % -7 co C, N v w O M w w 1n m '7 O v m N N v co O n N O m O C",4 M cn r 111. it r m m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M N M N v N y r }.. a 0 — .- .-- — — .-- — .-- r — O U 'O Q\ N N mo 00 v N N O N r 0 Ur O IY x7: O M v m O n n O N v y`.�;Uom0000m000cnvcn o— n w J � ❑ O J ) M ❑— N M v to c0 r co m C H F ri Y O F � I 0 c0 O to 1D v an 0 N r n 0 I O I O tb N N N N M M N N cD to r M r .N-- •N- •N- •N- �2 t2 • L N a m m to w r O (D r M en co r o 0 0 Cl 0 0 0 O O v D) Cl) an n cc _ �- � �-- N � � � . M N O O N w r w O r O v m O m � 0 e O )n m w O O m m O O N r 0 Lo (D c0 tv7 N -IM n m m r O O O O Ow n o O M n (D 0 w r r w w to M N v r N m ^ ^ (D to O ep r 1n 117 m KO - a CO) M 1f) m 0m 0 c- m O 0 N 0 10�z O mMm�Cl) � CD Lf) (Ono �vo� M O �-In C) O r r n to r nIMIw (D M a� Lo to n N M M M v M v O o r � LnN m O m m 0 0 S w 1n � m M , O o 0 0 v` v v • N N co w 0 N M v cV co v c0 O N o M r- o n rr O O N O r r (D v U.)uv7 0 0 0 0 0 0 ^ ^ O H O 7 r r m m v 1n N m O O w m D) o O to v h O m m 0 0 m ° N O 0 0 0 0 0 0 v O v M m a ...__ ._.... c> w O v w to O w 1n M N O M m o O 7 m M M w r m O v v w (D v 01 N r amm0000oOo w o'!o 0 m m c- 1n 1n z w w n m 1n 0 N o O h m v v tp m N O w O O m 0 O cn 0 m 0c> 0 O O O O O m -- c) v w d O O � � v N W= p p O M to m 1n O M n co m O o 7 O tD O N N to r c0 M N v to c0 ,� O m O it n m O O O O O O O O v N N N v N N .} m 0 c> C) c> — — — — — e- — — � O a. m a -j c c Q r N N m 0 v N N O N r 0 f6 =-w 000o�000crnvm �OC7 n a) a W J N m c, 010 Q❑ �- N M v to c0 r 0 m V Q d M cr Y O F n 0 N N X r O c0 O CL oC> O�C)OD N Q p� M M r O a. rrr rn am v w to rn O r Cn co co n o W ap OM N r CL r r r r OO O CO M N N n O r O O CO n 0 O O Cl) N N n. rrrrr 7 n N o n CO co O CO O" r -m nv O)NO Q' O O O co N N0- r a r r r r r O cNo n W m LO rn `r Q' to O O O O M M r JL r r r r r r r 0 tf i n N N CO O tO O0 v O r v CO n to M O O) Q' � OO O O OM N N a r r r r r r r r v n M W V n co O r M v v M n 0 CO o W) 0 a -- onovrnvMo_N co O r M N N o m W n O Q' N O O O O O O O M M CL r r r r r r r r r r N Co ao t0 0 O n v N CO CO CO O O r O v n n D) w v O V O O O O O O O M N N O a r rrrrrrr r r r e � rtn 0 ODO M CO w)CO O Nm Mm � T M a m o m rn o 0 0 0: r o v o0 O V N CD CO N v 0 tO O) O n o OLc)w 10 N tO v CO ci M n M CO O 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0� r v Cp a r o M O m tO N COv CO v m v CM N n o .... 0 0 M CO O v M to n N O co O O N O N a O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0--- N- CO r o O Q O -m N N v CVO O r N US m O N M o c� � O O O O O O O O O m" m N v tv CL O J C C :9O M O t°Oo v r n O N V 0 0 o�-- O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .M-- .v- - er- V O •d Q r a' a o Q �[ •- N M V to O n ao O+ Or r 4. � r o 0O O N CA N O N Q' � O n r M M N r �a rrrr O 0 V O> Cl) r- x a0 �rntnrnu� v M r a r r r r r O 0 cq co N M 0 of n v (0 r M N r a r rrrr r �n vN Ooao M N a r rrrrr r O� r.- mLO °o�otvO W io O r v M N r a r r r r r r r r O r n t0 M CO r Co O CO N c0 0f 0) cO to to Q' O O O O v M N a r rrrrrrr r Or rnntOW t -r -v n' Q' C7 vWrrrrr�ntO O Co Co O r v m N O a r -- � M OZZ: _ N V v LO O N N CMO to C.) � it N O O O O r r V v r CL r rrrrrrrr N O M y to 0) v N CO v CO O r N N N co O N o n f- CO O O O O O r r V N O a r r r r r r r r r r r r M M w v U.)N O O O CO m O o r v O O W)M M O N O O O W n O O O O O O O r r O C" CO N v N CO v O to CO t0 to M N Colo M M o O M CO n O O v v CO CO v O W a0 O m m m 0 0 0 0 O O r v YV L. LO 00 . Q. Cl) n r v v a0 O N w w CD 0 Of N a0 aD o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m r v n r a o r o O M co to m J t0 CO M n (D 01 O M o 0 !R O O N N tOn CO M N v to CO to O O O O O O O O O-- N- v o Gi, J C C <r-- Of 0 c� N O M V O to n n O N v M l0 P- A �- O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M V MU _ lo Q r c � 0)a J a CO Q .- N M v �tO CO n CO O 0 r Y r o • O O N L d m O U O N Z _O U W '7 O w a Z CW G J F9 L•!A • O MCO (0 tOM N O�--Mv u7 N p� 00 00 O r M Cor�nvr O M v o p p O O O O O r co c0 (0 v N CO OM v C O 00000 r co CO Ino M v w 00000 n C O v M O v C) c7 v Ln ,� 00000 mr O MN O M M LO O M MLo n 36 N— M O O N O O N M Ln M O O O O O o 6n 0 O N M L n O O O O O r v O N M v L0v M —.-.- — Or CD V CO M O N M C O O O M 0 0 0 0 O rco vNO O N M v 01 0 0 06 3M O OO O v M (O o N O'It 0 0 0 0 0 O O �f S M 0!2 (O NN v(10 C.4 r-r 0 0 0 0 5 ODh O rN N M 00 O Oo�v°O C7 o ooCD CO o— a aa) a U O o N M v ( O M or O w Coo v(n C0 N 0'� NN NNN N MM M(O (D n O O O O p p N NNN N M �_ c. (D n Co M co w C O M z mtov CO r MraoM t�000r r (O N v ao M O m a. ID Mm O M Un M O r 0 co v O C NC, L0v M —.-.- — M � rN M Mco M MO wo "F OOOO- tO co cn rcDnraoS N M r M CM v (O cpv Cn clM O C> 00000 mCO �O co0 vCD� M M M co r o 0 xmmc>OCDCDIONC0 O vv Co M CO M 00 00 O v O ;Y h` co O M S M �:. O N N UO r cmn c M Ca r 00000 O t0 O n N N M W a3 -C: � •-or>v� U o 0000M o— n U d O � N N M v W� c C: N N M M CO n r m a. r O N r 0 co o rN n v (O u) M o r co M v v CO M M O O O M Co n(Dv M N N N O O O O O O N M a0 CO M M O O O M O O O O O .�-- nnMvtDJIZ Nv IT LO O O O O O O 10 CO M v Ln M v O (D OZ O O v N (D O i M m 00 M C3 0 0 C o q'. O C) i` N L i O M u) N (O O M ` M M 0v0 C. 0 N O atS M M M 0 0 0 Co_ C9w '0N . v � O M 0 Cl 0 0 DN NMO C_• r LO _ im co v v O 0 0 0 0 0 C.M O OCO a � �oc�v°p DC7 q. o 0000m o= to a ((j o C 3 W M Oo N N O r O O O O O U d m � Q m un of ml 0 �L r 0 N v N K r 0 0 n N Q� M co r r co CD n u) M o r co CO M O O O O O M vOOCO N IL Nv IT LO O O O O N M v Ln M v N N N O 0 00 0 0 MM Co vh C) O O &0 M N O 0 0 0 0 0 nN 7-7 v m Lc)N(DM(Dn ocn M M M 0 0 0 O dAr O NMO r LO _ Y co v v O 0 0 0 0 0 C.M O OCO YA aO O\ Min M o ( O Oo N N O r O O O O O 0 W �L _C .0: n N N M n(a N ' 0 O O O O M 0— 0 U 4. 0 N (� Nm u9r, < M o r 0 N v N K r 0 0 n O W vM o Nwcorn r o m M o c. 0 �moornv r ap O O O N .- M O flo O N 0) mCO W W M M O O O N M .- r � Om W W M it m 0 00 N (L f) o m M OO C) O N v Q' tf) CL M o 0 O N W m m O `z m n W N (C O O O O N a �) o v r M O o OV) O O N .M- � M 0 O Of W M O N O O O N N "Ir- vw 'T le �rrnv W O O O NM O) � �`8-mv o00 O O W O v Q' O O O .- N O W CL M O m N v N o Ozwmmmu.) W O O O N a 0 r — M O rY' ".) W m st V' o O co n N W W 0 W � co O O O O n CL C) �- M N MW W m M m O� O r N 0 0 W ar 0 0 0 N v O M w C C v N V C� i7 tO w )n r v 0000� o -a m Q c a w C6 < m n co O a 00 v O m O o O N M N N W n n Q' Q2 m N N 0 0 a M m to ONO c. N O n Q' aO m n Wo m W W r N r m l m : .- M � �:�r- W WI:'o m m O n O �lco C','C'Nu loo n cp O a Q � M M` m O •- O u O M M M Cl 00 �p M N a 0 fhlN �lnla W M " N a M Mc O Z o v W N M O M COL, �) O Cm O Go C') a. N O O m o m O N N m n 0 0 M M n r M N flO 0) o f -W m o v v m o O O N N O M rn o W N coaD O m N W O O O N O) p) O M _: J M co Oco M .r- e� o O r O O O ccoo N O .0, Q r W� N v N N vp!RO m n v !D• F- m 0 0 0 `o — '. Q da LLI w rn O m Q 2 CO n co G a F M O Oo _N a - m O Z rn Q W O a W O rn rn rr- 0 0 a r N O r O o r rnrnnMOo M M m N m O o n m m o o M O O O N v M O 'n N coW O O co W O m O O !;-a W v "�vvrnMv O M n O W" N 0 C) 7 N m v CL o M W v M m O O rn W M O A kx N O O O N N ... (L c') 0 7 N r v N M o O n r rn v W Q' •-- O O O N O M d '') o 0 in ww o v' 0 0 0 O 7 N O d M O m N v N o O m rn M m 1n lz m 0 0 C) N W �-'f�m. M O v m •t v e 0 - CO w Q CO O O O )n n W W m M m ` 0 2 O r N O O W n 0 0 0 N M �- O r r M U ©D Q Q n W v N v F- w O 0 Con F- C) 0 Q o � w w � O O m QN m co co r a O Ncm Pl N m f0 w C, CL m w M O N o O O O N W a . M M M O O mcc CD coo O O O o o M tO N � � o O F- W M O M d O 7 M M r m o WNV) O M IL - r M 6 n' M N W M o O n CA' 1n � r M O N m O m o `- m O N m r O O M M n W m O 0 0 rn o v v m o °)mmnHC", o m N WcO O O OO M Or rN ' C O Go M � O Q' O O0 O ccq a o W c c co `r rN v 0 U' Q aci d w Q w m IL O m Q �mr- co M C7 ' • �J • r O O •- O O) � o 0) Lo O M 01 O r o 0 0 o r v -IV O N rl to n O) O N O Lo M r4� r O r �n r M co O O (O O r 0) N 0 0) In O a `* o tD N O O VJ O n O) ;- � p rn 10 M '- O N a ") o 0 O w h C) V (O o 07 O M N 0D a0 .�{ M O MLO �O co v n ao o O w O to v M N X M M o M o a o O .M- 00 O O o O r O V M p N O O a7 O o f w v o v co 00 w M N� O W Y) N v O co m to O M O 00 .- v O O )f) O O M r M O O r Q1 M 0) O 011m V M N I r 0 O 00 O- O N M 00 M` N O L C:) .0 _: W, o m ao u) rn O 7 0 0 N O O N 0) 00 O.}a r M CV M N 0) v a O O a C C O N V V O O 11p: V O r r V7 D. r aha w W O d m 2 w o o 0 a F cam) (� o) ON r t0 N_ o LO r r M co co r aJ o O V O) M �n ) O Lo v M a0 a 'n o � v m m w O o O N r CO Q) O r W ^ Ln MN O a to o LnOOmMo O ZZ O O M:1 v N N a `O o O w n N O (L )1) r r N a `f) o a' v v m N 7 N O)Or) OL O r)n n� nv a M M r O(PM CL W) o O M v M v L o O o oD o W N V m X 0 0 O) a 'O N V w O O o O�corrc3MCO CL O VA 0 0) U N a `* o �O M N O M 00 O V m o V o r v W rn v O m m m CL o v -� Q) 0) .- to CO N o O a0 0 0 0 0) t0 a' 00 M m — .- N O 0o aO vri O iO C) V V N o O N 00T 0o r t0 M O Q1 N r - a O 0) o v n rn rn O oow 0oro)nrn�� a `* o �OOMNNr v' O fO n O O a r M O CL � o n m o 0 o m a o O Ln n rn O rn a. M O N )nrn)nmvw0 OzaornoN ww a' V M O M m CL v OD v n ao ao O" O CD—LO v M N a' m M mo m o _ a o 0 aM-- aD N O W o O n u) O V M p X CL w O O o O-OovovcowM ow .- M �2 O aO M N Gi M�C)wmw ' O `- N rn O O in N IX O M O 00 O v7 a �* O O u) O) O M O 7 n M w_ O n V arnMN .-rnoo a 0 — — V N 0 0 VM N r O o 00 0 O N S a' 00M � � N O � .-- a o �n ii v Y'o 0 .m o 0 2 r c0 O O 0) 'm 0� O co O O) O .)= N V O fD O) N co ��'(�. O� N O) O N O Oo .-. a nV N N N M V W n M N M N C y a O M c;O a O tO C tD i° 0.. Q r N O N n m m =o Q �` N O N r m 03 rO r 0 :, F O M O_ co LL,a O m W� W O a`) = O O N i- a m Q O) C) •- N H a F C) 0) N O N M o O N O) r M )n M aLn O O a1 m .0 O N CO M N o a LO o O�nrvi°imrn' -� r 0 o ao rn O" 00 W M� O M M a (O V`N V N a ") o a ") o V V .M -`N 7 " N Op ) r) a 0�nrv•-rno O r r n v a' i7 V M O C> M a '� o MM V M v O o O W Un W O u) V M r O O O O�aorrcornOUM am Ovo,n O�oo�rnrni�o O M N O M w O" v w w v o r v a rn v� C rnm w a o �+ () 0) r- u) 00 N c "• O Q co OO O D1 (O O 00 d O M •M- •- •- V M W16-orm0)oM " W O OQ N V toO m N 00 n V . N O7 V O: f o r �n m O, Q r N O N r T °..'CJ: D n O N V V O O -: f-- o Cl) - .M- N .�- D LC: ar U n rrs- m' a r a' J ca O co < n N V CL V O O N co O co O O N O M (O M ' O O N M O V co O O O N N N N M 01 r O O N r O Lo 0) 00) a' 01 a' M N (O a' (O a� a�(i1(n coocaO.1 a�MM vc`Ov a-a� 0) 1� V LO ccoort too Ozco(oo OZ 0 Or- O°'vn c0 OOj a O X 00 N (o a' c0 O M M N V O a O �a a — co v M Lo v a '- M M m M n p_ v (n v O O v M o M co M a (O cp LO aO 0 �- co O M 00 O r— M co O 00 0 a'�M� a'� (n Lo 0) ODr v v a'�M� a ^ LOLO v 0)vccoo0) (Vj V)in O�MM 0 O--rMi�0)im r 0 r 0 a O M a O O a- N O N M a O N M a O� O IM O M M v M M M M M M P- N N u) O N 'Q O a 0 — O N O" O V -V '7 ((D O '"1 co O O O O O O � c0 0 a�o� aOOit a�MMC 04 V')MM a�NONO Cl)N M O M � O N O w O a. N co �� 0 Lf) ��rao 0 ��coo000) 0 )�(ommm O M�Mco O a V O a V m a V N V M a- O N O N a V Cl) V °) r O O M M O Cl) M M M O V V M y r N 0 0 0 0 co O 00 M v— v O O CO M V 0- V O V 0 �' V 0 !- .� 0 �_ r 0- O O a��� N (o aMM�Mm r M v M v CL M� V O V O (O v o v 00 aM�� it) it)O �mO 0 -1�(nao 0 �Mco(ococo O ��Mt)M 0 0 :z a' N a O r M a' N a v O r' r a' N a N M N Ma' Cl) M M M M M M M v v v v N a .- M O M O V O V O O O O O 00 M 00 M a' N a 0) O N ao v N 0 N O -) N 0 '- -� N O -7 N O 0- r v v IL cl)w N 0) w V M O O T a�McnM� O c0 O (O v N v N a��ITIT� r .-- r u) M O M M 0) O O (o co v M O : 0 O 0 '-a 0 a' O a� M O M M a O a�wlo�il0 M .- O M 00 N a' O" a�MMMM M N M N M N M a' O 0- 00 M c0 M vv M 00 Cl) O a O a� v V V V .-. •- O M r M -7 O O C) ' O O O O V V O W N v 0o (n N O O 0) M V M V N .; N 0 0 0 0 0 0 (O M M (O aM O OV) M M 0) CO) M M M a O O O O O O N M 00 M O 0 0 a O C; M M M M v M v M ao O a0 O a O V V V v r N r N O M O M a' a O .V - V N t- (o o N M M O O o M O M 0 Q M O Q M O O aO 0 OM1 M N O O t0 O x 0 N ^ 0 0 0 (n M c0 M 00 V r V r O a O N `"' N M M M M (0 to O O a 0 h V O V O M O M M M M M a. a co N M N N .V- .V- .V- r O Cl) co v O O M O O O M O O O 00 0 O O CO O O 00 O O n a0 ,� O n a 0 I() (c1 Ic1 O a 0 M M M M a 0 a 0 M V M v Q r ��vvvv (Na N N N V V V V co QF�vrvv co O a0 co '�Hc00000 Q r Q r �Otovvvv Q r Q r UO M M M M Q () 0 0 0 0 0 °oO�vvvv_ Q V O M M M M Q V O Ncl h O N O V O V V V V W i W tW Q 1 W Q U W M_ M Q D M Q O < a-- r cc)r (O < Q OW (O (O a' OW _M CO " (O ONmm2 ui (A (4 (n a OCl) � O (O www U' W W W U' oO(q(A(p(n 0 MCl) Cl) S.- • • V O N a X r- 9 O to 0 CL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o FX:; X:;F0V M rn o XvO V O co o Xv v� (n c XONvrn x w co rn O O N N x n o n N N N N x n n N '- N x M OR V ao 0 0 rn rn rn rn O �-- x N rn 0 W �-- x o W O W a0 t:x M v M V• X� c0 •,�- x N V' 0) x �rnao 0) xto— t 0) rn0 x�C(n-0 n 03 (D (D n O O> co co Lo O-: M O M N m n c0 a0 V' (O O rn O M v N Cl) .- c0 O O rn rn O _O (D n n 00 0) Go rn cc) O V' '+- O O N O _ M, rn O:. O rn" F- (n co co h (O F- N N N N N F-- :+-,. � � ^. V' � � H - �- O rn a tO c X O rn c X N GO N W a X rn N N M c X co (n M O Q1 N U x M n n rn x (M n cM n' x rn V; n 0 x (O O rn C C O O N N O O O O O r- 0 0 v 0 N N ci v m @ ao ao OD o0 O Y Y _ _ N y @ r L rzt- rn O x W N M 0 X r ', rn O X N N x °i 0' n O X x W W) rn O x_ M N X n C :2 (�.� _r 0)rn 0,CD0) Z "v c 10) 0)U C to N (D W'q M a0 N` O co co .- O. rn O rn N co N O w N N- rn M O 0)'-cO CD n .O-. M cD co C's (� V) •y C C W Y Y O f rn rn rn n n u7 ' (O . LO LO (O O F ao W n o0 n N N' N N N 0 0 0. 0 0) rn v SY M co O I N '00 N N N r ooa� o,000 0000 0000 CL O O O O X O co M N n M rn 0 c X N N N (O n n n n c X w N N rn c X CO c0 v cO M M x x x V; rn x 7 V; ZO O O O N N v N v N 0 0 0 0 W = _ _ _ d' w w LLIQ Q LLJ Q ¢ W} W rn rn x _ xx rn ,-�- rn X co 0) co 0) rn cD '�— xx (n M (O M rn (p � X (n N ,n (O J )- } } 0 v N (vn 0 x n v n v rn 0 x �' ?' 0) 0 x v N (n r f0 r O rn rn rn rn Q ¢ r cD r M rn Mi M W0) 0) .�,.: N (O rn .0.. (n aO (e) co 0) n : K n .r M oD . Cl, e0 O V O� (n c0 (n Yo _ (0 rn (D CO v co 0)0) V' ' V'" V' V' M M M M F -C T- O I-- n A10-: O 00 n h; (n:�i O (O (O O n cO co co co N N' N N N O co n n n O W 0-aaa O v o o a o 0 o e o 0 o e o 0 o a o Xvovv o Xrnmrn(D o Xvovo o xM C) LO X U) x v M N ((Y x v M V M x 0) M rn M OD M M OR N C O O M m O O O O O O O O N 0 3 O U F- co T X (D rn T= X co O) X co rn '�) w X v Q Q U) m rn 6 (O n o o x N N N � O •- O O x v v e- n a O v v •- x M r M .-- W O O W N xx M N N U N N Q O > O O r r J; 0 0 a r 0` �rn•vmNN�(nm(nco O N 'rn V' M M n, I"+q n rn rn O 0)(O (n IM (D rn cD n l+ - n n n �rnM,oMo O N m.: V• (D V' (D tO (O (o coO cam; "(nrnM = M M z N 4) F- O ,>n : (O ((7 O N N: N N N (- M f0?. M M M F- -: �. N �! a H O Z U C C o C 0 I r 0 r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 xY Q^� O O O Q �',: l0 ' c X (O N (D N x M o .-- (O x n n n n X O (D O (D x Cl) rn M M X M N o N n M (2 v jj Cl) (O r- Cl) D- U d O •- O O N •-• N �- N N N N�- m �' W' ¢ o 'o Q O m a) c o rn v o OD (n rnrn v x n (D n COV= x (n n (n n rn •t w m N (D - M m x to v (n v CD X OD n co n al rMi 'm -).. O z a rn rn rn rn (n 4T M (D O O [� : V' n N .O-• O n, -co n t0 c0 O .- O .�-• n N,- V' N v (n wf r. M V' M W O ftQj co M (D cp -_ 0) rn 0) O �-- (D !� . n cO n (n rn (O (n N O F n ,ab . c0 c0 OD N N,_. N N N O F- (n V' < v v v M c?i ": Cl) Cl) M O F" ;„ o 0 O Cl) M Q M ¢ tD r m ; r (O r tD f/1 ¢ c0 cD W W W W M M M M o" : -Ci W W W W H M M M M N'. a '(".; � W LLt W W F- M M M M - "� D W w W W F.- M M M M < 0- 0- a M.-�' Q a` a a` li t9 ?�' ¢ a` a a` a` ¢ ,t� Q a` a a` a` • V O N a X r- 9 O to 0 CL a) y y y Ctl N N N U U C C Y � d _ Ol t N _ t: N y m m ¢ ¢ U ZT ocmU y C C ca ca ca c6 I W 0000 D D of W r O r t0 M O M Q ^ m M M M •�cr a a a a x o 0 0 0 o x O M C) m x O (D an (O O Cl) O M 9 x O Q X N O CO CO ',?"U>:sO (MO F v v.ry v x o 0 0 0 o x M O M 0 x O 11 O M O O M o_ x O O X v O v O N Ln O M n �'n o (r, O .(�; to O 0 0 0 0 n X (D O O O x rn v rn v O O O O N C X x M N M N C§O X v v N N co x e v o 0 c X O M O M x M O M O O If X 0o Xttnco a)co N r (o M (O 4k} (O O �p M M M(D M F o e o e c X N O) N 0) xMVMv O v O C. o RD Q X n A a00 rn O C!) M N O c ;OM �p N M M=M F �2 t0 V c2 a¢O 5 W W W W *i V � c' c' ¢a`0 -0-a` 0000 u x rn v v X c M N w C sees M— O X ( N � a7 x ! O N X O aO O a0 0 0 V ON O O r t0 LO CD (0 tD F O O O O O O F N N N N N M M M M M c X ^ O M c x M O (O O O O O Cl) o x _ _ C) D X O N M O N x O m r- M NM O M O o if NV) V n In n n, Ir n F O to tnO O F 0 0 0 0 o XVCO�o c X v CO N �f N O x n O M OD N Xaa^nao v Yvnav:rncn N ,C, M O 00 O O) O O F O O U., O O O F o e x (D ao ao n o x x O O Cl! OR c O M O O o(�apo to O 6 x p N to "If, O O lQ 7 m;�- O o a0 m O co ~O O O O:O O F M M HeM- 0 0 0 0 o u� to e X0 nv Cl C9)) M N O O O O O Q x O) O X A N v n � p 0) 0) 0) co N N. N N F Lo r- 00 .0 � - co f— 1- F 0 0 tA7 O O 'o F D w ui lL LL1 - J.M- - mLU Y tD y� LU LLJ LU ` U . x o 0 0 0 o x O M C) m x O (D an (O O Cl) O M 9 x O Q X N O CO CO ',?"U>:sO (MO F v v.ry v x o 0 0 0 o x M O M 0 x O 11 O M O O M o_ x O O X v O v O N Ln O M n �'n o (r, O .(�; to O 0 0 0 0 n X (D O O O x rn v rn v O O O O N C X x M N M N C§O X v v N N co x e v o 0 c X O M O M x M O M O O If X 0o Xttnco a)co N r (o M (O 4k} (O O �p M M M(D M F o e o e c X N O) N 0) xMVMv O v O C. o RD Q X n A a00 rn O C!) M N O c ;OM �p N M M=M F �2 t0 V c2 a¢O 5 W W W W *i V � c' c' ¢a`0 -0-a` 0 0 0 0 o X t0 ( m (D c x aD O O O C sees C) x n M N CO O C X O aO O a0 0 0 X a`o v ap n N m Q.O IT O co O F N N N N N M M M M M c o v o 0 c x x CO O CO O x O M O M M O _ xX 'IT _ _ O x O m r- M N W -0 O N O O V 'O a0 O F M M M M M o a o 0 c rn ia rn G X n N 1-: N C—:, v O N 7K_ X st O v O _9 O 0 N x x � rn to LC) O vN N O O O O F M M o 0 0 0 x c r O r C) O XM O M O Op O X N N N to O M4f?:. M O �p W N O N O O O CS-; O O p N CO ry Cl) M F M M HeM- 0 0 0 0 c X N (D N CO e X CO V CO v Cq cli v N Cl C9)) x O O O O O O O O 0 o x O N W �o M C) A'in 'n to AN N- N O � p 0) 0) 0) co N N. N N F OO 'V".: M O) o o mo 0)6 r F ¢ n (O iQ0 p D w ui lL LL1 - F M M M M 0. CL 6- 0- x o 0 0 0 o x O M C) m x O (D an (O O Cl) O M 9 x O Q X N O CO CO ',?"U>:sO (MO F v v.ry v x o 0 0 0 o x M O M 0 x O 11 O M O O M o_ x O O X v O v O N Ln O M n �'n o (r, O .(�; to O 0 0 0 0 n X (D O O O x rn v rn v O O O O N C X x M N M N C§O X v v N N co x e v o 0 c X O M O M x M O M O O If X 0o Xttnco a)co N r (o M (O 4k} (O O �p M M M(D M F o e o e c X N O) N 0) xMVMv O v O C. o RD Q X n A a00 rn O C!) M N O c ;OM �p N M M=M F �2 t0 V c2 a¢O 5 W W W W *i V � c' c' ¢a`0 -0-a` .-I -I 0 0 o Xn to dao x N T to O C x C) O LL') N C) x n M N CO Co N r mn N O NA O rnuly O m Q.O IT O o0 0 0 c Y M O a0 Sjii st n O O O O O M 0 O x O m r- M O N t0 rn u) LON N a0 O co O Lo F M M 0 0 0 0 c X w to CO x v N 0 0 N x V N N M _9 O0 O N x O A v v — — v n ,att? a) ao "amoaa=� O v M N'M M �..� M M M o o 0 X N N Vv c X O O M N O O O m m o O oN to O M Iw' r co jp M OCfJ O N O;'. M N M M HeM- eN*'` .M-• 0 0 0 e X A 0 0 M X O OM O O O O 0 o x O N W �o M X O � OO 'V".: M O) o o mo 0)6 M F tD. CO =1 LULU LU y� f- Mm M M ` U . • • (D rn o 0 0 0 a n C O U X O N N M Q O O O O N cm m X(�V�N j 0 X v v M Q 0 0 0 0 rL t6 N U N m x M CD M 01 r mVE OJ C W C C EO W O I, - x cv N cN c0 N v v m N C 0 0 o e xrn(Ornv o X Cq p C'0 0 c1l .N.. N m Ito� X a0 CD CO f� O d n O E N O ,CY N O O Cp LO a- O o'noonto 00 V co U 0 0 0 oN Xo n O N m x N tD co o0 N 7 Q .- O L O(7 o'n E o N r N N CA `v= Y Q c 2 C J m_Q r c r CO Cp t- M M M M a th•€ Q a` a a a Y y m tom fro o 0 0 o w N o 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 N O O L Q X n i ro n N M M o X N V 01 V O CO 0 o X M M n v (n M M r OI L R mQ N x Y O O O O N > x O O O O tU Q x 0 0 0 0 Z j N to O V U �rn w rn F- 0) c 1 m t- x ui "1 n � m X m x cel c W �?YY 0) O xx!i > Xn= n= >j5 X�(O� Q Q Q rrrr o000 0000 0000 IL O O O O x (O N X O a0 n O o X .- CD r CD X O v O o X co (O co (O to CA O) O V x ZN N N v N N O O O O N N N N W = tY��� n n n to (2 t2 } W} W O O X tO r tO N r .- O d X Z, N N O 0 to ! �n x r r r v CO r CD N .r.. N N M Q to •-- r (O M O .r 0 M- O N Cl)i?. •. N CO r O V CO r 'D V , M' V M '6 O CO CO M CO •CO CO a0 CO M M M " 0: CO'l m CO W co :il N O F .- r,. r r r M M M M M F-- N :O O O O CO ;CO ; CO Cn CO Z -. a a a : W a` o 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c X M tD c%> Y'! c X n n .--. c x (D N CO N N x M CO M n x r 0 0 X fD O (D O H N r N r C v N C7 C 00 > > U m cD cD a Q Q X M N M O H'1 X 1� N 1� N X P'i O O O X r O r O 0 x s v M vCD C, O O X r C) N N N v N N O O O O J 0 r- Ul) O V co in O O a0 O iN'. n N n co c%M N cb O a0 O M w', 00 W 00 O O co n n n n CO ;CO. CC'/ to t0 O _M _M _M M M'. M M M Y O p CO CO 00 00 CO 'tt`. V V V C/7 Lt Z N t - U O:c c c U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl.c O p c X M O un n c X V Cl) V M oX n n n n t0 x q S V M X (O r CD r X W) N W N m O r O O O r O r N N N N 0Q O M a a to C� �rW d O 9� X O r O ''� O x X M O �_ O X O CD O O 0 0 00 O ` O O X N CO N O N M N 0 x r '- U 7 N O N O N O N ..� ��. O Z a CO r 01 O� (0: V 10 r CD�_ n W CA M M CA M CD CO CO CO CO CO 11 N n n co n ia+-: N N N M N M 'M' �p CO n n h n 11 11 CO CO N #i,R, F M M M M (O Q o t. _! r � r r CD r O 7 io, CO Ca0 taD j (n w W w W : w LLI lil LLl _D-T f_ til IllIll til f- M M M M '. ;- M co M M M M M M C ►- U' Y Qa`aaa QaaaIt- a.aaa • (D rn o 0 0 0 n N fD e X O N N M Q O O O O N cm m X(�V�N j 0 X v v M Q 0 0 0 0 X O V O c x M CD M 01 r mVE _ X Lo M V I, - x cv N cN c0 N v v m CO CO v C) 0 0 o e xrn(Ornv o X Cq p c1l .N.. N m X a0 CD CO f� o n p CD v M N p N O ,CY N O R Cp LO a- O o'noonto r .M- � 0 0 0 oN Xo n O x N tD co o0 N .- O O O(7 X fD N r t0 O N r N N CA R to a0 :- co 2 J m_Q r CO Cp t- M M M M a th•€ Q a` a a a n N V N V UP m a CL Appendix A.2 - CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Enrollment Projections • • • • co O O N fU L O U O (A O f- - O a) N O ,C L y O (6 c -o W n D 0 ca 0 3 0 a D m • T (0 O V m NO O O O Li- O co O O m T O O O O 0) N ` N (D O O C = E m � � t0 V U% (L o O O co t4 LL C m O to M M +' ~O o to 0. N r to s! o I N O N N O N NLr). ` �... to o 0) N OD M �T ,. V. N (O '� go M GD M tt n. CD CO m � L L (6 C7 m vcn 'O O t00 (00 t1II �, O O O O O c, C W O CO N-4 M qr t0 � ti �O 3 0 u N -_O = N O N N Y. W 2 to F- N N N N co O N:. co t` (D �-= (O d' t7D to' t0; s- O O O O O O GI O N (o r (0 M (D. N M M GO M N— — M s-.. N. co r. N V = C N O Cv ONco O (00 r `OV' co, Ap O Co Cl O O C3 O ( 00 �: OV O O co coO� r N M M C N M m (fit M N' N c E � Q p O O U O O N O O N. f0 00 r• 10 co O M �- ht (fi. W t0 OD tN O C 0 N (0 co- Co to N M r e. Y Cl) N Q c ami 0) CD G0 M 1 N M m 0D O Q O N m C N N O to coo r- CN O U, to t0 N co �: to O to N tD co N, M OD, 0) (NO- t0 fL3 to M aM-.. Om h ^ N �. M: � a- fh 00 � N aD m u 4 N N Q t9 O V Go r 0) o r N O h m m to O >y d N co to to co N N ] to O N M N-,. C3 (13 (00 tn. to O N'. (0 jr r., .tt) OQ N M M � Lo {� 0 CN .IT a N C h N O O N .- to a "M N � '0 a to m MR m O J to O �O O O p OD x--. J m0 N t0 co r-': � st 'ty t0 (0 o t0 � b. N. CO .- t0 'e:. r-. i;-_ M: M (0 ('� to to co R N, to oo M N M to r- le 44 = C N N (h rO N o =L. 2 `OL N m .. p LO OD N �,. C4 = �. Ul OD N r C4 N u':' w N N to co O f.. w W) c y m p — Y�O�Y ;? _ ILZ Ytb�Y Y t t a m O.,_ W a w a c v m> c m �o �rn h N h Q 0e LL: co LL_ LL N m Q Om (D m o a to Sa E — h O ;r �_ y «, w rn h o m o LL CL CL hui �_`���'�a�.. CL � aa� CL- m�c� o t t = y-�am 'cpm mto-a'a�, L CL h W i m aci Q C m o 5 ti o o °- c o° a m :° rn F- : J 0x in d oa a e a c" g F -(L �M a c. N w°t > v= O e a O m OY m m� __� o _� m o = m�� c R ��_ gym! cm 'M 7 0— .� to V. C O L Cmc_ �a U C L E n� i� C m m m m" y= m m `J O O m=.0 .0 {, Y (6 L_ O Wm fn m a> a� (D Y L O 1L 2.- u to m W TL £ m� c t0�� �CU JO a' JO 3 m di to m R R O �! Q O q too c ahi R to Q a h m a 3 d m Y FT co F� Fm LW D m Q N M M M • 0 X r— O m co v 0 O c0 co r-- _O 0 0 O O cD r- 7 -V 0 0 O O tD r- O N (0 0 0 0 t` O O N r— r-- O r- 0 «) O r- O 0 Cl t` M tO M N RIt tO r- O O to N 0 to cO r` M OR to 0 M O - - - - N N N - to - - 0 00 of 1- cn mr- co N 0 (ID O r r` to - 0) O O 0 O O a O t- (O sf O r - M 0 J N to ;co r n j44 O N 00 M Nto O O M M co c0 MC> O # Y) �. ;:Q O .: t*7 4 CJ CO IT CN GDN O M cm m R ` N 'L^ V M to U.) w c0 O O _ a) 0) �� O O O O O M O O O O N N t0 OC%l i N N Ol to vt O O tO C-4 Lo U N aD O GoODOD OD wco m.-- ONi w co O � O N 4;: N 0) 0 o o r- o N M U) w w O M y sr LO 0r- r-- O CO M N o O to O LO co co w wco w n to to co L N i t4 O O E a co LO n tO r O O O O � 00 N r- M N. N p M M M M M M v 'cf to -V q M O O tp c a m N W .0 co '2 .�+ r 00 cU O O O O O O� O tC b p------------- N-NNNNN.-O 0 N 0 h' O m o M� u w 0 00 CO O N a.r 44. ',-* t0 mF� N � N o N f�7 y OD 0 0 'a 0 0 0 a Ci o a t.3 a) OO a v +) N CC F - Z > t6 R @ Ur = C o T C \ \ \ \ \ \ o 0 o e o o \ \ \ \ \ \ e e e e o e o e 0 Q N N> M co N b th r C t0 0 O 10 tOD ti . e'- d! > N J to to to n ^ h P r` f` � m r` r` O v J d a_ co � m m d R y N 0 0 v M t0 O O v CO O N r- 00 Cl Cl) tO kc) I- N c0 O Oo (3) } O) C O) 601 0 0 0 0 0 N O M m co Q W Z N O+ N W � O R W J to N Y N M V tO co 00 O N R f ir Cl04 0 • 0 X r— O m co "o >' co 0 O c0 co r-- _O 0 0 O O cD r- 7 -V 0 0 O O tD r- O N (0 0 0 0 t` O O N r— r-- O r- 0 «) O r- O 0 Cl 0 O(D f` r• to "T M 0 0 O r P- 7 ttrn u) 0 0 to cO r` M OR to 0 0 cO r, O r- 0 0 M O M ao N Iq 0 00 of 1- cn mr- co N 0 (ID O r r` to - 0) O 0 r r O o aD O 0 O O a O t- (O sf O r - M 0 J to ;co r n j44 O N 00 e d ib R L°3 # Y) �. ;:Q O .: t*7 '!V' ; •t9 . .. 4 M cm m R ` 'L^ V d t0 OC%l N Ol to vt w ti O C7 N co co O e t0 C 4;: 0) 0) 0 O o r M M O O d. 3 . 0 h' O O I O OtO CO O N "T Ncm Cl t0 Co to LO � N o N f�7 OD 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O O M o R w . c IV N O+ N ONO O CD � LO r` V Cl04 NO in n d c`, 0) 0) 0 0) 0 0 O- N O O M O N 0 N R C O O cO v r- O O O N N t) IT N V) V C O O M p L L w C p W m ` _ m N CO CO O cO rraocor- <t tOMO O O c + ` p- OD 0) O 0) 0) t` O O N O O O O O n O O of N c i. i b L co Q o W J y H m M N 0 .— N M V O cO r- w O O cV t0 F Y r H • 0 X r— O m co H SI CD to tT '7 to Cl) w, O�': (D co (o co t U to r N T t0 h (D ap O N 1 M to �r t -- 1-:1 -- M O O r r r ', N (�+�' M ::i V r N a` t O M r O O N 0) to CD (D N; N O r NN to (D ,� � m LO .N- O, o>r ^ I- tf)m 0 st to LC14o O aO to I- N _O -Cr O O O N M to ('Vp" M r O to u) M M- r r r tff r r r r C-.4 0-.) aO AO M t`"' to N Co (D, CA N 00 U N 0 tp -I_- r Lo to (C) T r- O O` M O M r- 01 - OO O O r r r rD r M - r L r O CD to) 't SIX O (D Cn 'Cc) D r to) O O to (D t0 O X M to O iOP (A to co O O O O r- r r 0 M' st M CV r r m` r r to r 11" N M O) to (CS � (D Cn (n N N� O M '7 t- (D 0) r (D N 0. (O M � q 00000 "� M'.� r r co y p Cl) O O �+,`, M CD M [;- to N (D co p 0 X 0 0 O O O M M C14 IT O co N a r r r O N 4N, r to OD 'd' N [' N O C-if- t- CD 7 t� yam.. N 3 °OD v . U C, W .. O M V to O t• W M r0 - -- 0 O O N � 0 o O CO N e t0 M N UD o N 7 N N fh o O � N o N O` O O o r co (y to N v wlD O '7 O M - CO- cD M r r 0 N N N(�D U,) M co r, o M: r (D 00 M n NN IT '� e^k t` O (T O O O N ' N IT r^'- q O to "r - C) .N- r � � N N N N (D to N N (D r r r M is r O M t�OF N O COV7 ;l t3S(ff3Sc01YN.- O M co O V' co N O t` to p U Ln S N O O r N (t3-. '�t (N 0 •O r r r r .- � � r r�- r O D O M t` O M (D O O O O n M O) U M O W O N M N O p .O 0 0 0 0 r O CN O 0 co co N M Cl (D (D co M O co (n 0 U O Iq co co N (D IrM 0 0 0 6 0'D O '7 O O M OD �T4-tn 0 0 0 0 0 a; . Ci,`i; Lo O O O r- OO I- 0 N µ r - a k O N o L 07 goo m m n (D0 > mO E y O Yr N M (n (D fl- 00 O r C N Uc O A) m V tyq y y > 3 m� M CO 2 2 E mj �,— .- C O (Q O O `c o t_ N m Z Q d c (`c CN�Tt3o (D O Np V N Cc 1yy N> W -tM O Ac CNO p 5:i >O Z' g> 0 Ctx YQ N (0io 2 0 O O N � 0 o O CO N e t0 M N UD o N 7 N N fh o O � N o N O` O O o r co (y to N v wlD O '7 O M - CO- cD M r r 0 N N N(�D U,) M co r, o M: r (D 00 M n NN IT '� e^k t` O (T O O O N ' N IT r^'- q O to "r - C) .N- r � � N N N N (D to N N (D r r r M is r O M t�OF N O COV7 ;l t3S(ff3Sc01YN.- O M co O V' co N O t` to p U Ln S N O O r N (t3-. '�t (N 0 •O r r r r .- � � r r�- r O D O M t` O M (D O O O O n M O) U M O W O N M N O p .O 0 0 0 0 r O CN O 0 co co N M Cl (D (D co M O co (n 0 U O Iq co co N (D IrM 0 0 0 6 0'D O '7 O O M OD �T4-tn 0 0 0 0 0 '- ' CD O d' 0 0 r r Ci,`i; Lo O O O r- OO I- 0 N µ r - i N Nci O<L7 O O O 07 0) r mO E y O Yr N M (n (D fl- 00 O r a o O W s M r mO E y O M C N N C O � V tyq y y > 3 m� M CO W (0 mj �,— .- m 0 Z' a GyiO y 0 y > C> o t_ N f' Q d Y Q. C3) 0 3 e N O N N n O N N X 0 v M 0 m V! V J E rn 3 Zd w o w Q c mo o0(D(D Uoaci�vo LL dac)Mm Z M M M M aM?.�. c•- Cc� UW EooQ�a m� �C LLla M LE> ._ QC" L . � C N M co 13 Q Q Q m m m m m U U U U U N N C4 0O Q Lt(n 7 N M C C 00 a C N N O > (n Z 3 C o m m m m m E M 3 to 0 0 .`- V 0 0 30 0 m m M t Z3 M M M C M L� 3 a 'O t N N c 3 m N m>> O O M y N m m M W Y O O M Q W W W �» N O W B CL m C N= c �N C Z—m m m m m m m m m c: Na) d M mLaMN N NNN m 0N_ C N C.YY Y Y Y YYY ) _c 7jD JJJJJJ-i-iJ-I _I- YYY cc a MCO(00qt(Du)000 Ml-u)iOCMMo00q o001,-"T000'tMoO(MM00co(V NI- O(D MC)MWf- N(OO 0 NrNMT- Mr- MaaMLOMU)C)WM d WW MIT 'It WW WM(O lC 0 OONu)I�Ot�NN(Df�MaOMN�YO'14:cq"gC 0 0 0 �- 0 0 0 0 0 0• - 0 0 Co C) C) U 0 "COMNIlMMti(OV:7COU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E2 o OCO V-000 -It000MN0001�(A0000(DLOM COCDN0W a W MstU)f- r- N m coo OOOI- O� 00lp�tODOLAt0�m0000NNNf�I-Nu)� 0001-r-COd N LL O N Cl u� N N M 0 r- M N CO N O N M M O O O N O N r- •- N N 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O Cl O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 N CM O O O tt 't 00 0 CO � to e- O tt M O tO tf) O (p 00 0 N 000 00 M 0 1� M O • - (0 d cc) 00 Lf) 0) 0000Nrn00�OCOCD0000NNI-OMO0Lf) I-- Lf) M. -00 w O � . O . N . r- . N . •- . M . O . r- . to . M . T7 . CO . M . O . 0 .. 7 . 7 . CM7 . . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 7 . 0 . 0 . 7 . N . 7 . O . � . O .c_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 ICI— 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 'a U) 0 CF) ITOMMOO Cf) O tnlnN'qf-'tMONM Cl, IOI-(ONO(f)N VtC)V)Ul IT 000 OD E ONS ON000I-LOI-u1CDIq000ONOONOstM�MONOMr-mOCD�OI`I` 0 O,tNdO(MCOMCDT7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MCA(Opt 0 0 0 0 Co. 0 M 0 0 ON'I*:O(OMN-1t04T7IT�`�tNNONN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V,v- V -0000I -d' 000000N00-,t1�000 'It CII IT0�-Mst(OOOOMcMtO(n0D—�t0 r MN001-0D coMr- N M MU)LOr- MMMIOCOCOCOT- M M� O F- OCD 0000CDCO CO 'q ItI-- ICD V-a0'9t O CC) COLO OCO(OCOCOO�ITO�MIq N r N .- . - �- .- .- .- T M �- r 2 d �-TO(O00000000h Cf) LOM(MI OMM 14- T-N�t00(OOMOO(OCC)000r- t V N V- T- e- N N T- U � � L � cov OOM000WWMMT-� 0)N'-aC)C> �t �i'N OO •- tMO CM 00u) 0 CO00OtoLO Q C E e- •- "TM CM NN T- NN NT- NNNMCOMM T ca 0 0b LJ 1 O N 0 t 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (O co O O m ._ Cm CL CL O V o v > O N�-d•0T-0000NOCDNMI�CO•-(O(Ott000-00N000Nmt0D0� ItM000O 'IT CO V T-Nr-NMOOtON(AN�-N �T- r- O� M000(D�OOI-OOOf-Nh (O� = C r T- qT T- d O L V � v �N�NM��ONipNmNM�w� W mMM(OOO(00 �001-C>wr- MOOu � V C� 0. V! V J E rn 3 Zd w o w Q c mo o0(D(D Uoaci�vo LL dac)Mm Z M M M M aM?.�. c•- Cc� UW EooQ�a m� �C LLla M LE> ._ QC" L . � C N M co 13 Q Q Q m m m m m U U U U U N N C4 0O Q Lt(n 7 N M C C 00 a C N N O > (n Z 3 C o m m m m m E M 3 to 0 0 .`- V 0 0 30 0 m m M t Z3 M M M C M L� 3 a 'O t N N c 3 m N m>> O O M y N m m M W Y O O M Q W W W �» N O W B CL m C N= c �N C Z—m m m m m m m m m c: Na) d M mLaMN N NNN m 0N_ C N C.YY Y Y Y YYY ) _c 7jD JJJJJJ-i-iJ-I _I- YYY cc a • J_ LL w J 'Z V/ a OlnOrlpr0 0 0 0 0 cc) 00 h d Or O O r 0 0 0 0 0 a I- r- 0 M W 0a N in OlnNlf)OOMNr O O O CD r O O N m OOLf) OLr) OOd' U) (R 0 r Co O r O r r 0 0 0 F- u (D d 00coCDfl- 00M 010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O c:2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m � a O C)C M ) m U) N O (D r - V ONO M IqNCAON(DCD coNM'ct 00�- LL (n C:) ��M�CO�tNrCO CD r N O r e� = 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 (n o aa,aCM00� N a1r000MOLf) Nt N OrC)Mlnr0(D E O O QO �t oO r N ('M EAN E Lor - N 2O0)O(M04r(DNCi)N 0) cu- '0 'Q rM000O1-m 1- (J a 0 0 0 M r M M 0 0r N c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m � a , (D U) U) >` C C r w a) a) CQ .- a) N a) N cc (n�aca 3 3�(D— O O O -=•- a a a. 1- > 0 ca 0 ci) O M O to to 00 0 In C7D N 2 C C c Q U_ 2 OOOm"awaMe- +' V (a (a (a a a. OCMNOCOlp1-r r o o r o 0 0 0 NC'O 0 0 W N co (u c c r N co N .2 'm .2 0 is c m 4' 3��N o C caaF->tu�a� co M aNi 00 N n - N 0 >IU) 02 c c c o m ca ca a 02 } (n 00 m � @ -@z L-4- (a O p > Tw Z � H LL ?: c CL O'V'OMr0Itr m (v m ti o,�=Uw N> a� a� C c W (D C:Q (a N N M d OMO1-- O O 3:Ca 0) co tJ1 Ca CO o NLL(n V/>>>> CA N .a NONMIArIp'gr OCA r N M r r N CV r— Mu n N U LO "C>0 0 0 0 0 0 0 h d O O r 0 0 0 0 0 0 N in O O O CD r O O N m OOLf) OLr) OOd' O p= 0 0 cc,:!) 0 0 0 0 0 Z F- u (D d 00coCDfl- 00M 010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O c:2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m � a N M O r C C) r 0 0 0 N V M N coNM'ct 00�- C e-rNM cu ��M�CO�tNrCO r F- F- d la OOo00NOOLO NOrCDCM(Dw (D u) rrr r co _ L � 3 (n o aa,aCM00� N a1r000MOLf) Nt U � E O O QO �t oO r N ('M EAN E M N N M N r 0 O 0) cu- '0 'Q rM000O1-m 1- �1 CMC) Mr N W (O a N W MIt N N H O f' v to O N M L , (D U) U) >` C C r w a) a) CQ .- a) N a) N cc (n�aca 3 3�(D— O O O -=•- a a a. 1- > 0 ca 0 a. O(DC)LOC10d'MCD m (D" C y M 1- (70 N r qT M O (D C2 O y y r r In 2 C C c Q U_ 2 +' V (a (a (a a a. Q� �.-i lofa(n ti (D 1- Q o O N co (u c c r co .2 'm .2 O is c m 4' 3��N o C caaF->tu�a� co aNi - n - >IU) 02 c c c o m ca ca a 02 } (n 00 m � @ -@z L-4- (a c p > Tw Z m LL ?: c CL m (v m O o,�=Uw N> a� a� C c (D C:Q (a N N d.>- O O 3:Ca C C tJ1 Ca o NLL(n V/>>>> n N U LO O O O O M M O O OOOCOM�tOCD O O O r M r to N O O r 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O O O CD r O O N m OOLf) OLr) OOd' U- (n OO 0 0 0 0 0 p= 0 0 cc,:!) 0 0 0 0 0 Z (D d 00coCDfl- 00M 010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c:2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m � a � OOI-OIAMOM OO(DCOO't00 OO COrNrIC)r 00000000 !JJ 00�- e-rNM cu ��M�CO�tNrCO r F- F- OOo00NOOLO NOrCDCM(Dw (D u) rrr r co _ � 2 (n o aa,aCM00� N a1r000MOLf) Nt E O O QO �t oO r N ('M EAN E M N N M N r 0 4) 0) cu- '0 'Q rM000O1-m 1- O 0 r(DCDOI-MNM Ca CL f' v to O N OMNInC�f- 0 a, V rrrNM r , (D U) U) >` C C r w a) a) CQ .- a) N a) (n�aca 3 3�(D— O O O -=•- a a a. 1- > 0 ca 0 O(DC)LOC10d'MCD m (D" C y M 1- (70 N r qT M O (D C2 O y y r r In 2 C C c Q U_ 2 +' V (a (a (a a a. Q� �.-i lofa(n ti 0 o co (u r O Z N d' m 4' 3��N o C caaF->tu�a� ami d c 02 c c c o m ca ca a 02 i m � @ -@z L-4- (a ai mm(a'� ca n N U LO El N O N U c N t O 0 c N E O. O N N d O O N L L �o 'CrqTr- M OD C CO M f� r O CO lgt O M O M N q •- q 00 .. t O O r O T- Mr CDWI- M r In r r r r r CO M N� r O N r M (y r r r r M CM M r N N N N O N O t) V r I -- O LO ONrOO 04 C) 0) ON U) LorNOd'MMa Co O O O O O O O O O r O r O r O O O O O O O r CO CO N O O O O O O O �+ U C = M = d R M CL i C � v N 0 it Cp Imo. O N coM Mr It M M CO 0)I1- W mNrr rr O N � �-'M �f [�0000CbMCOetOrOpN00000MOO�} N a � OMMOO�700MMOOCOM N r COOI-rMNN M NNC)OO(- O CM r I-NONr- M cool) e -w '}'N Cf) 0') CN 00tOOr E r rrN M r eMNrIt0 V r d r r 1. a r Cp W 'CrqTr- C OWWOMW 'IT OrON000WMOOR;rOQ)OCO0OV-OMOIOOCOM N Mr CDWI- rMNN M NNOOI- Mlw r N M rNNrrlA '-r CO CM M r Ma N O t) V O Co O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O �+ U C = d R CL i C � U U v O �-'M �f [�0000CbMCOetOrOpN00000MOO�} OMMOO�700MMOOCOM N r COOI-rMNN M NNC)OO(- CM r N M rNNrr0 rV)MrM V N 1. a M r N to .r M .r C 'a NN E C N N Q) .-. M ns N 0 t to t N ca to L O ti N 4 o c a Q 5 a d o W L > O 0 oaN o'o C ma WWm 3-3 a) vas N cQ�moco odd add (aC 3•- ���Wwmrna) N -i pM �° CU CO N N N -a O 0 w " Ca .. N N Q_' oa M a -0 �' -0g> = o N �a C d .. N +� tl) C O L C O C O W ;= a 0 2>— C C C N LL U) .0 0 > 0 N a N a Q o co = E ��U)i`L-(D Z0iaoiaoiNa���u, =��`� 3v� O •O V �cYim N N ._ L_ ,�,, �. N N C C L ,C Y 3— 3 U 0 � d QQmmmmmUUUOW22=YYYJJJJ�22Zda. fn w.'>-. • 2 J_ LLL J 2 _ rn 00 r- 00 r� co C,4 O r LO r- rn 1Q N r - Lo 00 NT M N U) O M M W 0 0 1 O 0 1 O 0 O 0 r 0 I r 0 1 C) 0 0 0 r 0 N O 0 r� a) is � U) -C N �- O U Y a) C ,4 M= LL ON0O��000MM�'ct O r 0 0 In LO U') O r Lf) r M = V 0 O 0 O 0 O 0q O O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O x O 0 0 lC L r r r r r r- m N C 00'�t 0-r d 000000 -a O O N N N r r O O ti r V V t� 000000000000 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 GN 00 CO (or- 00NMNr00'4-V) CD O CO r- r E O N CD O 0p r ON N N to CD O r O r o0 M M Lf) co O co 'at N m d'OOOOOr00000 r W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IL MM00 'IT o00000N 'IT Nr -ti a r N N O r t T- o O c F- t 0 a) °) ONTOLor-0)C) c F- 0a� —Cl) 0 t` H oQCl r M m E _ v -D Q 0 3 0 0 CD N r M N r 0 0 r` O -� L m L X 0 M a) �_ a) c M N N m 3UUt.r_2��0(00 S .0 CL Mrm cco -0 -0 cot`rMr00 r � 0 m cu 2 m m m U- a) w Y Y Y -R -2 Y Y .Y N 'a r C) C) O O C) 00 O O O C> 0 m d I�-0 _ w w N Q a) a Q N o U a U) a) M a W `c 0 � a) is � U) -C N �- c a) Y a) C ,4 M= O LLJF-fn 0000NCMctr00" r 0 CD CDONCnOr-- rO C C C r r r r r r- Q ` V V t� 00 CO (or- 00NMNr00'4-V) CD O CO r- 0 0 r r N r CM O r r 0 00 N V r C � IL a t c t 0 a) °) c F- 0a� —Cl) 0 H oQCl c m E _ v -D Q 0 3 ca Z -0 c 0a) 3= 0E0 EL L m c 0 F - y+ L m L X 0 M a) �_ a) c M N m 3UUt.r_2��0(00 S .0 CL occu cco -0 -0 c o m cu 2 m m m U- a) Y Y Y -R -2 Y Y .Y N 0 UJJ.JJJJJJ�> NIMI°°I�IMI�CO I� 000000 NIM!°°I�ICO ;t r- 0 r U c 0 o 0 y= a) -0 I�-0 _ w w 0 Q a) a Q o U a U) a) M a W `c co a) is � U) -C N �- c a) Y a) C ,4 M= LLJF-fn r- 0 r U 11 - 210 i/ 20 0 BIT SCNoo�oIsmicTNO,MI Emerald Park Elementary Site Emerald Park Elementary School Emerald Park Elementary Sewing Unincorporated King County Residents And Residents of the Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn, Back Diamond, Maple vaffey, Renton, and SeaTac, Washington 0 Aprii2007 A TZ BIT SeNOOL DISTRICT No ,�� Emerald Park Elementary Site Emerald Park Elementary School Emerald Park Elementary Serving Unincorporated King County Residents And residents of the Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn, BCac%Eliamond,, Maple vaffey, Renton, and SeaTac, Washington Apri12007 0 • • Kent school District Kent School District No. 415 12033 SE 256th Street Kent, Washington 98030-6643 (253) 373-7295 SIX -YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007 - 2008 - 2012 - 2013 BOARD of DIRECTORS Jim Berrios Bill Boyce Sandra Collins Chris Davies Mike Jensen ADMINISTRATION Barbara Grohe, Ph.D. — Superintendent Fred H. High — Assistant Superintendent for Business Services Mark Haddock, Ph.D. — Assistant Superintendent for Learning & School Improvement Margaret A. Whitney — Assistant Superintendent for Human Resources John Knutson — Executive Director of Finance Merri Rieger — Executive Director, School Improvement 9 - 12 Janis Bechtel — Executive Director, School Improvement K - 8 Jeanette Ristau — Executive Director, School Improvement K - 6 Greg Whiteman — Executive Director of Information Technology Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2007 KENT SCHOOL pISTRECT, SIX - YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007 - 2008 - 2012 - 2013 April 2007 For information on the Plan, please call the Finance & Planning Department at (253) 373-7295 Capital Facilities Plan Contributing Staff Gwenn Escher-Derdowski Forecast & Planning Administrator Fred Long, Supervisor of Facilities & Construction Karla Wilkerson & Lynell Mooney, Facilities Department Don Walkup, Supervisor of Transportation Department Kathy Fosjord, Purchasing Department Cover Design by Debbi Smith Maps by Jana Tucker Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2007 I� • Kent school District Sim }'ear Capital facilities Plan Table of Contents Section Page Number I Executive Summary 2 11 Six -Year Enrollment Projection & History 4 is III District Standard of Service 8 I V Inventory, Capacity & Maps of Existing Schools 11 V Six -Year Planning and Construction Plan 14 V I Relocatable Classrooms 17 V 11, Projected Classroom Capacity 18 VIII Finance Plan, Cost Basis and Impact Fee Schedules 23 I X Summary of Changes to Previous Plan 30 X Appendixes 31 • Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2007 Executive Summa • Summary This Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") has been prepared by the Kent School District (the "District") as the organization's facilities planning document, in compliance with the requirements of Washington's Growth Management Act, King County Code K.C.C. 21A.43 and Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn, Renton, SeaTac, Maple Valley and Black Diamond. This annual plan update was prepared using data available in the spring of 2007 for the 2006-2007 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, Auburn and Renton 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. • In order for impact fees to be collected in the unincorporated areas of Kent School District, the Metropolitan King County Council must adopt this Plan and a fee -implementing ordinance for the District. For impact fees to be collected in the incorporated portions of the District, the cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn and Renton must also adopt this Plan and their own school impact fee ordinances. This Plan has also been submitted to cities of Maple Valley, Black Diamond, and SeaTac. This Capital Facilities Plan establishes a "standard of service" in order to ascertain 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 for students of the District. This Plan includes the standard of service as established by Kent School District. Program capacity is based on an average capacity and updated to reflect changes to special programs served in each building. Relocatables in the capacity calculation use the same standard of service as the permanent facilities. (continued) • Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2007 Page 2 • • • Executive Summary (continued) The capacity of each school in the District is calculated based on the District standard of service and the existing inventory, which includes some relocatable classrooms. The District's program capacity of permanent facilities reflects program changes and the reduction of class size to meet the requirements of Student Achievement Initiative 728. Relocatables provide additional transitional capacity until permanent facilities are completed. Kent School District is the fourth largest district in the state. Enrollment is electronically reported monthly to the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) on Form P-223. Although funding apportionment is based on Annual Average Full Time Equivalent (AAFTE), Enrollment on October 1 is a widely recognized "snapshot in time" that is used to report the District's enrollment for the year. P-223 Headcount for October 1, 2006 was 26,996. P-223 FTE (Full Time Equivalent) enrollment was 25,864.47. (FTE reports Kindergarten at .5 and excludes Early Childhood Education [ECE] and college -only Running Start students.) The actual number of individual students per the October 2006 full head count was 27,590. (Full Headcount reports all enrolled students at 1.0 including Kindergarten, ECE and college -only Running Start students.) The District's standard of service, enrollment history and projections, and use of transitional facilities are reviewed in detail in various sections of this Plan. The District plans to continue to satisfy concurrency requirements through the transitional use of relocatables. A financing plan is included in Section V I I I ability to implement this Plan. Pursuant to Management Act, this Plan will be updated schedules adjusted accordingly. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan which demonstrates the District's the requirements of the Growth annually with changes in the fee April 2007 Page 3 I I Six - Year Enrollment Projection For capital facilities planning, growth projections are based on cohort survival and student yield from documented residential construction projected over the next six years. (see Tabie 2) The student generation factor, as defined on the next page, is the basis for the growth projections from new developments. King County births and the Districrs relational percentage average were used to determine the number of kindergartners entering the system. (see Table t) 8.235% of 21,863 King County live births in 2002 is forecast for 1,800 students (900 FTE @ .5) expected in Kindergarten for October 1, 2007. Together with proportional growth from new construction, 8.235% of King County births is equivalent to the number of students projected to enter kindergarten in the district for the next six-year period. (see Terre 2) Early Childhood Education students (sometimes identified as "Preschool Special Education [SE] or handicapped students") and non -disabled peer models are forecast and reported separately. Capacity is reserved to serve that program at seven elementary schools. Full day kindergarten programs are provided at most elementary schools with alternative funding for the second half of the day. • The first grade population is traditionally 7 - 8% larger than the kindergarten population due to growth and transfers to the District from private kindergartens. • Cohort survival method uses historical enrollment data to forecast the number of students projected for the following year. Near term projections assume some growth from new developments to be offset by current local economic conditions. With 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 markettgrowth 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 School District serves seven permitting jurisdictions: unincorporated King County, the cities of Kent, Covington, and Auburn and small portions of the cities of Renton, SeaTac, and Maple Valley. The west Lake Sawyer area of Kent School District is in the city of Black Diamond. (Continued) Kent School District Six -Year capital Facilities Plan April 2007 Page 4 • • • I I Six - Year Enrollment Projection STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR (Continued) "Student Factor" is defined by King County 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 .444 Middle School .148 Senior High .252 Total .844 Multi -Family Elementary .293 Middle School .058 Senior High .094 Total .445 The student generation factor is based on a survey of 3,746 single family dwelling units and 1,283 multi -family dwelling units with no adjustment for occupancy rates. Please refer to Appendix E on Pages 35-36 of the Capital Facilities Plan for details of the Student Generation Factor survey. The actual number of students in those residential developments was determined using the District's Education Logistics (EDULOG) Transportation System. Kent School District Six Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2007 Page 5 OW O~ IL C4 y M N N wa Y � W m O 1- U O "CD• CDm a p O N a O ,-Go W 0 M ao co O o_ O V N N to C) ti p N N O O O O) W N O O to O O N O N r r N OD O K Op O O ro m ?�_ N �. N N N N N N N N N N Lc) to 2QS U') co o t7 co N O O0) r m to O OO " OD �- Cl)O O t0 N O O to co r O r O W W c : O ;, 11:�j O T O N O N N N N N N r N N M m J N OD N r- o r W)m O O r N m t'7 -V O R r t0 O r b di E C O: O m M O) l7 to N O O O O N N N O r " O to V sr r _N m @ N _;- C -4 O �— .— N N N N N N N N N m n M r C e O O N r O O) O) r r 0Go O C m C p 0 rr W tp O to OD to to r 0i rr O o O 0 N C) N t7 o th o N w n m of t,) v to Q) a m N t0 N m pp W t- C 0 T (O W) 00 C) O O) v O) t+) to V O M co ^ N tq O tO v b leo r O r) N r Ln Cl) V) C m n Oto O to O O to O "t O tD 't OD - N N ap N N N N N N N N r N m „�, m Q r \ rO r Qe� t0 O th N N O �{ O O 0) E p o qCa C) N .a O Oa) O O r N N tO " W Z a Ca N N Ol N N N N N N N N N N m $ 21 C> p to O co m co to t+) O th O N OD W Q M W ", O O m O O O O WO O N O O O N M O O N r •- r r M c7 N m O _m 8 jp c m .. p N--' N N c6 N N N tli N N N N N N r- N m tD t0 r C O O> O \(pp O OD N r W O N O N r O cOvi O N '� ao to r O N N M O OD O O O v O co r- to 00 m r- CO cy E o a .� W J r- ._ N tb r N N N N N N N N N N n _N m 0 Q b oD `- LO M o O o O ao O o0 o to m 0) NCIA M E �. m N O W O O N O O tO O r to N m O M O OD th CO tt) N m m a) c N N N N N N O N co N .-- •- r N O p to NtD f� "Z"� co m \ c N O co `7 0) CO O tO to N (0 t7 N co CD M M r r r O r O m OD v _5 F Y n M ::i Cf) r O O CC O O to Of O) O) 1: m M it N Qp N J W W $ :' N o N W O tO tD V 0) r to O N O o m O i" p O s{ r O r rn N o tD 0) N Cl) O co N m to 0) O ao tD toCb t0 W r U � r O N tV j? N r r r r r r r r N @ c � T O f0 O a{ C a '$ C :. O W O O O) O O OD to tO r tO N Vto m T-': N Of r N r N .- .- r r r r N O a J C � N e o O r r O (O N to O) O m (4 co O O O) O) co O m m c W Q $ £ _ N a 0) rn to C) rn corn aD O com N t0 M n o r m m rn vi _C Sc E CW) o O r OD N 0) r to t0 Oo r C) m a Q C ..CD N O W 00Ch )_ Q) P b t�C)_ dD b b E 0 m _. r -:. N 6 N N r .- r r •- •- e- 1- r N M c O f'15 t n m N s:. 6) :, \ N to tD O O : O N v O) M W O N N fO 0) O 4 O N O O) O to O to to o 00 OD N n OD tO t0 m O 'Q 0) N N W O L e- .- NM $ tD C wc C '� o O O) Ov tD tO t0 — O M m t0 O N co N N O OD O O O O N M t4 r of W S 0 c to C O> R Ci 00 r1t. n tO tO N O v m r =: pj 01 .- - .- r- — '- ' I— N �- N tx C Y O N o N M v N M O) N O O) It O 0) co O co N O CD W � c { c �- w 00 coO 00 tD r ►� tO � tO C a 't N O W .. rr-- ` (D D m .'_ .. r ::: Q O N > 7 CM m Em L 0 == 3 m > m O = O o $ an u w" ; m c c m tD tD c m ui$ to E E 2` m m tD r N Cl) v to tO r OD Q ty O ' o S Ytp O W W r W Q 0 E c Q° m N N 'D N- v d 'o m 'O tD 'O m v m to m tD 'O m 'O m 'C m O c C N l`6 f`6 N N v -p WWD $ .c E .9 L Y 2 0 C9 0' ♦�� ♦LNC ' 0 C9 ♦co ' o `N o 0 U a } U LL LL N 0 "CD• CDm a p O N a • • KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 SIX -YEAR F.T.E. ENROLLMENT PROJECTION I R in 2tln1 I R in 2002 1 R in 2003 L8 in 2004 LB in 2005 LB in 2006 LB in 2007 King County Live Births' 21,778 21,863 22,431 22,874 Octoberl 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 443 -194 820 100 King County Live Births' 21,778 21,863 22,431 22,874 22,680 23,500 23,600 ' Increase / Decrease -709 85 568 443 -194 820 100 Kindergarten / Birth % 2 8.22% 8.23% 8.24% 8.24% 8.24% 8.24% 8.24% 213 Kindergarten FTE @ .5 895 900 924 942 934 968 972 Grade 1 2,003 1,900 1,928 1,979 2,017 2,000 2,072 Grade 2 1,998 2,062 1,954 1,983 2,035 2,073 2,056 Grade 3 2,026 2,032 2,117 2,007 2,037 2,090 2,128 Grade 4 2,015 2,082 2,097 2,184 2,071 2,102 2,166 Grade 5 2,051 2,031 2,125 2,140 2,228 2,114 2,145 Gracie 6 2,101 2,082 2,083 2,179 2,194 2,284 2,168 Grade 7 2,205 2,153 2,146 2,147 2,245 2,260 2,352 Grade 8 2,254 2,270 2,216 2,209 2,210 2,310 2,325 Grade 9 2,772 2,709 2,751 2,686 2,677 2,679 2,799 Grade 10 2,212 2,329 2,312 2,347 2,292 2,285 2,286 Grade 11 1,881 1,912 2,077 2,061 2,092 2,044 2,038 Grade 12 1,451 1,487 1,617 1,754 1,741 1,767 1,727 Total FTE Enrollment 25,864 25,949 26,347 26,618 26,773 26,976 27,224 NOW. 21314 Yearly Increase 55 85 398 271 155 203 248 Yearly Increase % 0.21% 0.33% 1.53% 1.03% 0.58% 0.76% 0.92% Cumulative Increase 55 140 538 809 964 1,167 1,415 ----------------- =€ Full Time Equivalent FTE 25,864 1 25,949 1 26,347 26,618 1 26,773 1 26,976 27,224 ' Kindergarten enrollment projection is based on KSD percentage of live births in King County five years previous. 2 Kindergarten FTE projection at .5 is calculated by using the District's previous year percentage of King County births 5 years earlier compared to actual kindergarten enrollment in the previous year. (Excludes ECE - Early Childhood Education) 3 Kindergarten projection is at .5 FTE although most schools provide Full Day Kindergarten with alternative funding. 4 Oct. 2006 P223 FTE is 25,864 & Headcount is 28,996. Full student count with ECE Preschool & Running Start = 27,590. s G ROW T H PROJECTIONS - Ad'ustments for current economic factors For facilities planning purposes, this six-year enrollment projection anticipates moderate enrollment growth from new development currently in some phase of planning or construction in the district. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 2 April 2007 Page 7 • III Current Kent School District "Standard of Service" In order to determine the capacity of the District's facilities, King County Code 21A.06 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 the student population. This Plan includes the standard of service as established by Kent School District. The District has identified schools with significant special needs programs as "impact" schools and the standard of service targets a lower class size at those facilities. 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. Kent School District is continuing a long-term strategic planning process combined with review of changes to capacity and standard of service adjustments 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. Because the • funding for Initiative 728 is incremental, implementation of the Initiative is also incremental and may result in annual changes to school capacity. Current Standards of Service for Elementary Students Class size for Kindergarten should not exceed an average of 22 students. Class size for grades 1 - 4 should not exceed an average of 23 students. Class size for grades 5 - 6 should not exceed an average of 29 students. Program capacity for general education elementary classrooms is calculated at an average of 24 students per classroom because of fluctuations between primary and intermediate grade levels (i.e. third/fourth or fourth/fifth grade split classes, etc.). Most elementary schools provide full day kindergarten programs (FDK or KAI — Full Day Kindergarten or Kindergarten Academic Intervention) with the second half of the day funded by grants or tuition. Students have scheduled time in a computer lab. Students may also be provided music instruction and physical education in a separate classroom or facility. Special Education for students with disabilities may be provided in a self- contained classroom with a capacity of 10-15 depending on the program. (continued) Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2007 Paye 8 • III Current Kent School District "Standard of Service" (continued) Identified students will also be provided other educational opportunities in classrooms for programs such as those designated as follows: English Language Leamers (E L L) Self-contained Special Education Support Center Programs (SC) Integrated Programs & Resource Rooms (for special remedial assistance) Early Childhood Education (ECE) (3-4 yr. old students with disabilities) School Adjustment (sA) Program for severely behavior -disordered students Speech & Language Therapy & Programs for Hearing Impaired students Adaptive Support Center for Mild, Moderate & Severe Disabilities (ASC -DD) Occupational & Physical Therapy Programs (OT/PT) Developmental Kindergarten in SC Programs Kindergarten Academic Intervention Program (KAI-Full Day Kindergarten) Education for Disadvantaged Students (Title I) Leaming Assisted Programs (LAP) District Remediation Programs Education for Highly Capable Students (formerly "Gifted" Program) 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 "pull-out" 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. Reductions have been made in 7th and 10"' grade English classes for Initiative 728. These standards are subject to change pending annual updates based on staff and public review for changes funded by Student Achievement Initiative 728. Class size for grades 7 - 8 should not exceed an average of 29 students. Class size for 7th & 10th grade English class should not exceed an average of 25 students. Class size for grades 9 - 12 should not exceed an average of 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. (conrd.) Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2007 Page 9 III Current Kent School District "Standard of Service" (continued) • Identified students will also be provided other education opportunities in classrooms for programs designated as follows: Computer, Multi -media & Technology Labs and Programs English Language Learners (E L L) Science Programs & Labs — Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Oceanography, Astronomy, Meteorology, Marine Biology, General Science, etc. Integrated Programs & Resource Rooms (for special remedial assistance) Basic Skills Programs Child Development Preschool and Daycare Programs Music Programs — Band, Orchestra, Chorus, Jazz Band, etc. Art Programs — Painting, Design, Drawing, Ceramics, Pottery, Photography, etc. Theater Arts — Drama, Stage Tech, etc. Journalism and Yearbook Classes Highly Capable (Honors or Gifted) and Advanced Placement Programs International Baccalaureate Program Night Academy — Evening classes for credit retrieval program Traffic Safety Education Transition Outreach Program for 18-21 year old Special Education students JROTC - Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps Variety of Career & Technical Education Programs (CTE -Vocational Education) Family & Consumer Science — Cooking, Sewing, Child Development, etc. • Health Sciences, Sports Medicine, etc. Business Education Keyboarding, Accounting, Business Law, DECA, FBLA (Future Business Leaders), Sales & Marketing, etc. Material Sciences — Woods and Cabinet Making, Metals, Welding, Electronics, Auto Shop, Manufacturing Technology, Machine Shop, CAD, (Computer-aided Design) Drafting & Drawing, etc. Culinary Arts, Graphic & Commercial Arts, Engineering, 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 programs are provided for students in grades K -12 at Kent Mountain View Academy. Space 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 at secondary schools. Based on the analysis of actual utilization of classrooms, the District has determined that the standard utilization rate is 85% for secondary schools. Program capacity at elementary schools reflects 100% utilization at the elementary level with adjustments for pull-out programs served in relocatables. In the future, the District will continue close analysis of actual utilization. - Kent School District six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2007 Page 10 • I V Inventory and Capacity of Existing Schools Currently, the District has permanent program capacity to house 27,598 students and transitional (relocatable) capacity to house 1,412. This capacity is based on the District's Standard of Service as set forth in Section I 11. Included in this Plan is an inventory of the District's schools by type, address and current capacity. (See Table 3 on Page 12) The program capacity is periodically updated for changes in programs, additional classrooms and new schools. Program capacity has been updated in this Plan to reflect program changes. It has also been updated to report new capacity for building additions at the high schools and updated program capacity for Mill Creek Middle School. Program capacity also reflects adjustments for the Student Achievement Initiative 728 reduction in class size. The class size reduction received voter approval in the Educational Programs and Operations Levy as well as through funding for Student Achievement Initiative 728. The District will conduct annual • public review and update class size recommendations in accordance with the requirements and incremental funding of Student Achievement Initiative 728. • Kent Mountain View Academy (formerly Kent Learning Center and Grandview Elementary) serves grades Kindergarten 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 originally designed as an elementary school and is included in the elementary capacity for this Plan. Calculation of Elementary, Junior High and Senior High School capacities are set forth in Appendices A, B and C. A map of existing schools is included on Page 13. Kent School District Six -Year capital Facilities Plan April 2007 Page 11 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 INVENTORY and CAPACITY of EXISTING SCHOOLS Changes to capacity reflect program changes and new building additions at high schools. Z Kent Junior High was closed for 2004-05 for remodel and re -purpose. it re -opened in 2005 as Mill Creek Middle School. 3 Kent Mountain View Academy serves grades K-12. The school was formerly known as Kent Looming Center & Grandview Elementary. Kent School District Sb( -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 3 April 2007 Page 12 2006-2007 Year SCHOOL Opened ABR ADDRESS Program Capacity Carriage Crest Elementary 1990 CC 18235 -140th Avenue SE, Renton 98058 452 Cedar Valley Elementary 1971 CV 265W Timberlane Way SE, Covington 98042 402 Covington Elementary 1961 CO 17070 SE Wax Road, Covington 98042 498 Crestwood Elementary 1980 CW 25225 -180th Avenue SE, Covington 98042 456 East Hill Elementary 1953 EH 9825 S 240th Street, Kent 98031 464 Emerald Park 1999 EP 11800 SE 216th Street, Kent 98031 504 Fairwood Elementary 1969 FW 16600 -148th Avenue SE, Renton 98058 408 George T. Daniel Elementary 1992 DE 11310 SE 248th Street, Kent 98031 450 Glenridge Elementary 1996 GR 19405 -120th Avenue SE, Renton 98058 456 Grass Lake Elementary 1971 GL 28700 -191st Place SE, Kent 98042 452 Horizon Elementary 1990 HE 27641 -144th Avenue SE, Kent 98042 504 Jenkins Creek Elementary 1987 JC 26915 -186th Avenue SE, Covington 98042 398 Kent Elementary 1999 KE 24700 - 64th Avenue South, Kent 98032 464 Lake Youngs Elementary 1965 LY 19660 -142nd Avenue SE, Kent 98042 524 Martin Sortun Elementary 1987 MS 12711 SE 248th Street, Kent 98031 474 Meadow Ridge Elementary 1994 MR 27710 -108th Avenue SE, Kent 98031 464 Meridian Elementary 1939 ME 25621 -140th Avenue SE, Kent 98042 524 Millennium Elementary 2000 ML 11919 SE 270th Street, Kent 98031 498 Neely -O'Brien Elementary 1990 NO 6300 South 236th Street, Kent 98032 440 Panther lake Elementary 1938 PL 20831 -108th Avenue SE, Kent 98031 396 Park Orchard Elementary 1963 PO 11010 SE 232nd Street, Kent 98031 480 Pine Tree Elementary 1967 PT 27825 -118th Avenue SE, Kent 98031 522 Ridgewood Elementary 1987 RW 18030 -162nd Place SE, Renton 98058 504 Sawyer Woods Elementary 1994 SW 31135 - 228th Avenue SE, Kent 98042 504 Scenic Hill Elementary 1960 SH 26025 Woodland Way South, Kent 98031 464 Soos Creek Elementary 1971 SC 12651 SE 218th Place, Kent 98031 408 Springbrook Elementary 1969 SB 20035 -100th Avenue SE, Kent 98031 398 Sunrise Elementary 1992 SR 22300 - 132nd Avenue SE, Kent 98042 504 Elementary TOTAL 13,012 Cedar Heights Middle School 1993 CH 19640 SE 272 Sheet, Covington 98042 923 Mattson Middle School 1981 MA 16400 SE 251st Street, Covington 98042 804 Meeker Middle School 1970 MK 12600 SE 192nd Street, Renton 98058 890 Meridian Middle School 1958 MJ 23480 -120th Avenue SE, Kent 98031 790 MIN Creek MS (former Kent Jr Hi) 2 2005/1952 MC 620 North Central Avenue, Kent 98032 828 Northwood Middle School 1996 NW 17007 SE 184th Street, Renton 98058 972 Sequoia Middle School 1966 SJ 11000 SE 264th Street, Kent 98031 771 Middle School TOTAL 5,978 Kent -Meridian Senior High SdxxA 1951 KM 10020 SE 256th Street, Kent 98031 1,772 Kentlake Senior High School 1997 KL 21401 SE 300th Street, Kent 98042 1,986 Kentridge Senior High School 1968 KR 12430 SE 208th Street, Kent 98031 2,297 Kentwood Senior High School 1981 KW 25800 -164th Avenue SE, Covington 98042 2,137 Senior High TOTAL 8,192 Kent Mountain View Academy 3 1965 LC 22420 Military Road, Des Moines 98198 416 DISTRICT TOTAL 27,598 Changes to capacity reflect program changes and new building additions at high schools. Z Kent Junior High was closed for 2004-05 for remodel and re -purpose. it re -opened in 2005 as Mill Creek Middle School. 3 Kent Mountain View Academy serves grades K-12. The school was formerly known as Kent Looming Center & Grandview Elementary. Kent School District Sb( -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 3 April 2007 Page 12 L � C 0 Z O C yU �00_mo E y °h O E ra 0`d / y _ 'Op Y Y O ®� �• 0 C 6 N C� OO U D •o O N3mw°mNO mO il y_.N... OOO U z -O d m m v O U N O0 r c c �m mt 0V � of • x 4± vz vm Y _ Y Gm Uw • m m Ym mU£ a`' N c g o • O oQ L cM po m w °coo V w N oo o _ o v oa_, 20 cw m • W r 3 •� 0 >o 220 • x �d OE N 3S end 41D91 CW JO ZD �!T 7�V[ OOr c h Vgjy 0- �m• .0I �o ° LLw �w E 0 - mE •° • fNJ ^C L 2m w CL W 3S aAV 4lOVL H Cm Nw 04 w • om 2w mL amm �'a m o Y> 3S—VP°7.C1 and o Z F.. >�, 3SeAVP°ZCL Z' Q 7E C° °W 02 �L Um• (o] • C F Cm mL 2 N / c m? ��• O° mO Uc y= oof Y?J)W 39 ta) t;otjE MV °tpm • U �`Tiw om m<> •Cm CW m 4m U� 'Cm O o \a� / • mE a0 Dm• Op Z. U • ca aw om • N 0 U Q U C A! �W £W �� w SE QD oL oy •mv om �� U N -C C h d W .2 v cE O N U CDD � 3S aAV U{90l • p 8 w 2 = O 00• mm= p• YppO• 3S aAV 41VOl y lCv Tt Q v 1 mE w o W W m o m N • 2` C N w U m o W W G Cn Y 09 U2 m m H CN ii • OAV P4000 C W y� ti Z N AoA+481H AeA°A ysaM • o c m L N Z E m Q mmme H ) y ZW C c o U • Y�Q • s a4ouei°1 Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2007 P p � age 13 V Six -Year Planning and Construction Plan • At the time of preparation of this Plan in spring of 2007, the following projects are completed or in the planning phase in the District: • Additions to three high schools have added capacity for students from new development and 9"' Grade students moving to high schools. Voters recently approved funding for additional classroom capacity to be added at Kentlake and Kent -Meridian High Schools. • Reconfiguration to 71' and 8h grades provides additional capacity at middle schools. The Board has approved renovation and re -configuration of Sequoia Middle School to provide capacity for approximately 350 high school students at a new non-traditional high school, Kent Phoenix Academy in 2007-08. • Kent Junior High was temporarily closed for one year in 2004-05 for re -purpose and remodel. In 2005, the school was renamed and opened in September 2005 as Mill Creek Middle School (# 7a) which also serves the 7-8 Kent Technology Academy program. The voters have approved funding for Phase I I of the renovation of Mill Creek MS. • In February 2006, voters approved construction funding for replacement of Panther Lake Elementary School and a future new Elementary School to accommodate new growth. • Enrollment projections reflect future need for additional capacity at the elementary and high school level. Future facility and site needs are reflected in this Plan. • A new site is being acquired for replacement of Panther Lake Elem. Sites for potential future schools and facilities are listed in Table 4 and shown on the site map on page 16. • • Some funding is secured for purchase of additional portables and some funding may be provided by impact fees as needed. Sites are based on need for additional capacity. County and city planners and decision -makers 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, as well as 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. (See rabie 4) Voter approved bond issues for $105AM in 1990 and $130M in 1994 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. Some funding is secured for purchase of additional sites but some may be funded with impact fees as needed. Not all undeveloped properties meet current school construction requirements and some property may be traded or sold to meet future facility needs. 2006 voter approval of $106M bond issue for capital improvement included the construction funding for a new elementary school, replacement of Panther Lake Elementary, and classroom additions to high schools. Some impact fees will also be applied to those projects. Student Achievement Initiative 728 funds are being utilized to reduce class size and provide extended learning opportunities. Based on community input at public hearings, the Board will continue annual review of standard of service and those decisions will be reflected in the each update of the Capital Facilities Plan. • Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2007 Page 14 • 1�1 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 Site Acquisitions and Projects Planned to Provide Additional Capacity / FACILITY / SITE I LOCATION Status Projected Projected % for Completion Program new I Date Capacity Growth wpi ELEMENTARY (Numbers assigned to future schools may not correlate with number of existing schools.) 13 Replacement for Panther Lake Elementary (F) SE 216th Street & 102nd Ave SE Replacement Planning 2009 500 20% Panther Lake Elementary Replaced in 2009 SE 208 Street & 108th Ave SE Replacement Planning 2009 -396 Elementary# 31 (Funded) To be determined 2 New Planning 2012 500 100% Elementary Site (Unfunded) To be determined 2 Site Planning 2008 500 100% I # on MIDDLE SCHOOL Sequoia Middle School Renovation & Reconfiguration Renovation Planning 2007 -771 for Kent Phoenix Academy SENIOR HIGH Additional Elementary Capacity' New Planning 2006 + 24-31 each 100% New Planning TBD 2 Classroom additions at three High Schools Kent -Meridian Additions Utilized 2004-07 386 75% for growth & reconfiguration (Funded) Kentridge Additions Utilized 2004-07 1,000 75% 17426 SE 192 Street, Renton 98058 Kentwood Additions Utilized 2004-07 896 75% New Non-traditional High School Former Sequoia Middle School TBD 2 King County Kent Phoenix Academy (Funded) 11000 SE 264th Street, Kent Renovation Planning 2007-08 350 100% Classroom additions at Kentlake High School (F) 21401 SE 300th Street, Kent Additions Planning 2008 171 100% Classroom additions at Kent -Meridian HS (F) 10020 SE 256th Street, Kent Additions Planning 2009 79 100% TEMPORARY FACILITIES Rektcatables For placement as needed SUPPORT FACILITIES Bus Facility (Unfunded)' Near Kent -Meridian High School 3 OTHER SITES ACQUIRED 4 Covington area North (Near Mattson MS) Additional Elementary Capacity' New Planning 2006 + 24-31 each 100% New Planning TBD 2 N / A Type Land Use TBD' Jurisdiction 4 Covington area North (Near Mattson MS) SE 251 & 164 SE, Covington 98042 Elementary City of Covington 7 Covington area South (Scarsella) SE 290 & 156 SE, Kent 98042 Elementary King County 5 Covington area West (Halleson-Wikstrom) 15435 SE 256 Street, Covington 98042 TBD' City of Covington 3 Ham Lake area (Pollard) 16820 SE 240, Kent 98042 Elementary King County 8 SE of Lake Morton area (West property) SE 332 & 204 SE, Kent 98042 Secondary King County 2 Shady Lk area (Sowers, Blaine, Drahota, Paroline) 17426 SE 192 Street, Renton 98058 Elementary King County 1 So. King Co. Activity Center (Nike site) SE 167 & 170 SE, Renton 98058 TBD 2 King County 12 South Central site (Plemmons-Yeh-Wms) SE 286th Street & 124th Ave. SE, Kent TBD 2 King County Notes: ' Unfunded facility needs will be reviewed in the future. 2 TBD - To be determined - Some sites are acquired but placement, timing and/or configuration have not been determined. 3 Numbers correspond to sites on Map on Page 16. Other site locations are parcels identified in Table 7 on Page 26. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 4 April 2007 Page 15 LO N- o y z o , V m �, YN � N W p =m O -2' O UD O OC !�♦+ V ♦ 0a of }_ 7 H.0 • 11w m • y Dm • VZ Op mW C Y `W i �m U • �m Z t im0 U m HoU� p0 OwWO � C p • m09 • mO 3S OAV U1V91t OTi Z,O Lv Ip �vCm 0ccti.c � 4 �• CR o m �y o0 DinU ^c f{OmL_L 2 1 `opEru • 3SOAV440VL DE �• ru cc 20 Om c mOL m`y'Y •- Z 3S OAV PuZ£ t c- 1Wy N SW E 3S eAV PAZ£ t O m O �« 8 0 C O v oW • mtenaaNm: mo UE• hi •Dz m E o® mE m �m® OO mW 0 ym'Em wDWm p •'D � •m V Z • zip w • O o . Dm •• $m C7W vDOl • E. OC-0 _{ot 0 mCm M Oc wv _M . 3S —V 4MIy o Ym g� mm 2E =2 `coo$• 3SeAVUIVOI I'EEm ED C•- Y� tLU� N • f xom• wu Dw cclOm a� wmm� =c W "!j m U,-vm Z m m o 4 ys C • enV IDJ4000 �� • N P y� h Z w A--t4BtH Ash tseM • C0 m mo y lap Y `c OC m 3 to y > Zw W Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan •g April 2007 Page 16 • 0 1 • V I Relocatable Classrooms For the purpose of clarification, the term "portables" and the more descriptively accurate term, "relocatables" are used interchangeably in this Plan. The Plan also references use of portables or relocatables as interim or transitional capacity/facilities. Currently, the District utilizes 132 total relocatables to house students in excess of permanent capacity, for program purposes at school locations, and six for other purposes. (See Appendices A B C D) Based on enrollment projections, program capacity and funded permanent facilities, the District anticipates the need to purchase some additional relocatables during the next six-year period. The continually escalating cost of moving relocatables will increasingly limit the choice between building new relocatables on site and relocating older ones. 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 life 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. • 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. 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 Community Facilities Planning Committee for 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 District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2007 Page 17 • VII Projected Six Year Classroom Capacity As stated in Section I V, the program capacity study is periodically updated for changes in special programs and reflects class size fluctuations in Grades K - 4. As shown in the Inventory and Capacity chart in Table 3 on Page 12, the program capacity is also reflected in the capacity and enrollment comparison charts. (See Tables 5 & 5 A -B -C on pages 19-22) Enrollment is electronically 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 widely recognized as the enrollment count date for the year. Full Time Equivalent (FTE) student enrollment for October 2006 was 25,864.47 which represents an increase of 55 FTE over the previous October. Kindergarten students are counted at .5 and P-223 FTE excludes Early Childhood Education students (ECE - preschool special education) and College -only Running Start students. (See Tables 5 & 5 A -B -C on pages 19 - 22) In October there were 589 students in IIth and 12th grade participating in the Running Start program at 9 different colleges and receiving credits toward both • high school and college graduation. 300 of these students attended classes only at the college ("college -only") and are thus excluded from the FTE and headcount for capacity and enrollment comparisons. Kent School District continues to be the fourth largest district in the state of Washington. P-223 Headcount for October 2006 was 26,996 with kindergarten students counted at 1.0 and excluding ECE and college -only Running Start students. A full headcount of all students enrolled in October 2006 totals 27,590 which includes ECE and college -only Running Start students. Based on the enrollment forecasts, current inventory and capacity, current standard of service, relocatable capacity, and future planned additional classroom space, the District anticipates having sufficient capacity to house students over the next six years. (See Table 5 and Tables 5 A -B -C on Pages 19 - 22) This does not mean that some schools will not experience overcrowding. There may be significant need for additional portables and/or new schools to accommodate growth within the District and class size reduction mandated under Student Achievement Initiative 728. Some schools, by design, may be opened with relocatables on site. Boundary changes, limited movement of relocatables, zoning changes, market conditions, and educational restructuring will all play a major role in addressing overcrowding and underutilization of facilities in different parts of the District. is Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2007 Page 1 B • • • KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY TOTAL DISTRICT SCHOOL YEAR 2006-2007 2007-2008 I 1 2008-2009 1 2009-2010 1 2010-2011 1 2011-2012 1 2012-2013 Actual P R O J E C T E D Permanent Program Capac,:ty77 24,488 lChanges to Permanent Ca ad ' Classrooms added at 3 high schools (F) Kent -Meridian - Kentridge - Kentwood Estimated Program Capacity 2,282 27,598 27,177 27,348 27,531 27,531 27,531 Classroom additions at Kentlake & Kent -Meridian (F) 171 79 4 Sequoia Middle School will be renovated and reconfigured as Kent Phoenix Academy High School in 2007-08 Change to Middle School Capacity -771 4 Kent Phoenix Academy High School replaces Sequoia Middle School in 2007-08 High School Program Capacity added 350 5 Mill Creek MS Renovation - Phase 2 828 Replacement with increased capacity for Panther Lake Elementary (Funded) -396 500 Elementary # 31 (Funded) 500 Permanent Program Capacity Subtotal 27,598 27,177 27,348 27,531 27,531 27,531 28,031 Interim Relocatable CaDad Elementary Rekuatatie Capacity Required 0 0 0 0 0 120 0 Middle schod Rabcatable Capacity Required 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Senior High Rebcatable Capacity Required 155 0 62 62 31 0 62 Total Relocatable Capacity Required1&6 155 0 62 62 31 120 62 TOTAL CAPACITY' 27,753 1 27,177 1 27,410 1 27,593 1 27,562 1 27,651 1 28,093 FTE ENROLLMENT/ PROJECTION 2 1 25,864 25,949 26,347 26,618 26,773 26,976 27 DISTRICT AVAILABLE CAPACITY 1 1,889 1,228 1,063 975 789 675 869 ' Capacity is based on standard of service for programppaCi capacity updated periodically to reflect program changes. 2 FTE = Full Time Equivalent Enrollment (i.e. 1/2 day Kindergarten student = .5). 3 In Fall 2004, 9th grade moved to the high schools which provided increased capacity at Middle School level. 4 Sequoia Middle School will be renovated and reconfigured as Kent Phoenix Academy High School in 2007-08. 5 Phase I I of renovation continues for Mill Creek Middle School & Kent Technology Academy. 6 2006-2007 total classroom relocatable capacity is 1,412. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 April 2007 Page 19 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY SENIOR HIGH - Grades 9 -12 Senior High Permanent Capacity 1 5,910 8,192 8,542 8,713 8,792 8,792 8,792 Chan es to High School Capacity Classrooms added at three high schools (Funded) Kent -Meridian - Kentridge - Kentwood Program capacity 2,282 4 Kent Phoenix Academy - New Non-traditional High School added through renovation of Sequoia Middle School Estimated program capacity 350 Classroom additions at Kentlake High School (F) 171 Classroom additions at Kent -Meridian High School and KM Technology Academy 4 (F) 79 subtotal 8,192 8,542 8,713 8,792 8,792 8,792 8,792 Relocatable Capacity Required 1 155 0 62 62 31 0 SCHOOL YEAR 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 1 2009-2010 1 2010-2011 2011-2012 1 2012-2013 Actual P R O J E C T E D Senior High Permanent Capacity 1 5,910 8,192 8,542 8,713 8,792 8,792 8,792 Chan es to High School Capacity Classrooms added at three high schools (Funded) Kent -Meridian - Kentridge - Kentwood Program capacity 2,282 4 Kent Phoenix Academy - New Non-traditional High School added through renovation of Sequoia Middle School Estimated program capacity 350 Classroom additions at Kentlake High School (F) 171 Classroom additions at Kent -Meridian High School and KM Technology Academy 4 (F) 79 subtotal 8,192 8,542 8,713 8,792 8,792 8,792 8,792 Relocatable Capacity Required 1 155 0 62 62 31 0 62 TOTAL CAPACITY 1 8,347 8,542 8,775 8,854 8,823 8,792 8,854 FTE ENROLLMENT I PROJECTION 2 8,316 8,437 8,757 8,848 8,802 8,775 8,850 SURPLUS DEFICIT CAPACITY 31 105 18 6 21 17 4 Number of Relocatables Required 5 0 2 2 1 0 2 5 Classroom Relocatables required in 2007-08. Some additional Relocatables used for classroom and program purposes. Capacity is based on standard of service for program capacity and updated periodically to reflect program changes. 2 FTE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment, excluding College -only Running Start students. 3 Grade level reconfiguration - All 9th grade students moved to the high schools in Fall 2004. 4 Sequoia Middle School will be renovated and reconfigured as a new non-traditional high school, Kent Phoenix Academy, and KM will add a new Technology Academy program in 2007-08. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 A April 2007 Page 20 • • • KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY MIDDLE SCHOOL - Grades 7 - 8 Middle School Permanent Capacity' 5,150 5,978 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 Chan es to Middle School Capacity 4 Mill Creek Middle School - Kent Junior High re -opened as Mill Creek Middle School #7a in Fall 2005 Phase 2 of Mill Creek Renovation continues in 2007-08 Program capacity of Mill Creek MS and Kent Technology Academy 828 5 Sequoia Middle School will be renovated and reconfigured as Kent Phoenix Academy High School in 2007-08 MS Capacity offline - changed to high school -771 Subtotal 5,978 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 • �Relocatable Capacity Required' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL CAPACITY 18,3 5,978 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 FTE ENROLLMENT / PROJECTION z 4,459 4,423 4,362 4,356 4,455 4,570 4,677 SURPLUS DEFICI CAPACITY 1 1,519 784 845 851 752 637 530 No Classroom Relocatables required at middle schools at this time. Some Relocatables used for classroom and program purposes. ' 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 3 Grade level reconfiguration - All 9th grade students moved to the high schools in Fall 2004. 4 Mill Creek Middle School & Technology Academy - Kent Junior High was renovated and re -opened in Fall 2005 with a Technology Academy serving 7th & 8th grade students from all service areas. Phase I I of Mill Creek renovation continues in 2007-08. 5 Sequoia Middle School will be renovated and reconfigured as non-traditional Kent Phoenix Academy High 0 School in 2007-08 and middle school boundaries will be reconfigured for six middle schools district -wide. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 B April 2007 Page 21 SCHOOL YEAR 2006-2007 2007-2009 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 Actual P R O J E C T E D Middle School Permanent Capacity' 5,150 5,978 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 Chan es to Middle School Capacity 4 Mill Creek Middle School - Kent Junior High re -opened as Mill Creek Middle School #7a in Fall 2005 Phase 2 of Mill Creek Renovation continues in 2007-08 Program capacity of Mill Creek MS and Kent Technology Academy 828 5 Sequoia Middle School will be renovated and reconfigured as Kent Phoenix Academy High School in 2007-08 MS Capacity offline - changed to high school -771 Subtotal 5,978 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 • �Relocatable Capacity Required' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL CAPACITY 18,3 5,978 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 5,207 FTE ENROLLMENT / PROJECTION z 4,459 4,423 4,362 4,356 4,455 4,570 4,677 SURPLUS DEFICI CAPACITY 1 1,519 784 845 851 752 637 530 No Classroom Relocatables required at middle schools at this time. Some Relocatables used for classroom and program purposes. ' 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 3 Grade level reconfiguration - All 9th grade students moved to the high schools in Fall 2004. 4 Mill Creek Middle School & Technology Academy - Kent Junior High was renovated and re -opened in Fall 2005 with a Technology Academy serving 7th & 8th grade students from all service areas. Phase I I of Mill Creek renovation continues in 2007-08. 5 Sequoia Middle School will be renovated and reconfigured as non-traditional Kent Phoenix Academy High 0 School in 2007-08 and middle school boundaries will be reconfigured for six middle schools district -wide. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 B April 2007 Page 21 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY ELEMENTARY - Grades K - 6 Elementary Permanent Cap aci t 13,012 13,428 13,428 13,428 13,532 13,532 13,532 Kent Mountain View Academy 2 416 Changes to Elementary Capacity Replacement with approximately 104 net increased capacity for -396 Panther Lake Elementary (Funded) ° '500 Elementary # 31 (Funded) 5 M subtotal 13,428 13,428 13,428 13,532 13,532 13,532 14,032 r Relocatable Capacity Required' 0 0 0 0 0 120 0 • I TOTAL CAPACITY 2 1 13,428 13,428 13,428 13,532 13,532 13,652 14,032 FTE ENROLLMENT / PROJECTION 3 1 13,089 13,089 13,228 13,414 13,516 13,631 13,697 SURPLUS DEFICIT CAPACITY 1 339 339 200 118 16 21 335 SCHOOL YEAR 2006-2007 2007-2008 1 2008-2009 2009-2010 1 2010-2011 1 2011-2012 1 2012-2013 Actual P R O J E C T E D 0 0 0 0 5 0 Elementary Permanent Cap aci t 13,012 13,428 13,428 13,428 13,532 13,532 13,532 Kent Mountain View Academy 2 416 Changes to Elementary Capacity Replacement with approximately 104 net increased capacity for -396 Panther Lake Elementary (Funded) ° '500 Elementary # 31 (Funded) 5 M subtotal 13,428 13,428 13,428 13,532 13,532 13,532 14,032 r Relocatable Capacity Required' 0 0 0 0 0 120 0 • I TOTAL CAPACITY 2 1 13,428 13,428 13,428 13,532 13,532 13,652 14,032 FTE ENROLLMENT / PROJECTION 3 1 13,089 13,089 13,228 13,414 13,516 13,631 13,697 SURPLUS DEFICIT CAPACITY 1 339 339 200 118 16 21 335 Number of Relocatables Required 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 Classroom Relocatables required in 2011-12. Some additional Relocatables used for classroom and program purposes. I Capacity is based on standard of service for program capacity and is updated periodically to reflect program changes. 2 Kent Mountain View Academy is a special program at the former Grandview School serving students in Grades K - 12. The school building (formerly Kent Leaming Center & Grandview Elem.) was designed as an elementary school. 3 FTE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment or Projection (Kindergarten @ .5 & excluding ECE) Kindergarten projection is at .5 FTE although most schools provide Full Day Kindergarten with aitemative funding. ° Panther Lake Elementary will be replaced with increased capacity in 2009 and built on a new site. 5 Site selection and construction timing for Elementary #31 is pending review of location and capacity needs. Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 C April 2007 page 22 • VIII Finance Plan The finance plan shown on Table 6 demonstrates how the Kent School District plans to finance improvements for the years 2007 - 2008 through 2012 - 2013. 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, which opened in January 1999 as a replacement for the original Kent Elementary School, was the last elementary school for which the District received state matching funds under the state funding formula. Millennium Elementary #30 which opened in the fall of 2000 was the last elementary school constructed in the District. Voters approved a $69.5 million bond issue for Capital Construction and Improvements in February 2002. The bond issue partial funded building additions at three high schools which coincided with moving 9 grade students to the senior high in September 2004. The District received some state matching funds and has utilized impact fees for the senior high school additions. • In February 2006, voters approved a $106 million bond issue for replacement of Panther Lake Elementary School with increased capacity to be built on a new site, construction of a new elementary school to accommodate growth, Phase H renovation for Mill Creek Middle School, and renovation of Sequoia Middle School to be reconfigured as a new non-traditional high school, Kent Phoenix Academy which will open in September 2007. Construction funding approval will also provide some additional classrooms to be constructed at Kentlake and Kent -Meridian High Schools. Some impact fees will be utilized for new construction that will increase capacity. Enrollment projections reflect future need for additional capacity at the elementary and high school level and unfunded facility needs will be reviewed in the future. Some funding is secured for additional portables and some will be funded from impact fees. For the Six -Year Finance Plan, costs of future schools are based on estimates from Kent School District Facilities Department. Please see pages 25-26 for a summary of the cost basis. Kent School District Six -Year capital Facilities Plan April 2007 Page 23 N • a to 0 m .a H n U �o } X N D O • Y 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'm 0 C 0 0 0 0 aND O 1 �O rn N LO � W :. m �. M N H C4 Go L LL b9 f9 60 O O ' 0 0 U CD to Oma N .- O O OO O O O O O O N N O N O O V O O a N m cD O W co 0 O O O O O O O O O O o oOo0o M -J.: : :::; o O c p O O O N O O O aD a0 act W) (D O 1� O N O aD O Lq O O I tD Y .: F_ ':. m H M O_ O N :. O O O O O N N 4 m O O n p E 0 00 7 aD a t00 K m In N:.:-.: 69 N c 7 q w W C � O p O O C (� m O ' O ..::: p N O N O N:_::: .iii• p Lf)aD O M C d Lr) m E E w 0 0 m o Q co o m m :. $ w w v LL cy W3. v E N o o:? m 40 o 0 00 0 8 c N ': a0 to aD C> IA CO V n p Cl) w O m m _ w 2 E m G m H 5 O 0 y o j • LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL D m m E O y ° t m w w > c LUO a o IN o co m = O m C L LD E m LL 8o w Q lY O J. •.• w O m m m W it 0 Z ctiii (Q _o CIS J C m LL G w c c c m E o c A c [C a v o a v z m L c o ro w v LL ° c Z v L.., w .o 11 m t] H m Q Q Q C LL LL Ce� pnp z LL • m � F N IL h (J O U. b N • a to 0 m .a H n U �o } X N D O • Y VIII Finance Plan - Cost Basis Summary For impact fee calculations, construction costs are based on cost of the last elementary school, adjusted for inflation, and projected cost of the next elementary school. Elementary School Cost Projected Cost Millennium Elementary #30 Opened in 2000 $12,182,768 Cost of Panther Lake Elementary Replacement (To open in 2009) $16,650,000 $20,802,000 Projected cost of Elementary #31 in 2012 $14,850,000 $24,100,000 Construction cost of the additions to high schools: Senior High School Additions Projected Cost Total Addition to Kent -Meridian $8,300,000 Addition to Kentrid a $16,650,000 Addition to Kentwood $14,850,000 Construction cost of HS additions $39,800,000 New Non-traditional High School Kent Phoenix Academy $1,650,000 2008 Addition to Kentlake High School $5,700,000 2009 Addition to Kent -Meridian HS $2,500,000 Construction cost of new HS capacity $9,850,000 Site Acquisition Cost 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 26 for a list of site acquisition costs and averages. District Adjustment for 2007 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 and adjusted for increase in the Consumer Price Index. 0 Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2007 Page 25 0 N a Q m O m U Mr M o cco m • _ a a tDN � E U) ER O U) s e v a_ ono O W :E h e 0) `� EOR v N a tUD n Oct OMD act h c�D Lq m v_ OND OD O ch co t0 CD OD OD a 0 H _M OT � to E9 1N E9 � 69 tR to fA Q O O w m O O It h st cq O) O O M co N N O M — cD — M O O OctO O O U! "' q .- �;11 Q O O to �t t()tA O h N h t- o c'j O O w sr M M — M N U tD cJ cn cD cD OD W 14 M to M M — e0 O ER UiE H 1613, C6 69 EMRR H W04 � N 0 cc M O OD (! tOt1 6 LO sf; U O Oi O to 6O vi cD cD ~ co Q N M CD MOD m co O O N Q Lf) Y m co ) pop ? �'n m N C U) m cA c c CL ° d in Y CooN g o) c m m p� O N c C as N v N £ N u1 m m m U LU m v N $ w in I N r U w .'� N co N N w y w U)M w w w w w y hN O Y O O 1� O h m O n O Go w o N m m tp W N N 0 N Ol N Of OAi W W W C Q r W T W W 3 O O O N N an t C7 W co IL c a j E E _ E m m -e o a v m r m o m m w o x D� o e n e d as m y C 'E_ O ' 3 O y W O O W E O c 0 O m O m N c y g y m W '`Oc Y 'b w m O n m E a> c c a Z m v ra t c o 0 c N m n as L a L m = cDi Q t m A z a o c m U Cl) E m -� c c O U Q R c m L 3 a a > o, a c C o m 2 W Y ? U Q) a Q a m p o x c vV) Cl) EY CL e o m N= L m v o > 0 t a W o > W ao m 0 cmw o yUr-) m CL N Z wcc_W tq L X Y L Y to 2 Q Z ton in in rn m in O CL CI C 0 _ 0 -e O1 S C -e c .e O C cc -e :3O C c O m e > > O ? Z5 > > Z r tr EY m > W ~ ik W co _V = � � � r, N co N 0 N a • • • KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT FACTORS FOR ESTIMATED IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS Student Generation Factors - Single Family Student Generation Factors - Multi -Family x Elementary (Grades K - 6) 0.444 Elementary 0.293 x Middle School (Grades 7 - 8) 0.148 Middle School 0.058 x Senior High (Grades 9 -12) 0.252 Senior High 0.094 x Total 0.844 Total 0.445 Projected Increased Student Capacity OSPI - Square Footage per Student x Elementary 500 Elementary 90 x Middle School 1,065 Middle School 117 x Senior High 2,882 Senior High 130 Special Education 144 Required Site Acreage per Facility x Elementary (required) 11 Average Site Cost / Acre x Middle School (required) 21 Elementary $468,750 x Senior High (required) 32 Middle School $52,563 Senior High $93,955 New Facility Construction Cost x Elementary' $24,100,000 Temporary Facility Capacity & Cost x Middle School $0 Elementary @ 24 $106,700 x Senior High ' $9,850,000 Middle School @ 29 $0 • see cost basis on Pg. 25 Senior High @ 31 $106,700 Temporary Facility Square Footage x Elementary 71,652 x Middle School 27,000 x Senior High 20,272 x Total 4% 118,924 State Match Credit Current State Match Percentage 55.94% Area Cost Allowance ACA - Cost/Sq. Ft. Area Cost Allowance (Effective July o7) $162.43 Permanent Facility Square Footage x Elementary 1,475,936 x Middle School 651,273 District Average Assessed Value x Senior High 1,007,522 Single Family Residence $282,605 x Total 96% 3,134,731 Total Facilities Square Footage x Elementary 1,547,588 x Middle School 678,273 x Senior High 1,027,794 x Total 3,253,655 Developer Provided Sites / Facilities Value 0 Dwelling Units 0 Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan District Average Assessed Value Multi -Family Residence $89,689 Capital Levy Tax Rate/$1,000 Current / $1,000 Tax Rate $1.28 General Obligation Bond Interest Rate Current Bond Interest Rate 4.08% April 2007 Page 27 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT $4,578.75 B = Permanent Facility Cost per Residence $24,877.34 IMPACT FEE CALCULATION for SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE $113.65 • Site Acquisition Cost per Single Family Residence D = State Match Credit per Residence $6,607.58 TC = Tax Credit per Residence $2,929.26 Formula: ((Acres x Cost per Acre) / Facility Capacity) x Student Generation Factor - $9.536.84 Required Site Acreage Average She C VAcre Faplity Capacity Student Factor A 1 (Elementary) 11 $468,750 500 0.444 $4,578.75 A 2 (Middle School) 21 $0 1,065 0.148 $0 A 3 (Senior High) 32 $0 1,000 0.252 $0 0.844 A —> $4,578.75 Permanent Facility Construction Cost per Single Family Residence Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (PermanentfTotal Square Footage Ratio) Construction Cost Facility Capacity I Student Factor I Footage Ratio B 1 (Elementary) $24,100,000 500 0.444 0.96 $20,544.77 B 2 (Middle School) $0 1,065 0.148 0.96 $0 B 3 (Senior High) $9,850,000 550 0.252 0.96 $4,332.57 0.844 B —> $24,877.34 Temporary Facility Cost per Single Family Residence Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Temporary / Total Square Footage Ratio) Facility Cost Facility Capacity I Student Factor Footage Ratio C 1 (Elementary) $106,700 24 0.444 0.04 $78.96 C 2 (Middle School) $0 29 0.148 0.04 $0 C 3 (Senior High) $106,700 31 0.252 0.04 $34.69 0.844 C —> $113.65 State Match Credit per Single Family Residence Formula: Area Cost Allowance x SPI Square Feet per student x District Match % x Student Factor Area Cost Allmance I SPI Sq. Ft / Student I D 1 (Elementary) $162.43 90 District Match % I 0.5594 Student Factor 0.444 $3,630.90 • D 2 (Middle School) $162.43 117 0 0.148 $0 D 3 (Senior High) $162.43 130 0.5594 0.252 $2,976.68 D —> $6,607.58 Tax Credit per Single Family Residence Average SF Residential Assessed Value $282,605 Current Capital Levy Rate / $1,000 $1.28 Current Bond Interest Rate 4.08% Years Amortized (10 Years) 10 TC —> $2,929.26 Developer Provided Facility Credit Facility / Site Value Dwelling Units 0 0 FC —> 0 Fee Recap A = Site Acquisition per SF Residence $4,578.75 B = Permanent Facility Cost per Residence $24,877.34 C = Temporary Facility Cost per Residence $113.65 Subtotal $29,569.74 D = State Match Credit per Residence $6,607.58 TC = Tax Credit per Residence $2,929.26 Subtotal - $9.536.84 Total Unfunded Need $20,032.89 50% Developer Fee Obligation $10,016 FC = Facility Credit (f applicable) 0 District Adjustment (See Page 25 for explanation) ($4,906) Net Fee Obligation per Single Family Residence $5,110 • Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2007 Page 28 • KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT IMPACT FEE CALCULATION for MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENCE Site Acquisition Cost per Multi -Family Residence Unit Formula: ((Acres x Cost per Acre) / Facility Capacity) x Student Generation Factor Permanent Facility Construction Cost per Multi -Family Residence Unit Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Permanent / Total Square Footage Ratio) $3,021.56 $0 $0 $3,021.56 Required Site Acreage I Average Site Cost/Acre I Facility Capacity I Student Factor I A 1 (Elementary) 11 $468,750 500 0.293 A 2 (Middle School) 21 $0 1,065 0.058 A 3 (Senior High) 32 $0 1,000 0.094 $0 B 3 (Senior High) $9,850,000 0.445 0.094 0.96 $1,616.12 A b Permanent Facility Construction Cost per Multi -Family Residence Unit Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Permanent / Total Square Footage Ratio) $3,021.56 $0 $0 $3,021.56 State Match Credit per Mufti -Family Residence Unit Construction Cost I Facility Capacity I Student Factor I Footage Ratio I Area Cost Allowarwe I SPI Sq. Ft. / Student B 1 (Elementary) $24,100,000 500 0.293 0.96 $13,557.70 B 2 (Middle School) $0 1,065 0.058 0.96 $0 B 3 (Senior High) $9,850,000 550 0.094 0.96 $1,616.12 Average MF Residential Assessed Value $89,689 0.445 B 4, $15,173.81 Temporary Facility Cost per Multi -Family Residence Unit Current Bond Interest Rate Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Temporary / Total Square Footage Ratio) Years Amortized (10 Years) Facility Cost Facility Capacity j ShWent Factor I Footage Ratio Dwelling Units C 1 (Elementary) $106,700 24 0.293 0.04 $52.11 C 2 (Middle School) $0 29 0.058 0.04 $0 C 3 (Senior High) $106,700 31 0.094 0.04 $12.94 Subtotal $18,260.42 0.445 C {' $65.05 State Match Credit per Mufti -Family Residence Unit Formula: Area Cost Allowance x SPI Square Feet per student x District Match % x Student Factor Area Cost Allowarwe I SPI Sq. Ft. / Student District Match % I Student Factor D 1 (Elementary) $162.43 90 • 0.5594 0.293 $2,396.07 D 2 (Middle School) $162.43 117 0 0.058 $0 D 3 (Senior High) $162.43 130 0.5594 0.094 $1,110.35 D {' $3,506.42 Tax Credit per Multi -Family Residence Unit Average MF Residential Assessed Value $89,689 Current Capital Levy Rate / $1,000 $1.28 Current Bond Interest Rate 4.08% Years Amortized (10 Years) 10 TC —> $929.65 Developer Provided Facility Credit Facility / Site Value Dwelling Units 0 0 FC —> 0 Fee Recap A = Site Acquisition per Multi -Family Unit $3,021.56 B = Permanent Facility Cost per MF Unit $15,173.81 C = Temporary Facility Cost per MF Unit $65.05 Subtotal $18,260.42 D = State Match Credit per MF Unit $3,506.42 TC = Tax Credit per MF Unit $929.65 Subtotal - $4,436.06 Total Unfunded Need $13,824.36 50% Developer Fee Obligation $6,912 FC = Facility Credit (if applicable) 0 District Adjustment (See Page 25 for explanation) ($3,766) • Net Fee Obligation per Multi -Family Residence Unit $3,146 Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2007 Page 29 IX Summary of Changes to April 2006 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 2006 Plan are summarized here. Voters approved funding for replacement and expansion of Panther Lake Elementary School on a new site, a future new elementary school, classroom additions at high schools to accommodate new growth, renovation of Sequoia Middle School to be reconfigured as a new non-traditional high school named Kent Phoenix Academy and Phase II of the renovation at Mill Creek Middle School. Changes to capacity continue to reflect fluctuations in class size as well as program changes. Reduction in class size for Student Achievement Initiative 728 is reflected in this update. Changes in relocatables (portables) or transitional capacity reflect use, purchase, sale, surplus and/or movement between facilities. The student enrollment forecast is updated annually. At this time, enrollment projections continue . to reflect need for future additional capacity at the elementary and high school level. The district expects to receive state matching funds for projects in this Plan and tax credit factors are updated annually. Unfunded site and facility needs will be • reviewed in the future. Changes to Impact Fee Calculation Factors include: ITEM Graderrype FROM TO Comments Student Generation Factor Eleni 0.444 0.4" No change this year Single Family (SF) Ms 0.148 0.148 No change this year SH 0.252 0.252 No change this year Total 0.844 0.844 Student Generation Factor Eleni 0.293 0.293 No change this year Multi -Family (MF) Ms 0.058 0.058 No change this year SH 0.094 0.094 No change this year Total 0.445 0.445 State Match Credit 55.94% 55.94% No change per OSPI Website Area Cost Allowance (former Boeckh Index) $154.22 $162.43 Per OSPI Average Assessed Valuation (AV) SF $263,362 $282,605 Per Puget Sound ESD AV - Average of Condominiums & Apts. MF $82,971 $89,689 Per Puget Sound ESD Debt Service Capital Levy Rate / $1000 $1.74 $1.28 Per King Co. Assessor Report General Obligation Bond Interest Rate 4.39% 4.08% Market Rate Impact Fee - Single Family SF $4,928 $5,110 Change to fee + $182 Impact Fee - Multi -Family MF $3,034 $3,146 Change to fee + $112 Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2007 Page 30 • • X Appendixes Appendix A: Calculations of Capacities for Elementary Schools Appendix B: Calculations of Capacities for Middle Schools • Appendix C: Calculations of Capacities for Senior High Schools • Appendix D: Use of Relocatables Appendix E: Student Generation Factor Survey Kent School District Sic -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2007 Page 31 F Z W J J O Ix Z W F - Z Z) O V a V L W F- U) w mJm � Q vq V z°0 vLU F o U) a� J 0 Z = W U Z Y pQ, Q U w IL W v_ LU N O O N AN M M O too 07 tD M' V t0 O I- N O h I- 7 N 00 .- t-- O O i- tn O O O w N N to aD w m M t0 1� t0 M t� W O M O N M O It v f0 t0 U) I Y K K 1n p O v O O w Y too O Y O v V O Sb SO�OS O O S N8 MOMM b O O b S Nn r O M V m to 9))N m N too N N 'V 4 t6 oot0 Q Y Mc�1 O tMC404N W)MVM MV OaMaMMa VV0 O O O N V O O O O O O N v O N O V O N O O O V O N O O O O tol O O O — N O O O O O O — N O — Y N O O O O O N O — O O O O — N — V M N M — N— M M N O — O M O to f- N M — O M M N M O IGI v v v v ton v v�p v v vOi v v trNi a v voi voi v v cc'n voi v N O O O M O O O N O M to N l0 t� N M 7 O O M O Co O too I too l O t0 to N r, N M w v N r w r M w M M O M � v — N m Q to N M I N I v v v g -W a v In M a$ a v g v M m v ton ton g v v M ton m C 1 vm m o a 7� �o w o to rn o o w to v l cll N '- N .- � v N v ': N � � N N N N N .: � � N .- M U R p� x m m w x w U m u� a p-, U F 3 x U m� U v U v U w w o 0 x Y m z a a a 0 (0 m � 2 E Ill m m m E m 8 O za E c m m O m m O w 'C Y W Y Y O U c IL 8LD T LD LDOj N m m U£ c o x w E m c m C > W m ` O C m N Y C m 0 TO M m O 'S O m W L' G m C m � m E io m m L° o m m s m m m= o m a c W $$; o w U CS tg U w w u_ C7 c7 c9 x Y i z a a 8: g In m m m c x _m 7. 8a t N E n w U w m m Q x 0 2 W IL ILQ • is • Z W J J w Z W F - Z D O Q 2 V c !0 LU LL • O "". �ppp ' �l�p p < m V8 o Q 'i: 1A 1� 1n m c ::•: m tooO LL c N 0 O $ N Q 10 N C -T CL W R n o o o o 0 E kn o o 0 o 0 0 ) "• pLu, IL :? o rn a M o o cn Qtr N Le 0 N b N ti a.' of co OOf co h w 0 r� n o a 04 V N OOi `CD 7 T a L vs E h .- O N in N dN w W T J.. l'7 S Ol V W 'ii CD(D n W W 1n tIi :� N m N � W D m .. h to Y O P N 8 N n to co to n OD W v V # H M N O N l7 f0 m N N 0 Z W a N E� N CV CV N 2 ' � O Qm� E r; C1,14 0 c 0 L. W m LL m L U co C M L C W L T d i C a C CL I w Q v- 00 v O 00 70 m O LL CD I m ;Lai Q N CL c r = v E i OD C { m w � o c � = m m { m e° a F � m L i N m s�pap m LL U r0 T m $ Q } c x w w N c n n W O L� U C CD Y � � Z CO) v� « co) k p O LU O 2 0 Q LU 0) � 2 2 w Y 0 0 C4 C., 0 0 _ 2 i} 40 in | ( ® a} �} CD 6 © § § \ E CL 0 £ 7 r ( k to 2 • \ 2 ) /- f / k ■} $ § § k » k �\ E CL ) k} _ ƒ 3 � J 2 0 C4 \ \ C4 0 ( k J} � ! 0 o ) �\ ( a( a} \ - e ) � k\ a: / a: k \ 2 ) CD Cj �} k k\ C \ Q : �! o o � I} } 8 - a{ { z\ m § �! . 2 , 2 k} 0 0 C. o k z !} 0 0 C4 C., 0 0 _ go 40 in | CD e f © § § \ E CL 0 to 7 r in to 2 • \ 2 ) /- f / k 0 0 C4 C., 0 0 0 _ in | e f © § § \ E CL 0 to 7 r � CIJ 2 2 to 2 • \ 2 ) /- f / k J $ § § k ~ k �\ E CL ) K cc \ _ ƒ 3 � J 0 C4 C4 0 0 o e k 0 0 C4ƒ o o 2 0 0 C. o k 0 0 0 / o in e f © § § \ � X 0 2 LU IL CL « J e f © § § \ E CL 0 a ° k 7 r � CIJ 2 2 - u / 2 • \ 2 ) /- f / k J $ § § k ~ k �\ E CL ) K cc \ _ ƒ 3 � J � X 0 2 LU IL CL « J • • • U) o z zD U o U F• LL C 0.0 J � O� 00 2 U c v F- CO) W Y t, O O N t CL Q i TU 0 z W IL a Q c m a m a m LL m U m } X U w 0 c Y (n O O t O O O N O M N O M N O Io O Io O O N N O M in N O OD M O O n M O M m N O r O N O O O O O M O M O M M O O O r O r M O tD M O M (h O O O N O N O IO M O O O N O (O N O N t0 r O (O O N O in W O O N N N 0 U W LL' O O t r to M .-- 0 N M 0 N r M M r O to r O N N t r N (0 r O N I` (0 r M O r M N r O aD O O O r M M M O r to O N In N N N M O O O N O O r O t �- M Io O � r Y C (!� O to In (0 O A O M O N C4 O (In0 '•f O 0 O O O f- O M O N O M M O 4O a -t O O �o w �i O M h O O t0 O st M't Co 'tO O 1� O -,taD O ON OO qtO C _7 O O O) C7 N D) t0 N to to h O O c0 (D OD O O N r1% O O M N r In w tl O O '�f 0. O O V a0 O (0 M r r O r M w t' O M M O� O �n O� O In h M N O M r O N r O N N r t M c0 O t0 a� m O Pl.W et 1. O N aD O t In M O p O M N W O N � M M M W M M N O t O M O N r co co M t N O � Io O Oo N t t I� N N M In t M � N O w O r N t O N N O M O Io W N t N M t r W M V M N In N a� tp 7 y O W M (n0 O (0 w M t� N 0 NO t M c0 O1 O t CO (D h N (0 Of M N Q N r � t0 n M N (0 r h r a0 t N N N M (p r. � (0 (0 /- O co o M M (O t r N r (O ^ M N r (0 N In O r N O r co coM M N O N co M M r M r co N Ln O m t r co O r t.- N r co W (p ch {- N to M r N Io to O (O .M-• O !� P- Or O Or w CO r N N r n O (0 N t Cl) N t0 r In r n r O N t .M- -- — r t 'VV M M z E } J o U U w x w o U U m o U w> 2 J U` w o Z w� w U w In J w= 2 w 0 (n 3 3 3 3 3 m w v _ 0 F- c _m C E O j O DU E ca0 Qi — o Y J o= cg 0 m Z m ~ c m (n U 3 '0 w ami o _ C ata m w m LL v O LL CW q v m L z c G = z U N c z N LL c 3 ~ O LL 8 m L Y C m 3_ m y 3 y 3 O p ots m W m W L t z0 �° , N .5 m r z m ; 0 m a z ca y� 3 m m a o °° m a. c CR C'O E w M w c mp o 12 °m' .0 cin Mn i 3 (n m m c m tC m N 'g Lo (n m W c C9 E y m E _� CO O E E c'n m � '� ca E � ,L cu m F- Y a o F- m 3 v 3 IIi t, O O N t CL Q i TU 0 z W IL a Q c m a m a m LL m U m } X U w 0 c Y 4 •O m CL W X • 5 Z W CL CL Q O O O O O O O O G `o U LL )Cl OD (O N N O 04 Go O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O c ID O W o N 0 v 0 � 0 v .- t0+) 0 Ci It 0 0 N G 7 LL) N n (o n r Cl) N tD O 0 N M OND N � � N 'T F" O O O O N Co O O !n r r N V N M st N r N C � n `N" O) n cli N ti m WN co C'7 � e} in N n t0 N o v n m v a'co °) .- 9 D o N n N O O N N M op N r E co U w (n LL J m w W 0 0 E _O > c Y N NO m -i m n rp Q co C4 N C � E L 1 m OY < 75 m Q O e °)c o Q 4) LE 13 'D d m m ¢ O a LL ra co Q 8 a J .]C U ir O) C -r- U > N V Q v`oy O m m c r'n W 4 •O m CL W X • 5 Z W CL CL Q ME Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2008--2013 Board Approved April 30, 2007 t� e DIERINGER SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 343 1320-1786 Avenue East Lake Tapps, Washington 98391 (253) 862-2537 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Jim Barfoot Pete George John McKenna Corey Pawlak Larry Thompson Dr. Judy Neumeier-Martinson, Superintendent ( 9 Dieri'nger Educating, -every child for �i Confidence today and Contribution tomorrow • Dieringer School District No. 343 Dieringer School District • An Overview Established in 1890, Dieringer School District consolidated with Lake Tapps School District in 1936. The District's three schools, Lake Tapps Elementary School, Dieringer Heights Elementary School and North Tapps Middle School, provide K through 8th grade education, and serve as hubs for community activities as well. Dieringer School District #343 is located in unincorporated Pierce County, bounded on the east by the White River, on the west by the Stuck River, on the north by the city of Auburn, and on the south by the cities of Bonney Lake and Sumner. The District surrounds the northern two-thirds of Lake Tapps and covers approximately 5.5 square miles. The current student enrollment is approximately 1,222 students in grades kindergarten through eight. Students in grades first through third are housed at Lake Tapps Elementary, constructed in 2005 as a replacement project. Dieringer Heights Elementary opened in the fall of 2000 and is home to students in kindergarten, fourth and fifth grade. Originally constructed in 1992 and added on to in 1998, North Tapps Middle School houses students in grades sixth -eighth. The'district supports an additional 531 high school students who may select to attend any public high school. The majority chose to • attend Auburn Riverside and Sumner High School. The district has a long standing history of providing high quality education for all our students. Our goal is for our students to gain the skills that will allow them to become successful, confident, contributing members of society. Dieringer is composed of students who come to school well prepared and eager to learn_ Parents are concerned with student success and provide outstanding support for their children and the Dieringer School District. The PTA and many volunteers contribute countless hours and resources to our schools and students. The community supports the schools through the passage of funding issues to support bus acquisition, student access to current technology and the construction of school facilities • (0 • DIERINGER SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 343 Capital Facilities Plan Update, 2007 Current Facilities Inventory of Public Schools NAME CAPACITY LOCATION Lake Tapps Elementary 396 1320-178`b Ave E., Lake Tapps Dieringer Heights Elementary 431 21727- 34a' St. E., Lake Tapps North Tapps Middle School 405 20029-12`x' St., E., Lake Tapps High School 0 TOTAL 1,232 01 a rn I• p a i - d _ • I jpifls _ �� -� � � . m all - _ HL c; Soames-Haaierm - (DZ . Celt Unikm'• Uj �Ll e0 m a o •t r 0 !E r' li 57 77 f 01 a rn I• p a i - d _ • I jpifls _ �� -� � � . m all - _ HL c; Soames-Haaierm - (DZ . Celt Unikm'• Uj �Ll e0 m a o •t r 0 !E Lake Tapps Elementary Constructio (0- r • - Dieringer-Heights • *I Enrollment Projections • Thb Dieringer School District is located in an area that continues to experience growth. This growth can be noted by reviewing the following indicators: enrollment trend data, proposed housing development, the increase in the assessed valuation of the real property and the mitigation impact fees received for new construction. The District continues to experience slow, steady growth in student enrollment. This has mirrored the Pierce County and Puget Sound Educational Service District (PSESD) enrollment growth over the same period. A review of proposed construction within the borders of the Dieringer School District indicates that the growth trend can be expected to continue over the next four years and beyond. There are 680 single family residents slated for construction within the next four years. The multi -family project, transferred from Pierce County to the City of Auburn, will contribute an additional 59 residential units during. These projects are anticipated to generate an additional 333 students in kindergarten through eighth grade. Information from Pierce county Planning & Land Services indicates that there is space and zoning for approximately 1,200 additional housing lots in the western portion of the district. This creates a potential for 576 additional students, kindergarten through eighth grade, that are not included in the above numbers. Toartiall address this growth, the District passed a 2006 bond issue to construct an • p y additional five classrooms at Dieringer Heights Elementary and an auxiliary gym, health and fitness classroom, and four science rooms at North Tapps Middle School by fall of 2007 and 2008, respectively. Future anticipated growth will create the need to acquire an additional school site and construct an additional school to house the growing student enrollment. • Dieringer School District Proposed Housing Potential Enrollment Increase April, 2007 Proposed Housing Units for Approved Developments: Single Family- 680 x .48 generation factor = 326 students K-8 grade Multi -family — 59 x .1149 generation factor= 7 students K-8 grade (Calculated based on Auburn SD 2005 Generation Factor) Proposed Housing Units from Individual Lots and In -migration: 160 students K-8 grade Enrollment Impact: 493 students K-8 Estimated 98 students a year over the period 2008-2013 Potential five year enrollment increase = 40.34%v (based on 1,222 enrollment 4-07) Increase per grade level = 55 students Approximately 164 students per school HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS March 2007 #1 Fairweather Cove Estates (28) - Notice of application 1/24/01 - 28 Single Family Lots - 1600-2000 block of 16'h St. @ the 17500-17800 block of Sumner-Tapps Hwy. -10 houses under construction by fall 2007 #2 Rainier Plateau (10) -Notice of application 10/13/00 - 10 Single Family Lots - End of 34`h St. - Plat Approval resubmitted to Pierce County - No date for starting #3 Quiet Water (5) - Notice of Application 12/30/94. Re-application 3/19/99 -156 Single Family Lots sold - Along 214'h East of Tapps Island - All lots sold; 5 homes to be built 94 Grandview Ridge H and III (9) - Off Sumner-Tapps Hwy. across from Driftwood and Deer Island Dr. • - Grandview Ridge Notice of Application 1/13/99 - - 50 Single Family Lots; completed - III (9 lots) no date #5 North Lake Tapps Estates (193_) -north of Lake Tapps Elementary -Preliminary Plat 7/23/02 -193 Single Family Lots -Construction summer 2007 #6 Forest Canyon Highlands (251) -Notice of application 8/27/04 -251 single family Lots -South of road terminus from Lakeland Hills Hwy. -65 homes to begin 2/07; first move -ins 5/07; complete winter 2008 #7 Tapps Meadow (Van Der Hoek) (11) -Notice of application 9/13/04 -1 I large lots -across from Snag Island -permitting #8 Country Creek Estates (9) • -9 Single Family Lots -off 15'h near Edwards Road -No construction in near future; looking for contractor #9 Forest -Canyon Estates (121) -121 Single Family Lots —off Forest Canyon Rd. -home construction starting fall 2007 #10 Forest Canyon Heights (21) -21 Single Family Lots —off Forest Canyon Rd. - 7 homes by fall 2007 911 Terrace View Town homes (59) -69 units; 1, 2 & 3 bedroom units; East Valley and Lake Tapps Pkwy. -Auburn City Limits -Construction beginning spring/summer 2007 #12 Carter Estates (16) -16 Single Family Lots— Lake Tapps Parkway and 179'h -16 homes #13 Charlotte Avenue (6) -6 Single Family Lots — Lake Tapps Parkway and 176'h -6 homes 680 Single Family Units 59 Multi -family Units #14 Auburn Annexation (100) f • -100 Single Family Lots 3/07 Standard of Service The Dieringer School District houses children in elementary schools serving students kindergarten through fifth grade and a middle school that houses grades six through eighth. High school students, grades nine through twelve, attend adjacent high schools, primarily in the Auburn School District. Dieringer School District follows a traditional school calendar beginning in early September and completing in mid June. The daily school schedules begin between 7:49 and 8:45 a.m. and end between 2:17 and 3:15 p.m. The Dieringer School District standard of service is based on class size and program decisions adopted by the Dieringer School District Board of Directors. Due to the passage of Initiative 728 and in keeping with the district philosophy regarding class size, the targeted number of students per classroom kindergarten through third grade is 22, fourth through fifth grade 25 and sixth through eighth grade 27. These class sizes have an impact on facilities and the permanent capacity of each school reflects these class sizes. is In the District, rooms designated and assigned for special use are not counted as capacity classrooms. At the elementary level students are provided music instruction, physical (~ education and art instruction in separate, non -capacity classrooms. Computer labs are • provided at each school as non -capacity spaces. Special education and remedial programs are provided as pullout programs and do not provide capacity. At the middle school level, instruction is organized around a six period day; classrooms are calculated as providing 5/6 capacity to accommodate teacher planning time in the instructional space. 0 ( V DIERINGER SCHOOL DISTRICT NO- 343 Capital Facilities Plan Update, 2007 Dieringer School District Service Standards Public School Facilities (Square Feet Per Student) Elementary School 120 Middle School 189 Junior High NA High School NA Dieringer School District Individual Capacity Proiects (2007-2013) NAME CAPACITY Dieringer Heights Elementary 116 Five Classroom Addition Elementary School No. 3 400 North Tapps Middle School 162 Science Labs, Auxiliary Gym, Health and Fitness Classroom Addition High School NA DIERINGER SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 343 Capital Facilities Plan Update, April 2007 CFP Projects and Financing Plan Sources and Uses of Funds (x $1,000) Sources of Funds Existing Revenue: Bond Proceeds, Reserve New Revenue: Bonds, Levies, Fees, State Matching Funds, Dedications, Mitigation Payments TOTAL SOURCES Uses of Funds Dieringer Heights Elementary Five Classroom Addition Elementary School No. 3 North Tapps Middle School Science Labs, Auxiliary Gym, Health And Fitness Classroom Non -Capacity Projects: Technology Upgrades & Road Improvements TOTAL USES $10,269 $19,139 $29,408 ($1,315) ($18,312) ($6,715) ($3,066) ($29,408) 0 � J • co W T N d'w CD CD 0 N CD CD O (am N 0 0 0 N ULUL` N co OD E� Q Q CD a — U- m c w- 'D 'O Q OC F— U) Zo Q 0 v 0 E o 0 0 U- U L o C Q CV N p U C Q O O O O Q OZ Co C!C} co U '- <C c W C0 > O M O O d O O co 00 co CO flZS N O if) � O CMO N CO 'O U In Cp T C M p O CAL (D UC CO co m N Lr) O O ED C) N a) '— r T N M OT Q E pQ- [L CD rnc co W T N d'w N z O O U u-' a U cd LO z co o E� Q Q Q F— U U- m w- 'D 'O Q OC F— U) Zo Q 0 v 0 E o 0 0 D r JU N o C Q CV N W � E o q) O CO OZ ' C!C} co o '- <C c W C0 > O O o It 0 o CO CO CO U .- N CO OT C/) CD > c O N w DV ( L co R1 cl p O O O O O O O 0 0 N C7 O T W T N N z O O It LO O co w N N U LO U 'D 'O Q Cl) C U) U U o EU Ir N r � O a n�w ' Q Cr) M Il- co > O O o It 0 o CO CO CO U .- N M OT W T N N c U U 'D 'O Q Cl) C U) U U O IL E O o ON v 0 E O a ' Q o 0 ° CD > co c > !- �U � cn U o oa U U C/) CD > c O N DV ( L co R1 cl p Q E pQ- [L CD rnc m UC U:� Q a) m 0 z ca ° cis 0 F- o� 6 z t° F- C'7 d' ('r) O Z C) U W U) 13C p IL F' W O vvo I CL N N U)UW'C Ir N w W Q C'3 Z Z � Ir w w W o a A Nj 0 N O�N O� O N W� O O N O n 0 O N 0 0 Co U cd m UU ca C C m a) E w� � � a Z o a) }C _N W ca ~ ..i v X X ,- co 0 q Tlqt co 00 T N co Ea o m - Z w Q- E o s a rn o 2 c cn � U � Cli � c W E a� = a) 5 0 w X X LO CO d CD o LO CO O r LO O Nr c E �, o U n. F U < ca Q o sU) 'x Z Z (nL O rn Y r - to N CO N T r � J el Time Period 2007 Actual 2008-2013 Growth Elementary Schools $26,032 DIERINGER SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 343 Capital Facilities Plan Update, 2007 Capital Facilities Requirements to 2013 Student Student Net Reserve Population Capacity Or (Deficiency) 1222 1232 10 493 678 185 Dieringer School District Cost Per Student (2007 Dollars) Middle Junior High Schools Schools $36,896 NA Total Cost (Cost/Student X Net Deficiency) High Schools NA School -Impact Fee Calculation 4/07 DISTRICT�enngerSchoolDisinct School Site Acquisition Cost: ((AcresxCost per Acre)/Facil Copacity)xStudent Generation Factor Student Student Facility Cost/ Facility Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/ Acreage jAcre, Icapocity SFR MFR SFR MFR $1,156 $247 Elementary 120D $120,000 '40Q Y ° 0.322 ` 0O6Q _ o 15$ Middle 0 t74. : : TOTAL $1,158 $247 ooConstructionCost:ty F(;hacllllCost/Foci1 Co acl )xStudent Generation Factor)x(permanent/Totai Sq Ft) - Student Student FcSchffy _ Facility ;` Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/ ..._...........:... . Cost Capacity SFR MFR SFR MFR . Elementary No. 3 S18,312.000 $1 315,000 400 11 f 0.322 0.069 $14,741 $3,159 Elemento -DHE$ 0.322 0.069 $3,646 $779 0.158 0.046 $6,566 $1.915 Middle Sch. Additions S6 715,(t00 162 TOTAL $24,953 $5,853 ..... Tem orary Facility Cost: ((Facility Cost/Foc lity Ca ity)xStudent Generation Factor)x(Tempora /Total Square Feet) Student Student Cost/ Cost/ %Tem / IFocillty Facilt Factor Factor SFR MFR Total Sq.F Cost Size SFR MFR Elementary S0 _, 0? 0.322 0.069 Middle - $Q't 0.158 0.046 TOTAL $0 $0 State Matching Credit: Boeckh Index X SPI Square Footage X District Match %X Student Factor Student Student Boeckh SPI District Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/ Index Footage Match % SFR MFR SFR MFR Elementary. Middle TOTAL $0 $0 Tax Payment Credit: Average Assessed Value (est.) 2006 SFR MFR $473 511 $360,954'- Capital Bond interest Rote 4/07 _._==-4G1`;_:;-ru;4,b1`? Net Present Value of Average Dwelling 3,726,577_ $.. $2836,808 Yeors Amortized :�i:: ill •' :l Of �y[: ..:.�::� .'F]U Property Tax Levy Rate 2007 ::::::::.:::::::::S2a,638# 2138; Present Value of Revenue Stream $8.064 $6,138 Fee Sumary: Single Multiple ED -m- -IIX Famiiy Site Ac ulstion Costs $1.158.00 $247.00 Permanent Facility Cost $24,952.66 55,852.64 Temporary Facility Cost $0.00 $0.00 State Match Credit $0.00 $0.00 Tax Payment Credit ($8,063.57) ($6,138.28) FEE 1 $18,047 . ($39) FEE WITH DISCOUNT OF 50% $9,024 FEE WiTH DISCOUNT OF 5096 (19) r� • • • Federal Way Public Schools 2008 Capital Facilities Plan Buildingfor the Future FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN • FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN BOARD OF EDUCATION Ed Barney Evelyn Castellar David Larson Charles Hoff Thomas Madden SUPERINTENDENT Thomas R. Murphy • 0 • FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ii INTRODUCTION iii -iv SECTION 1 THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Introduction 1 Inventory of Educational Facilities 2 Inventory of Non -Instructional Facilities 3 Needs Forecast - Existing Facilities 4 Needs Forecast - New Facilities 5 Six Year Finance Plan 6 SECTION 2 MAPS OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES Introduction 7 Map - Elementary Boundaries 8 Map - Middle school Boundaries 9 Map - Senior High Boundaries 10 • SECTION 3 SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION Introduction 11 Building Capacities 12-13 Portable Locations 14-15 Student Forecast 16-18 Capacity Summaries 19-23 King County Impact Fee Calculations 24-26 SECTION 4 SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM THE 2007 27-29 PLAN • ii FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN • INTRODUCTION In response to the requirements of the State of Washington Growth Management Act (SHB 2929 (1990) and ESHB 1025 (1991)), and under the School Impact Fee Ordinances of King County Code 21A, City of Federal Way Ordinance No. 95-249 effective December 21, 1995 as amended, City of Kent Ordinance No. 3260 effective March 1996, and the City of Auburn Ordinance No. 5078 effective 1998, Federal Way Public Schools has updated its 2007 Capital Facilities Plan as of May 2007. This Plan is scheduled for adoption by King County, the City of Kent, City of Federal Way and the City of Auburn and is incorporated in the Comprehensive Plans of each jurisdiction by reference. This plan is also included in the Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive Plans of each jurisdiction. To date, the City of Des Moines has not adopted a school impact fee ordinance. The Growth Management Act requires the County to designate Urban Growth areas within which urban growth can be encouraged. The Growth Management Planning Council adopted and recommended to the King County Council four Urban Growth Area Line Maps with designations for urban centers. A designation was made within the Federal Way planning area, which encompasses Federal Way Public Schools boundaries. King County will encourage and actively support the development of Urban Centers to meet the region's need for housing, jobs, services, culture and recreation. This Plan's estimated population growth is prepared with this underlying assumption. • This Capital Facilities Plan will be used as documentation for any jurisdiction, which requires its use to meet the needs of the Growth Management Act. This plan is not intended to be the sole planning tool for all of the District needs. The District may prepare interim plans consistent with Board policies. The District has prepared a multi phase plan for the renovation and construction of Federal Way Schools and support buildings. Phase 1, a $245 million bond was presented to the voters in February 2006. This received a 54% yes vote, unfortunately not enough to pass. The School Board presented a restructured bond of $149 million for adoption in November. This received a 59.5% approval from voters, still unfortunately not enough to pass. The Board authorized presenting the $149 million bond again on May 15, 2007. The bond, passed at 63.93%, will replace four elementary schools, Lakeland, Panther Lake, Sunnycrest and Valhalla and one middle school Lakota. Capacity increases are planned at all four elementary schools. Plans to replace Federal Way High School and increase capacity by approximately 800 students have been delayed. Federal Way High School was built in 1938. It has been added onto at least 10 times and currently has an almost maze -like layout. Based on an annual 4% increase in construction cost, the estimated cost to rebuild is $122 million. The reconstruction would increase the capacity of the high school by 800 students, or by about 33%. None of the cost to replace Federal Way is included in the Impact Fee calculation in this Plan. Because of continued construction inflation, estimated construction costs will be re- calculated prior to the next bond election iii • FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN The non -instructional projects included in the plan will consolidate support services operations at a single location. The current Transportation and Maintenance facility cannot continue to meet the District needs in the future. Nutrition services and other administrative functions will also relocate to this centralized location. • The Board approved a pilot program at one elementary school to offer Kindergarten through 8th grade instructional configuration. The program will begin at one elementary school in September 2007 by adding a sixth grade class. As the program grows, there will be more information available about the unique facility needs for this grade configuration. Minor boundary changes are planned for the 2007/08 school years at the elementary level to adjust for the fluctuating enrollment. Most of the growth in the Federal Way School District area has been on the east side of the district in unincorporated King County. Increases of elementary capacity and boundary changes will mitigate space requirements for students moving into this new housing. iv FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN • SECTION 1 - THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN The State Growth Management Act requires that several pieces of information be gathered to determine the facilities available and needed to meet the needs of a growing community. This section provides information about current facilities, existing facility needs, and expected future facility requirements for Federal Way Public Schools. A Financial Plan which shows expected funding for any new construction, portables and modernization listed follows this. L FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN INVENTORY OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS Adelaide 1635 SW 304th Street Federal Way 98023 Brigadoon 3601 SW 336th Street Federal Way 98023 Camelot 4041 S 298th Street Auburn 98001 Enterprise 35101 5th Avenue SW Federal Way 98023 Green Gables 32607 47th Avenue SW Federal Way 98023 Lake Dolloff 4200 S 308th Street Auburn 98001 Lake Grove 303 SW 308th Street Federal Way 98023 Lakeland 35827 32nd Avenue S Auburn 98001 Mark Twain 2450 S Star Lake Road Federal Way 98003 Meredith Hill 5830 S 300th Street Auburn 98001 Mirror Lake 625 S 314th Street Federal Way 98003 Nautilus 1000 S 289th Street Federal Way 98003 Olympic View 2626 SW 327th Street Federal Way 98023 Panther Lake 34424 1st Avenue S Federal Way 98003 Rainier View 3015 S 368th Street Federal Way 98003 Sherwood Forest 34600 12th Avenue SW Federal Way 98023 Silver Lake 1310 SW 325th Place Federal Way 98023 Star Lake 4014 S 270th Street Kent 98032 Sunnycrest 24629 42nd Avenue S Kent 98032 Twin Lakes 4400 SW 320th Street Federal Way 98023 Valhalla 27847 42nd Avenue S Auburn 98001 Wildwood 2405 S 300th Street Federal Way 98003 Woodmont 26454 16th Avenue S. Des Moines 98198 MIDDLE SCHOOLS Federal Way Public Academy 34620 9`h Avenue S Federal Way 98003 Illahee 36001 1 st Avenue S Federal Way 98003 Kilo 4400 S 308th Street Auburn 98001 Lakota 1415 SW 314th Street Federal Way 98023 Sacajawea 1101 S Dash Point Road Federal Way 98003 Saghalie 33914 19th Avenue SW Federal Way 98023 Sequoyah 3450 S 3601h ST Auburn 98001 Totem 26630 Oh Ave S Kent 98032 SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS Decatur 2800 SW 320th Street Federal Way 98023 Federal Way 30611 16th Avenue S Federal Way 98003 Thomas Jefferson 4248 S 288th Street Auburn 98001 Todd Beamer 35999 16th Ave S Federal Way 98003 Harry S Truman 31455 28th Ave S Federal Way 98003 ALTERNATIVE SCHOOLS Merit School 36001 1" Ave S Federal Way 98003 LEASED SPACES Internet Academy 32020 1st Ave S Federal Way 98003 2 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 0 CURRENT INVENTORY NON -INSTRUCTIONAL FACILITIES Developed Property Administrative Building 31405 18th Avenue S Federal Way 98003 MOT Site 1066 S 320th Street Federal Way 98003 Central Kitchen 1344 S 308th Street Federal Way 98003 Federal Way Memorial Field 1300 S 308th Street Federal Way 98003 Leased Space Community Resource Center 1813 S Commons Federal Way 98003 Available Office Space 3081914 1h Ave S Federal Way 98003 Undeveloped Property Site # Location 75 SW 360th Street & 3rd Avenue SW — 9.2 Acres • 65 S 351 st Street & 52nd Avenue S — 8.8 Acres 60 E of 10th Avenue SW - SW 334th & SW 335th Streets - 10.04 Acres 73 N of SW 320th and east of 45th PL SW — 23.45 Acres 71 S 344th Street & 46th Avenue S - 17.47 Acres 82 1" Way S and S 342nd St — Minimal acreage 74 3737S360 th St - 47.13 Acres (Part of this site is being used for Sequoyah Middle School) 96 S 308`h St and 14th Ave S —.36 Acres 81 S332 nd St and 9th Ave S — 20 Acres Notes: Not all undeveloped properties are large enough to meet school construction requirements. Properties may be traded or sold depending on what locations are needed to house students in the District. 3 • FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN NEEDS FORECAST - EXISTING FACILITIES EXISTING FACILITY FUTURE NEEDS ANTICIPATED SOURCE OF FUNDS Purchase and Relocate Interim Capacity Anticipated source of funds is Portables Impact Fees. Elementary Schools: Replace Existing Buildings Voter approved bonds. Lakeland, Panther Lake, Increase capacity at Lakeland, Sunnycrest and Valhalla Panther Lake, Sunnycrest and Valhalla by a total of 200 seats Lakota Middle School Replace Existing Building Voter approved bonds Federal Way High School Replace Existing Building, Future bond authorization Increase Capacity Decatur High School Increase Capacity Future bond authorization. The District is also planning the replacement of some non -instructional facilities. The District has purchased 20 acres (Site #81) for construction of consolidated facilities for support services functions. Transportation, Nutrition Services, Maintenance and other • non -instructional functions will be housed at this centralized location. As part of the multi phase plan, the District intends to increase capacity for high school students with expansion at the Decatur High School site. Increased capacity at Federal Way High and at Decatur High supplant the need for construction of a fifth comprehensive high school. 0 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN NEEDS FORECAST - NEW FACILITIES NEW FACILITY LOCATION ANTICIPATED SOURCE OF FUNDS No current plans for new facilities. • • �J • • Y Q� Xr W [w �r :l a w '0 "a N cd FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN • SECTION 2 - MAPS OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES Federal Way Public Schools (the District) has twenty-two elementary schools (grades K-5), seven middle school schools (grades 6-8), five senior high schools (grades 09-12), one school serving K-6 and one school serving students in grades 6 -10 for the 2007/08 school year. The Internet Academy serves grades K-12. The following maps show the service area boundaries for each school, by school type. (Harry S. Truman High School, Merit School, Internet Academy and Federal Way Public Academy serve students from throughout the District). The identified boundaries are reviewed annually. Any change in grade configuration or adoption of programs that affect school populations may necessitate a change in school service areas. The Growth Management Act requires that a jurisdiction evaluate if the public facility infrastructure is in place to handle new housing developments. In the case of most public facilities, new development has its major impact on the facilities immediately adjacent to that development. School Districts are different. If the District does not have permanent facilities available, interim measures must be taken until new facilities can be built or until boundaries can be adjusted to match the population changes to the surrounding facilities. Adjusting boundaries requires careful consideration by the District and is not taken lightly. • It is recognized that there is a potential impact on students who are required to change schools. Boundary adjustments impact the whole district, not just one school. It is important to realize that a single housing development does not require the construction of a complete school facility. School districts are required to project growth throughout the district and build or adjust boundaries based on growth throughout the district, not just around a single development. 7 • � !-:�.-.,-.,.. � � „-.. t: ! if Federal Way Public Schools �, s� ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS MIDDLE SCHOOLS 1 AlU4 0 r-5 30 iUhe4 ' L -g _ 7 #r+f'v >is 31 k,'4o Gam.. •-•5 •.-. -: r 3 t_i4e4rl:d. {'i --S 37 LAk u DAI "• t - r 4 £raarurr LA 33 Sac.ya . £-S S Groan Gib)" R -T 34 349nA a C41 9 lake DOW0 G.a 56 Te4— G•3 1 :.tt<.t V.— 0.6 36 1`00xa1 Way pu0at: E:-3 I takA m E10 9 U&k frraan 10 Ma vffm "m y_`, SENIOR HK;H SCHOOLS. - }9 Wtv,La" s3 ktrubllzs Yew.:7. E4 E-°-' code - t 33 c3fY+R{c {a Patn4a take E,-# 40 Dac1i[:r 55 hainier+fraw 5b 3rwrvrtia0 FW -1 F'W Q -b at faAerat Wa - y' + '•= 3�.... 17 SA;, ar lake 0.r Ai TtlOman 3e14srs.�.-,. a3 T ei+#rt?4r ti<2 .. < ' } t Y'� star Lakd. r=3 eda x9 harry 5. i'rctrnsn i•6 ', " �,+ 15S moycnerd G-2 20 1w m LOO I5-6 ' _•.3 . 9 it K47¢waeQ F_3 Ft,4��.a acixznr! 3«9ati h 73 iM1sns'.dn3ont f-3 Surgias 541ai, - .• i - ^A Y < �s y/!a±a+arrancy Liyaragtxua-7rae�['~wuecr, c -a - coag � T � MIDDLE SCHOOL BOUNDARIES Federal Way Public Schools 1 r. ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS MIDDLE SCHOOLS Code• Code- _ I AddNte co 30 fuw�a- 2 D -S 31 K40 nA 3 erd" o1 G-5 32 0.6 4 s �raNprbe D -S 37 Sacajav�air sKa* E.� _' 5 orMn 06w" A-7 6 lake CW001I G-6 34 Sags U# 35 TnMm.. C.0 t#:7 ' 7 4ewt 3i Ft4" WAy PublC Ac my _'-&D-64v 9 ALulk TN71!?h H3 ,s - 10-MwMSlpi4til it Uwe, IJ#e SENIOR MQH...SCHOOLS �'" =,� c fi .E' if r Cot1e - 11 0*91ok V*.. C -T 14 PWhW LO* E41 15 7t.Affmw vow F -t, at F!e}ni'at M/yr E 5 16 SHaN*WO F*f_t 1 7 0-7 42 Timm" .%Pff lFwt ✓ �^ Sovwiakr. 35 7msan+sr Ad S -Er3 t , 9 - ttl SU, WG-? t9 Su+jperewt G-2 a9 S. ?rwnrm Vii'-+--..�,._.,.... PA - �, aw tkr:.:ti ' 20 Twwn lakes 8'6 +• •:_ . - r:' 2t Va"mia GA '4'V040"" F-5 .:, 22 21 YYuo&a4t- F-1 Fuu" 8mWA '%rvs h„ Sugttva EF:ax - i 1 ^ } Federal Way Public Schools :a if FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN • SECTION 3 - SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION Building Capacities - The Education Program Portable Locations Student Forecast — 2008 through 2014 Capacity Summaries King County Impact Fees - Single and Multi Family Units • 11 • FEDERAL WAY P11BI.1 . SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN • Building Capacities • This Capital Facilities Plan establishes the District's "standard of service" in order to ascertain the District's current and future capacity. The Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes square footage guidelines for capacity, but these guidelines do not take into consideration the education program needs. In general, the District's current target class size provides that the average class size for a standard classroom for grades K through 2 should be 20 students. For grades 3-5 the target is 25 students. For grades six to 12 the target class size is 26 students. Classrooms for students with Individualized Education Program (Special Education) needs are calculated at 12 seats per classroom. Using the OSPI square footage calculation as a base line, the District has calculated a program capacity for all schools. The following list clarifies the adjustments to the OSPI calculation. Music Rooms: Each elementary school requires a standard classroom for music instruction. All Day Kindergarten: Every elementary school operates at least one all day Kindergarten program. These all day Kindergarten program require additional capacity because the standard classroom is available for one all day session rather than two half day sessions. The District will operate 39 sections of all day Kindergarten in 2007/08. Special Education Resource Rooms: Each elementary and middle school requires the use standard classroom(s) for special education students requiring instruction to address specific disabilities English as a Second Language Programs: Each elementary, middle school and high school requires the use of standard classroom for students learning English as a second language. Middle School Computer Labs: Each middle school has at least one computer lab. High School Career Development and Learning Center (Resource) Room: Each high school provides special education resource room and career development classrooms for students requiring instruction to address specific disabilities. 12 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN BUILDING PROGRAM CAPACITIES ELEMENTARY BUILDING PROGRAM CAPACITY School Name Headcount FTE Adelaide 349 349 Bri adoon 312 312 Camelot 254 254 Enterprise 443 443 Green Gables 474 474 Lake Dolloff 395 395 Lake Grove 344 344 Lakeland 377 377 Mark Twain 321 321 Meredith Hill 475 475 Mirror Lake 371 371 Nautilus 353 353 Olympic View 333 333 Panther Lake 422 422 Rainier View 429 429 Sherwood Forest Silver Lake 421 421 Star Lake 367 367 Surra crest 354 354 Twin Lakes 308 308 Valhalla 352 352 Wildwood 286 286 Woodmont 347 347 12007 TOTAL > > MIDDLE SCHOOL BUILDING PROGRAM CAPACITY School Name Headcount FTE Illahee 890 899 Kilo 908 917 Lakota 827 835 Saca'awea 735 742 Sa halie 849 858 Se uo ah 601 607 Totem 751 759 Federal Way Public Academy 199 201 2007 TOTAL 5,760 5,818 OSP] Middle SchoolCalculation 6,327 [70=e cooAverage 1 927 1 936 SENIOR HIGH BUILDING PROGRAM CAPACITY School Name Headcount FTE Decatur 1306 1,382 Federal Way 1405 1,487 Thomas Jefferson 1386 1,467 Todd Beamer 1121 1,186 Truman High School 290 307 Federal Way Public Academy 133 141 2007TOTAL 5,641 5,969 OSPI High School Calculation 5,948 OSPI Elementary Calculation 11,339 *Senior High Average 1,305 1 1,380 jElementary Average 1 369 369 Notes: * Federal Way Public Academy capacity is not used in calculated average. * Truman High School capacity is not used in calculated average. 13 ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL BUILDING PROGRAM CAPACITY School Name Headcount FTE Merit School 16 16 2006 TOTAL 16 16 • • FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Portable Locations The Washington State Constitution requires the State to provide each student a basic education. It is not an efficient use of District resources to build a school with a capacity for 500 students due to lack of space for 25 students when enrollment fluctuates throughout the year and from year to year. Portables are used as temporary facilities or interim measures to house students when increasing population impacts a school attendance area. Portables may also be required to house students when new or changing programs require additional capacity. They also provide temporary housing for students until permanent facilities can be financed and constructed.. When permanent facilities become available, the portable(s) is either used for other purposes such as storage or child care programs, or moved to another school for an interim classroom. Some portables may not be fit to move due to age or physical condition. In these cases, the District may choose to buy new portables and surplus these unfit portables. It is the practice and philosophy of Federal Way Public Schools that portables are not acceptable as permanent facilities. • The following page provides a list of the location of the portable facilities, used for temporary educational facilities by Federal Way Public Schools. 0 14 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PORTABLE LOCATIONS PORTABLES LOCATED PORTABLES LOCATED AT ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS AT SENIOR HIGHS PORTABLES LOCATED AT MIDDLE SCHOOLS INSTRUMONAL NON INSTRUMONAL Adelaide 3 3 Bri adoon 1 1 Camelot 3 1 Enterprise 3 Green Gables 1 Lake Dolloff 1 1 Lake Grove 2 1 Lakeland 2 4 Mark Twain 3 Meredith Hill 2 1 Mirror Lake 3 1 Nautilus 1 Olympic View Panther Lake 3 Rainier View 2 1 Sherwood Forest 4 Silver Lake 4 Star Lake 2 2 Sunn crest 1 1 Twin Lakes 2 1 Valhalla 1 1 Wildwood 4 Woodmont ITOTAL 49 T77771 PORTABLES LOCATED AT MIDDLE SCHOOLS 15 • INSTRUCTLONAL NON INSTRUcn0NAL Illahee Federal Way 3 Kilo 6 1 Lakota 3 Saca'awea 4 Sajzhalie 4 Totem 5 Merit 2 24 4 15 • PORTABLES LOCATED AT SUPPORT FACILITIES MOT 1 TDC 5 TOTAL 6 HEAD START PORTABLES AT DISTRICT SITES • Lota wood Forest 1 I A • NON INSTRUCTIONAL INSTRUCTIONAL. Decatur 9 Federal Way 2 1 Thomas Jefferson 7 Todd Beamer 7 1 TOTAL 25 PORTABLES LOCATED AT SUPPORT FACILITIES MOT 1 TDC 5 TOTAL 6 HEAD START PORTABLES AT DISTRICT SITES • Lota wood Forest 1 I A • • FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Student Forecast Student enrollment projections are a basic component of budget development. Enrollment projections influence many of the financial estimates that go into budget preparation. The majority of staffing requirements are derived directly from the forecasted number of students. Allocations for instructional supplies and materials are also made on the basis of projected enrollment. Other expenditures and certain revenue projections are directly related to enrollment projections. Enrollment projections are completed annually in the Business Services Department. Projections must be detailed at various levels, district total, school -building totals, grade level and program level to include vocational and special education students. The basis of projections has been cohort survival analysis. Cohort survival is the analysis of a group that has a common statistical value (grade level) as it progresses through time. In a stable population the cohort would be 1.00 for all grades. This analysis uses historical information to develop averages and project the averages forward. This method does not trace individual students; it is concerned with aggregate numbers in each grade level. The is district has used this method with varying years of history and weighted factors to study several projections. Because transfers in and out of the school system are common, student Migration is factored into the analysis as it increases or decreases survival rates. Entry grades (kindergarten) are a unique problem in cohort analysis. The district collects information on birth rates within the district's census tracts, and treats these statistics as a cohort for kindergarten enrollment in the appropriate years. The Federal Way School District is using various statistical methods for projecting student enrollments. The resultant forecasted enrollments are evaluated below. The first method is a statistical cohort analysis that produces ten distinct forecasts. These are forecast of enrollment for one year. The projections vary depending on the number of years of historical information and how they are weighted. A second method is a projection using an enrollment projection software package that allows the user to project independently at school or grade level and to aggregate these projections for the district level. The Enrollment MasterTrm software provides statistical methods including trend line, standard grade progression (cohort) and combinations of these methods. This software produces a five-year projection of school enrollment. In December 2006, the District contracted a demographer to develop projections for the Federal Way School District. The report was complete in January 2007. The model used to forecast next year's enrollment uses cohort survival rates to measure grade to grade growth, • assumes market share losses to private schools (consistent with county -wide average), 16 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN • assumes growth from new housing or losses due to net losses from migration. This forecast was provided as a range of three projections. The long-range forecast provided with this report used a model with cohort survival rates and growth rates based on projected changes in the 5-19 age group for Ding County. Most of the methods used for long range enrollment reporting assume that enrollment is a constant percent of something else (e.g. population) or that enrollment will mirror some projected trend for the school-age population over time. The report included 5 different calculations to provide a range of possible projections for the District to the year 2015. This model produces a projection that is between 23,000 and 24,000 when applied to the low, medium and high range modes. This provides a reasonable range for long-range planning and is consistent with estimates from various models. Long-range projections that establish the need for facilities are a modification of the cohort survival method. The cohort method of analysis becomes less reliable the farther out the projections are made. The Federal Way School District long-range projections are studied annually. The study includes information from the jurisdictional demographers as they project future housing and population in the region. The long-range projections used by Federal Way Public Schools reflect a similar age trend in student populations as the projections published by the Office of Financial Management for the State of Washington. Near term projections assume some growth from new housing, which is offset by current local economic conditions. The District tracks new development from four permitting • jurisdictions. Long range planning assumes a student yield from proposed new housing consistent with historical growth patterns. Growth Management requires jurisdictions to plan for a minimum of twenty years. The Federal Way School District is a partner in this planning with the various jurisdictions comprising the school district geography. These projections create a vision of the school district community in the future. 17 0 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN • 22,000 21,000 20,000 0 O 19,000 m a 18,000 0 0 0 17,000 16,000 15,000 • * New Configuration Elementary K-5 Middle School 6-8 High School 942 Enrollment History and Six Year Forecast 0.6% 0.4% 0.2% 0.0% m -0.2% A m V 0 -0.6% -0.8% -1.0% -1.2% a .3.� .� .� -o .0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 `-, `'o ao r'o ao o o � c? v� A S 6' O� OCP 0i9 School Year FTE 4 Percent of Change 18 Full Time Equivalent Enrollment History and Projections Simplified FTE (K Headcount = .5 FTE; Middle School FTE=.99 Headcount; Senior High FTE = .945Headcount) Total K -12 Percent Calendar Yr School Year Elementary Middle School Senior High FTE Chan e 2002 2001-02 11,498 5,337 4,467 21,302 2003 2002-03 11,202 5,454 4,437 21,093 -1.00/0 2004 * 2003-04 9,127 5,524 6,408 21,059 -0.2% 2005 2004-05 9,164 5,473 6,515 21,152 0.4% 2006 2005-06 9,105 5,309 6,770 21,184 0.2% 2007 2006-07 9,022 5,261 6,754 21,037 -0.7% 2008 B2007-08 9,025 5,162 6,880 21,067 0.1% 2009 P2008-09 8,976 5,091 7,012 21,079 0.1% 2010 P2009-10 9,006 5,119 6,985 21,110 0.1% 2011 P2010-11 9,054 5,120 6,797 20,971 -0.7% 2012 P2011-12 9,113 5,085 6,749 20,947 -0.1 2013 P2012-13 9,208 5,037 6,725 20,970 0.1 2014 P2013-14 9,312 5,011 6,729 21,052 0.4% 22,000 21,000 20,000 0 O 19,000 m a 18,000 0 0 0 17,000 16,000 15,000 • * New Configuration Elementary K-5 Middle School 6-8 High School 942 Enrollment History and Six Year Forecast 0.6% 0.4% 0.2% 0.0% m -0.2% A m V 0 -0.6% -0.8% -1.0% -1.2% a .3.� .� .� -o .0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 `-, `'o ao r'o ao o o � c? v� A S 6' O� OCP 0i9 School Year FTE 4 Percent of Change 18 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN • Capacity Summaries All Grades, Elementary, Middle School, and Senior High Schools The Capacity Summaries combine Building Capacity information and the Student Forecast information. The result demonstrates the requirements for new or remodeled facilities and why there is a need for the District to use temporary facilities or interim measures. The information is organized in spreadsheet format, with a page summarizing the entire District, and then evaluating capacity vs. number of students at elementary, middle school, and senior high levels individually. The notes at the bottom of each spreadsheet provide information about what facilities are in place each year. is 19 0 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN • CAPACITY SUMMARY - ALL GRADES ENROLLMENT Basic FTE Enrollment 21,067 nuuget 21,110 - - rtujcctou - - Internet Academy Enrollment (AAFTE) 296 Calendar Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 � CAPACITY School Year 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 BUILDING PROGRAM y h HEADCOUNT CAPACITY 19,896 19,896 19,896 19,896 19,996 20,096 20,096 y� z 'wua�'v%....`Y,'��.;, �Y '``,O.w,'"a",�,1?.� , 3 xfi . .x�jX: Add or subtract changes to capacity Increase Capacity, tY> Lakeland, Panther Lake Sunnycrest and Valhalla ........ ....... . ENROLLMENT Basic FTE Enrollment 21,067 21,079 21,110 20,971 20,947 20,970 21,052 Internet Academy Enrollment (AAFTE) 296 296 296 296 296 296 296 gal Add New Portable Capacity::::::::: � 21i; S1 1. KIM u. ;.':::::: Deduct Portable Ca acit SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) RELOCATABLE CAPACITY Current Portable Capacity 2,600 2,675 2,675 2,675 2,675 2,675 2,675 Add/Subtract Portable Capacity RELOCATABLE CAPACITY Current Portable Capacity 2,600 2,675 2,675 2,675 2,675 2,675 2,675 Add/Subtract Portable Capacity gal Add New Portable Capacity::::::::: KIM u. ;.':::::: Deduct Portable Ca acit y h "s SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE gal KIM u. 20 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN • CAPACITY SUMMARY - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS ENROLLMENT Basic FTE Enrollment 9,025 "UUr,GI 9,054 - - i 1 VJC%,LCU - - 49 49 49 Calendar Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 CAPACITY School Year 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 BUILDING PROGRAM HEAD COUNT, CAPACITY 8,495- 8,495 8,495 8,495 8,595 %8,695 8,695 1. Increase Capacity, Lakeland, Panther Lake ..... ................................. ._..._... .........__... ...... Sunn crest and Valhalla Adiusted Program Headeoubt Canaeity R_495 R 495 R A95 R 595 R (95 R 695 'RA05 ENROLLMENT Basic FTE Enrollment 9,025 8,976 9,006 9,054 9,113 9,208 9,312 2. Internet Academy (AAFTE) 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 .R 35 WON"**" Will OR :. :: ...................... <::»: ': > ;: >:: SURPLUS OR RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 3. • Current Portable Capacity 1,225 1,300 1,300 1,300 1,300 1,300 1,300 Add/Subtract portable capacity ........... :': 5:::=:: ...................... > < ...................... >::::: :.::::....:: :. :: ...................... <::»: ': > ;: >:: SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE .. — 81WL= NOTES: 1. Increase Capacity at Lakeland, Panther Lake, Sunnycrest and Valhalla 2. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities. 3. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only. The actual number of portables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs. The District may begin to pull portables from the instructional inventory. Age and condition of the portables will determine feasibility for continued instructional use. 21 0 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN • CAPACITY SUMMARY - MIDDLE SCHOOLS Budget - - Projected - - Calendar Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 CAPACITY School Year 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 BUILDING PROGRAM HEADCOUNT CAPACITY 5,760 5,760 5,760 5,760 '5,760 5,760 5,760 FNUM 1 AWNT Basic FTE Enrollment 5,162 5,091 5,119 5,120 5,085 5,037 5,011 1 Internet Academy (AAFTE) 76 76q 76 76 76 76 '+,p�e'�iat`olitxteu'if%out .itlt+i;,', �J ,:.9J K...'!`Bd, '- -, .,� �.k�`'l4 i76 SURPLUS OR • RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 2.. Current Portable Capacity 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 Add/Subtract portable capacity ...................... ...................... ........... Add new portable capacity SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE NOTES: 1. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities. 2. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only. The actual number of portables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs. The District may begin to pull portables from the instructional inventory. Age and condition of the portables will determine feasibility for continued instructional use. PA 0 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN CAPACITY SUMMARY - SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS CAPACITY IScho BUILDING PROGRAM Y- A T!' T iA TT ! A A -%T Add or subtract changes in capacity ............... _..... ...................... ......... ........ ... ......... Adjusted Program Headcount Capacity" 11 1 1 5,641 1 5,641 5,641 5641 5,641 1 5,641.1 5,641 ENROLLMENT Basic FTE Enrollment uuugut - - rtvjuutcu - - ir Year 2008 20092010 6,725 2011 1 2012 1 2013 1 2014 Year 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 .. 2012/13 2013/14 S A,dt: S hdl G (,A1 5 AA1 12011/12 S AA1 I S AA1 I { "I ............... _..... ...................... ......... ........ ... ......... Adjusted Program Headcount Capacity" 11 1 1 5,641 1 5,641 5,641 5641 5,641 1 5,641.1 5,641 ENROLLMENT Basic FTE Enrollment 6,880 7,012 6,985 6,797 6,749 6,725 6,729 1. Internet Academy (AAFTE) 171 171 171 171 171 171 171 .. SURPLUS OR RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 2. • Current Portable Capacity 625 ............. ................. 625 ........ ............... 625 ...................... ...................... 625 ................. 625 ............... .... 625 . . .. ...................... 625 ........... ... ...................... ...................... „ ...................... ................... ....... ... ...................... - WS", ....... .. MAN ......_.... .... ........... owW10,11 .. SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE NOTES: 1. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities. 2. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only. The actual number of portables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs. The District may begin to pull portables from the instructional inventory. Age and condition of the portables will determine feasibility for continued instructional use. 3. Capacity for unhoused students will be accommodated with traveling teachers and no planning time in some classrooms. Puget Sound Early College will house approximately 60 of the unhoused students. 23 0 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN King County, the City of Federal Way and the City of Kent Impact Fee Calculations Single and Multi -Family Residences Each jurisdiction that imposes school impact fees requires that developers pay these fees to help cover a share of the impact of new housing developments on school facilities. To determine an equitable fee throughout unincorporated King County, a formula was established. This formula can be found in King County Code 21A and was substantially adopted by the City of Federal Way and Kent. The formula requires the District to establish a "Student Generation Factor" which estimates how many students will be added to a school district by each new single or multi -family unit and to gather some standard construction costs, which are unique to that district. - STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR ANALYSIS Federal Way Public Schools student generation factor was determined separately for single- family units and multi -family units. The factors used in the 2007 Capital Facilities Plan were derived using actual generation factors from single-family units that were constructed in the last five (5) years. - IMPACT FEE CALCULATION Following the calculations for the student generation factor is a copy of the Impact Fee Calculation for single family and multi -family units based on King County Code 21 A and the Growth Management Act. ➢ Temporary Facility Cost is the average cost of a portable purchased within the last 12 months. ➢ Site Acquisition Costs is the per acre cost of the last school site purchased (site 45); this is a negotiated purchase price. Plan Year 2008 Plan Year 2007 Single Family Units $4,697. $3,018 Multi -Family Units I $1,647. $ 856. 24 W) W z 0 40 � C7 C w Z 00 H H Z u >1 r W O 2 U C W� z .r od OI-(OO_O O �Mq-M000Mr-(O(00I`r HO W OO N OM -0000000 94 r r G! tf) MMLAN_OO 00 O 2m 42 0: Pt 10, = d L. O N LLC) 00 O N O^ c-- � r- - Z T: L O V O O O, cM — (O 7 t7 V N N 0) s- LC) N (0 M N'7 LO Co v7 L b E LL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r O N ZEN "3 O O O L C LN(OOON t) d OCl) NLO0(7)NCOt-MCD F7 Cl) 00r-N� N L Z W •• V c-NNNNO1-NN rNCO—OO(Or- 4Cp r �yLL0000000000 C} C�C L.- Cf r- NOq(OLnq- Lo V ZD M +O,N00(00'IT0c-c-M0 d•C (�MO)00t0rNONO� CA. O O�-rLt)M�'Ms-MNN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N y' W 4 W O Im L p ~ N cf)am- c to CO �- ? Z w O O o 0 c d _ 04 V) �� w Z CO 0 O L C NC y E E CO or- col- M Lf) 0)0)-0) �-- �- co N Z W N o L C � � L LL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z O N L U. M�-)O)OC()titi000000 V NMCO N d �LO�N0r-r- = O) 3 r- Z S N H Z w 4) c O W W ca 1 a m ° (D cm v C C 0 W C +N o 0O (9 lJ YN C N t .a ~ w C 0 W O --o L 'L C'a -j � .�— 'Z 0 N (6 y 02 C 7 �+ N O> O O L U> C� L C 7> 'O N y U�DO0Z=mUC4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 O O •E N L 41 LE C N LO I` LLL=�I` 0 E,_ G)Mr �f Z O y � (fid C L LL 0 0 0 Z C D (A N is v • Cd O d•p V E O y�LL00 w N OM r 94 r r G! y. L O 2m 42 I-3: C r N _ E p Z d O L b w O p L 0 c N d M LA co (� d r r N ZEN "3 O F7 M N L Z W O •E N L 41 LE C N LO I` LLL=�I` 0 E,_ G)Mr �f Z O y � (fid C L LL 0 0 0 Z C D (A N is v • FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPTIAL FACILITIES PLAN 0 School Site Acquisition Cost: Facility Cost / Acreage Acre Elementary Middle School Sr High IMPACT FEE Student Student Facility Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/ Canacitv SFR MFR qFR MFR 0.00 ......................................................................................................................................9.................................... $0 417 0.2996 0.1129 $0 $0 0.00 ............................................................................................................................................................................ $0 921 0.1886 0.0575 $0 $0 1.20 $0 133 0.2178 0.0842 $0 $0 TOTAL $0 $0 School Construction Cost: % Perm Fac./ Facility Total Sq Ft Cost Elementary Middle School Sr High Student Student Facility Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/ Canacitv SFR MFR qFR MFR 96.21% $9,100000 200 0.2996 0.1129 $13,115 $4,942 96.21% ............................................................................................................................................................................. $0 921 0.1886 0.0575 $0 $0 96.21% $0 933 0.2178 0.0842 $0 $0 TOTAL $13,115 $4,942 Temporary Facility Cost: % Temp Fac. Facility Facility Total Sq Ft Cost Size Elementary Middle School Sr High Student Student Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/ SFR MFR qFR MFR 3.79% ....................................o.......................................................................................................................... $128,982 4.08%4.08% 0.2996 0.1129 $59 $22 ...........................3.79/0 .........................$� T5�5 ................. $0 $0 3.79% $0 0.000 .0:1886 0.2178 .0:0575 0.0842 $0 $0 TOTAL $59 $22 • State Matching Credit Calculation: Area Cost Sq. Ft. State Allowance/Sq Ft Student Match Elementary Middle School New Sr High 0 Student Student Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/ SFR MFR SFR MFR $162.43 .............. $63,234 4.08%4.08% 0.2996 0.:1129 $2,711 $1,022 .$162.43...........................117..................0:00%.................0.1886.................0.0575 .90 ................61:90% ................. ................. $0 $0 $162.43 130 0.000 0.2178 0.0842 $0 $0 Total $2,711 $1,022 Tax Payment Credit Calculation Average Assessed Value (April 2007) Capital Bond Interest Rate (April 2007) Net Present Value of Average Dwelling Years Amortized Property Tax Levy Rate Present Value of Revenue Stream SFR MFR $262,848 ................................................................... $63,234 4.08%4.08% ................................................................... $2,123,468 .................................................................. $510,848 Mitigation Fee Summary ..............10 $1.27 .............10 $1.27 $2,697 $649 26 Single Family Multi -Family Residences Residences Mitigation Fee Summary Site Acquisition Cost $ - $ - Permanent Facility Cost $ 13,115 $ 4,942 Temporary Facility Cost $ 59 $ 22 State Match Credit $ (2,711) $ (1,022) Tax Payment Credit $ (2,697) $ (649) Sub -Total $ 7,766 $ 3,294 50% Local Share $ 3,883 $ 1,647 Im act Fee $ 3,883 $ 1,647 26 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM THE 2006 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN The 2008 Capital Facilities Plan is an updated document, based on the 2007 Capital Facilities Plan. The changes between the 2007 Plan and the 2008 Plan are listed below. SECTION I - THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN SIX-YEAR FINANCE PLAN The Six Year Finance Plan has been rolled forward to reflect 2008/2014 SECTION III - SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION CAPACITY Elementary school capacity reflects program changes for the 2007/08 school year. Elementary capacity includes space for All Day Kindergarten programs at every elementary school. Changes to the Building Program Capacities calculation are found on page 13. PORTABLES The list of portables reflects the movement of portables between facilities or new portables purchased. Portable Locations can be found on page 15. STUDENT FORECAST The Student Forecast now covers 2008 through 2014. Enrollment history and projections are found on page 18. CAPACITY SUMMARY The changes in the Capacity Summary are a reflection of the changes in the capacities and student forecast. New schools and increased capacity at current buildings are shown as increases to capacity. Capacity Summaries are found on pages 20-23. IMPACT FEE CALCULATION - KING COUNTY CODE 21A The Impact Fee Calculations have changed due to changes in several factors. The adjustment made in the Impact Fee Calculation, causing a change in the Impact Fee between the 2007 Capital Facilities Plan and the 2008 Capital Facilities Plan can be found on page 29. 27 0 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN • IMPACT FEE CALCULATION CHANGES FROM 2007 TO 2008 STUDENT GENERATION FACTORS Student Generation factors are based on rates for new developments constructed over a period of not more than five years prior to the date of the fee calculation. The changes in student Generation factors between the 2007 Capital Facilities Plan and the 2008 Capital Facilities Plan are due to developments that were deleted or added based upon the age of the developments and the year placed in the survey. The Student Generation worksheet is found on page 25. SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION COSTS The anticipated cost for replacing Lakeland, Panther Lake, Sunnycrest and Valhalla is $70,000,000. The replacement will add 50 new seats to the school capacity at each building. The total capacity at these four elementary schools is currently 1505. Adding 200 additional seats will increase the capacity by 13%. Total Cost .13 X $70,000,000 = $9,100,000 • 0 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2008 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN IMPACT FEE CALCULATION CHANGES FROM 2007 TO 2008 IMPACT FEE Item From/To Comment Percent of Permanent Facilities 96.08% to 96.21% Report #3 OSPI Percent Temporary Facilities 3.92% to 3.79% Updated portable inventory Average Cost of Portable $128,106 to $128,982 Updated average of portables Classroom purchased and placed in 2006 Area Cost Allowance $154.22 to $162.43 Change effective July 1, 2007 State Match Average Assessed Value Capital Bond Interest Rate Property Tax Levy Rate Single Family Student Yield Elementary Middle School High School Multi -Family Student Yield Elementary Middle School High School No Change SFR — $245,644 to $262,848 MFR — $57,873 to $63,234. 4.39% to 4.08% $1.14 to $1.27 .3030 to .3462 .2013 to .2186 .2013 to .2418 .0929 to .1129 .0410 to .0575 .0628 to .0842 Per Puget Sound Educational Service District (ESD 12 1) Market Rate King County Treasury Division Updated Housing Inventory Updated Housing Inventory 29 0 • Mission Federal Way Public Schools is obligated to educate all students in academic knowledge, skills, abilities and responsible behavior to be successful, contributing members of a free society. Vision All students proficient in reading and math All students will meet or exceed standards in reading and math on all WASL tests. Federal Way Public Schools 31405 18`h Avenue S Federal Way, Washington 98003-5433 • (253) 945-2000 This document is published by the Business Services Department of the Federal Way Public Schools June 2007 Federal Way Public Schools O 0 Every Student, a header 0 • • • ...bAbt �- 1 As reserved. No warranties of any sort, including accuracy, ftnessorrrnerchantability, accompany this product LEGEND F--] Auburn City Limits Existing Streets -1 Potential Annexation IRIM City Truck Routes Areas M • • City Future Truck Routes N Ml�s State Truck Routes o as i TRUCK ROUTES Figure 2-3 Comprehensive Transportation Plan Proposed 2007 Updates Update Table 2-2, Auburn Corridor Level of Service Purpose: City staff is calculating 2007 level -of -service (LOS) for some corridors, which can replace the 2005 LOS where available. Update Figure 2-2, Daily Traffic Volumes Purpose: To reflect 2007 count data. Remove Figure 2-3, Speed Limits Purpose: To make it easier to update the speed limit map, staff proposes to maintain a speed limit map administratively that would be available for public viewing. With this system, the speed limit map can be updated whenever a speed limit changes, rather than on an annual basis. Update Figure 2-4, Truck Routes to add C Street NW (West Main to 3rd Street NW) as a truck route Purpose: C Street NW from West Main to 3rd Street NW was reconstructed to a truck standard in 2006 and can now be added to the list of City Truck Routes. Renumber Figures 2-4 through 2-7 and update references to those figures Purpose: With the proposed removal of Figure 2-3, subsequent figures in Chapter 2 will need to be renumbered and references to those figures will need to be updated. Add a new policy to address development within the Lea Hill and West Hill Annexation Areas New Policy: While the City is in the process of updating the Comprehensive Transportation Plan to include technical information for the recently approved Lea Hill and West Hill annexation areas, new development and infrastructure improvements will be examined on a case-by-case basis in conformance with adopted City policies, development standards, construction standards, and other applicable regulations. Purpose: The proposed policy addresses development in the newly annexed areas. 0 ® i any sort, including accuracy, fitness or merchantab I ty accompany this product. LEGEND Auburn City Limits 10.000 Auburn 2007 Counts (7 day average) Potential Annexation 10.000 Auburn 2006 Counts ---:-� Areas (7 day average)' 10 000 Auburn 2005 Counts Daily Traffic Volumes (7 day average)' Mlles 0 0.5 1 ` Counts are rounded to the nearest hundred. DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES BLT Figure 2-2 NATE t:Qxil sotr►s der rte oec�f,ra ndmn Yd'd M , CHAPTER 5 CAPITAL FACILITIES Introduction This chapter provides an overall policy direction for the different capital facility plans and programs provided by the City. Capital facilities belonging to privately owned utilities (electricity, natural gas lines, etc.) are covered in the Private Utilities chapter (Chapter 6). Certain City plans and programs are further refined in other sections of this plan such as parks or transportation. Overall, however, this chapter acts as a reference to all of the various capital facility plans, including the City of Auburn Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan (which is a key component of, and is adopted with, this plan), comprehensive plans, capital improvement and investment programs, inventories, and studies that together represent the • planning and financing mechanisms required to serve the capital facility needs of Auburn. For more detail on a particular Capital Facility or the City's overall Capital Facility Plan, see the most recent adopted version of the following: City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan City of Auburn Comprehensive Water Plan City of Auburn Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan City of Auburn Comprehensive Drainage Plan City of Auburn Parks and Recreation Master Plan City of Auburn Comprehensive Transportation Plan Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plan Issues and Background Growth The provision and sizing of public facilities such as streets or water and sewer lines can influence the rate or timing of development and is an is important means of managing growth. Timed provision of facilities also ensures that new development can be assimilated into the existing Capital Facilities CF -29 The City shall continue to fund solid waste collection, disposal and waste reduction and recycling programs and services 40 through the existing solid waste utility, with supplemental funding provided through available grants. CF -30 The City shall implement solid waste management programs and services which provide ample opportunities and incentives to maximize the community's participation in local and regional waste reduction and recycling efforts. CF -31 The City's solid waste management programs shall be developed to make waste reduction and recycling efficient, reliable, cost-effective, and convenient for all residents and businesses. CF -32 The City encourages and should promote the use of products manufactured from recycled materials, and the use of materials which can be recycled. City Departments and contractors shall use recycled and recyclable products whenever and wherever feasible. CF -33 The City shall implement solid waste reduction and recycling programs which have the cumulative effect maintaining the 50 • percent waste reduction and recycling goal (recycling tons/total solid waste stream). CF -34 The City shall periodically monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of Auburn's waste reduction and recycling programs to ensure that local and state goals and policies are being met. CF -35 The City shall promote the recycling of solid waste materials by providing opportunities for convenient recycling and by developing educational materials on recycling, composting and other waste reduction methods. Storm Drainage The City Storm Drainage System serves over 9,281 customers, exclusively within the City limits. The System consists of a combination of open ditches and closed conveyance pipes. For more details, see the Capital Facilities Plan or the Comprehensive Drainage Plan. Objective 13.4. To ensure that collection, conveyance, storage and discharge of storm • drainage is provided in a sufficient and environmentally responsible Chapter 5 • manner, in order to meet the needs of the existing community and provide for its planned growth. Policies: CF -36 The City of Auburn Comprehensive Drainage Plan is incorporated as an element of this Comprehensive Plan. CF -37 The City shall require developers to construct storm drainage improvements directly serving the development, including any necessary off-site improvements. CF -38 The City shall require that off-site storm drainage improvements needed to serve new development shall be built prior to or simultaneous with such development, according to the size and configuration identified by the Comprehensive Drainage Plan as necessary to serve future planned development. The location and design of these facilities shall give full consideration to the ease of operation and maintenance of these facilities by the City. The City should continue to use direct participation, LIDs and payback agreements to assist in the financing of off-site • improvements required to serve the development. CF -39 The City shall recognize the overall system impacts of new development upon the City's drainage system, through the collection of system development charges or similar fees to assist in the financing of new and oversized (e.g. regional drainage improvements.) CF -40 The City should continue to fund and provide storm drainage services through the existing storm drainage utility. The City's storm drainage utility should be responsible for implementation, maintenance and operation of the City's comprehensive drainage system and to seek out sources of storm water pollution and correct them. CF -41 Appropriate rates and system development charges shall be assessed to fund the on-going maintenance, operation, and capital expenditures of the utility, in accordance with the Comprehensive Drainage Plan. Periodic cost of service studies shall be completed to reassess the monthly service and system development charges. • CF -42 Drainage facilities serving the larger community should be owned, operated and maintained by the City's storm drainage Capital Facilities utility. Drainage facilities serving individual properties are discouraged, however if essential, as determined by the City Engineer, they should be owned, operated and maintained by the property owner in accordance with a recorded maintenance agreement approved by the City. The maintenance agreement shall include provisions that will preserve the City's ability to ensure the long term use of the drainage facility, and may include the granting of an easement over the facility to the City. Maintenance intensive drainage facilities designed to serve as a multifunctional private resource (e.g. private parks, wetland mitigation) should not be owned, operated or maintained by the utility. The utility shall ensure that all private and public storm drainage improvements are designed, constructed, operated and maintained in accordance with the Comprehensive Drainage Plan and Comprehensive Plan. CF -43 The City shall encourage the use of regional -scale water quality and quantity control facilities as a means of controlling drainage and flood waters. CF -44 I Wherever possible, regional detention facilities should be utilized as a multi -functional community resource. When selecting a site and designing a regional storm drainage facility, . the City should consider other public benefits such as recreational, habitat, cultural, educational, open space and aesthetic opportunities. CF -45 The City shall promote policies which seek to maintain the existing conveyance capacity of natural drainage courses. CF -46 Whenever a street is to be substantially reconstructed or a new street built, the City Engineer shall determine whether drainage facilities in that street right of way shall be constructed to adequately service the street and whether they should be brought up to the size and configuration indicated by the Comprehensive Drainage Plan. If the inclusion of water quality and quantity control facilities is not feasible, as determined by the City Engineer, when street reconstruction occurs, off-site mitigation may be considered regionally as proposed within the Comprehensive Drainage Plan to meet the City's storm drainage requirements as determined by the City Engineer. CF -47 The City shall require the separation of sanitary and storm sewer facilities wherever combined sewers may be discovered. • Chapter 5 . CF -48 In selecting the preferred Comprehensive Drainage Plan sub - basin alternative for implementation by the City's storm drainage utility, the City shall consider the following factors: 1. The most efficient and cost effective means of serving a subbasin or combination of subbasins. 2. The ability of the alternative to implement source control best management practices and to avoid or mitigate envirohmental impacts, such as impacts to existing wetlands, and the degree to which the alternative promotes water quality treatment, and protects aquatic and riparian habitat. 3. Consistency with Comprehensive Drainage Plan policies and recommendations and compatibility with stormwater improvement policies and recommendations presented in other regional stormwater plans. 4. restrictions or constraints associated with receiving waters. • 5. The ability to develop a multi -use facility. 6. The degree to which the alternative preserves, increases, and is compatible with existing open space. 7. Consistency with existing and future planned development. 8. The advantages and disadvantages of storage versus conveyance while ensuring adequate treatment for water quality treatment. 9. The degree to which the alternative preserves and enhances existing native vegetation and existing drainage courses. 10. The alternatives ability to reduce flood hazard impacts resulting from the 25 -year design storm event. CF -49 The City's Storm Drainage Utility shall strive to meet the environmental protection goals of the Comprehensive Plan • through compliance with and implementation of the policies contained herein. Environmental issues such as water quality Capital Facilities and fish habitat protection shall be considered in all new is development applications and new storm drainage improvements. CF -50 The Storm Drainage Utility shall work with other jurisdictions and agencies to address regional water quality issues. CF -51 The City shall seek opportunities where feasible to reintroduce treated urban runoff back into groundwater system as new and redevelopment occurs to minimize urbanization impacts to the hydrology of the natural river systems. CF -52 The City shall evaluate the feasibility and opportunity to improve the water quality of its existing discharges to the river systems to enhance water quality in response to the Endangered Species Act. CF —53 The City shall seek to minimize the impacts to the natural river system's hydrology by encouraging pre-treatment of surface flows of new development and re -introduction into the groundwater where feasible. CF — 54 While the City is in the process of updating the Storm Drainage Comprehensive Plan to include technical information for the recently approved Lea Hill and West Hill annexation areas new development and infrastructure improvements will be examined on a case-by-case basis in conformance with adopted City policies, development standards, construction standards, and other applicable regulations. Communications and Data Infrastructure Objective 13.4 To enhance the City's communications and data infrastructure through installation of City -owned conduit throughout the city, Policies: CF -55 To allow for expansion of the City's conduit system with minimal disruption to streets and at a lower cost to theup blic the City shall require the placement of conduits asap rt of arterial street (as defined in the City of Auburn Transportation Plan) improvement projects whether private or public • development projects. Chapter 5 • CF -56 The City shall explore new technologies that may present additional opportunities for the City to use its communications and data infrastructure to enhance its provisions of public services. CF -57 To increase system -wide coordinated management of facilities, the City shall work towards increasing the number of remote monitoring facilities for utility facilities, traffic control devices, and other equipment located throughout the city. CF -58 Whenever possible, make remote data access available to the City's police officers, inspectors, utility staff, and other field personnel. GOAL 14. PUBLIC BUILDINGS. To maximize public access and provide for the appropriate location and development of public and quasi -public facilities that serve the cultural, educational, recreational, religious and public service needs of the community and the region. • Objective 14.1. To site public buildings in accord with their service function and the needs of the members of the public served by the facility. Policies: CF -594 Downtown shall continue to be the business center of City government and the City shall seek to site all of its business functions in the downtown area. CF -60-5-5 All "people oriented" City facilities should be located in high amenity sites. Les Grove Park and Downtown are particularly appropriate sites for services such as senior services, community center, library, museums, etc. CF -6166 City park buildings should be developed in accord with the Parks and Recreation Element. CF -5-762 City fire stations should be developed in accord with the City fire services study. While the siting of new fire stations should avoid Single Family Areas, fire safety and access shall have a very high priority under this plan[sril. 0 Capital Facilities CF -5563 The siting, design construction and improvement of all public buildings shall be done in full compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). CF -5964 Public and quasi -public facilities which attract a large number of visitors (City Hall, museums, libraries, educational, permit or license offices, and health or similar facilities, etc.) should be sited in areas which are accessible (within 1/4 mile) by transit. CF -659 The City shall encourage other agencies to follow these siting principles in considering new sites for public buildings. CF -661- The location of religious institutions, private schools, community centers, parks and similar public or quasi -public facilities shall be related to the size of the facility and the area served. City-wide facilities should be sited in visible and accessible locations. CF -672 Small public or quasi -public facilities intended to serve one or two residential neighborhoods may be located within a neighborhood. Larger public or quasi -public facilities intended to serve mainly Auburn residents or businesses shall be located • along major arterial roads within the Community Serving Area of Auburn, however, elementary schools should be given flexibility to locate along smaller roads. Buffering from adjacent land uses may be required. CF -685 The location of utility facilities is often dependent upon the physical requirements of the utility system. Sewerage lift stations, water reservoirs, and other similar facilities should be sited, designed, and buffered (through extensive screening and/or landscaping) to fit in with their surroundings harmoniously. When sited within or adjacent to residential areas, special attention should be given to minimizing noise, light and glare impacts. CF -694 Public facilities of an industrial or heavy commercial character should be confined to the Region Serving Area of Auburn, unless no other reasonable siting opportunity exists in which case siting still must comply with applicable zoning standards. Examples of such facilities are the City maintenance and operations facility, state and regional solid waste facilities, and the Auburn School District bus barn. CF -694A The siting and relocation of City maintenance and operation I • facilities shall be responsive to growing demands for utility, Chapter 5 • -transportation and fleet services and shall also take into account the City's role in emergency preparedness and response. Essential Public Facilities According to the GMA (RCW 36.70A.200), as amended, "Essential public facilities include those facilities that are typically difficult to site such as airports, state education facilities, state or regional transportation facilities as defined in RCW 47.06.140, state and local correctional facilities, solid waste handling facilities, and in-patient facilities including substance abuse facilities, mental health facilities, group homes, and secure community transition facilities as defined in RCW 71.09.020." More generally, essential public facilities are facilities, conveyances, or sites that meet the following definition: (1) the facility, conveyance or site is used to provide services to the public; (2) these services are delivered by government agencies, private or non-profit organizations under contract to or with substantial funding from government agencies, or private firms or organizations subject to public service obligations, and (3) the facility or use of the site is necessary to adequately provide a public service. • The Growth Management Act requires that every comprehensive plan include a process for siting essential public facilities. No comprehensive plan can preclude the siting of essential public facilities within the community. The Growth Management Act includes these provisions because siting certain public facilities has become difficult due to the impacts many of these facilities have on the adjacent community. Many factors contribute to this problem, including increased demand for facilities to serve a growing population, increased competition for land as the state becomes more urbanized, problems with siting processes, and judicial decisions which compel jurisdictions to provide certain facilities. By including a process for siting essential facilities in the Comprehensive Plan, deficiencies in the siting process can be minimized. This section contains Auburn's process for siting essential public facilities. This is an interim process as the Growth Management Planning Council, which is made up of representatives of the cities in King County and the county, will develop a countywide process for siting essential public facilities. When that process is developed, Auburn may modify these procedures to reflect the Council's recommendation. C�-70615 Essential Public Facility Siting Process. . General: Capital Facilities The City will review proposals through the process outlined in • parts (3) through (8) below, if the essential public facility largely serves a regional, countywide, statewide or national need and is included in a policy sense within an adopted state or regional plan which meets the following criteria: a. The state or regional plan was developed through an appropriate public process (including at least one local public hearing) and has undergone a NEPA and/or SEPA review; and; b. A clear policy statement supporting the type of facility proposed must be included. The plan should also include, in a policy sense, a set of siting guidelines used for such a facility. Such criteria may include, but not be limited to, type and sufficiency of transportation access, co -location requirements, preferred adjacent land uses, on -or off-site security and/or mitigation, and required public facilities and services. 2. If the essential public facility largely serves a regional, countywide, statewide or national need and is not part of an adopted state or regional plan, the proponent will be required to request that the appropriate state or regional plan be amended • to include the proposal meeting the criteria contained in part (1) above. The proposal will also be reviewed following the process outlined in parts (3) through (8). Essential Public Facilities of a regional, countywide, statewide, or national nature: 3. Essential public facilities of a regional, countywide, statewide or national nature will be reviewed by the City through the special area plan process. The boundaries of the Special Area Plan will be set at a scale directly related to the size and magnitude of the proposal. For facilities of regional, state, and national need, an alternative analysis will be performed using, but not limited to, the guidelines described in part 1 (above). Auburn staff shall participate in the review process of part 1 (above), and use the data, analysis and environmental documents prepared in that process to aid in the City's special area plan review, if Auburn determines that those documents are adequate. If the facility requires other development permits, those approvals also shall be considered within the review process. . Chapter 5 • 4. Impacts of the proposed essential public facility must be identified and an appropriate mitigation plan developed. Unless otherwise governed by State law, the financing strategy for the mitigation plan shall be structured so that the costs of the plan shall be allocated proportionally on a benefit basis using, but not limited to, non -local sources of funding. 5. The special area plan process to be used for essential public facilities of a regional, countywide, statewide or national nature shall follow the City's Comprehensive Plan amendment process which includes multiple opportunities for public involvement. 6. An analysis of the facility's impact on City finances shall be undertaken. If the study shows that locating a facility in a community would result in a disproportionate financial burden on the City of Auburn, an agreement with the project's proponents must be executed to mitigate the adverse financial impact or the approval shall be denied. Essential Public Facilities of primarily local nature: • 7. If the essential public facility meets largely local needs (for example, in-patient facilities, including substance abuse facilities, mental health facilities and group homes), the facility shall be considered based upon section (8) below. All Essential Public Facilities: 8. The following criteria shall be used to evaluate all applications to site essential public facilities: a. Whether there is a public need for the facility. b. The impact of the facility on the surrounding uses and environment, the City and the region. c. Whether the design of the facility or the operation of the facility can be conditioned, or the impacts mitigated, in a similar manner as with a traditional private development, to make the facility compatible with the affected area and the environment. d. Whether a package of mitigating measures can be developed that would make siting the facility within the community more acceptable. e. Whether the factors that make the facility difficult to site • can be modified to increase the range of available sites or Capital Facilities to minimize impacts on affected areas and the • environment. f. Whether the proposed essential public facility is consistent with the Auburn Comprehensive Plan. g. Essential public facilities shall comply with any applicable state siting and permitting requirements (e.g., hazardous waste facilities). h. Whether the State proves by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence that 1) a sufficient and reasonable number of alternative sites have been fully, fairly, and competently considered; and 2) such sites were found to be unsuitable for an SCTF for reasons other than the cost of property. i. Whether careful analysis has been completed to show that siting of the facility will have no undue impact on any one racial, cultural, or socio-economic group, and that there will not be a resulting concentration of similar facilities in a particular neighborhood, community, jurisdiction or region. CF -6671 The Planning Director shall make a determination as to whether a development application will result in a significant change of use or a significant change in the intensity of use of • an existing essential public facility. If the Planning Director determines that the proposed changes are significant, the proposal will be subject to the essential public facility siting process as defined in Policy CF -65. If the Planning Director determines that the proposed changes are insignificant, the application shall be reviewed through the City's standard development review procedures. The Planning Director's determination shall be based upon the following: a. The proposal's impacts on the surrounding area b. The likelihood that there will be future additions, expansions, or further activity related to or connected with the proposal. One of the difficulties of siting essential public facilities is that they are not allowed in all appropriate areas. To help address this problem, Auburn shall allow essential public facilities in those zones in which they would be compatible. The types of facilities that are compatible will vary with the impacts likely from the facility and the zoning district. In the M-2 Zoning District, many essential public facilities will be compatible uses and broad use categories allowing such uses should be included in the zone. Chapter 5 • CF -672 Essential public facilities shall be allowed in those zoning districts in which they would be compatible and impacts can be mitigated. In situations where specific development standards cannot be met, but there is a determination that the facility can be made compatible, the City Council can waive those specific standards with the requirement that appropriate mitigation is provided. The M-2 Zoning District should include broad use categories that allow all essential public facilities that are difficult to site as permitted or conditional uses as appropriate. CF -6973 Essential public facilities should be equitably located throughout the City, county and state. No jurisdiction should absorb a disproportionate share. CF -6974 Essential public facilities of a regional, countywide, statewide or national nature should be restricted to the Region Serving Area of Auburn. Such facilities should be located in relationship to transportation facilities in a manner appropriate to their transportation needs. Extensive buffering from adjacent uses may be required. Facilities which generate a significant amount of truck traffic should be located on major arterial streets. 11 • NOTE: Only sections of this Chapter proposed for amendment are included': Introduction CHAPTER 14 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP The previous chapters presented the goals, objectives and policies intended to guide Auburn's future physical development. The Comprehensive Plan Map presented in this chapter (Map 14.1) applies those policies to the various areas of the City, by indicating the appropriate locations for various categories of land use. The Plan Map should be consulted together with the written policies of this Plan when decisions about land use and . public facility development are considered. This chapter also explains the reasoning and intention behind the Plan Map's land use designations. This should be useful in developing and applying implementing tools (such as zoning provisions); for interpreting the Plan Map as it applies to specific regulatory decisions or development proposals; and in adjusting or amending the Plan Map when changing conditions or land use markets warrant. Finally, this chapter sets forth some special policies intended to deal with the unique problems or opportunities that exist in certain specific locations within Auburn. These specific policies supplement the general goals, objectives and policies of earlier chapters. Land Use Designations: Plan Map Residential Categories Rural Chapter 14 smaller than those typically allowed by the City's zoning ordinance for non-PUD's. The maximum allowable number of residential units provided for originally was 3,408 based upon an overall gross density of 5 units per acre. High density multifamily units are limited to one area of the PUD to approximately 669 units. Twenty acres are to be used for light commercial development and significant area has been set aside as open space. In 2007, the developer of Lakeland Hills South PUD requested an expansion to the Lakeland Hills South PUD to add an additional 4 acres of commercial land. The development includes a developed 15 -acre park, an undeveloped 15 -acre park, two 5 -acre parks and a linear park along Lakeland Hills Way. The locations of the parks are shown on the comprehensive plan map. Changing the location of any or all of the parks does not constitute a comprehensive plan amendment provided that the total park acreage does not change and the location is agreed upon by the City. Within the Lakeland Hills South Special Plan area only, the permitted density ranges for the comprehensive plan designations are as follows: Single Family Residential: 1-6 units per acre; Moderate Density Residential: 2-14 units per acre; and High Density Residential: 12-19 units per acre. The development is occurring in phases in coordination with the provision of required urban services. In 2004, the developer of Lakeland Hills South PUD requested an • expansion to the Lakeland Hills South PUD involving several parcels totaling approximately 77 acres — bringing the total PUD acreage to approximately 762 acres. The proposal designated these additional parcels as "Moderate Density Residential" (from "Single Family Residential") with the objective of increasing the total number of units allowed in the PUD from 3,408 to approximately 3,658. Subsequently, in 2005, it was determined and agreed that the total number of units within even the expanded boundaries of the PUD would be no greater than 3,408. In considering expansion to the PUD, the City established provisions and conditions to be followed during subsequent review of land use actions affecting the PUD expansion area. These include: 1. Expansion of the Lakeland Hills South PUD and the amendment to a "Moderate Density Residential" comprehensive plan designation (from "Single Family Residential") shall expire and revert back to a "Single Family Residential" Comprehensive Plan designation if the applicant fails to complete a rezone as required by ACC Section 18.76.170(C) to extend the exterior boundaries of the PUD prior to December 1, 2005. Page 14-18 August 2007 NOTE: Only sections of this Cha ter ro osect for amendment are inelt�`ded • Introduction CHAPTER 15 IMPLEMENTATION A comprehensive plan is a set of policies intended to guide and coordinate other decisions. However, general comprehensive plan documents are further supported by more specific functional plans. Functional plans that further implement a comprehensive plan are usually referred to as "elements" of the comprehensive plan. Other types of actions that further advance the implementation of the plan include regulatory measures, or development regulations, which control • the physical development of the City. This chapter will describe the various actions, plans and measures necessary to implement this Plan. Public Improvement Elements This Plan is a policy plan, intended to provide a policy framework for future decision making. It is, however, not intended to be a rigid blueprint.. The Plan is designed to be subject to amended and will be annually reviewed for that purpose. This is not say, however, that the Plan should be amended to fit any particular need or interest. To avoid frivolous amendments, policy amendments should follow a procedure designed to assess its need and appropriateness. Policy issues related to the proposed amendment need to be identified and adjusted in the same process. This chapter will describe this process. The most effective implementing actions for a comprehensive plan are often the development of key public facilities. A new street or water line can provide a powerful stimulus for new development. However, development of these facilities uncoordinated with use regulations or with 0 the development of other facilities, can result in facilities either too small Chapter 15 Conditional Use Permits Conditional use permits should be divided into two classes under the zoning code. Routine permits intended to merely check compliance with standards should be an administrative process with appropriate appeals provisions. Permits involving more substantive policy questions or interpretations should be processed through the hearing examiner system, with appeal to the City Council. Plan Review, Update, and Amendment A comprehensive plan provides the policy framework necessary for City programs and projects to follow to achieve the long term goals which have been identified. This comprehensive plan has a twenty year horizon - long term, but within a frame of reference that can be reasonably comprehended. This does not mean that this plan should be unchangeable. As Community goals and conditions change, this plan should be amended and updated to reflect these new circumstances. The Washington State Growth Management Act limits the process of amending a city comprehensive plan to once a year. This will enable changes to be considered in terms of their cumulative impacts on the City rather than on a piecemeal basis. Timing of • Amendments Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan should occur no more frequently than once every calendar year, except as allowed by State Law (RCW 36.70A.130) or in cases of emergency as described below. All amendment proposals shall be considered concurrently so that the cumulative effect of the various proposals can be ascertained. All amendments should, where feasible, be reviewed as part of a coordinated SEPA process so that the environmental impacts may also be assessed cumulatively. The Citv izenerally advertises for amendment nronosals in Anril eve calendar vear. Avnlications are izenerally accented until mid-June: however, the display -ad sets a specific deadline. While Comprehensive Plan amendments should only occur once per year as described above, requests for Comprehensive Plan amendments may be filed at anytime during the year. Those requests will be "docketed" until the next appropriate annual amendment cycle. Comprehensive plan amendments may be adopted whenever an emergency exists. An emergency for purposes of plan amendments is defined in two ways. One, by Chapter 2.75 of the City Code; and two, when the Planning Director determines that an amendment is necessary to ensure compliance with RCW 36.70A (the Growth Management Act.) In such instances, the Implementation The City will encourage and facilitate public participation in the planning process. Public participation techniques that are transparent and open to the public are desired. Techniques to solicit public participation will also vary depending on the proposal's complexity. In addition to conducting public hearings as required by law and in addition to public participation invited through the SERA process, the City of Auburn has and will continue to use the following methods to promote citizen participation and solicit public input. • Posting the property for site-specific proposals in accordance with Since the time of the GMA initial adoption, there has been increased use of new public participation techniques. The expanded use of websites and cable access television by local jurisdictions are examples. As with the advent of websites and Cable TV, it is likely additional techniques and methods of advancing public participation. a may present themselves in the future. The City will, as it has in the past, take advantage of using these opportunities. 0 the City of Auburn's city code requirements; • Publishing legal notices in a newspaper of general circulation for public hearings; • Mailing notice to property owners and residents within a certain radius of a sites specific proposals; • Posting of public notices in general locations; • Publishing display advertisements local newspapers; • Providing notice on the cable access channel; • Maintaining mailing lists of public or private groups with known interest in a certain proposal or in the type of proposal being • considered and providing notice; • Publishing notices in the City's newsletter; • Publicizing planning activities, agendas and public hearing notices on the city's website; • Establishing citizen advisory committees; • Coordinating with the media to obtain media coverage; • Holding neighborhood meetings, open houses, and public workshops. Since the time of the GMA initial adoption, there has been increased use of new public participation techniques. The expanded use of websites and cable access television by local jurisdictions are examples. As with the advent of websites and Cable TV, it is likely additional techniques and methods of advancing public participation. a may present themselves in the future. The City will, as it has in the past, take advantage of using these opportunities. 0 AUBURN NORTH BUSINESS AREA PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION II. PURPOSE AND SCOPE III. PLAN POLICIES 1 1 2 A. LAND USE POLICIES 2 B. DESIGN POLICIES 4 C. FACILITY POLICIES 6 IV. PLANNING AREA VICINITY MAP • Page 8 6bdl] AUBURN NORTH BUSINESS AREA PLAN I. INTRODUCTION In June, 1990 the City of Auburn initiated a planning study for the area located directly north of the Auburn Central Business District. The purpose of the study was to analyze and recommend appropriate land uses, circulation, and urban form/design features for this 200 acre area (referred to as the Auburn North Business Area). The need for a comprehensive planning study of the Auburn North Business Area has arisen for a number of reasons. First, there has been increasing development pressure in the area during the past few years, best evidenced by the completion of the 175,000 square foot Fred Meyer store in 1989. The City had also received Resent development proposals have includLinqed rezone applications to change industrial zoned properties to commercial, while other proposals requested have intended to reclassify commercial designation to industrial. A comprehensive planning analysis of the Auburn North Business Area was viewed as a preferable alternative to continued consideration of rezone requests on a parcel -by -parcel basis. • Second, while there is a substantial amount of vacant land in the Auburn North Business ` Area, a significant portion of that land has been identified by the City as likely to contain wetlands. Recent changes in wetlands regulations may significantly affect the amount of development permitted within the Auburn North Business Area. Finally, the study area is located directly adjacent to downtown Auburn and with the increased development pressure being experienced, the time is ripe to reconsider the future of the Auburn North Business Area. Should this area develop with industrial uses, or is it more appropriate to develop with commercial and/or high density residential uses that may be more compatible with the existing CBD? The Planning Study is incorporated within a Final Environmental Impact Statement that was issued in November of 1991. In 2005 the City amended the plan to provide specific development standards for automobile service stations. Then in 2006 and 2007 the City amended the plan to coincide with Comprehensive Plan Map changes to eliminate industrially designated land within the plan area and to refine the applicable design standards. II. PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of the policies contained within this Plan is to implement the findings and conclusions of the Planning Study. The policies will be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan as a Plan Element. The Plan is intended to provide long-term predictability to both the City and the property Page 1 •owners and will govern the future planning, zoning, subdivision and development decisions of the City as they apply to the subject area. This Planning Element is compatible with, and will comply with the City's existing Comprehensive Street, Sewer, Water, Storm Drainage and Parks and Recreation Plans as they apply to this area. The policies contained within this implementation plan will only apply to the area identified as the "Planning Area" as illustrated in Figure #1. The Planning Area is somewhat smaller than the study area. The Planning Area was chosen in that it contains the largest, most cohesive undeveloped parcel of land that provides the greatest opportunities for a planned area development. The remaining portion of the study area is either developed or there is not a need for additional policies that would guide redevelopment of the area. III. PLAN POLICIES A. LAND USE POLICIES: AN1.1. A mix of land uses that include light commercial and high density residential, which complement the Central Business District (CBD), are to be the principal uses of the Planning Area. • Commercial uses that could complement the CBD may include but not be limited to entertainment, professional office, dining, medical/dental and personal services. AN1.23. In order to promote the efficient use of land and attain open space amenities that aFe GGAdUGiVe tG pedestFia , multi -story buildings are encouraged. AN1.34. High density multi -family development is encouraged if it is directly linked to a commercial development, e.g. part of a multi -story building that has the ground floor devoted to commercial uses. AN14.5. Multi -family development may be allowed independent from a commercial development if the multi -family development does not have frontage on a street. AN1.56. Multi -family developments shall also provide recreational facilities commensurate with the size of the development. • Page 2 AN1.667. Except as allowed by Policy AN1.94-94, service 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. AN1.79. The Comprehensive Land Use Map shall be amended to illustrate the majority of the Planning Area as General Commercial. An exception will be a 5.5 aGFe paFGel, that lieG east ef the fiFe statieR, whir0h should designated light the developed Fred Meyer store site shall retain the existing heavy commercial designation. AN1.89. The Planning Area shall be zoned C-1, Light Commercial, with the exception of the -developed Fred Meyer store site which will retain the existing C-3, Heavy Commercial zone. This zoning shall be implemented by an "area wide" zoning to be initiated by the City. The ordinance adopting the zoning shall contain conditions necessary to implement the policies of this Plan. PlanniRg Area, speGial pr-eyisieRs shall be made to eRsuFe that futuredevelepmeRt of these iRdustFial pr-eper-tie6 will not- ruenfkt 4 A 4th the urge• AN1.940_4 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 principal tenant has a minimum floor area of at least 25,000 square feet. The principal tenant must own and/or manage 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. 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 existing curb cuts and driveways whenever practical. If the curb • Page 3 • 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 property to allow for adequate 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 adjacent parking area for the cars being fueled. The area that is covered by the roof of the facility shall be no larger than 6,000 square feet. The number of pumps shall be limited to five (5) such that no more than ten (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 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 along 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. B. DESIGN POLICIES: AN2.1. Each building, shall provide at least one public entry to the building. The public entry shall provide pedestFiaR _amenities such as benches, lighting, trash receptacles or weather protection features. AN2.23. Non-residential buildings that have frontage on a street shall provide at least 50% of the first floor building facade with window space that is not When y find it io nni n ihle to moot this obscured by signs. �#�r+ #-he-Gi#,-�.�-.�-.�-.,��-pass 101 ................. ....... ... ....................... ..may..... �.........�.. .�.. ....�........ .,Y�...,.,,_ aAlternative facade treatments may be allowed. These treatments shall Page 4 incorporate a mix of fagade modulation, roof design, significant massing • of landscaping and other measures that reduce the visual impact of the building on adjacent public streets. Particular emphasis must be placed upon screening truck loading, trash storage and similar components, from public view. AN2.34. In order for a building to be considered to not have street frontage, another building must intervene between the street and the building. AN2.45. Pedestrian walkways, at least 5 feet wide, shall be provided between each property when possible the walkway can be extended. If there is more than one building in the development, then pedestrian walkways shall be provided between the buildings as well. Sidewalks typically associated with a public street are not intended to implement this policy but may if that is the most practical option. The walkways shall be easily identified and be constructed of either asphalt concrete, cement concrete, brick or other similar hard surface.. AN2.547. Pedestrian walkways, at least five feet wide, shall be provided to • connect the parking lot to the building entrance the parking lot serves. The walkways shall be separated from the parking lot driveway except to allow a driveway to bisect the walkway. Walkways may consist of raised sidewalks or pavement treatment that clearly distinguishes the walkway from vehicular traffic. AN2.659. Parking shall not be allowed in the required zoning setbacks and shall be located in the side or rear yards whenever possible. Parking is and tg-aha-Street. Parking may e+A-y be located between the front of the building and the street if walkways aremust be provided between the street and building. AN2.768. Pedestrian walkways shall be "stubbed" to adiacent properties when it is conceivable that the adiacent property may also be able to provide for and utilize a similar walkway. Parking lots shall be oriented so that adjoining uses can share the parking lot and pedestrian walkways. AN2.8740. For parking lots and/or driveways that abut the side and rear yards of adjacent properties, there shall be provided a 5 foot width of Type III Page 5 landscaping along that portion of the property line that the parking lot abuts. Driveways and pedestrian walkways that connect one property to another are excepted. AN2.994.20% of each parcel, to be developed, must consist of pedestrian amenities such as walkways, plazas, landscaping, recreation or a combination of these or similar pedestFian design amenities. AN2.1094-2. The entire width of the zoning setbacks of the parcel to be developed shall be landscaped with the type of landscaping required by the Zoning Ordinance, except for driveways or pedestrian accesses. AN2.1103.Freestanding signs shall not exceed twelve (12) feet in height except when the total area of the site is in excess of ten (10) acres, then a sign with a height of 35 feet shall be permitted. All freestanding signs shall be designed to incorporate architectural elements that are consistent with those employed on the primary structure. AN2.1244. Exterior lighting shall be provided for pedestrian walkways and for parking lots. When lighting is provided for walkways, tThe shall be designed for the pedestrian with regard to height, design, and illumination for safety. is This exterior lighting is not intended to replace the lighting required for public streets. AN2.132-5.Landscaping shall be provided between any wetland buffer and any new development, including streets. Plantings should be clustered to allow occasional views into the wetlands. At least one pedestrian walkway or sidewalk, public or private, should be provided adjacent to any wetland buffer or accompanying landscape area whenever the opportunity may exist. Interpretive signs should be placed close to the buffer and pedestrian walkway or sidewalk. These signs should be coordinated with the City to ensure adequate coverage of interpretive information along the wetland buffer, without unnecessary repetition. AN2.1436.The design schematics contained with the Auburn North CBD Final EIS may be used as a guide to implement these policies. AN2.1547-.Anyone who develops within this Planning Area shall be required to prepare a site design plan that is consistent with the policies of this plan and other applicable City regulations. The Planning Director shall be authorized to approve, deny, condition or modify the site plan based upon the policies of the Plan. • Page 6 C. FACILITY POLICIES: 0 AN3.1. Any proposed development, that is not exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), shall be required to provide a study on each utility that the development requires as well as a traffic study. The study(ies) shall become part of the required environmental review. a. The scope and content of the study(ies) shall be determined by the Public Works Director. The study(ies) shall be consistent with and implement the City's existing Utility and Street Comprehensive Plans, including any subsequent amendments. b. The study(ies) shall determine the impacts and what mitigating measures will be required to alleviate the impacts. Mitigating measures may include construction of off-site improvements and/or financial participation in the construction of those off-site improvements. AN3.2. "A" Street N.E. shall not be continued north through the Planning Area in the vicinity south of 10th Street. "A" Street NE shall however be available for pedestrian access. Development within the Planning Area shall plan for this pedestrian connection. • AUBURN NO BUSINESS AREA PLAN RES2283 Page 7 • • U City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan WASHINGTON CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN (2008 -2013) DGJq�j Adopted by Ordinance No.xxxx, December 3, 2007 as part of the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan City of Auburn 25 West Main Auburn, WA 98001 (253) 931-3000 www.aubumwa.gov City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan rm- a r. ci f .MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED • is is • 0 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2008-2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS ExecutiveSummary................................................................................................................... 1 1. Introduction Purpose.................................................................................................................................. 7 Statutory Requirement for Capital Facilities Elements............................................................ 7 Concurrency and Level of Service.......................................................................................... 8 Implementation....................................................................................................................... 8 2. Goals and Policies 1. Capital Facilities Response to Growth.............................................................................. 11 2. Financial Feasibility............................................................................................................ 11 3. Public Health and Environment......................................................................................... 13 4. Consistency With Regional Planning................................................................................ 13 3. Capital Improvements Introduction............................................................................................................................. 14 Transportation........................................................................................................................ 15 Water...................................................................................................................................... 75 SanitarySewer....................................................................................................................... 92 StormDrainage...................................................................................................................... 101 SolidWaste............................................................................................................................ 120 Parksand Recreation............................................................................................................. 121 General Municipal Buildings................................................................................................... 142 Community Improvements...................................................................................................... 149 Airport..................................................................................................................................... 160 Cemetery................................................................................................................................ 170 GolfCourse............................................................................................................................ 174 PoliceDepartment.................................................................................................................. 178 FireDepartment...................................................................................................................... 179 - City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan 1� MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED • • 0 • LJ City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A capital facilities element is one of the comprehensive plan elements required by Washington's Growth Management Act (GMA). Capital facilities generally have long useful lives, significant costs and tend not to be mobile. The GMA requires that capital facilities elements include an inventory of existing capital facilities (showing locations and capacities), a forecast of future needs for such capital facilities, proposed locations and capacities of new or expanded capital facilities and at least a six-year plan to finance capital facilities with identified sources of funding. The GMA also requires that the land use element be reassessed if probable funding falls short of existing needs. This document is the City's six-year Capital Facilities Plan (CFP). The CFP, in conjunction with other City adopted documents, satisfies the GMA requirement for a Capital Facilities Element. It addresses one of the GMA's basic tenets, that is, the provision of adequate facilities to support development in accordance with locally adopted level of service standards. This CFP will enable the City to: (1) Make informed decisions about its investment of public dollars, and (2) Make timely decisions about maintaining level of service in accordance with this CFP and other adopted plans. CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN CONTENT This CFP consists of the following: Chapter 1. Introduction Purpose of CFP, statutory requirements, methodology. Chapter 2. Goals and Policies Goals and Policies related to the provision of capital facilities. Chapter 3. Capital Improvements Proposed capital projects, which include the financing plan and reconciliation of project capacity to level of service (LOS) standards. This CFP is a companion document to the Capital Facilities Element of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 5). The Capital Facilities Element of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan identifies the City's planning approach and policy framework for the provision of capital facilities. This CFP provides the background inventory, identifies proposed projects and establishes the six-year capital facilities plan for financing capital facilities. City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan GROWTH ASSUMPTIONS In planning for capital facilities, contemplation of future growth needs to be considered. The CFP is based on the following City population forecast: Year Population 2006 48,955 2007 50,470 2013 72,000 The population forecasts are based on information from the State of Washington Office of Financial Management (OFM) as well as estimates developed by the City of Auburn Planning and Community Development Department. CAPITAL COSTS OF FACILITIES Based on the analysis of capital improvements contained in this document, the cost of City - owned and managed capital improvements for 2008-2013 is summarized as follows: Type of Facility 2008-2013 Transportation $ 146,538,600 Water 15,570,000 Sanitary Sewer 12,309,400 Storm Drainage 9,600,200 Parks & Recreation 9,468,400 General Municipal Buildings 2,500,000 Community Improvements 6,753,800 Airport 4,135,400 Cemetery 15,000 Goff Course 350,000 Total $ 207,240,800 IN • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan FINANCING FOR CAPITAL FACILITIES The financing plan for the citywide capital improvements includes: Funding Source 2008-2013 Capital Facility Grants 3,857,400 Airport 1,683,900 Parks & Recreation 95,200 Storm Drainage 61,140,000 Transportation User Fees / Fund Balance 278,000 Airport 15,000 Cemetery 700,000 Equipment Rental 9,706,1900 Sewer 9,505,000 Storm Drainage 14,470,000 Water Arterial Street Fund 6,001,000 Transportation G.O. Bonds 5,000,000 Community Center 350,000 Golf Course General Fund 4,303,800 Community Improvements Municipal Parks Fund 271,500 Parks & Recreation Cumulative Reserve Fund 568,000 Parks & Recreation Local Street Improvement Fund 640,000 Transportation Sales Tax - Local Streets - Transportation Property Tax - Local Streets 3,310,000 Transportation Public Works Trust Fund 1,100,000 Water 1,000,000 Sewer 1,800,000 Transportation Muckleshoot Indian Tribe 1,602,500 Sewer Mitigation/Impact Fees 10,078,300 Transportation REET1 1,800,000 General Municipal Buildings 1,800,000 Community Improvements REET2 980,000 Parks & Recreation 250,000 Community Improvements 6,400,000 Transportation Other Sources 965,000 Parks & Recreation 400,000 Community Improvements 57,169,300 Transportation Total $ 207,240,800 • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan SUMMARY OF IMPACTS ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS The forecasted impacts of new capital facilities on the City's future operating budgets (2009-2014) are as follows: Budget Year: 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total 1 Transportation $ 12,370 $ 21,404 $ 22,958 $ 72,346 $ 76,711 $ 92,685 $ 298,474 2 Water - - - 1,200 1,200 1,200 3,600 3 Sanitary Sewer - - - - - - - 4 Storm Drainage - - - 2,000 2,000 2,000 6,000 5 Solid Waste - - - - - - - 6 Parks and Recreation 6,000 32,000 32,000 32,000 32,000 32,000 166,000 7 General Municipal Buildings - - - - - - - 8 Community Improvements - - - - - - - 9 Airport 12,800 12,800 12,800 12,800 12,800 12,800 76,800 10 Cemetery - - - - - - - 11 Golf Course - - - - - - - 12 Senior Center - - - - - - - 13 Police Department - - - - - - - 14 Fire Department - - - - - - - Total $ 31,170 $ 66,204 $ 67,758 $ 120,346 $ 124,711 $ 140,685 $ 550,874 11 0 � Cl 01 • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) CONSEQUENCES OF THE CFP Based on the proposed six-year capital projects and the projected population increase of 21,530 (42.5%), the LOS for the following City -owned public facilities will change as follows: The LOS for the following facilities will be increased as a result of the CFP. CAPITAL FACILITY LOS UNITS 2007 LOS CFP LOS Community Center Sq. Ft. per 1,000 Pop. I - 1 486.00 The LOS for the following facilities will be maintained as a result of the CFP. CAPITAL FACILITY LOS UNITS 2007 LOS CFP LOS Roads Volume/Capacity Ratio "D" "D" Airport % Air Operations Support 100% 100% Sanitary Sewer Residential GPCPD (Note 1) 158.00 158.00 Storm Drainage N/A 4.68 3.28 Water Residential GPCPD (Note 1) 236.00 236.00 Note 1: GPCPD = Gallons per Customer per Day Acres per 1,000 Pop. 3.94 The LOS for the following facilities will be reduced as a result of the CFP. CAPITAL FACILITY LOS UNITS 2007 LOS CFP LOS Cemetefy Burial Plots per 1,000 Pop. 60.63 42.50 General Municipal Buildings Sq. Ft. per 1,000 Pop. 3,553.52 2,977.03 Neighborhood Parks Acres per 1,000 Pop. 1.05 0.74 Community Parks Acres per 1,000 Pop. 4.68 3.28 Linear Parks Acres per1,000Pop. 0.63 0.44 Open Space Acres per 1,000 Pop. 3.94 2.76 Special Use Areas Acres per 1,000 Pop. 1.08 0.75 Golf Course Acres per 1,000 Pop. 0.36 0.25 Fire Protection Apparatus per 1,000 Pop. 0.20 0.14 City Jail Beds per 1,000 Pop.1.07 0.75 Senior Center I Sq. Ft. per 1,000 Pop. 249.65 175.00 As indicated in the chart above, a significant increase in population without a corresponding increase in the unit of measure (square footage, acreage, etc.), will naturally result in a reduced level of service. In some cases, the unit of measure will remain constant, but a greater number of people will be accessing the property resulting in a reduced level of service. For example, a park's acreage remains constant, but increased population brings more people to that park. On the other hand, other facilities such as buildings may be remodeled or expanded to keep. pace with population growth. This would prevent or minimize the reduced level of service. The impact of population growth to the level of service for facilities will vary depending on the type of facility and long range planning by is the City. 9 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan CFP ELEMENT SOURCE DOCUMENTS Documents used in preparing this Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) are principally the master is plans for the various public facilities included in this CFP. These individual master plans provide detailed identification of projects and identify their (projects) proposed funding sources. City documents include: • City-wide Comprehensive Land Use Plan (2003); • City Municipal Airport Master Plan Update (2001-2020); • City Comprehensive Water Plan (2001); • City Comprehensive Transportation Plan (1997) and Six Year Transportation Improvement Program (2008-2013); • City Comprehensive Drainage Plan (2002); • City Comprehensive Sewer Plan (2001); • City 2007-08 Biennial Budget and 2006 Annual Financial Report; and, • Master plan update for parks, as well as numerous other planning and financial documents. All documents are available for public inspection at the City of Auburn. • • G City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan • CHAPTERI INTRODUCTION PURPOSE The Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) is a 6 -year plan (2008-2013) for capital improvements that support the City of Auburn's current and future growth. In this plan, funding for general government projects is identified. To maintain consistency with individual master and utility comprehensive plans, applicable projects in the 6 -year window of those master/utility plans are included in this CFP. The CFP also identifies LOS standards, where applicable, for each public facility. STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENTS RCW 36.70A.070(3)(d) requires that the comprehensive plan capital facilities element include "a six-year plan that will finance such capital facilities within projected funding capacities and clearly identifies sources of public money for such purposes." RCW 36.70A.070(3)(e) requires that all capital facilities have "probable funding" to pay for capital facility needs, or else the City must "reassess the land use element." In addition, the capital facilities element must include the location and capacity of existing facilities, a forecast of future needs, and their proposed locations and capacities. The State Growth Management Act (GMA) guidelines suggest that this analysis be accomplished for • water systems, sanitary sewer systems, storm water facilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, police and fire protection facilities. • The GMA also seeks the selection of level of service standards for capital facilities. As a result, public facilities in the CFP should be based on quantifiable, objective measures of capacity such as traffic volume, capacity per mile of road and acres of park per capita. In some instances, though, level of service may best be expressed in terms of qualitative statements of satisfaction with a particular public facility. Factors that influence local level of service standards include, but are not limited to, community goals, national and local standards, and federal and state mandates. To be effective, the CFP must be updated on a regular basis. State GMA guidelines suggest that the CFP be updated at least every two years. Beginning in 2007, the City transitioned to a biennial budget. With this in mind, the City will follow these guidelines and update the CFP every two years, incorporating the capital facilities improvements in the City's biennial budget process. 7 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan CONCURRENCY AND LEVEL OF SERVICE Concurrency The GMA requires that jurisdictions have certain capital facilities in place or available within a specified time frame when development occurs. This concept is called concurrency. Under the GMA, concurrency is required for transportation facilities, and is recommended by the State for certain other public facilities, namely potable water and sanitary sewer. Concurrency has a direct relationship to level of service. The importance of concurrency to capital facilities planning is that development may be denied if it reduces the level of service for a capital facility below the locally adopted minimum. Explanation of Level of Service As indicated earlier, the GMA requires that level of service be established for certain transportation facilities for the purposes of applying concurrency to development proposals. The State GMA guidelines recommend the adoption of level of service standards for other capital facilities to measure the provision of adequate public facilities. Typically, measures of level of service are expressed as ratios of facility capacity to demand (i.e., actual or potential users). Table 1-1 lists generic examples of level of service measures for some capital facilities: TABLE 1-1 Sample Level of Service Measurements Type of Facility Sample Level of Service Measure General Municipal Buildings Square feet per 1,000 population Parks Acres per 1,000 population Roads and Streets Ratio of actual volume to design capacity Sewer/ Water Gallons per customer per day The need for capital facilities is largely determined by a community's adopted LOS standards and whether or not the community has formally designated capital facilities, other than transportation, as necessary for development to meet the concurrency test. The CFP itself is therefore largely influenced by the selection of the level of service standards. Level of service standards are measures of the quality of life of the City. The standards should be based on the City's vision of its future and its values. IMPLEMENTATION Implementation of the CFP requires constant monitoring and evaluation. The CFP is sensitive to funding and revenue availability and therefore needs to be constantly monitored against variations in available resources. To facilitate its implementation, the CFP should be kept current. .3 is • • 0 • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan Update of Capital Facilities Plan Perhaps the most desirable way to keep the CFP current is to update it regularly so the six- year plan is a rolling CFP. Again, the State recommends that the CFP be updated at least biennially. The City of Auburn will seek to update the CFP biennially in conjunction with the budget process. Future updates will consider: A. Revision of population projections, including annexations; B. Update of inventory of public facilities; C. Update of costs of public facilities; D. Update of public facilities requirements analysis (actual level of service compared to adopted standards); E. Update of revenue forecasts; F. Revise and develop capital improvement projects for the next six fiscal years; and, G. Update analysis of financial capacity. Amendments to the CFP, including amendments to level of service standards, capital projects, and/or the financing plan sources of revenue are all actions that can keep the CFP current and relevant to City decision-making. OJ City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan • MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED 10 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan • CHAPTER 2 GOALS AND POLICIES This chapter identifies goals and policies specific to the City's provision of capital facilities. Goal 1 Provide a variety of responses to the demands of growth on public • Policy 2.3 Match revenue sources to capital projects on the basis of sound fiscal policies. 2.3.1 The City shall continue to fund utility costs through utility enterprise funds, based on user fees and grants. Public facilities included in utilities are sewer, solid waste, storm drainage, and water. 2.3.2 Where feasible pursue joint venture facility construction, construction timing, and other facility coordination measures for City provided facilities, as well as with school districts and other potential partners in developing public facilities. 2.3.3 The City shall continue to assist through direct participation, LIDs and payback agreements, where appropriate and financially feasible. Where funding is available, the City may participate in developer initiated facility extensions or improvements, but only to the extent that the improvements benefit the broader public interest, and are consistent with the policies of this Capital Facilities Plan. It facilities. Policy 1.1 Establish land use patterns that optimize the use of public facilities. Policy 1.2 Provide additional public facility capacity when existing facilities are used to their maximum level of efficiency (consistent with adopted standards for level of service). Policy 1.3 Encourage development where new public facilities can be provided in an efficient manner. Policy 1.4 Exempt the following from the concurrency management program: 1.4.1 Development vested by RCW 19.26.095, 58.17.033 or 58.17.170. 1.4.2 Development that creates no added impact on public facilities. 1.4.3 Expansions of existing development that were disclosed and tested for concurrency as part of the original application. Goal 2 Provide needed public facilities that are within the ability of the City to • fund or within the City's authority to require others to provide. Policy 2.1 Establish level of service standards that are achievable with the financing plan of this Capital Facilities Plan. Policy 2.2 Base the financing plan for public facilities on realistic estimates of current local revenues and external revenues that are reasonably anticipated to be received by the City. • Policy 2.3 Match revenue sources to capital projects on the basis of sound fiscal policies. 2.3.1 The City shall continue to fund utility costs through utility enterprise funds, based on user fees and grants. Public facilities included in utilities are sewer, solid waste, storm drainage, and water. 2.3.2 Where feasible pursue joint venture facility construction, construction timing, and other facility coordination measures for City provided facilities, as well as with school districts and other potential partners in developing public facilities. 2.3.3 The City shall continue to assist through direct participation, LIDs and payback agreements, where appropriate and financially feasible. Where funding is available, the City may participate in developer initiated facility extensions or improvements, but only to the extent that the improvements benefit the broader public interest, and are consistent with the policies of this Capital Facilities Plan. It City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan Policy 2.4 If the projected funding is inadequate to finance needed public facilities and utilities based on adopted level of service standards and forecasted growth, the City will do one or more of the following to achieve a balance between available revenue and needed public facilities: is 2.4.1 Lower the level of service standards; 2.4.2 Increase the amount of revenue from existing sources; 2.4.3 Adopt new sources of revenue; 2.4.4 Require developers to provide such facilities at their own expense; and/or 2.4.5 Amend the Land Use Element to reduce the need for additional public facilities. Policy 2.5 Both existing and future development will pay for the costs of needed capital improvements. 2.5.1 Ensure that existing development pays for capital improvements that reduce or eliminate existing deficiencies, and pays for some or all of the cost to replace obsolete or worn out facilities. Existing development may also pay a portion of the cost of capital improvements needed by future development. Existing development's payments may take the form of user fees, charges for services, special assessments and taxes. 2.5.2 Ensure that future development pays a proportionate share of the cost of new facilities which it requires. Future development may also pay a portion of the cost to replace obsolete or worn-out • facilities. Future development's payments may take the form of voluntary contributions for the benefit of any public facility, impact fees, mitigation payments, capacity fees, dedications of land, provision of public facilities, and future payments of user's fees, charges for services, special assessments and taxes. Policy 2.6 The City will determine the priority of public facility capital improvements using the following criteria as general guidelines. Any revenue source that cannot be used for the highest priority will be used beginning with the highest priority for which the revenue can legally be expended. 2.6.1 Projects that eliminate hazardous conditions. 2.6.2 Refurbishment of existing facilities that contribute to achieving or maintaining standards for adopted level of service. 2.6.3 New or expanded facilities that reduce or eliminate deficiencies in level of service for existing demand. 2.6.4 New or expanded facilities that provide the adopted level of service for new development and redevelopment during the next six fiscal years. 2.6.5 Capital improvements that significantly reduce the operating cost of providing a service or facility, or otherwise mitigate impacts of public facilities on future operating budgets. 12 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan 2.6.6 Capital improvements that contribute to stabilizing and developing the economy of the City. • 2.6.7 Project priorities may also involve additional criteria that are unique to each type of public facility, as described in other elements of this Comprehensive Plan. Policy 2.7 Ensure that the ongoing operating and maintenance costs of a capital facility are financially feasible prior to constructing the facility. Goal 3 Protect public health, environmental quality, and neighborhood stability and viability through the appropriate design and installation of public facilities. Policy 3.1 Promote conservation of energy, water and other natural resources in the location and design of public facilities. Policy 3.2 Require the separation of sanitary and storm sewer facilities wherever combined sewers may be discovered. Policy 3.3 Practice efficient and environmentally responsible maintenance and operating procedures. Policy 3.4 The siting, design, construction and improvement of all public buildings shall be done in full compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Policy 3.5 Promote economic and community stability and growth through strategic investments in public facilities and public private/partnerships. Goal 4 Make the Capital Facilities Plan consistent with other elements of the is comprehensive plan, and - to the extent feasible - with other city, county, regional and state adopted plans. Policy 4.1 Ensure that the growth and development assumptions used in the Capital Facilities Plan are consistent with similar assumptions in other elements of the comprehensive plan. Policy 4.2 Coordinate with non -city providers of public facilities on a joint program for maintaining applicable level of service standards, concurrency requirements, funding and construction of public facilities. • 13 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan CHAPTER 3 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS 1. INTRODUCTION This CFP includes City capital improvement projects, and the financing plan to pay for those projects. It also contains the inventory of existing City facilities, and identifies level of service standards, where applicable. Each type of City public facility is presented in a separate subsection that follows a standard format. Throughout this section, tables of data are identified with abbreviations that correspond to the type of facility: For example, Table W-1 refers to Table 1 for Water (Supply and Distribution). Each abbreviation corresponds to the name of the type of facility. 1. Narrative Summary This is an overview of the data, with sections devoted to Current Facilities, Level of Service, Capital Facilities Projects and Financing, and Impact on Future Operating Budgets. 2. Inventory of Facilities (Table X-1) • This is a list of existing capital facilities, including the name, capacity (for reference to level • of service), and location. This table also includes any proposed capital projects and the planned inventory total as of December 31, 2013. 3. Capital Projects and Financing Plan (Table X-2) This is a list of capital improvements that identifies existing deficiencies, identifies facilities needed for future growth, and identifies the repairing or replacing of obsolete or worn out facilities through December 31, 2013. Each list shows the proposed financing plan followed by individual worksheets showing the project detail. 4. Impact on Future Operating Budgets (Table X-3) This is a list of new capital projects and the forecasted impacts on the City's future operating budgets (2009 — 2014). • 14 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan • TRANSPORTATION Current Facilities Roadways: The City's roadway system consists of a network of limited access freeways and 189 miles of arterial, collector, alleys and local streets. Table T-1 "Facilities Inventory" lists the inventory of state operated and maintained freeways, city arterial road segments, and signalized intersections. Table T-1 also includes the most current volume/capacity ratio and Level of Service (LOS) of each arterial roadway segment and the most current LOS of each signalized and un -signalized intersection. Transit: Metro and Sound Transit provide transit service to the Auburn area. Auburn is currently served by nine Metro routes, two Metro -operated Sound Transit routes, and one Pierce Transit -operated Sound Transit route. Six park and ride facilities, with a total of 1,127 parking spaces, also serve Auburn. The Sound Transit "Sounder" commuter rail system, running between Tacoma and Seattle, runs through the Auburn station located a 23 A Street SW. The Sounder makes four stops daily during both the morning and evening commutes, as well as providing limited weekend, holiday and special event schedules. Level of Service (LOS) • Washington's Growth Management Act (GMA) requires service level standards for both arterials and transit routes. The GMA requires that each jurisdiction's Level of Service (LOS) standards be coordinated within the region and be supported by local ordinance, but the standards and the methods used are up to the local jurisdictions. Under GMA, the focus is on the performance of the whole road system, not on individual intersections or roadways. Level of service standards are a tool to help keep the transportation system in balance with the needs of future population growth and development. A methodology and set of standards have been drafted for the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. The standards help determine concurrency (i.e., balance) between transportation and land use elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan, as required by GMA. The City has four choices if it finds the standards cannot be met. • Modify the land use plan, placing tighter controls on the amount and type of development to minimize traffic. • Construct additional transportation facilities to support increased travel demand from new development. • Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures. • Relax the LOS standards. The City can accept lower level of service standards to • encourage further growth and minimize the need for additional transportation facilities. 15 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan The Transportation Land Use Balance will be monitored through the City's Concurrency • Management System as part of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Transportation concurrency will be evaluated for key facilities and on a system -wide basis. By having system -wide and facility -based roadway LOS standards, the City of Auburn can define preliminary capacity needs. The City and WSDOT can then begin to plan corridor studies that will define the characteristics and location of a particular roadway improvement. At the project level, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) process will continue to guide the more specific planning and analysis efforts. Uses of Level of Service Standards As measures of transportation system effectiveness, level of service standards can help jurisdictions identify where and when transportation improvements are needed, and when development or growth will affect system operation. Level of service provides a standard below which a transportation facility or system is not considered adequate. Level of service standards can be used to evaluate the impact of proposed developments on the surrounding road system. They can assure that all developments are served by a safe, efficient and cost-effective road system. They can also be used to identify problems, suggest remedial actions, and apportion costs between public and private sources. LOS standards are a cornerstone in the development of equitable traffic impact fee systems, which makes development pay some of the costs for improvements to the transportation infrastructure. In July 2001, the City implemented a traffic impact fee. The purpose of the fee is to is mitigate traffic impacts more equitably while making the costs of development more predictable to developers. In 2007, the City implemented phase one of a new transportation impact fee to address the impacts of heavy truck usage on the City's transportation system. The City studied the impacts of truck -dependent land uses and determined that the current transportation impact fees do not fully address the impacts of such uses on the city's truck routes and other truck -related transportation infrastructure. Future phases will begin in 2008. Measuring Transportation System Performance Arterial Corridor Link Level. The level of service for roadway segments or links is analyzed with two primary purposes in mind. First, this site-specific LOS can be used, with the help of a travel demand model, to evaluate areas of congestion within a transportation network --leading to the development of a long-range transportation facilities plan. Traffic forecasts from the model will be analyzed to determine where capacity improvements should be considered. Second, arterial corridor LOS analysis is used to assess concurrency or if facilities are meeting the LOS standards. The City of Auburn uses traditional engineering methodology to assess arterial corridor LOS. Roadway travel volumes are compared to roadway capacity to develop a ratio known as volume -to -capacity (WC). The volume -to -capacity ratios relate directly to measure of level of service standards. Table T -2A shows the relationships between • LOS, WC ratios, peak hour, and free flow speed on an arterial. 16 • • is City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan Table T -2a V/C Ratio Ranges as they relate to LOS LOS Volume to Capacity (ratio range) Percent of free-flow speed (peak hour) A .50 and below 90% orgreater B .60 to .69 70%-90% C .70 to .79 50% D .80 to .89 40% E .90 to .99 30% F 1.00 and above 25% or less There are six levels of service on a scale of A to F. LOS A represents the best operating conditions, and LOS F the worst. The characteristics of the six levels of service are summarized in Table T-213. Table T -2b Definition of Arterial Level of Service (LOS) Level of Service A - describes primarily free flow operations at average travel speeds, usually about 90 percent of the free flow speed for the arterial class. Vehicles are completely unimpeded in their ability to maneuver within the traffic stream. Stopped delay at signalized intersections is minimal. Level of Service B - represents reasonably unimpeded operations at average travel speeds, usually about 70 percent of the free flow speed for the arterial class. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is only slightly restricted and stopped delays are not bothersome. Drivers are not generally subjected to appreciable ail . Level of Service C - represents stable conditions; however, ability to maneuver and change lanes in mid block location may be more restricted than in LOS B, and longer queues and/or adverse signal coordination may contribute to lower average travel speeds of about 50 percent of the average free flow speed for the arterial class. Motorists will experience tension while driving. Level of Service D - borders on a range in which small increases in flow may cause substantial increases in approach delay and, hence, decreases in arterial speed. This may be due to adverse signal progression, inappropriate signal timing, high volumes, or some combination of these. Average travel speeds are about 40 percent of free flow speed. Level of Service E - characterized by significant approach delays and average travel speeds of one-third the free flow speed or lower. Such operations are caused by some combination of adverse progression, high signal density, extensive queuing at critical intersections, and inappropriate signal timing. Level of Service F - characterizes arterial flow at extremely low speeds below one-third to one-quarter of the free flow speed. Intersection congestion is likely at critical signalized locations, with resultant high approach delays. Adverse progression is frequently a contributor to this condition. Source. 1985 Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C. 1985, page 11-4 The LOS scale has been adopted by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, the Transportation Research Board, and by most jurisdictions throughout the country. The scale is also accepted and generally understood by the public and elected officials. 17 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan Level of Service Standards for Capacity and Congestion - The LOS standards shown in • Table T -2c apply to the facility's location and its functional classification. Specific details of the level of service methodology are provided in the City of Auburn Transportation Plan (1997). Table T -2c Draft Roadway Capacity/Congestion LOS Standards Roadway/intersection Maximum V/C Ratio/LOS Arterial Corridor (Capacity) "D" for each arterial link, except for collector residential arterials which are "C" Signalized Intersection "D" Unsi nalized Intersection "D" Relationship to Concurrency Management - Concurrency involves matching public facilities and new development. The GMA extends concurrency to transportation facilities by requiring that new development be served by adequate roads and public transportation service, and that development is not permitted to cause these transportation facilities to operate below level of service standards that are adopted by local governments in their comprehensive plans. • Capital Facilities Projects and Financing The City's transportation facilities include projects totaling $146,538,600. Table T-2 shows the proposed financing plan followed by individual worksheets showing the project detail. Impact on Future Operating Budgets As Table T-3 shows, operating budget impacts of $298,474 are forecasted for transportation facilities during the six years 2009 — 2014. Concurrency (Adequate Public Facilities) In compliance with the GMA, adequate transportation system facilities must be available within six (6) years of the time of occupancy and use of new development. • l: City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan . TABLE T-1 Facilities Inventory Transportation • • Route Classified Street Segments - Arterials (9/20/02) From To LOS 003rd St NE/NW Auburn Ave C St NW D 003rd St SE A St SE SR 18 WB ramps D 004th St SE Auburn Way South F St SE C 004th St SE F St SE M St SE B 008th St NE 009th St NE Harvey Rd D 008th St NE 104th Ave SE R St NE F 008th St NE Harvey Rd Pike St E 008th St NE Pike St R St NE E 009th St NE 008th St NE Auburn Way North B 009th St NE Auburn Way North D St NE B 012th St SE A St SE F St SE C 012th St SE Auburn Way South F St SE E 012th St SE Auburn Way South M St SE D 014th St NW A St NE B St NW C 015th St NE A St NE D St NE C 015th St NE Auburn Way North D St NE E 015th St NW A St NE C St NW C 015th St NW C St NW SR167 NB ramp D 015th St NW R St NW W. Valley Highway B 015th St NW SR 167 NB ramp SR167 SB ramp F 015th St NW SR167 SB ramp W. Valley Highway D 015th St SW Boundary Blvd C St SW D 015th St SW Boundary Blvd O St SW D 015th St SW O St SW SR167 NB ramp C 015th St SW SR167 NB ramp SR167 SB ramp D 015th St SW SR167 SB ramp W. Valley Highway F 016th St NW A St NE B St NW B 017th St SE A St SE F St SE D 017th St SE Auburn Way South F St SE C 017th St SE Auburn Way South R St SE F 029th St SE A St SE F St SE C 029th St SE F St SE M St SE B 029th St SE M St SE R St SE D 037th St NE Auburn Way North I St NE D 037th St NW Auburn Way North B St NW E 037th St NW B St NW W. Valley Highway D 041st St SE A St SE C St SW F 047th St SE Lakeland Hills Way Mill Pond Dr B 053rd St S Bridget Ave SE Kersey Way N/A' 055th Ave SE Bridget Ave SE Jordan Ave SE N/A' A St NE 014th St NE 015th St NE C A St NE 015th St NE 016th St NE C 19 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan TABLE T-1 (continued) Route Classified Street Segments - Arterials (9/20/02) From To LOS A St SE 002nd St SE 003rd St SE E A St SE 002nd St SE E Main St D A St SE 003rd St SE 006th St SE D A St SE 006th St SE 012th ST SE B A St SE 008th St E City Limits E A St SE 008th St E Lakeland Hills Way E A St SE 012th St SE 017th St SE D A St SE 017th St SE 021st St SE D A St SE 021st St SE 029th St SE D A St SE 029th St SE 037th St SE C A St SE 037th St SE 041st St SE F A St SE 041st St SE Lakeland Hills Way E A St SW 002nd St SW 003rd St SW B A St SW 002nd St SW E Main St C Auburn Ave 001st St NE 003rd St NE E Auburn Ave 001st St NE E Main St F Auburn Ave 003rd St NE 004th St NE F Auburn Ave 004th St NE Auburn Way North E Auburn Black Diamond Rd R St SE City Limits B Auburn Way North 001st St NE Auburn Ave D Auburn Way North 001st St NE E Main St E Auburn Way North 009th St NE 015th St NE D Auburn Way North 009th St NE Auburn Ave C Auburn Way North 015th St NE 022nd St NE C Auburn Way North 022nd St NE 030th St NE/NW D Auburn Way North 030th St NE/NW 037th St NE/NW D Auburn Way North 037th St NE/NW S 277th St D Auburn Way South 002nd St SE 004th St SE D Auburn Way South 002nd St SE E Main St C Auburn Way South 004th St SE SR18 WB ramps F Auburn Way South 012th ST SE F St SE E Auburn Way South 012th St SE M St SE F Auburn Way South 032nd St SE Academy Dr F Auburn Way South 032nd St SE Hemlock St SE F Auburn Way South Academy Dr S 368th P/ F Auburn Way South Dogwood St SE Hemlock St SE F Auburn Way South Dogwood St SE Riverwalk Dr F Auburn Way South F St SE SR18 EB ramps E Auburn Way South M ST SE Riverwalk Dr D Auburn Way South SR18 EB ramps SR18 WB ramps F B St NW 014th St NW 015th St NW A B St NW 015th St NW 016th St NW A B St NW 016th St NW 030th St NW A B St NW 030th St NW 037th St NW D B St NW 037th St NW 049th St NW E Boundary Blvd 015th St SW O St SW A Bridget Ave SE 053rd St S 055th Ave SE N/A` W • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan TABLE T-1 (continued) Route Classified Street Segments - Arterials (9/20/02) From To LOS C St NW 003rd St NW 006th St NW C C St NW 003rd St NW W Main St C C St NW 006th St NW 015th St NW C C St NW 015th St NW Emerald Downs Dr D C St SW 015th St SW Ellingson Rd C C St SW 015th St SW SR18 EB ramps D C St SW SR18 EB ramps SR18 WB ramps D C St SW SR18 WB ramps W Main St C Cross St A St SE Auburn Way South C D St NE 010th St NE 015th St NE B D St NW S 277th St S 285th St N/A' E Main St Auburn Ave Auburn Way NIS E E Main St Auburn Ave Division St E E Main St Auburn Way NIS F St SE C E Main St F St SE M St NESE C E Main St M St NESE R St NE/SE D Harvey Rd 008th St NE t St NE F Harvey Rd Auburn Way North I St NE F I St NE 014th St NE 022nd St NE A I St NE 014th St NE Harvey Rd E 1 St NE 022nd St NE 030th St NE B l St NE 030th St NE 031st St NE A 1 St NE 037th St NE 040th St NE A I St NE 037th St NE CAMWEST Dev A Lake Tapps Parkway E East Valley Highway Lakeland Hills Way A Lake Tapps Parkway E Lakeland Hills Way City Limits A Lakeland Hills Way 047th St SE Mill Pond Dr C Lakeland Hills Way 047th St SE Oravetz Rd C Lakeland Hills Way A St SE Oravetz Rd E Lakeland Hills Way Evergreen Way SE Lake Tapps Pkwy E C Lakeland Hills Way Evergreen Way SE Mill Pond Dr C M St NE 004th St NE 008th St NE E M St NE 004th St SE E Main St C M St SE 004th St SE 012th St SE D M St SE 004th St SE E Main St D M St SE 012th St SE Auburn Way South F M St SE 021st St SE 029th St SE C M St SE 021st St SE Auburn Way South F O St SW 015th St SW Boundary Blvd C Oravetz Rd Kersey Way Mill Pond Dr C Oravetz Rd Lakeland Hills Way Mill Pond Dr F Peasley Canyon Rd West Valley Highway City Limits F R St SE 017th St SE 021st St SE F R St SE 021st St SE 029th St SE E R St SE 029th St SE Oravetz Rd E R St SE 053rd St S Oravetz Rd B R St SE Auburn Black Diamond Rd E Main St C 21 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan TABLE T-1 (continued) 22 • is Classified Street Segments - Arterials (9/20/02) Route From To LOS Riverwalk Dr Auburn Way South Howard Rd B Riverwalk Dr R St SE C S 277th St Auburn Way North B St NW F S 277th St Auburn Way North City Limits D S 277th St B St NW D St NW D S 277th St D St NW Frontage Rd C S 316th St S 55th Ave W St NW B Terrace Dr R St NW W St NW B W Main St A St NW/SW B St NW/SW D W Main St A St NW/SW Division St E W Main St B St NW/SW C St NW/SW D W Main St C St NW/SW H St NW C W Main St H St NW W. Valley Highway B West Valley Highway 015th St NW 037th St NW C West Valley Highway 015th St NW W Main St B West Valley Highway 015th St SW Ellingson Rd F West Valley Highway 015th St SW Peasley Canyon Rd F West Valley Highway 037th St NW S 287th St F West Valley Highway Peasley Canyon Rd SR18 EB ramps F West Valley Highway SR18 EB ramps SR18 WB ramps F West Valley Highway SR18 WB ramps W Main St F N/A' = not analyzed 22 • is • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan TABLE T-1 (continued) Route Classified Street Segments - Collectors (9/20/02) From To LOS 001st St NE Auburn Ave Auburn Way North C 001st St NW Auburn Ave Division St C 001st St NW B St NW Division St C 002nd St SE A St SE Auburn Way South D 002nd St SE A St SE Division St F 002nd St SE Auburn Way South F St SE C 002nd St SE F St SE L St SE B 002nd St SW A St SW Division St D 004th St NE Auburn Ave Auburn Way North F 004th St NE Auburn Way North M St NE C 006th St NW C St NW H St NW C 014th St NE I St NE M St NE B 014th St NE I St NE Riverview Dr A 016th St NE D St NE E St NE B 021st St SE A St SE F St SE C 021st St SE F St SE M St SE C 021st St SE M St NE R St SE D 022nd St NE Auburn Way North E St NE C 022nd St NE Auburn Way North I St NE D 022nd St NE I St NE M St NE B 022nd St NE M St NE Riverview Dr B 030th St NE Auburn Way North I St NE D 030th St NW Auburn Way North B St NW C 032nd St SE Academy Dr Auburn Way South E 037th St NW West Valley Highway City Limits F 037th St SE A St SE M St SE N/A 105th PI SE 107th PI SE Lea Hill Rd F 107th P/ SE 105th PI SE SE 320th St C Academy Dr 032nd St SE Auburn Way South C B St NW 001st St NW W Main St D D St NE 015th St NE 016th St NE B Dogwood St SE Auburn Way South Forest Ridge Dr N/A Dogwood St SE Auburn Way South Scenic Dr N/A E St NE 016th St NE 022nd St NE B F St SE 002nd St SE 004th St SE C F St SE 002nd St SE E Main St C F St SE 004th St SE Auburn Way South D F St SE 012th St SE 017th St SE B F St SE 017th St SE 021st St SE B F St SE 021st St SE 029th St SE C Green River Rd 104th Ave SE City Limits A H St NW 006th St NW W Main St C M St NE 014th St NE 022nd St NE B M St SE 029th St SE 037th St SE B Mill Pond Dr 047th St SE Lakeland Hills Way B 23 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan TABLE T-1 (continued) Route Classified Street Segments - Collectors (9/20/02) From To LOS Mill Pond Dr 047th St SE Oravetz Rd D Mountain View Dr W Main St City Limits B Pike St 008th St NE 014th St NE N/A R St NE 008th St NE E Main St E Riverview Dr 014th St NE 022nd St NE A SE 320th St 107th PI SE City Limits C SE 304th Way Green River Rd SE 304th St A 24 • is NIS Street Signalized Intersections (9/20/02) AM E/W Street LOS PM LOS YEAR CONST YEAR COUNT 1 A Street NE 15th Street NE C 1988 2001 2 A Street SE 2nd Street SE C 1979 2001 3 A Street SE 3rd Street SEI Cross Street C 1968 2001 4 A Street SE 6th Street SE B 1994 2000 5 A Street SE 17th Street SE 1997 1999 6 A Street SE 29th Street SE 1997 1991 7 A Street SE 41st Street SE F 1979 2002 8 Auburn Ave 4th Street NE B 1977 2002 9 Auburn Ave 3rd Street NE B 1977 2002 10 Auburn Ave 1st Street NE B 1971 1999 11 Auburn Ave East Main Street C 1968 2001 12 Auburn Way N S 277th Street D 2002 2000 13 Auburn Way N 37th Street NE C 1984 2000 14 Auburn Way N 30th Street NE D 1985 2000 15 Auburn Way N 22nd Street NE C 1982 2000 16 Auburn Way N 15th Street NE F 1988 2000 17 Auburn Way N 8th Street NE F 1990 2002 18 Auburn Way N 4th Street NE C 1979 2002 19 Auburn Way N 1st Street NE A 1968 1999 20 Auburn Way East Main Street B 1977 2000 21 Auburn Way S Academy Drive B 1991 2002 22 Auburn Way S Dogwood Street C 1987 2002 23 Auburn Way S Riverwalk Drive E 1995 2002 24 Auburn Way S M Street SE E 1992 2002 25 Auburn Way S 12th Street SE C B 1972 2002 26 Auburn Way S 2nd Street SE B 1979 1999 27 Auburn Way S 4th Street NE C 1993 2000 28 C Street NW West Main Street B 2002 2001 29 C Street NW 15th Street NW C 1995 2001 30 C Street NW 3rd Street NW B ? 2002 24 • is • TABLE T-1 (continued) • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan 25 N/S Street Signalized Intersections (9/20/02) AM E/W Street LOS PM LOS YEAR CONST YEAR COUNT 31 C Street SW 15th Street SW B 1975 2001 32 C Street SW Boeing Gate A-10 A 1979 N/A 33 C Street SW Ellingson Road F 1991 2002 34 D Street NE 15th Street NE B 1985 2001 35 D Street NW S 277th Street B 2002 N/A 36 Division Street West Main Street B 1968 2001 37 Harvey Road NE 8th Street NE F 1988 2000 38 Harvey Road NE I Street NE B 1988 1999 39 Industry Road 15th Street SW B 1994 2001 40 O Street SW 15th Street SW B 1994 2000 41 Market Street 15th Street SW B 1994 1999 42 Perimeter Road SW 15th Street SW A ? 1999 43 M Street NE 4th Street NE B 1978 1999 44 M Street SE East Main Street D C 1977 2002 45 M Street SE 4th Street SE C 1978 2002 46 Auburn Way S Pedestrian Signal (N. of 12th St. SE) ? N/A 47 A Street SW West Main Street 2000 N/A 48 A Street SW 2nd Street SW 2001 N/A 49 D Street NE 10th Street NE/ 9th Street NE 1999 2000 50 D Street NE Firestation ? N/A 51 C Street SW 8th Street SW 1998 1999 52 West Valley Highway 37th Street NW C 1995 2001 53 West Valley Highway 15th Street NW D 1988 2001 54 West Valley Highway West Main Street B 1968 2001 55 West Valley Highway 15th Street SW B 1994 2001 56 B Street NW S 277th Street 2002 2000 57 B Street NW 37th Street NW 1995 1999 58 Emerald Downs Drive 37th Street NW 1996 N/A 59 Division Street 3rd Street S 2002 N/A 60 R Street SE 29th Street SE/ Riverwalk 1998 1999 61 R Street SE 31st Street SE (Pedestrian Signal) ? N/A 62 R Street SE Firestation 1985 N/A 25 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan TABLE T-2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING TRANSPORTATION 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total TIP# Capacity Projects: Capital Costs 5,000 650,000 4,695,000 8,283,700 7,210,000 5,150,000 25,993,700 2 'A' Street NW, Phase 1 318,800 • Arterial Street Revenue - - - - - - - Capital Costs 1,996,900 2,695,000 3,000,000 2,412,400 10,104,300 Funding Sources: 5,000 650,000 939,000 1,656,700 504,700 1,030,000 4,785,400 Other (Other Agencies) - - - - 2,513,200 - 2,513,200 Arterial Street Revenue - - - - - Grants 1,646,000 1,646,000 3,000,000 2,412,400 8,704,400 Other (Traffic Impact) 350,900 549,000 - - 899,900 Other (Developer) - 500,000 Arterial Street Revenue - 500,000 3 Citywide Intelligent Transportation System - Grants - 1,038,000 Capital Costs 763,600 - 200,000 162,000 763,600 Funding Sources: Other (Developers) - - - - - - Arterial Street Revenue - - Grants 711,800 200,000 200,000 400,000 Funding Sources: 711,800 PWTFL - Arterial Street Revenue - Other(TrafficMitigation) 51,800 - - - 51,800 5 T Street NE Corridor Other (Traffic Impact) 40,000 40,000 80,000 Capital Costs 5,000 460,000 1,020,000 4,280,000 5,765,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Revenue - - - - - Grants - - Other (Traffic Impact) 5,000 - - - 5,000 Other (Developers) - 460,000 1,020,000 4,280,000 5,760,000 6 'M' Street Grade Separation Capital Costs 5,000 650,000 4,695,000 8,283,700 7,210,000 5,150,000 25,993,700 Funding Sources: 318,800 • Arterial Street Revenue - - - - - - - Grants 3,756,000 6,627,000 4,192,100 4,120,000 18,695,100 PWTFL - - - - - Other (Traffic Impact) 5,000 650,000 939,000 1,656,700 504,700 1,030,000 4,785,400 Other (Other Agencies) - - - - 2,513,200 - 2,513,200 7 South 277th -AWN to Green River Bridge Capital Costs 325,000 318,800 2,406,200 3,050,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Revenue - - - - Grants 100,000 159,400 1,203,100 1,462,500 Other (Developers) 225,000 159,400 1,203,100 1,587,500 9 'A' Street NW, Phase 2 Capital Costs 200,000 1,200,000 1,250,000 2,650,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Revenue - - - - Grants - 1,038,000 1,081,300 2,119,300 Other (Traffic Impact) 200,000 162,000 168,700 530,700 Other (Developers) - - - - - - 10 'D' Street NW, 37th to 44th Capital Costs 200,000 200,000 400,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Revenue - - - Grants 160,000 160,000 320,000 Other (Traffic Impact) 40,000 40,000 80,000 26 • TABLE T-2 (continued) City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 11 'F' Street SE, 4th to AWS Capital Costs 850,000 1,150,000 2,000,000 Capital Costs 200,000 999,500 Arterial Street Revenue - - 1,1999500 Funding Sources: - - - Other (Developer) - 850,000 1,150,000 2,000,000 Arterial Street Fund - - Capital Costs 205,000 1,720,000 - - - Grants - 780,000 - 780,000 Other (Traffic Impact) 200,000 219,500 - PW TF 80,000 1,720,000 419,500 12 'M' Street NE, E. Main to 8th - 125,000 21 Auburn Way South and M Street SE Intersection Improvements Capital Costs 150,000 - 805,000 1,000,000 1,955,000 Funding Sources: - - Grants 80,000 520,000 600,000 Arterial Street Fund - 130,000 - - - Grants - 644,000 800,000 1,444,000 Other (Traffic Impact) 150,000 161,000 200,000 - 511,000 13 Grade -Separated Crossing of BNSF Railyard Capital Costs - - - 1,000,000 1,000,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund - - Grants - - Other (Developers) - - - 1,000,000 1,000,000 14 Kersey Way from Oravetz to the southern Citylimit Capital Costs 200,000 5,000 1,720,000 5,500,000 6,000,000 13,425,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund - - - - 1,000,000 1,000,000 Grants - - 1,376,000 4,400,000 4,000,000 9,776,000 Other (Traffic Impact) 200,000 5,000 - 550,000 1,000,000 1,755,000 Other (Developers) - - 344,000 550,000 - 894,000 4916 8th Street NE Widening Capital Costs 450,000 1,000,000 1,450,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Revenue - - - Grants 360,000 800,000 1,160,000 Other (Traffic Impact) 90,000 200,000 290,000 17 49th Street NE from Auburn Way North to M Street NE Capital Costs 850,000 1,150,000 2,000,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Revenue - - - Grants - - - Other (Developer) - 850,000 1,150,000 2,000,000 18 Harvey Rd. & 8th St. NE Intersection Improvements Capital Costs 205,000 1,720,000 - - 1,925,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Revenue - - - Grants - - - PW TF 80,000 1,720,000 1,800,000 Other (Traffic Impact) 125,000 - - 125,000 21 Auburn Way South and M Street SE Intersection Improvements Capital Costs 100,000 650,000 750,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund - - - Grants 80,000 520,000 600,000 Other (Traffic Mitigation) 20,000 130,000 150,000 23 Auburn/Pacific Trail Capital Costs 37,000 300,000 337,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund - - - Grants 37,000 - 37,000 • Other (TBD) - 300,000 300,000 27 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan TABLE T-2 (continued) 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 27 37th Street SE PR' Street Connector Capital Costs 63,000 - 542,500 63,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund 63,000 - 63,000 Grants - 452,900 - Other - - - - 28 Academy Drive Multi -Use Trail Capital Costs 150,000 425,000 425,000 1,000,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund 150,000 42,500 42,500 235,000 Grants - 382,500 382,500 765,000 Other - - - - - 35 Lea Hill Road and 8th Street NE Bridge Widening Study Capital Costs 200,000 2,000,000 200,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund - - - Grants - 1,725,000 - Other (Traffic Impact) 200,000 - - 200,000 42 Future Truck Route System Improvements Capital Costs 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 15,000,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund - - - - Grants - - - - Other (TBD) 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 15,000,000 • Subtotal, Capacity Proiects: Capital Costs 3,275,500 6,800,000 12,738,300 28,107,300 20,335,000 17,775,000 89,031,100 • TIP# Non -Capacity Projects: 1 Urban Area TSM Improvements Capital Costs 542,500 - 542,500 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund - - Grants 452,900 452,900 Other (Other Agencies, KC) 89,600 - - 89,600 4 Auburn Way Corridor Improvements Capital Costs - 818,700 3,000,000 3,818,700 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund 110,000 600,000 710,000 Grants 708,700 2,400,000 3,108,700 Other - - - - - 8 15th St SW Reconstruction Capital Costs 375,000 1,625,000 2,000,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund - - - Grants 325,000 1,400,000 1,725,000 Other (Traffic Mitigation) 50,000 225,000 - 275,000 15 West Valley Hwy Improvements Capital Costs - 300,000 4,700,000 5,000,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Revenue 50,000 1,950,000 2,000,000 Grants 250,000 2,750,000 3,000,000 Other - - • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan • TABLE T-2 (continued) 19 20 2008 2009 2010 8th Street NE/R Street NE Traffic Signal Capital Costs 45,000 205,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund - - Grants 45,000 205,000 Other - Auburn Way North / 1st Street NE Signal Improvements Capital Costs 200,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund 40,000 Grants 160,000 Other - - 2011 2012 - 2013 - Total 250,000 - 250,000 - 200,000 40,000 1607000 - 22 C Street NW and West Main Street Capital Costs 50,000 100,000 500,000 650,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund 50,000 20,000 100,000 170,000 Grants - 80,000 400,000 480,000 Other - - - 24 BNSF / E. Valley Hwy. Pedestrian Underpass Capital Costs 4,550,000 4,550,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund - - Grants 4,550,000 4,550,000 Other - - - 25 A Street SE Pedestrian Improvements Capital Costs 121,000 121,000 • Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund 53,000 53,000 Grants 68,000 68,000 Other - - 26 White River Trail Extension Capital Costs 136,000 136,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund - - Grants 136,000 136,000 Other - - 29 AWS Pedestrian Crossing Capital Costs 124,300 124,300 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund - - Grants 124,300 124,300 Other - - 30 Olympic Middle School Safe Routes to School Capital Costs 185,000 185,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund - - Grants 185,000 185,000 Other - - 31 Auburn Way North Pedestrian Crossing Capital Costs 325,000 325,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund - - Grants 325,000 325,000 Other - - 1� u 29 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan TABLE T-2 (continued) 0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 32 R Street Corridor Study Capital Costs 50,000 50,000 Funding Sources: 200,000 Arterial Street Fund 50,000 50,000 200,000 Grants - - Other - 34 41st St SE and A Street SE Access Management Study Arterial Street Fund Capital Costs 50,000 50,000 200,000 Funding Sources: 200,000 600,000 Arterial Street Fund 50,000 50,000 Grants - - - Other - 36 Comprehensive Transportation Plan Update for Annexation Areas - - Capital Costs 100,000 100,000 40 Annual Arterial Pavement Preservation Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund 100,000 100,000 Grants - - - 6,000,000 Other - - - - - - - 37 So. 277th, Wetland Mitigation Funding Sources: Capital Costs 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 150,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund - Arterial Street Fund 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 150,000 - Grants - - - - - - - - Other - 38 Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Program Capital Costs 100,000 100,000 100,000 300,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund 100,000 100,000 100,000 300,000 • Grants - - - - Other - 39 Citywide Roadway Safety Infrastructure Improv. Capital Costs 200,000 200,000 200,000 600,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund 200,000 200,000 200,000 600,000 Grants - - - - - Other - - - - - - 40 Annual Arterial Pavement Preservation Capital Costs 675,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 30,675,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund - - - - - - Grants - - - - - - Other (REET) 675,000 675,000 675,000 675,000 675,000 675,000 4,050,000 Other (TBD) - 5,325,000 5,325,000 5,325,000 5,325,000 5,325,000 26,625,000 41 Annual Arterial Crack Seal Program Capital Costs 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 480,000 Funding Sources: Arterial Street Fund 809000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 480,000 Grants - - - - - - Other - ......................................................................................................... 43 Local Street Improvement Program - (Local Street Fund - 103} .................................................................................................... Capital Costs 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 7,200,000 Funding Sources: Local Street Fund 15,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 640,000 Property Tax 810,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 3,310,000 REET2 225,000 425,000 425,000 425,000 425,000 425,000 2,350,000 Utility Mitigation 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 900,000 Subtotal, Non -Capacity Proiects: Capital Costs 3,708,800 8,385,000 9,330,000 13,023,700 10,505,000 12,555,000 57,507,500 is Im • TABLE T-2 (continued) SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects Non -Capacity Projects Total Costs FUNDING SOURCES: Arterial Street Fund (102) Local Street Fund (103) Grants PWTFL BEET (102) BEET (103) Property Tax (103) Utility Mitigation (103) Other (Traffic Impact) Other (Traffic Mitigation) Other (Other Agencies) Other (Developers) Other (TBD) Total Funding is City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 3,275,500 6,800,000 12,738,300 28,107,300 20,335,000 17,775,000 89,031,100 3,708,800 8,385,000 9,330,000 13,023,700 10,505,000 12,555,000 57,507,500 6,984,300 15,185,000 22,068,300 41,131,000 30,840,000 30,330,000 146,538,600 471,000 445,000 255,000 2,515,000 867,500 1,447,500 6,001,000 15,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 640,000 3,731,000 2,516,000 10,903,400 17,162,500 13,214,600 13,612,500 61,140,000 80,000 1,720,000 - - - - 1,800,000 675,000 675,000 675,000 675,000 675,000 675,000 4,050,000 225,000 425,000 425,000 425,000 425,000 425,000 2,350,000 810,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 3,310,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 900,000 685,900 1,749,000 1,325,500 2,276,400 1,494,700 2,070,000 9,601,500 51,800 70,000 355,000 - - - 476,800 89,600 - - - 2,513,200 - 2,602,800 - 1,185,000 2,029,400 6,977,100 550,000 1,000,000 11,741,500 - 5,625,000 5,325,000 10,325,000 1.0,325,000 10,325,000 41,925,000 6,984,300 15,185,000 22,068,300 41,131,000 30,840,000 30,330,000 146,538,600 31 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: A Street NW, Phase 1 Project No: c207aO Project Type: Capacity Project Manager: Helbig (3rd St. NW to 14th St. NW) TIP #2 Description: Construct a multi -lane arterial from 3rd St. NW to 14th St. NW. This project will improve mobility and is tied to corridor development. It is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and contributes to the completion of a north/south arterial corridor. The project length is approximately three-quarters of a mile. The City purchased ROW from the northern property owner. If the property develops, some or a portion of those funds may be reimbursed to the City (total cost was $251,000). Progress Summary: Predesign was completed prior to 2007. Full design is anticipated to be near completion by end of the year 2007. Final design documents will be completed as ROW is purchased and the environmental process is completed in 2008. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $17,568. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue 327,424 - - 327,424 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - 276,000 1,646,000 1,646,000 1,922,000 REET - - - Traffic Impact Fees 331,312 69,000 350,900 549,000 751,212 Other Sources 381,000 - - 500,000 381,000 Total Funding Sources: 1,039,736 345,000 1,996,900 2,695,000 3,381,636 Capital Expenditures: Design 399,773 345,000 580,300 - 1,325,073 Right of Way 258,963 - 811,600 1,550,411 1,070,563 Construction 381,000 - 605,000 1,144,589 986,000 Total Expenditures: 1,039,736 345,000 1,996,900 2,695,000 3,381,636 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 3,000,000 2,412,400 8,704,400 REST - - - Traffic Impact Fees 899,900 Other Sources - - 500,000 Total Funding Sources: 3,000,000 2,412,400 10,104,300 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 580,300 Right of Way - - 2,362,011 Construction 3,000,000 2,412,400 7,161,989 Total Expenditures: 3,000,000 2,412,400 - 10,104,300 Grants / Other Sources: Other funds includes developer contributions, ROW dedications, and construction completed by others. Some of "other" dollars shown never go through the City. Approximately $4 Million of Grants is still unsecured. 32 • • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: Citywide Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) TIP #3 Project No: c307aO Project Type: Capacity Project Manager: Nutter Description: This project includes interconnect and coordination for all signals in the city. The project also includes traffic management cameras, fiber optic interconnect and related hardware along the SR -164 (Auburn Way So.), Auburn Way North, and So. 277th St. corridors. This project is required for special event traffic management, incident response, and traffic flow improvement. In the future and upon completion of the project, additional staff resources will be required to monitor the system. Businesses benefiting from this project may want to contribute funds to help expand and operate the ITS system. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $5000. In addition, staff time will be required upon completion of the project to monitor the system. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue 171,280 40,000 - 211,280 Grants (Fed,State,Local) 766,969 189,750 711,800 1,668,519 REET - - - - PWTFL 143,000 - 143,000 Traffic Mitigation - - 51,800 51,800 Other 800,000 - - 800,000 Total Funding Sources: 1,738,249 372,750 763,600 2,874,599 Capital Expenditures: Design 319,993 189,750 - 509,743 Right of Way - - - - Construction 1,418,256 183,000 763,600 2,364,856 Total Expenditures: 1,738,249 372,750 763,600 - 2,874,599 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) 711,800 REET - PWTFL - Traffic Impact Fees 51,800 Other - Total Funding Sources: 763,600 Capital Expenditures: Design Right of Way - Construction - 763,600 Total Expenditures: 763,600 Grants / Other Sources: Prior to 2006 King County and MIT funds. CMAQ funds; PWTF loan. 33 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: I Street NE Corridor (40th St. NE to 52nd St. NE) TIP #5 Project No: c415a0 Project Type: Capacity Project Manager: TBD Description: The final alignment of the I Street Corridor is being analyzed as part of the Northeast Auburn Special Area Plan Environmental Impact Study. A portion of the ROW and Construction will be developer funded. The cross section will likely be a 5 -lane arterial per the city's Comprehensive Plan. The project length is approximately three-quarters of a mile. Progress Summary: This project is development driven. The City has budget available to coordinate as needed and look for grant funding/partnership opportunities. If grant funds are available prior to 2009, a budget amendment will be required to accept the funding. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $17,568. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue 11,827 11,827 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - REET PWTFL - - Traffic Impact Fees 5,000 - 5,000 Other - 460,000 Total Funding Sources: 11,827 - 5,000 460,000 16,827 Capital Expenditures: Design 10,957 5,000 460,000 15,957 Right of Way 870 - - 870 Construction - - - - Total Expenditures: 11,827 5,000 460,000 16,827 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed,State,Local) REET PWTFL - - - Traffic Impact Fees 5,000 Other 1,020,000 4,280,000 5,760,000 Total Funding Sources: 1,020,000 4,280,000 - 5,765,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 465,000 Right of Way 1,020,000 - 1,020,000 Construction 4,280,000 4,280,000 Total Expenditures: 1,020,000 4,280,000 5,765,000 Grants / Other Sources: Developer Funding 34 • • C7 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan •ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds • • Project Title: M Street Grade Separation Project No: c201a0 Project Type: Capacity Project Manager: Gaub (E. Main to Auburn Way So.) TIP #6 Description: Construction of a grade separated railroad crossing of M Street SE at the BNSF Stampede Pass tracks. Project also includes construction of the bypass and road connection between M Street SE and Auburn/Black Diamond Road. 2008 will focus on developing partnership agreements and applying for grants/PWTFL. Progress Summary: The pre -design has been completed. Staff is searching for grant funding for preliminary-engineering/design. FAST has committed design money once available. A PWTFL will be applied for to assist with the design. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $21,827. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) REET PWTFL - - - - Traffic Impact Fees 245,309 5,000 650,000 250,309 Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 245,309 5,000 650,000 250,309 Capital Expenditures: Design 245,309 5,000 650,000 250,309 Right of Way - - - - Construction - - - - Total Expenditures: 245,309 - 5,000 650,000 250,309 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants (Fed, State, Local) 3,756,000 6,627,000 4,192,100 4,120,000 18,695,100 REST - - - PWTFL - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees 939,000 1,656,700 504,700 1,030,000 4,785,400 Other - - 2,513,200 - 2,513,200 Total Funding Sources: 4,695,000 8,283,700 7,210,000 5,150,000 25,993,700 Capital Expenditures: Design 1,100,000 249,700 - - 2,004,700 Right of Way 3,595,000 4,635,000 - - 8,230,000 Construction - 3,399,000 7,210,000 5,150,000 15,759,000 Total Expenditures: 4,695,000 89283,700 7,210,000 5,150,000 25,993,700 Grants / Other Sources: Funding partners include Port of Seattle, Port of Tacoma, BNSF, PSE, and more. 35 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: South 277th (AWN to Green River Bridge) Project No: c222a0 Project Type: Capacity Project Manager: TBD TIP #7 Description: This project includes major widening on S. 277th Street, including the addition of three lanes, one westbound and one eastbound, plus a Class 1 trail. The project length is nine -tenths of a mile. Progress Summary: The majority of this roadway is currently in City of Kent's jurisdiction. Because the property served from the roadway is in the City of Auburn, the plan is to annex this portion of the roadway from Kent into the City of Auburn. The majority of this project is expected to be completed by developers. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance costs for this project is estimated to be $10,541. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue 19,085 - 19,085 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - 100,000 - REET - PWTFL - Traffic Impact Fees Other - 225,000 - Total Funding Sources: 19,085 325,000 19,085 Capital Expenditures: Design 18,510 125,000 18,510 Right of Way 575 200,000 575 Construction - Total Expenditures: 19,085 - 325,000 19,085 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - Grants (Fed, State, Local) 159,400 1,203,100 1,462,500 REET - - - PWTFL - - - Traffic Impact Fees Other 159,400 1,203,100 1,587, 500 Total Funding Sources: 318,800 2,406,200 3,050,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 125,000 Right of Way 318,800 - 518,800 Construction - 2,406,200 2,406,200 Total Expenditures: 318,800 2,406,200 3,050,000 Grants / Other Sources: Developer funds or construction. 36 C7 • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: A Street NW, Phase 2 (W. Main to 3rd St. NW) TIP #9 Project No: cpXXXX Project Type: Capacity Project Manager: TBD Description: Construct a multi -lane arterial from W. Main to 3rd St. NW. This project will connect A Street NW, Phase 1 to the Sound Transit Station and the Central Business District. This project may end up being funded in all or part by developers. The project length is one fifth of a mile. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $1,405. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) REET Bond Proceeds - Traffic Impact Fees 200,000 Other - Total Funding Sources: - 200,000 - Capital Expenditures: Design 200,000 Right of Way - Construction - Total Expenditures: 200,000 - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 1,038,000 1,081,300 2,119,300 REET - - - Bond Proceeds - - Traffic Impact Fees 162,000 168,700 530,700 Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 1,200,000 1,250,000 2,650,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 200,000 Right of Way 1,200,000 - 1,200,000 Construction - 1,250,000 1,250,000 Total Expenditures: 1,200,000 1,250,000 2,650,000 Grants / Other Sources: Anticipated developer contributions 37 - City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: D Street NW (37th St. NW to 44th St. NW) Project No: cpXXXX Project Type: Capacity Project Manager: TBD TIP #10 Description: Construct a four -lane arterial per the city Comprehensive Plan. It will improve north/south mobility. This project is tied to potential future development and will complete a major north/south arterial from Ellingson to S. 277th Street. The project length is approximately 0.42 miles. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $14,054. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other Total Funding Sources: - Capital Expenditures: Design Right of Way Construction Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - Grants (Fed, State, Local) 160,000 160,000 320,000 REET - - - PWTFL - - - Traffic Impact Fees 40,000 40,000 80,000 Other - Total Funding Sources: 200,000 200,000 400,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 200,000 200,000 400,000 Right of Way - - - Construction - - Total Expenditures: 200,000 200,000 400,000 Grants / Other Sources: W! • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: F Street SE (4th St. SE to Auburn Way So.) TIP #11 Project No: cpxxxx Project Type: Capacity Project Manager: TBD Description: The F Street SE project includes pavement reconstruction, installation of curbs, gutters, an 8 -foot wide sidewalk on both sides, parking on one side, and a center turn -lane, as well as crash attenuation at the supports for the BNSF railroad bridge. This project improves mobility and safety and provides an alternate route to mitigate traffic impacts during construction of the M Street SE Grade Separation project. The project length is approximately 0.3 miles. Progress Summary: This project will be a detour route for the M Street Grade Separation construction and therefore will need to be done prior to the construction of M Street Grade Separation. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $851. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) REET PWTFL - Traffic Impact Fees 200,000 Other - Total Funding Sources: 200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 200,000 Right of Way - Construction - Total Expenditures: 200,000 - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 780,000 780,000 BEET - - PWTFL - - Traffic Impact Fees 219,500 419,500 Other - - Total Funding Sources: 999,500 - 1,199,500 Capital Expenditures: Design - 200,000 Right of Way 60,000 60,000 Construction 939,500 939,500 Total Expenditures: 999,500 1,199,500 Grants / Other Sources: 39 City of Auburn Capital Tacilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: M Street NE (E. Main St. to 8th St. NE) Project No: cpXXXX Project Type: Capacity Project Manager: TBD TIP #12 Description: Widen M Street NE to 4 lanes, install curbs, gutters, sidewalks. The project length is approximately half a mile. Progress Summary: Pre -design will be done in 2009 to refine project scope, alignment, and cost. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $3,514. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed,State,Local) REST PWTFL - Traffic Impact Fees 150,000 Other - Total Funding Sources: - 150,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 150,000 Right of Way - Construction - Total Expenditures: 150,000 - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - Grants (Fed, State, Local) 644,000 800,000 1,444,000 REEr - - - PWTFL - - - Traffic Impact Fees 161,000 200,000 511,000 Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 805,000 1,000,000 1,955,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 150,000 Right of Way 480,000 - 480,000 Construction 325,000 1,000,000 1,325,000 Total Expenditures: 805,000 1,000,000 1,955,000 Grants / Other Sources: Wo • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan •ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds • • Project Title: Grade -Separated Crossing of BNSF Railyard TIP #13 Project No: cpxxxx Project Type: Capacity Project Manager: TBD Description: This project consists of a grade -separated crossing of the BNSF Railyard, either from SR -18 to 6th Street SE or from 15th Street SW to A Street SE. The first alternative would entail realigning the SR -18 eastbound ramp, grade separating the main north/south line and the Stampede Pass line, and connecting to 6th Street SE. It would also widen 6th Street SE from 2 to 4 lanes including signal modifications at A Street and Auburn Way South. The second alternative would provide a new corridor from 15th Street SW to A Street SE in the vicinity of 12th Street SE and 17th Street SE, either via an overpass or underpass of the BNSF Railyard. This project improves traffic flow significantly due to the potential development of the BNSF yard as an intermodal freight facility. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Not scheduled for completion until after 2013. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other Total Funding Sources: Capital Expenditures: Design Right of Way Construction Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed,State,Local) REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees - - Other 1,000,000 1,000,000 Total Funding Sources: 1,000,000 1,000,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 1,000,000 1,000,000 Right of Way - - Construction - - Total Expenditures: - 1,000,000 1,000,000 Grants I Other Sources: 41 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: Kersey Way from Oravetz to the Southern Citylimit TIP #14 Project No: Project Type: Capacity Project Manager: TBD Description: This project will widen the existing roadway from 2 lanes (1 in each direction) to 4 lanes (2 in each direction). The project will also include left turn lanes at intersections and a non -motorized trail on the west side of the roadway. It is necessary to complete a pre -design to determine more accurate cost figures. The project length is approximately two miles. Progress Summary: It is anticipated that a pre -design will be completed in 2008. The City will look for funding opportunities beginning in 2010. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $14,056. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) REET PWTFL - - Traffic Impact Fees 200,000 200,000 Other - - Total Funding Sources: - 200,000 200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 200,000 200,000 Right of Way - - Construction - - Total Expenditures: 200,000 200,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - 1,000,000 1,000,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) 1,376,000 4,400,000 4,000,000 9,776,000 REET - - - - PWTFL - - - - Traffic Impact Fees 5,000 550,000 1,000,000 1,755,000 Other - 344,000 550,000 894,000 Total Funding Sources: 5,000 1,720,000 5,500,000 6,000,000 13,425,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 5,000 720,000 - - 925,000 Right of Way - 1,000,000 500,000 - 1,500,000 Construction - - 5,000,000 6,000,000 11,000,000 Total Expenditures. 5,000 1,720,000 5,500,000 6,000,000 13,425,000 Grants / Other Sources: Other funding is Traffic Impact Fees and developer contributions. 42 • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan •ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds • is Project Title: 8th Street NE Widening (Pike Street to R Street NE) TIP #16 Project No: cpxxxx Project Type: Capacity Project Manager: TBD Description: Add eastbound lane to Southside of 8th Street NE. Currently the lane exists from M Street NE and drops as a right turn only lane at the intersection of 8th Street NE and Pike Street. This would extend the lane to R Street NE where it would then be a right turn only lane onto R Street NE southbound. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $851. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other Total Funding Sources: Capital Expenditures: Design Right of Way Construction Total Expenditures: - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - Grants (Fed, State, Local) 360,000 800,000 1,160,000 REET - - PWTFL - - Traffic impact Fees 90,000 200,000 290,000 Other - - Total Funding Sources: - 450,000 1,000,0000 00 1,450,- Capital Expenditures: Design 150,000 150,000 Right of Way 300,000 300,000 Construction - 1,000,000 1,000,000 Total Expenditures: 450,000 1,000,000 1,450,000 Grants / Other Sources: 43 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: 49th Street NE from Auburn Way North to M Street NE Project No: cpXXXX Project Type: Capacity Project Manager: TBD TIP #17 Description: Construct east/west corridor from Auburn Way North to M Street NE. The existing 49th Street NE extends westerly to B Street NE. This project also includes a traffic signal at the intersection of Auburn Way North and 49th Street NE. This roadway was evaluated and recommended in the NE Special Planning Area. It is anticipated that this will be constructed by future development. It is approximately 3/4 of a mile in length. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $2306. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) REET PWTFL Traffic Mitigation Funds Other Total Funding Sources: Capital Expenditures: Design Right of Way Construction Total Expenditures: - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed,State,Local) REET PWTFL Traffic Mitigation Funds - - - Other 850,000 1,150,000 2,000,000 Total Funding Sources: 850,000 1,150,000 2,000,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 200,000 - 200,000 Right of Way 650,000 - 650,000 Construction - 1,150,000 1,150,000 Total Expenditures: 850,000 1,150,000 2,000,000 Grants / Other Sources: Future Development is expected to fund and construction this project. • • is is • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Project Title: Intersection Improvements, Harvey Rd. & 8th St. NE Project No: cp0611 Project Type: Capacity Project Manager: TBD Special Revenue Funds TIP #18 Description: Add one EB combined through & right turn lane on 8th Street NE approaching Harvey Road. Modify traffic signals and traffic channelization to accommodate the new lane. The additional lane will improve traffic delays and vehicle queuing at the intersection of Harvey Road and 8th Street NE in all directions. This project will reconstruct M Street NE from 4th Street NE to 8th Street NE, a segment of roadway approximately 0.3 miles in length with four travel lanes. The reconstruction will fix the existing poor pavement condition and fill in any gaps in the sidewalk network. Progress Summary: Design is anticipated to be approximately 50% complete at the end of 2007. Design and property acquisition will be completed in 2008. Construction anticipated in 2009. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $703. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed,State,Local) REET - - - PWTFL - 80,000 1,720,000 80,000 Traffic Impact Fees 75,000 125,000 - 200,000 Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: 75,000 205,000 1,720,000 280,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 75,000 105,000 - 180,000 Right of Way - 100,000 - 100,000 Construction - 1,720,000 - Total Expenditures: 75,000 205,000 1,720,000 280,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) • BEET - PWTFL 1,800,000 Traffic Impact Fees 125,000 Other - Total Funding Sources: - - 1,925,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 105,000 Right of Way 100,000 Construction 1,720,000 Total Expenditures: - 1,925,000 Grants / Other Sources: Capacity Improvement eligible for traffic impact fees. A PWTF loan is likely_ 45 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: Auburn Way South and M Street SE Intersection Improvements Project No: cpxxxx Project Type: Capacity Project Manager: TBD TIP #21 Description: Construct a westbound to northbound right turn lane at the intersection of Auburn Way South and M Street SE. This project would also improve the turning radius at this same corner allowing drivers to make a safe right turn on red (after stopping and yielding to oncoming vehicles). Currently the intersection geometry has necessitated the City placing a legal restriction on this movement. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $703. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - Grants (Fed, State, Local) 80,000 BEET - PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees - Other (Traffic Mitigation) 20,000 Total Funding Sources: - 100,000 - Capital Expenditures: Design 100,000 Right of Way - Construction - Total Expenditures: - 100,000 - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 520,000 600,000 REET - PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees - - Other (Traffic Mitigation) 130,000 150,000 Total Funding Sources: 650,000 - 750,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 100,000 Right of Way 130,000 130,000 Construction 520,000 520,000 Total Expenditures: 650,000 750,000 Grants / Other Sources: ie • • • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: Skinner Road to 3rd Avenue (Auburn Pacific Trail Phase2) TIP #23 Project No: c507BO Project Type: Class 1 Trail Project Manager: Leah Dunsdon Description: This project will construct minor road widening and bicycle lane striping on Skinner Road and 3rd Avenue SE from Ellingson Road SW to Pacific Park. Sidewalks will be constructed along the western side of Skinner Road where there are gaps in the sidewalk network. The project length is approximately 1.2 miles. The project will connect to the Phase 1 improvements being constructed in Auburn in 2007. Progress Summary: Phase 1 (portion in Auburn) is being constructed in 2007. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $2,688. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 37,000 37,000 REET - - PWTFL - Traffic Impact Fees Other - 300,000 - Total Funding Sources: - 37,000 300,000 37,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 37,000 - 37,000 Right of Way - - - Construction 300,000 - Total Expenditures: 37,000 300,000 37,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (FedState,Local) 37,000 BEET - PWTFL - Traffic Impact Fees Other 300,000 Total Funding Sources: - 337,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 37,000 Right of Way - Construction 300,000 Total Expenditures: - 337,000 Grants / Other Sources: 47 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: 37th Street SE / R Street Connector Project No: cp0803 Project Type: Class 1 Trail Project Manager: TBD TIP #27 Description: This project will use existing right-of-way to connect 37th Street SE to R Street SE with a paved Class 1 trail. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $191. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - 63,000 63,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - REET Traffic Impact Fees Other Sources - - Total Funding Sources: - - 63,000 - 63,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 10,000 10,000 Right of Way - - Construction 53,000 53,000 Total Expenditures: 63,000 63,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 63,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) REET Traffic Impact Fees Other Sources - Total Funding Sources: - 63,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 10,000 Right of Way - Construction 53,000 Total Expenditures: - 63,000 Grants / Other Sources: M. • • • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: Academy Drive Multi -Use Trail TIP #28 Project No: cpxxxx Project Type: Non -Motorized Trail Project Manager: TBD Description: This project will use existing right-of-way to repair the damaged roadbed to a usable multi -use trail on Academy Drive from the Green River Road to Auburn Way South. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $1,680. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed,State,Local) REET Traffic Impact Fees Other Sources Total Funding Sources: - Capital Expenditures: Design Right of Way Construction Total Expenditures: - - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 150,000 42,500 42,500 235,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - 382,500 382,500 765,000 REET - - TraHic Impact Fees Other Sources - - - - Total Funding Sources: 150,000 425,000 425,000 1,000,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 150,000 - 150,000 Right of Way - - - - Construction - 425,000 425,000 850,000 Total Expenditures: 150,000 425,000 425,000 1,000,000 Grants / Other Sources: City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: Lea Hill Road and 8th Street NE Bridge Widening STUDY TIP #35 Project No: cpXXXX Project Type: Capacity Project Manager: TBD Description: Review the feasibility, capacity benefits, and required scope to widen Lea Hill Road and 8th Street NE Bridge or identify other means to gain needed vehicular capacity. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: This study will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed,State,Local) REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other Total Funding Sources: - - Capital Expenditures: Design Right of Way Construction Total Expenditures: - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (FedState,Local) REET PWTFL - - Traffic Impact Fees 200,000 200,000 Other - - Total Funding Sources: 200,000 - 200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 200,000 200,000 Right of Way - - Construction - - Total Expenditures: 200,000 200,000 Grants / Other Sources: 50 • • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: Future Truck Route System Improvements TIP #42 Project No: Various Project Type: Capacity Project Manager: TBD Description: Increase pavement capacity, lane widths, and turning radii on routes that the comprehensive plan has identified as future truck routes. Funding has not been identified and is currently being evaluated by Auburn's Arterial Task Force. Total program need is $25M. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) REET PWTFL Traffic impact Fees Other Total Funding Sources: - Capital Expenditures: Design Right of Way Construction Total Expenditures: - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) BEET PWTFL - Traffic Impact Fees - - - Other 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 15,000,000 Total Funding Sources: 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 15,000,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 400,000 400,000 400,000 1,200,000 Right of Way - - - - Construction 41600,000 4,600,000 4,600,000 13,800,000 Total Expenditures: 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 15,000,000 Grants / Other Sources: 51 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan • Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: Urban Area Transportation System Management Improvements TIP #1 Project No: c501a0 Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Robert Lee Description: This project will modify four intersections to improve bus turning radii and will reconstruct 2nd Street SW between A Street SW and A Street SE. The project distance is approximately 200 meters. Progress Summary: ROW has been completed. Design is expected to be completed by end of 2007. Construction is anticipated in early 2008. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget - Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue 15,516 - 15,516 Grants (Fed State, Local) 48,160 41,668 452,900 542,728 REST - - - PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees - - - Other - 10,417 89,600 100,017 Total Funding Sources: 63,676 52,085 542,500 658,261 Capital Expenditures: Design 58,693 47,500 - 106,193 Right of Way 4,983 4,585 - 9,568 Construction - - 542,500 542,500 Total Expenditures: 63,676 52,085 542,500 - 658,261 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 452,900 REET - PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees - Other 89,600 Total Funding Sources: 542,500 Capital Expenditures: Design - Right of Way - Construction 542,500 Total Expenditures: - - 542,500 Grants / Other Sources: King County Metro 52 :7 • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: Auburn Way Corridor Improvements (4th Street NE to 4th Street SE) Project No: c409aO Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: TBD TIP #4 Description: This project is based on a pre -design study and is intended to improve pedestrian accessibility, appearance, and link the downtown area along Auburn Way South between 4th St NE and 4th St SE. This project may include some pavement repairs. However, an overlay is being completed as part of the City's Arterial Pavement Preservation Program in 2007. Although this is considered a temporary fix, the scope has been modified to account for the pavement work. The project length is approximately a half mile. Progress Summary: The pavement portion has been minimized due to the work being completed in 2007 under the Arterial Pavement Preservation Program. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue 78,251 78,251 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - - Total Funding Sources: 78,251 78,251 Capital Expenditures: Design 78,251 78,251 Right of Way - - Construction - - Total Expenditures: 78,251 78,251 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 110,000 600,000 710,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) 708,700 2,400,000 3,108,700 REET - - - PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - - - Total Funding Sources, 818,700 3,000,000 3,818,700 Capital Expenditures: Design 618,700 - 618,700 Right of Way 200,000 - 200,000 Construction - 3,000,000 3,000,000 Total Expenditures: 818,700 3,000,000 3,818,700 Grants / Other Sources: 53 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan - ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: 15th Street SW Reconstruction Project No: cpxxxx Project Type: Non -Capacity (access mgmt / pavement preservation) Project Manager: TBD TIP #8 Description: Rehabilitate the north side of 15th Street SW between C Street SW and the Union Pacific Railroad. The project will also construct landscaped medians, which will continue the access management treatment that is currently west of the UPRR tracks. Final project design will be coordinated with the Auburn School District to allow full access to and from the busbarn. The project length is one-third of a mile. Progress Summary: Approximately 1/2 of the pavement reconstruction costs have been removed from the estimate, as the south portion of the roadway was reconstructed by King County Metro as part of their sewer project. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 325,000 REET PWTFL - Traffic Mitigation Funds 50,000 Other - Total Funding Sources: - 375,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 375,000 Right of Way - Construction - Total Expenditures: 375,000 - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 1,400,000 1,725,000 REET - - PWTFL - - Traffic Mitigation Funds 225,000 275,000 Other - - Total Funding Sources: 1,625,000 2,000,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 375,000 Right of Way - - Construction 1,625,000 1,625,000 Total Expenditures: 1,625,000 2,000,000 Grants / Other Sources: 54 0 • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: West Valley Hwy Improvements (SR18 to West Main Street) TIP #15 Project No: cpXXXX Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: TBD Description: Reconstruct pavement, widen lane widths to accommodate truck movements, lengthen left turn pockets, install curb and gutter, rebuild traffic signal, and install sidewalk on east side of roadway. The project length is approximately 0.3 miles. Progress Summary: City is applying for a TIB grant in 2007. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) REET PWTFL Trac Impact Fees Other Total Funding Sources: Capital Expenditures: Design Right of Way Construction Total Expenditures: - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 50,000 1,950,000 2,000,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) 250,000 2,750,000 3,000,000 REST - - - PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other Total Funding Sources: 300,000 4,700,000 5,000,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 300,000 - 300,000 Right of Way - 500,000 500,000 Construction 4,200,000 4,200,000 Total Expenditures: 300,000 4,700,000 5,000,000 Grants / Other Sources: 55 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: 8th Street and R Street NE Traffic Signal Project No: cp0701 Project Type: Intersection Improvement Project Manager: Vondrak TIP #19 Description: This project includes the construction of new traffic signal at the intersection of 8th Street NE and R Street NE. Intersection improvements will include crosswalks and pedestrian signals. This project was selected on accident history, surrounding land uses, and pedestrian flow patterns. Progress Summary: The design is anticipated to be started in 2007, with construction scheduled for 2009. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $5,643. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 45,000 205,000 45,000 BEET - - PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - - - Total Funding Sources: - 45,000 205,000 45,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 45,000 - 45,000 Right of Way - 15,000 - Construction - 190,000 - Total Expenditures: 45,000 205,000 45,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 250,000 REET - PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - Total Funding Sources: - 250,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 45,000 Right of Way 15,000 Construction 190,000 Total Expenditures: 250,000 Grants / Other Sources: Intersection & Corridor Safety Grant W • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan •ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds • • Project Title: Auburn Way North / 1st Street NE Signal Improvements TIP #20 Project No: cpXXXX Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: TBD Description: Add left turn phasing to the north and south bound directions including new mast arms to accommodate the necessary length. Replace damaged signal poles. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - 40,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) 160,000 REET - PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - Total Funding Sources: 200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 15,000 Right of Way - Construction 185,000 Total Expenditures: - 200,000 - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 40,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) 160,000 BEET - PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - Total Funding Sources: 200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 15,000 Right of Way - Construction 185,000 Total Expenditures: 200,E Grants / Other Sources: 57 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan 401 Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: C Street NW and West Main Street TIP #22 Project No: cpxxxx Project Type: Non Capacity Project Manager: TBD Description: Reconstruct intersection at C Street NW and West Main Street. Project would include a new traffic signal and modifications to the turning radii at each comer to help facilitate vehicular movements. The new traffic signal would allow for protected left tum phasing for northbound and southbound left turn movements. This would also provide additional safety related to the Railroad Pre-emption. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: There will be no impact to the maintenance budget. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - 50,000 50,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - - Total Funding Sources: - - 50,000 50,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 50,000 50,000 Right of Way - - Construction - - Total Expenditures: 50,000 50,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 20,000 100,000 170,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) 80,000 400,000 480,000 REST - - - PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 100,000 500,000 650,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 100,000 - 150,000 Right of Way - 150,000 150,000 Construction 350,000 350,000 Total Expenditures: 100,000 500,000 650,000 Grants / Other Sources: MI. • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan •ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds • • Project Title: BNSF/E. Valley Highway Pedestrian Underpass TIP #24 Project No: c229a0 Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: TBD Description: Project to construct an undercrossing of the BNSF Railroad in conjunction with a pedestrian bridge to allow a safe, direct, attractive non -motorized access between neighborhoods in the City of Pacific and schools in the City of Auburn. Progress Summary: The design is on hold. Funding source is most likely a federal earmark. Currently this project is on hold pending some discussions with BNSF RR. They are in the process of planning for a third rail which would significantly impact the design. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $240. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue 52,508 - 52,508 Grants (Fed,State,Local) 170,353 244,647 415,000 REET - - - PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - - Total Funding Sources: 222,861 244,647 467,508 Capital Expenditures: Design 222,861 244,647 467,508 Right of Way - - - Construction - - - Total Expenditures: 222,861 244,647 - 467,508 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 4,550,000 4,550,000 BEET - - PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - - Total Funding Sources: 4,550,000 4,550,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 500,000 500,000 Right of Way 50,000 50,000 Construction 4,000,000 4,000,000 Total Expenditures: 4,550,000 4,550,000 Grants / Other Sources: KC Open Space Bond and High Speed Rail Safety Money. 59 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: A Street SE Pedestrian Improvements (Stair by-pass, ADA accessibility) Project No: cpxxxx Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Fritz Timm TIP #25 Description: The A Street SE Pedestrian Improvement will convert the existing staircases on the east and west sides of A Street SE, under Hwy 18, to ADA accessible ramps. The ramps will enable anyone unable to use stairs, including wheelchair riders, bicyclists, and some pedestrians to safely travel on A Street SE. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - 12,000 53,000 65,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) 68,000 68,000 REET - - PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - - - Total Funding Sources: - 12,000 121,000 133,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 12,000 2,000 14,000 Right of Way - - - Construction - 119,000 119,000 Total Expenditures: 12,000 121,000 133,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 53,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) 68,000 REET - PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - Total Funding Sources: 121,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 2,000 Right of Way - Construction 119,000 Total Expenditures: - - - 121,000 Grants / Other Sources: TIB Me • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan •ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds • Project Title: White River Trail Extension Project No: cpxxxx Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: TBD TIP #26 Description: The proposed project is the 1,050 foot extension of the existing Class 1 White River Trail from its terminus in Roegner Park to A Street SE/East Valley Highway. The trail extension will be lit at night and will link the existing pedestrian facilities from Riverside High School and Ilalko Elementary School to A Street SE. This project will allow students safe passage across the White River via the bridge on A Street SE. It will also connect to Auburn's BNSF/East Valley Highway undercrossing, providing direct access from the residential areas in the City of Pacific to schools in the City of Auburn. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual parks maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $168. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding. Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - Grants (Fed, State, Local) 136,000 136,000 REET - - Traffic Impact Fees Other Sources - Total Funding Sources: 136,000 136,000 Capital Expenditures: Design . 16,000 16,000 Right of Way - - Construction 120,000 120,000 Total Expenditures: - 136,000 136,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 136,000 BEET - Traffic Impact Fees - Other Sources - Total Funding Sources: 136,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 16,000 Right of Way - Construction 120,000 Total Expenditures: 136,000 Grants / Other Sources: King County Trails bond 61 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Project Title: Auburn Way South Pedestrian Crossing Project No: cp0702 Project Type: Safety Project Manager: Jacob Sweeting Special Revenue Funds TIP #29 Description: This project is a mid -block pedestrian crossing of Auburn Way South in the vicinity of Fir Street SE. The exact location will be determined based on engineering and pedestrian desire lines. The project will accomplish three objectives: alert drivers to possible pedestrians in the roadway, provide a safe crossing and waiting area in a high pedestrian location, and encourage pedestrians to cross at a marked crossing. Progress Summary: The city has received grant funding for this project. The project was scheduled for 2007 and has been delayed due to review by WSDOT NW Region. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $1,411. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 124,300 124,300 REET - - PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - - Total Funding Sources: 124,300 - 124,300 Capital Expenditures: Design 18,400 18,400 Right of Way - - Construction 105,900 105,900 Total Expenditures: 124,300 - 124,300 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (FedState,Local) 124,300 REET - PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - Total Funding Sources: 124,300 Capital Expenditures: Design 18,400 Right of Way - Construction 105,900 Total Expenditures: - - 124,300 Grants / Other Sources: W SDOT Pedestrian & Bicycle Safety Grant 62 • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan •ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds • • Project Title: Olympic Middle School Safe Routes to School TIP #30 Project No: cpXXXX Project Type: Non -Motorized Project Manager: TBD Description: This joint project between the City and Auburn School District includes: Installation of a non -motorized, shared -use path adjacent to Olympic Middle School along the eastern side of H Street SE, from 17th Street SE to 21st Street SE, which will accommodate both pedestrian and bicycle travel. Installation of various new crosswalks, lighting, and flashing beacons near the school. This project also includes student and parent education and enforcement by increased police presence and routine staff patrols. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: There is no impact to the street maintenance budget. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - Grants (Fed,State,Locaf) 185,000 185,000 REET - - PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - - Total Funding Sources: - 185,000 185,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 35,000 35,000 Right of Way - Construction 150,000 150,000 Total Expenditures: 185,000 - 185,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 185,000 REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - Total Funding Sources: - 185,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 35,000 Right of Way - Construction 150,000 Total Expenditures: 185,000 Grants / Other Sources: Sate Routes to School Grant 63 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: Auburn Way North Pedestrian Crossing Project No: Cpxxxx Project Type: Non -Motorized Project Manager: TBD TIP #31 Description: This project includes the installation of a crosswalk on Auburn Way North in the vicinity of either 28th Street NE or 42nd Street NE. The crosswalk will have a pedestrian activated signal to stop vehicular traffic and a median refuge. Educational and enforcement components include public outreach through media outlets and an enforcement demonstration exercise in which police officers will ticket violators at the crosswalk. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: The impact to the maintenance budget is approximately $5600. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 325,000 325,000 BEET - - PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - Total Funding Sources: - 325,000 325,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 50,000 50,000 Right of Way - - Construction 275,000 275,000 Total Expenditures: 325,000 325,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) 325,000 REET - PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - Total Funding Sources: - 325,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 50,000 Right of Way - Construction 275,000 Total Expenditures: 325,000 Grants / Other Sources: W SDOT Pedestrian & Bicycle Safety Grant Me, C7 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan •ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds • is Project Title: R Street Corridor Study Project No: cpxxxx Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: TBD TIP #32 Description: This corridor defining study will examine R Street and identify improvements for future capacity, safety, and other elements. This effort will identify a corridor vision and include all the necessary public involvement. This project is identified in the Comprehensive Plan. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: This study will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - 50,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - Total Funding Sources: - - 50,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 50,000 Right of Way - Construction - Total Expenditures: 50,000 - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 50,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other Total Funding Sources: - 50,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 50,000 Right of Way - Construction Total Expenditures: 50,000 Grants / Other Sources: N City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: 41st Street SE and A Street SE Access Management Study Project No: cpXXXX Project Type: Safety Project Manager: TBD TIP #34 Description: Study the area from 37th Street SE to the White River on A Street SE including 41 st Street SE from D Street SE to C Street SE. The study to should review the safety and access needs of the traveling public and the adjacent properties. Progress Summary: Pre -design will be done to refine project scope, alignment, and cost. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This study will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - 50,000 Grants (FeO, State, Local) - REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - Total Funding Sources: - 50,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 50,000 Right or Way - Construction - Total Expenditures: 50,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 50,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - Total Funding Sources: 50,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 50,000 Right of Way - - Construction - Total Expenditures: 50,000 Grants / Other Sources: •, • • • is J • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: Comprehensive Transportation Plan Update for Annexation Areas TIP #36 Project No: Cpxxxx Project Type: Study Project Manager: Goodman Description: This project will complete 20 year long range planning for the transportation system in Lea Hill and West Hill. These areas will be new to Auburn beginning January 1, 2008. This budget includes public involvement. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: There is no impact to the street maintenance budget. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - 100,000 100,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - - Total Funding Sources: 100,000 100,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 100,000 100,000 Right of Way - - Construction - - Total Expenditures: 100,000 100,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 100,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - Total Funding Sources: - 100.000 Capital Expenditures: Design 100,000 Right of Way - Construction - Total Expenditures: 100,000 Grants / Other Sources: 67 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: South 277th - Wetland Mitigation Project No: c410a0 Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Nutter TIP #37 Description: Wetland mitigation for the 277th Street Grade Separation project. Progress Summary: This is a 10 -year obligation, which began in 2004. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue 47,317 50,000 25,000 25,000 122,317 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - - REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - - - - - Total Funding Sources: 47,317 50,000 25,000 25,000 122,317 Capital Expenditures: Design 47,317 50,000 10,000 10,000 107,317 Right of Way - - - - Construction - 15,000 15,000 15,000 Total Expenditures: 47,317 50,000 25,000 25,000 122,317 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 150,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - - REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other Total Funding Sources: 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 150,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 60,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 90,000 Total Expenditures: 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 150,000 Grants / Other Sources: :7 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan •ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds • • Project Title: Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Program Project No: cp0627 Project Type: Non -Capacity (Annual) Project Manager: TBD TIP #38 Description: This project provides for pedestrian safety studies at various locations citywide. Projects are prioritized annually based on safety issues and pedestrian demands. This is an annual level of effort project used to fund small pedestrian safety studies and improvement projects. Progress Summary: Pedestrian enhancements were constructed on 3rd Street NW near the post office in 2005. In 2007, both I Street NE and East Main were completed. Future locations include 21st Street SE. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue 33,225 50,000 100,000 183,225 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - - REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: 33,225 50,000 100,000 183,225 Capital Expenditures: Design 13,225 5,000 10,000 28,225 Right of Way - - - - Construction 20,000 45,000 90,000 155,000 Total Expenditures: 33,225 50,000 100,000 183,225 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 100,000 100,000 300,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 100,000 - 100,000 300,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 10,000 10,000 30,000 Right of Way - - - Construction 90,000 90,000 270,000 Total Expenditures: 100,000 100,000 300,000 Grants / Other Sources: We City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: Citywide Roadway Safety Infrastructure Improvements Project No: cp102a Project Type: Non -Capacity (Safety) Project Manager: Various TIP #39 Description: This project provides for infrastructure improvements to enhance traffic safety. Projects are prioritized annually based upon field studies. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - 200,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - Total Funding Sources: 200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 15,000 Right of Way - Construction 185,000 Total Expenditures: 200,000 - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 200,000 200,000 600,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 200,000 200,000 600,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 15,000 15,000 45,000 Right of Way - - - Construction 185,000 185,000 555,000 Total Expenditures: - 200,000 200,000 600,000 Grants / Other Sources: 70 • is • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Project Title: Annual Arterial Pavement Preservation Project No: cp102b (Various) Project Type: Non -Capacity (Annual) Project Manager: Various Special Revenue Funds TIP #40 Description: Implement regular maintenance and/or rehabilitation of various classified streets. The system needs are approximately six (6) Million per year. An "Arterial Task Force" made up of members from the business community as well as citizens is working to provide recommendations to the Council on how these funds should be provided. Progress Summary: 2007 Projects included Auburn Way 4th Street SE to 4th Street NE overlay and 6th Street SE A Street SE to Auburn Way South reconstruction. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - REET 675,000 675,000 675,000 PWTFL - - - Traffic impact Fees - Other - 5,325,000 - Total Funding Sources: 675,000 6,000,000 675,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 40,000 1,000,000 40,000 Right of Way - - - Construction 635,000 5,000,000 635,000 Total Expenditures: 675,000 6,000,000 675,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants (FWState,Local) - - - - - REET 675,000 675,000 675,000 675,000 4,050,000 PWTFL - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - Other 5,325,000 5,325,000 5,325,000 5,325,000 26,625,000 Total Funding Sources: 6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 30,675,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 5,040,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 25,635,000 Total Expenditures: 6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 30,675,000 Grants / Other Sources: 71 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: Annual Arterial Crack Seal Program Project No: Various Project Type: Non -Capacity (Annual) Project Manager: Various TIP #41 Description: Implement regular maintenance and/or rehabilitation of various classified streets. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - 80,000 80,000 80,000 160,000 Grants (Fed, State,Locat) - - - - REET PWTFL Traffic Impact Fees Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 80,000 80,000 80,000 160,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 5,000 5,000 5,000 10,000 Right of Way - - Construction 75,000 75,000 75,000 150,000 Total Expenditures: 80,000 80,000 80,000 160,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 480,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - - - REET PWTFL Traffic impact Fees Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 480,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 450,000 Total Expenditures: 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 480,000 Grants / Other Sources: 72 • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan •LOCAL STREET FUND (103) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Special Revenue Funds • Project Title: Local Street Improvement Program Project No: cpxxxx Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Wickstrom TIP #43 Description: This program was created after passage of Proposition 1 on the November'04 ballot, setting the City's property tax levy limits and creating a dedicated local street fund to be used solely for local street improvements. The program will consist of a number of different contracts focused on the preservation of local streets (unclassified streets) within the City of Auburn. These contracts will include work such as crack sealing, asphalt patching, pre -leveling, asphalt overlays and pavement preservation. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Local Street Fund - 25,000 15,000 125,000 40,000 Property Tax 1,266,500 500,000 810,000 500,000 2,576,500 Sales Tax 680,000 - - - 680,000 REET2 540,000 1,435,000 225,000 425,000 2,200,000 Utility Mitigation 300,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 600,000 Total Funding Sources: 2,786,500 2,110,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 6,096,500 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction 2,786,500 2,110,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 6,096,500 Total Expenditures: 2,786,500 2,110,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 6,096,500 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Local Street Fund 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 640,000 Property Tax 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 3,310,000 Sales Tax - - - - REET2 425,000 425,000 425,000 425,000 2,350,000 Utility Mitigation 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 900,000 Total Funding Sources: 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 7,200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 7,200,000 Total Expenditures: 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 7,200,000 Grants / Other Sources: 73 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan TABLE T-3 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS Project: 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total 1 Urban Area TSM Improv. $ _ $ _ $ _ $ _ $ _ $ _ $ _ 2 A'St. NW, Phase 1 - - - 17,568 17,568 17,568 52,704 3 Citywide ITS Project 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 5 T St. NE Corridor - - - 17,568 17,568 17,568 52,704 4 Aub. Way Corridor Imp. _ _ _ _ _ 6 M' St. Grade Separation _ _ _ _ 7 S. 277th -AWN to Green River Bridge 10,541 10,541 10,541 31,623 8 15th St. SW -Reconstruction _ _ _ _ 9 A' SL NW, Phase 2 1,405 1,405 1,405 4,215 10 'D' ST. NW, 37th to 44th - - - - 14,054 14,054 11 'F' St. SE, 4th to AWS 851 851 851 851 3,404 12 M' St. NE, E. Main to 8th - - 3,514 3,514 7,028 13 Grade Separated Crossing of BNSF Railyard - - - - 14 Kersey Way Improvements _ _ _ _ 15 W Valley Hwy Improvements - 16 8th Street NE Widening 851 851 1,702 17 49th ST NE, AWN ro M ST NE 2,306 2,306 2,306 6,918 18 Harvey & 8th St. NE 703 703 703 703 703 3,515 19 8th St NE/R St. NE Signal 5,643 5,643 5,643 5,643 5,643 28,215 20 E. Valley Hwy - Pedestrian Underpass - - - - 240 240 20 AWN & 1st St Signal Imp. _ _ _ _ _ _ 21 AWS and M St SE 703 703 703 703 2,812 22 C ST NW & W Main ST _ _ _ _ _ _ 23 Auburn/Pacific Trail 2,688 2,688 2,688 2,688 2,688 13,440 24 BNSF / E Valley Hwy Pedestraan Underpass - - - - - - 25 A' St SE - Pedestrian Improvements 26 White River Trail Extension 168 168 168 168 168 168 1,008 27 37th St. SE / R SL Connector 191 191 191 191 191 191 1,146 28 Academy Drive Multi -use Trail - - - - - 1,680 1,680 29 A WS Pedestrian Crossing 1,411 1,411 1,411 1,411 1,411 1,411 8,466 30 Olympic Middle School Safe Routes 31 AWN Pedestrian Crossing 5,600 5,600 5,600 5,600 5,600 5,600 33,600 32 'R' Street Corridor Study _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 34 41st ST SE & A St SE Mgmt Study 35 Lea Hill & 8th ST NE Bridge Widening Study - 36 Transportation Comp Plan/Annex 37 S. 277th -Wetland Mitigation 38 Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Program 39 Citywide Roadway Safety Infrastructure Improv. 40 Annual Arterial Pavement Preservation 41 Annual Arterial Crack Seal Program 43 Local Street Improvement Program (Fund 103) - - - - - - - Total $ 12,370 $ 21,404 $ 22,958 $ 72,346 $ 76,711 $ 92,685 $ 298,474 74 • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan • WATER Current Facilities The City of Auburn water utility provides water supply, treatment, transmission, storage, distribution, and service connections to both in -City residences, and an approximately 10 square mile potential annexation area adjacent to the City. The water system consists of wells and springs for source, chlorinating stations and aeration for treatment, pump stations and pipelines for transmission, and steel and concrete enclosed reservoirs for storage. Table W-1, "Facilities Inventory", lists the facilities along with their current capacities and approximate locations. Level of Service (LOS) The City's Comprehensive Water Plan summarizes the design criteria for the City's water distribution system. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing The City of Auburn's water system anticipates two capacity projects in the amount of $4,410,000, and eight non -capacity projects totaling $11,160,000, for a 6 -year planning expectation total of $15,570,000. The financing plan is shown in Table W-2 followed by • individual worksheets showing the project details. The capacity projects will increase water supply quantities, storage, and distribution for growth of retail customers. The non -capacity projects will provide for pipeline improvements and replacements, delivery pressure improvements, comprehensive and resource management planning, pump station upgrades, telemetry system improvements, and meter upgrades. • Impact on Future Operating Budgets As Table W-3 shows, operating budget impacts of $3,600 are forecasted for water supply and distribution facilities during the six years 2009 — 2014. 75 TABLE W-1 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan Facilities Inventory Water Facilities 76 • • • CAPACITY FACILITY WATER RIGHT (MGD - max rate) LOCATION Water Supply. Algona Well 0.72 Washington Blvd and 3rd Ave S, Algona Coal Creek Springs Certificate 857 9.70<2.52> 3401 Stuck River Dr West Hill Springs Claim (1973 File Date) 0.9 1900 - 15th St NW ext. Well 1 Certificate 3560-A a 17 1130 "Ar StSE Well 2 G 1-00277 C 3.46 519 "K" St NE Well 3A G 1-23629 C 4.03 401- 37th St SE Well 3B Included Above Included Above 401 -37th St SE Well 4 GI -20391 C 4.03 950 25th Street SE Well 5 G1-23633 C 1.44 5530 James Ave SE Well 5A G1-25518 P 0.24 5401 Evergreen Way Well 5B (Supplemental to Wells 5 & 5A) 1.68 (supplemental) West end of 62nd Ct SE Well 6 (Supplemental to Wells 1, 2,3A, 3B, 4) 5.04 (supplemental) 519 "K" St NE Well 7 (Supplemental to Wells 1, 2, 3A, 3B, 4) 5.04 (supplemental) 403 "E"StNE Supply Total (MGD) 26.97 Available for Use 24.45 * Denotes deduction of 1,750 gpm (0/2,824 ac-ft/yr) to comply with the provisions of the Wcldeshoot-Auburn Stipulated Agreement. CAPACITY FACILITY (MG) LOCATION SERVICE AREA Storage Facilities: Valley Reservoir 1 5.0 2004 Auburn Way S Valley Service Area Valley Reservoir 2 3.6 32115 - 105th Place S Valley Service Area Academy Reservoir 1 1.0 5002 Auburn Way S Academy Service Area Academy Reservoir 2 1.5 5002 Auburn Way S Academy Service Area Lea Hill Reservoir 1 1.0 30502 - 132nd Ave SE Lea Hill Service Area Lea Hill Reservoir 2 1.5 30502 - 132nd Ave SE Lea Hill Service Area Lakeland Hills Reservoir 1 1.0 1118 57th Place SE Lakeland Hills Svc Area Storage Total (MG) 14.6 76 • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan • TABLE W-1 (continued) • Facilities Inventory Water Facilities 77 CAPACITY FACILITY (GPM) LOCATION Booster Pump Stations: Academy. 4 pumps 2,300 2004 Auburn Way S Green River. 4 pumps 4,680 29621 Green River Rd Academy Intertie: 7 pumps 4,830 30502 132nd Ave SE Lea Hill. 3 pumps 2,000 10406 Lea Hill Rd SE Lakeland Hills: 6 pumps 3,000 1118 57th Place SE Jannsen's Addition: 1 pump 100 3600 Block Lemon Tree Lane Game Farm Park. 2 pumps 1,060 2401 Stuck River Drive CAPACITY Hydraulic Grade FACILITY (downstream in feet) LOCATION Pressure Reducing Stations: Serves Valley Pressure Zone: Control Valve 1 264 Howard Road Control Valve By -Pass 264 Howard Road (Bypass) Well 4 By -Pass 257 25th Street SE Serves Hemlock: Dogwood North 431 Dogwood St. SE & Auburn Way S. Hemlock 443 Auburn Way S. & Hemlock St. SE Serves Fir: Dogwood South 470 Dogwood St. SE & Auburn Way S. Fir 470 Auburn Way S. West of Fir St. SE Chinook Elementary School 457 Auburn Way S. at Chinook Elementary Serves Clearwater Apartments: Clearwater Apts. North 470 AWS (Clearwater Apt. Connector) Clearwater Apts. South 471 AWS (Clearwater Apt. S. Connector) Poplar Street 484 AWS & Poplar St. River Walk 373 27th St. SE & 27th Place SE Serves Lea Hill: Lea Hill 500 500 304th St. SE West of 112th Ave. Lea Hill 462 462 SE 298th Place & 109 Ave. SE Lea Hill 406 406 304th St. SE West of 108th Ave. Lea Hill 401-1 401 Lea Hill Rd. S.E. Lea Hill 401-2 401 Lea Hill Rd. & 106 Place Lea Hill 415 415 Lea Hill Rd. & 107 Place Lea Hill 299 299 104th Ave SE (South of 303rd Road) Lea Hill 173 173 SE 304th Place & SE 101st Place Reservoir Apts. North 425 105th Place SE & 320th place Reservoir Apts. South 395 105th Place SE Near Reservoir 2 77 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan TABLE W-1 (continued) Facilities Inventory Water Facilities • • 0 CAPACITY Hydraulic Grade FACILITY (downstream in feet) LOCATION Serves Lea Hill: Lakeland Hills Zone 1 640 Nathan Avenue & 49th Street Lake Hills Connection 243 Oravetz Road @ Mill Pond Drive Lakeland Hills Zone 3 545 51st St. SE east of cul-de-sac Lakeland Hills Zone 3 547 Lakeland Hills Way & Mill Pond Dr. Lakeland Hills Zone 3 624 Evergreen Way & Lakeland Hills Way Lakeland Hills Zone 2 401 Lakeland Hills Way & 47th SE Lakeland Hills Zone 2 390 Mill Pond Dr. & Mill Pond Loop Lakeland Hills Zone 2 659 Quincy Ave N of 53rd St SE Lakeland Hills Zone 1 242 Lakeland Hills Way & Oravetz CAPACITY FACILITY (GPM) LOCATION Treatment: Coal Creek CCTF 4,600 2104 Howard Street Fulmer Field CCTF 9,600 1113 5th St NE Chlorination Stations: Coal Creek Springs Station 2,400 (gravity feed) 3401 Stuck River Drive West Hill Springs Station 625 (gravity feed) 1900 15th Street NW Well 4 950 25th Street SE Well 5B 600 West end of 62nd Ct SE • • 0 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan • TABLE W-2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING WATER DIVISION 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total Capacity Projects: 1 Lea Hill Booster Pump Station Capital Costs 160,000 1,100,000 1,260,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 160,000 - 160,000 PWTFL - 1,100,000 1,100,000 2 Lakeland Hills High Zone Reservoir Capital Costs 500,000 2,650,000 3,150,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund - 500,000 2,650,000 3,150,000 Subtotal, Capacity Projects: Capital Costs 160,000 1,100,000 500,000 2,650,000 4,410,000 Non -Capacity Proiects: 3 Annual Repair & Replacements Capital Costs 1,300,000 1,100,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 7,400,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 1,300,000 1,100,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 7,400,000 4 SCADA (Telemetry) Upgrades Capital Costs 405,000 55,000 58,000 518,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 405,000 • 55,000 58,000 518,000 5 Water Resources Protection Program Capital Costs 16,000 16,000 17,000 18,000 67,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 16,000 16,000 17,000 18,000 - 67,000 6 Water Reservoir Safety Improv. Project Capital Costs 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 250,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 250,000 7 Blow -off Installation on Deadend Mains Capital Costs 75,000 75,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 75,000 - 75,000 8 Well 5 Upgrade Capital Costs 450,000 450,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 450,000 450,000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total Non -Capacity Projects (cont.): 9 Comprehensive Water Plan Capital Costs 150,000 150,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 150,000 150,000 W City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan TABLE W-2 (continued) • 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 10 Les Gove Waterline Replacement Capital Costs 2,250,000 - - 2,250,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 2,250,000 2,250,000 Subtotal, Non -Capacity Projects: Capital Costs 4,696,000 1,221,000 1,467,000 1,326,000 1,250,000 1,200,000 11,160,000 SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects Non -Capacity Projects Total Costs FUNDING SOURCES: Water Fund PWTFL Total Funding 160,000 1,100,000 500,000 2,650,000 - - 4,410,000 4,696,000 1,221,000 1,467,000 1,326,000 1,250,000 1,200,000 11,160,000 4,856,000 2,321,000 1,967,000 3,976,000 1,250,000 1,200,000 15,570,000 4,856,000 1,221,000 1,967,000 3,976,000 1,250,000 1,200,000 14,470,000 - 1,100,000 - - - - 1,100,000 4,856,000 2,321,000 1,967,000. 3,976,000 1,250,000 1,200,000 15,570,000 ME is • • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan WATER FUND (430) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Lea Hill Booster Pump Station Project No: Project Type: Capacity (Expansion) Project Manager: TBD Description: Increase the pumping capacity to provide the Maximum Daily Demand (MDD) for the Lea Hill Service Area. Required to minimize the storage required in the Lea Hill service area and to meet future MDD. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact; this station will replace the existing pump station. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 160,000 160,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - PWTFL 1,100,000 Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 160,000 1,100,000 160,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 160,000 - 160,000 Right of Way - - Construction 1,100,000 - Total Expenditures: 160,000 1,100,000 160,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 160,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - PWTFL 1,100,000 Other - Total Funding Sources: - - 1,260,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 160,000 Right of Way - Construction 1,100,000 Total Expenditures: - 1,260,000 Grants / Other Sources: q'fl City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan WATER FUND (430) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Lakeland Hills High Zone Reservoir Construction Project No: Project Type: Capacity (Expansion) Project Manager: TBD Description: Construct a new total capacity of 2.65 million gallon reservoir on a track of land next to Francis Court cul-de-sac in the Lakeland Hills service area. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Project will require routine inspections by water operations staff. The annual maintenance cost is estimated to be approximately $1,200. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) PWTFL Other Total Funding Sources: - - - Capital Expenditures: Design Right of Way Construction Total Expenditures: - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 500,000 2,650,000 3,150,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - PWTFL Other - - Total Funding Sources: 500,000 2,650,000 - 3,150,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 500,000 - 500,000 Right of Way - - - Construction - 2,650,000 2,650,000 Total Expenditures: 500,000 2,650,000 3,150,000 Grants / Other Sources: i • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan •WATER FUND (430) Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 • • Project Title: Annual Repair & Replacements Project No: rphydr, rpsrvc, rpvlve Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Various Capital Facilities Plan Enterprise Funds Description: Funding set aside for replacing water lines as predetermined by the Water Utility. Projects will be coordinated with the Local Street Program and other utility projects. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: (Previous 2 Yrs) 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue 577,783 1,000,000 1,300,000 1,100,000 2,877,783 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - - PWTFL Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 577,783 1,000,000 1,300,000 1,100,000 2,877,783 Capital Expenditures: Design - 500,000 200,000 110,000 700,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 577,783 500,000 1,100,000 990,000 2,177,783 Total Expenditures: 577,783 1,000,000 1,300,000 1,100,000 2,877,783 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 7,400,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - - PWTFL Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 7,400,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 200,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 - 870,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 1,200,000 1,080,000 1,080,000 1,080,000 6,530,000 Total Expenditures: 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 7,400,000 Grants / Other Sources: City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan WATER FUND (430) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: SCADA Upgrades Project No: c524a0 Project Type: Non -Capacity (Improvements) Project Manager: McConnell Description: The Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA also known as the "Telemetry" system) is in need of upgrading. The existing system, based on an independent SCADA Assessment Study and the vulnerability study, has numerous obsolete components and does not allow control of the Sewer and Storm Utility stations. Upgrading the portion of the system utilizing antiquated equipment, while maintaining the portions of equipment that are compatible with the newer technologies available seems to be the logical course of action. The new system will utilize an open architecture so the City is no longer reliant on one vendor for repairs and maintenance. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 530,000 405,000 55,000 935,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - PWTFL Other - - Total Funding Sources: - 530,000 405,000 55,000 935,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 125,000 - - 125,000 Right of Way - - - - Construction - 405,000 55,000 405,000 Total Expenditures: - 125,000 405,000 55,000 530,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 58,000 518,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - PWTFL Other - - Total Funding Sources: 58,000 - 518,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - Right of Way - - Construction 58,000 518,000 Total Expenditures: - 58,000 - - 518,000 Grants / Other Sources: �0 • • • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan WATER FUND (430) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Water Resources Protection Program Project No: 00130 Project Type: Non -Capacity (Improvements) Project Manager: Thorn Description: Water Resource Protection Program will identify potential hazards, identify actions and begin the implementation program to protect the city's water resources. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 15,000 16,000 16,000 31,000 Grants (Fed,State,Locat) - - - - PWTFL Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: - 15,000 16,000 16,000 31,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - Right of Way - - - - Construction 15,000 16,000 16,000 31,000 Total Expenditures: 15,000 16,000 16,000 31,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 17,000 18,000 67,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - PWTFL Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 17,000 18,000 67,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - Right of Way - - - Construction 17,000 18,000 67,000 Total Expenditures: 17,000 18,000 - 67,000 Grants / Other Sources: M City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan WATER FUND (430) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Water Reservoir Safety Improvement Project Project No: cp0622 Project Type: Non -Capacity (Improvements) Project Manager: Thorn Description: There may be required security upgrades to the existing water utility facilities, based on an independent Vulnerability Assessment Study. Included with the security upgrades are upgrades to tank safety equipment, based on safety report. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Any impacts to the operating budget will be analyzed and calculated once the scope is identified. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue 50,000 50,000 50,000 100,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) PWTFL Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: 50,000 50,000 50,000 100,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - Right of Way - - - construction 50,000 50,000 50,000 100,000 Total Expenditures: 50,000 50,000 50,000 100,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007-2012 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 50,000 50,000 50,000 250,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - PWTFL Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: 50,000 50,000 50,000 250,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - Right of Way - - - - Construction 50,000 50,000 50,000 250,000 Total Expenditures: 50,000 50,000 50,000 250,000 Grants / Other bources: i r, • • • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan WATER FUND (430) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Project Title: Blow -Off Installation on Deadend Mains Project No: cpO623 Project Type: Non -Capacity (improvements) Project Manager: TBD Enterprise Funds Description: Identify and install all deadend mains with a blow -off assembly or hydrant to improve water quality and fire flow capability via routine flushing program. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact, although it will require visits by water distribution staff to flush mains as part of the deadend main flushing program. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 25,000 75,000 100,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - PWTFL Other Total Funding Sources: 25,000 75,000 100,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - Right of Way - - - Construction 25,000 75,000 100,000 Total Expenditures: 25,000 75,000 100,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 75,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - PWTFL Other - Total Funding Sources: - 75,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - Right of Way - Construction 75,000 Total Expenditures: 75,000 Grants / Other Sources: M City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan WATER FUND (430) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Well 5 Upgrade Project No: cp0624 Project Type: Non -Capacity (Improvements) Project Manager: TBD Description: Construct a new well facility that will meet current electrical and safety codes. The facility will require emergency backup power and disinfection capability. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue 49,000 100,000 450,000 599,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - PWTFL Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: 49,000 100,000 450,000 - 599,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 100,000 - 100,000 Right of Way - - - - Construction 49,000 - 450,000 499,000 Total Expenditures: 49,000 100,000 450,000 599,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 450,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - PWTFL Other - Total Funding Sources: - - - 450,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - Right of Way - Construction 450,000 Total Expenditures: - - - 450,000 Grants / Other Sources: • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan •WATER FUND (430) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds • • Project Title: Comprehensive Water Plan Project No: Project Type: Non -Capacity (Improvements) Project Manager: TBD Description: Update Comprehensive Water Plan in 2007/2008 as required by the Washington State Department of Health. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 250,000 150,000 400,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - PWTFL Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 250,000 150,000 - 400,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 250,000 150,000 400,000 Right of Way - - - Construction - - - Total Expenditures: - 250,000 150,000 400,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 150,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - PWTFL Other - Total Funding Sources: - 150,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 150,000 Right of Way - Construction Total Expenditures: 150,000 Grants/ Other Sources: i, City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan WATER FUND (430) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Les Gove Waterline Replacement Project No: Project Type: Non -Capacity (Improvements) Project Manager: TBD Description: This project will replace aging waterlines in the area northwest of Les Gove park. The area extends from 9th Street SE to 5th Street SE between D Street SE and K Street SE. Approximately 10,000 linear feet of old cast iron waterlines 2 to 6 inches in size will be replaced with new 8 inch waterlines. The existing waterlines are deteriorated and prone to leaking or breaking. Replacing the existing lines will improve fire flow and reduce maintenance needs and water losses. This project will be completed ahead of the SOS overlay program. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 2,250,000 2,250,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - PWTFL Other - - Total Funding Sources: 2,250,000 - 2,250,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 200,000 200,000 Right of Way - - Construction 2,050,000 2,050,000 Total Expenditures: 2,250,000 2,250,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 2,250,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - PWTFL Other - Total Funding Sources: 2,250,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 200,000 Right of Way - Construction 2,050,000 Total Expenditures: - - 2,250,000 Grants / Other Sources: is • • J TABLE W-3 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan Impact on Future Operating Budgets WATER Project: 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total 1 Lea Hill Booster Pump $ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 2 Lakeland Hills High Zone Resevoir 1,200 1,200 1,200 3,600 3 Annual Repair/Replacements 4 SCADA Upgrades 5 Water Resources Protection Prgm. 6 Water Reservoir Safety Improv. Project 7 Blow -off Installations, Dead End Mains - 6 Well 5 Upgrade 9 Comprehensive Water Plan 10 Les Gove Waterline Replacement Total $ - $ - $ - $ 1,200 $ 1,200 $ 1,200 $ 3,600 91 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan - SANITARY SEWER • Current Facilities The City's sanitary sewer service area encompasses approximately 30 -square miles, of which 20 -square miles are within the City limits and the remaining 10 -square miles are in Auburn's Adjacent Proposed Annexation area (PAA). The City contracts with King County for sewage treatment and disposal. The City's Sanitary Sewer Utility is responsible for the collection and transmission of wastewater to the King County trunk lines. The City's current inventory of 180 miles of sewer lines serves the City's sewer service area. Table S-1 Facilities Inventory, lists the sewage collection and transmission facilities along with their capacities and locations. Level of Service (LOS) The Comprehensive Sewerage Plan for the Sewerage Collection System summarizes the level of service (LOS), or design criteria, for the City's sewage collection system. These standards represent the average quantities of sewage that the system must accommodate, for residential, industrial, and commercial development. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing • The City's sewage collection facilities include two capacity projects totaling $6,831,400, which primarily represents expansion of the existing collection system; and four non - capacity projects totaling $5,478,000, which are primarily system renewals, replacements, and repairs. Total 6 -year costs for the six projects are $12,309,400. Table S-2 shows the proposed financing plan followed by individual worksheets showing the project detail. Impact on Future Operating Budgets There is no operating budget revenue impacts forecasted for sanitary sewer facilities during the six years 2009 — 2014. 92 • • 0 TABLE S-1 - City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan Facilities Inventory Sewage Facilities ACILITY (MGD) LOCATION 'D' Street 0.58 'D' Street NE & Auburn Way N. Dogwood 0.29 Dogwood St. SE 1500 & 15th St. SE Eastpoint 0.30 SE 1/4 of NW 1/4 of Sec. 05-20-05 (Lakeland Hills) Ellingson 0.72 41 st St. SE, East of 'A' St. SE F' Street 0.86 'F' St. SE & 17th St. SE Peasley Ridge 0.36 S. 320th St. & 53rd Ave. S. Rainier Ridge 0.29 125th Place SE & South of SE 318th Way Rainier Shadows 0.72 124th Ave. SE & SE 306th Place Valley Meadows 0.18 4th St. SE & 'V' St. SE 22nd Street 0.79 22nd St. SE & Riverview Drive 'R' Street 0.14 'R' St. NE & 6th St. NE Riverside 0.58 8th St. NE & 104th Ave. SE 8th Street 0.26 'J' St. NE & 8th St. NE ACILITY Pipe Size LOCATION Inverted Syphon 8 & 12 inch Crossing Green River at 26th St. NE 8th Street Bridge Crossing Green River at 8th St. NE 93 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan TABLE S-2 • CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING SANITARY SEWER DIVISION 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total Capacity Projects: 1 AWS Sewer Replacement - Phase 3 (60% Capacity, 40% Non -Capacity) Capital Costs 3,205,000 - 3,205,000 Funding Sources: Utility Funds (Sewer) 602,500 - 602,500 PWTFL 1,000,000 - - 1,000,000 Other (MIT) 1,602,500 - - - - 1,602,500 2 Sewer Facility Expansion 125,000 125,000 Capital Costs 1,326,400 500,000 1,150,000 500,000 150,000 3,626,400 Funding Sources: Sewer Fund 1,326,400 500,000 1,150,000 500,000 150,000 3,626,400 Non -Capacity Projects: 3 Sewer Facility Improvements Capital Costs 316,800 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 941,800 Funding Sources: Sewer Fund 316,800 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 941,800 4 Sewer Facility Repair & Replacement Capital Costs 1,874,000 500,000 500,000 150,000 500,000 - 3,524,000 Funding Sources: Sewer Fund 1,874,000 500,000 500,000 150,000 500,000 3,524,000 5 Sewer Comprehensive Plan Update • Capital Costs 300,700 - - - - 300,700 Funding Sources: Sewer 300,700 - - 300,700 6 SCADA (Telemetry) Upgrades Capital Costs 586,500 60,000 65,000 711,500 Funding Sources: Sewer Fund 586,500 60,000 - 65,000 711,500 SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects 4,531,400 500,000 1,150,000 500,000 150,000 - 6,831,400 Non -Capacity Projects 3,078,000 685,000 625,000 340,000 625,000 125,000 5,478,000 Total Costs 7,609,400 1,185,000 1,775,000 840,000 775,000 125,000 12,309,400 FUNDING SOURCES: Utility Funds (Sewer) 5,006,900 1,185,000 1,775,000 840,000 775,000 125,000 9,706,900 PWTFL 1,000,000 - - - - - 1,000,000 Other (MIT) 1,602,500 - - - - - 1,602,500 Total Funding 7,609,400 1,185,000 1,775,000 840,000 775,000 125,000 12,309,400 • 01 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan •SEWER FUND (431) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds • 0 Project Title: AWS Sanitary Sewer Replacement -Phase 3 Project No: c504aO (R Street SE Utility Improvements) Project Type: Expansion - 60%, Replacement - 40% Project Manager: Thorn Description: Design and replace the sanitary sewer transmission facilities located along the Auburn Way So. Corridor. This will benefit the City of Auburn and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT). The project is broken out into four distinct segments: 1)Design, 2)Construction-Phase 1, 3)Construction-Phase 2, and 4)Construction of Phase 3. Phase 2 involves work related to Water and Storm improvements. Progress Summary: Phase Three has been incorporated into the R Street Utility improvement project known as C504A. Work shall include the replacement of a portion of M St. SE, the addition of storm facilities, and the replacement of a water line. Design was complete in 2006 with construction starting in 2007. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Negligible Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue 10,924 22,500 602,500 635,924 Grants(Fed, State, Local) - - - - PWTFL - 1,000,000 1,000,000 Other (MIT) - 22,500 1,602,500 1,625,000 Total Funding Sources: 10,924 45,000 3,205,000 3,260,924 Capital Expenditures: Design 10,924 45,000 - 55,924 Right of Way - - - - Construction - - 3,205,000 3,205,000 Total Expenditures: 10,924 45,000 3,205,000 3,260,924 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue 602,500 Grants(Fed,State,Local) - PWTFL 1,000,000 Other (MIT) 1,602,500 Total Funding Sources: - - 3,205,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - Right of Way - Construction 3,205,000 Total Expenditures: - - 3,205,000 Grants / Other Sources: City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan SEWER FUND (431) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Sanitary Sewer Expansion Project No: Project Type: Expansion Project Manager: Thorn Description: Extend public sewer system into developed neighborhoods that currently have septic tanks. Current Projects: 1. 4th Street NE Sewer Force Main. 2. Lea Hill Pump Station Decommissioning, Phase 1 and Phase 2. (20%) Progress Summary Construction planned on a small system in 2007 with the design of another system also slated for 2007 with construction in 2008. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Will negligibly increase future operating expenditure. Should be offset by the increased customer base. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - 173,600 1,326,400 500,000 1,500,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - - PWTFL Other - - - Total Funding Sources: - 173,600 1,326,400 500,000 1,500,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 23,600 36,400 25,000 60,000 Right of Way - - - - Construction 150,000 1,290,000 475,000 1,440,000 Total Expenditures: 173,600 1,326,400 500,000 1,500,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue 1,150,000 500,000 150,000 3,626,400 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - PWTFL Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 1,150,000 500,000 150,OOQ 3,626,400 Capital Expenditures: Design 100,000 25,000 10,000 196,400 Right of Way - - - - Construction 1,050,000 475,000 140,000 3,430,000 Total Expenditures: 1,150,000 500,000 150,000 3,626,400 Grants / Other Sources: is is C7 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan •SEWER FUND (431) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Sanitary Sewer Facility Improvements Project No: Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Thorn Description: Capitalization shall be based upon costs associated with improvements to sewer facilities. Improvements will be primarily directed at pump stations to eliminate odor problems and ensure adequate capacity in the pumps, wet wells and generators. Current Projects: 1. Lea Hill Pump Station Decommissioning, Phase 1 and Phase 2. (80%) Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: (Previous 2 Yrs) 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - 614,700 316,800 125,000 931,500 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - PWTFL Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 614,700 316,800 125,000 931,500 Capital Expenditures: Design 34,400 41,800 10,000 76,200 Right of Way - - - - Construction 580,300 275,000 115,000 855,300 Total Expenditures: - 614,700 316,800 125,000 931,500 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 941,800 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - - - PWTFL Other - - - - - Total Funding Sources: 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 941,800 Capital Expenditures: Design 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 91,800 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 115,000 115,000 115,000 115,000 850,000 Total Expenditures: 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 941,800 Grants / Other Sources: • 97 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan SEWER FUND (431) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Sanitary Sewer Repair & Replacement Project No: Project Type: Non -Capacity (Repair and Replacement) Project Manager: Thorn Description: Repair and replace broken sewer mains and facilities. These lines will be identified through television inspection and routine cleaning. Current Projects: 1. Pavement Preservation, 6th Street SE 2. Sewer Relining, 19th Drive NE 3. Manhole Ring and Cover Replacement 4. Sewer Repair and Replacement Progress Summary: We wish to establish an annual program to spend one million dollars a year for the repacement of damaged pipe. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This should decrease the operating budget by correcting the problems that require operations attention. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: (Previous 2 Yrs) 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue 322,084 676,000 1,874,000 500,000 2,872,084 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - PWTFL Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 322,084 676,000 1,874,000 500,000 2,872,084 Capital Expenditures: Design -• 100,000 10,000 50,000 110,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 322,084 576,000 1,864,000 450,000 2,762,084 Total Expenditures: 322,084 676,000 1,874,000 500,000 2,872,084 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue 500,000 150,000 500,000 3,524,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - - PWTFL Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: 500,000 150,000 500,000 - 3,524,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 50,000 10,000 50,000 170,000 Right of Way - - - Construction 450,000 140,000 450,000 3,354,000 Total Expenditures: 500,000 150,000 500,000 - 3,524,000 Grants / Other Sources: •i • • • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan SEWER FUND (431) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Sewer Comprehensive Plan Update Project No: cp0758 Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Elwell Description: The City of Auburn last updated its Comprehensive Sewer Plan in 2001. The object of this project is to update the Comprehensive Plan to reflect current conditions and projected trends. The City has hired a consulting firm, Brown and Caldwell, to work with the City to gather data, analyze the existing infrastructure, create models of the City's sewer system, and make recommendations for the future including maintenance, upgrades, expansion, repair and replacement, etc. Progress Summary: We are currently in the data collection and inspection phase of the project. Future Impact on Operating Budget: While this results of this project may provide guidance for the future operating budget and may have a positive impact based on increased efficiency, in and of itself, it will have no impact on the operating budget. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: (Previous 2 Yrs) 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - 200,000 300,700 500,700 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - PWTFL Other - - Total Funding Sources: - 200,000 300,700 - 500,700 Capital Expenditures: Design 200,000 300,700 500,700 Right of Way - - - Construction - - Total Expenditures: 200,000 300,700 500,700 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue 300,700 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - PWTFL Other - Total Funding Sources: - 300,700 Capital Expenditures: Design 300,700 Right of Way Construction - Total Expenditures: 300,700 Grants / Other Sources: City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan SEWER FUND (431) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: SCADA Upgrades Project No: c524a0 Project Type: Non -Capacity (Improvements) Project Manager: McConnell Description: The Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA also known as the "Telemetry" system) is in need of upgrading. The existing system, based on an independent SCADA Assessment Study and the vulnerability study, has numerous obsolete components and does not allow control of the Sewer and Storm Utility stations. Upgrading the portion of the system utilizing antiquated equipment, while maintaining the portions of equipment that are compatible with the newer technologies available seems to be the logical course of action. The new system will utilize an open architecture so the City is no longer reliant on one vendor for repairs and maintenance. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue 4,766 173,500 586,500 60,000 764,766 Grants (Fed State, Local) - - - - - PWTFL Other - - Total Funding Sources: 4,766 173,500 586,500 60,000 764,766 Capital Expenditures: Design 4,766 173,500 - 178,266 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 586,500 60,000 586,500 Total Expenditures: 4,766 173,500 586,500 60,000 764,766 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue 65,000 711,500 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - PWTFL Other - - Total Funding Sources: 65,000 711,500 Capital Expenditures: Design - Right of Way - Construction 65,000 711,500 Total Expenditures: 65,000 - 711,500 Grants / Other Sources: 100 is • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan STORM DRAINAGE Current Facilities The City's storm drainage service area encompasses the municipal boundaries of the City. For management purposes the service area is divided into sixteen drainage sub - basins. The City's drainage system consists of a combination of closed conveyance pipes and open ditch conveyance facilities, with four pumping stations. Table SD -1 Facilities Inventory lists the facilities along with their current capacities and location. Level of Service (LOS) The City's Comprehensive Drainage Plan summarizes the level of service (LOS), or design criteria, for the City's storm drainage system. Generally, these standards represent a 25-year/24-hour design storm capacity within the sixteen drainage sub - basins. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing The City's storm drainage facilities include four categories of projects: (1) developer • participation capacity project totaling $200,000, which primarily represent developer participation projects to support new development; (2) pipeline and surface conveyance projects totaling $6,815,200; (3) retention, detention, and water quality non -capacity projects totaling $2,085,000, which primarily represent detention and retention facilities improvements and upgrades; and (4) comprehensive planning totaling $500,000. Total six-year costs for the four categories of projects are $9,600,200. Table SD -2 shows the proposed financing plan followed by individual worksheets showing the project detail. • Impact on Future Operating Budgets As Table SD -3 shows, operating budget impacts of $6,000 are forecasted for storm drainage facilities during the six years 2009 — 2014. 101 TABLE SD -1 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan Facilities Inventory Storm Drainage Facilities FACILITY (acres) (Feet of pipeline) (Feet of open channels) LOCATION Drainage Sub -Basins: AA 441 6,600 16,000 See City of Auburn's A 497 16,000 Comprehensive Drainage B 836 54,000 Plan, Aug. 2002 C 868 49,000 5,700 for Sub -Basin locations D 176 15,000 500 E 505 25,000 15,000 F 83 8,000 G 126 13,000 H 419 24,000 2,000 HV 63 5,000 1 240 9,000 7,000 K 244 6,000 1,000 L 104 3,000 1,000 O 287 6,000 10,000 P 155 4,000 3,000 V 572 10,000 9,000 W 66 7,000 Z 57 7,000 Total 5,739 267,600 70,200 FACILITY (GPM) LOCATION 'A' St. SE Pump Station #1 5,300 5000 block 'A' St. SE 'A' St. SE Pump Station #2 1,380 'A' St. SE near SR -18 and BNRR overpass Auburn Way S. Pump Station #3 1,000 Aub.Way So. near SR -18 and BNRR overpass Brannan Park Pump Station #4 20,200 Brannan Park 102 • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan • TABLE SD -2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING STORM DRAINAGE DIVISION 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total Capacity Projects: Capital Costs 880,000 750,000 1,000,000 500,000 3,130,000 Funding Sources: 1 Developer Participation Storm Fund 880,000 750,000 1,000,000 500,000 3,130,000 8 17th St. SE & 'M' St. SE Capital Costs 50,000 50,000 50,000 Funding Sources: 50,000 200,000 Funding Sources: 9 21st St. SE & 'R' St. SE (BC -14 Modified) Capital Costs 900,000 900,000 Storm Fund 50,000 50,000 50,000 Storm Fund 900,000 50,000 200,000 2 E Basin Ditch Improvements Capital Costs 175,000 175,000 Funding Sources: Capital Costs - - 300,000 Subtotal, Capacity Projects: - 300,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 300,000 - 300,000 3 21st St. SE & 'M' St. SE (BC -22 Modified) Capital Costs 75,000 425,000 500,000 Funding Sources: Stone Fund 75,000 425,000 5009000 4 Terminal Park Infiltration (BC -24 Modified) Capital Costs - 75,000 75,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 75,000 - 75,000 5 North Central Storm Pond (GHI-9) Capital Costs 275,000 750,000 1,025,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund • 275,000 750,000 1,025,000 6 15th Street Culvert Replacement (cp0638) Capital Costs 460,200 - - 460,200 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 365,000 365,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) 95,200 95,200 Other - - • 7 Downtown Storm Water Quality Facility Capital Costs 880,000 750,000 1,000,000 500,000 3,130,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 880,000 750,000 1,000,000 500,000 3,130,000 8 17th St. SE & 'M' St. SE Capital Costs 250,000 - - - 250,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 250,000 250,000 9 21st St. SE & 'R' St. SE (BC -14 Modified) Capital Costs 900,000 900,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 900,000 900,000 10 West Main Street Storm Station Capital Costs 175,000 175,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 175,000 - - - 175,000 Subtotal, Capacity Projects: Capital Costs 2,715,200 800,000 1,000,000 925,000 775,000 800,000 7,015,200 103 TABLE SD -2 (continued) City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total Non -Capacity Projects: 11 Regulatory Improvements CAPITAL COSTS Capital Costs 250,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 500,000 Funding Sources: 1,000,000 925,000 775,000 800,000 7,015,200 • Storm Fund 250,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 500,000 12 Storm Facility Retrofit Program 2,585,000 Total Costs 3,137,200 1,505,000 1,050,000 Capital Costs - 400,000 - 400,000 - 400,000 1,200,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund - 400,000 400,000 400,000 1,200,000 13 SCADA (Telemetry) Upgrades 9,505,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) 95,200 - - Capital Costs 172,000 55,000 58,000 - 285,000 Funding Sources: - - - - - Storm Fund 172,000 55,000 - 58,000 - 285,000 14 Pipeline Repair / Replacements 9,600,200 Capital Costs - 200,000 200,000 200,000 600,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 200,000 200,000 200,000 600,000 Subtotal, Non -Capacity Projects: Capital Costs 422,000 705,000 50,000 708,000 50,000 650,000 2,585,000 C, SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects 2,715,200 800,000 1,000,000 925,000 775,000 800,000 7,015,200 • Non -Capacity Projects 422,000 705,000 50,000 708,000 50,000 650,000 2,585,000 Total Costs 3,137,200 1,505,000 1,050,000 1,633,000 825,000 1,450,000 9,600,200 FUNDING SOURCES: Storm Fund 3,042,000 1,505,000 1,050,000 1,633,000 825,000 1,450,000 9,505,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) 95,200 - - - - - 95,200 Other - - - - - - - Total Funding 3,137,200 1,505,000 1,050,000 1,633,000 825,000 1,450,000 9,600,200 104 • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan STORM DRAINAGE FUND (432) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Developer Participation Project No: cp432a Project Type: Capacity (Expansion) Project Manager: TBD Description: Funding set aside for upsizing storm lines being installed by developers. These funds will be expended when developers install storm lines according to City code where larger lines are required as predetermined by the Storm Drainage Comprehensive Plan. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Impact cannot be determined until the specific developer projects are identified. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: (Previous 2 Yrs) 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue 45,000 50,000 50,000 95,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - Bond Proceeds Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 45,000 50,000 50,000 95,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - Right of Way - - - - Construction 45,000 50,000 50,000 95,000 Total Expenditures: 45,000 50,000 50,000 95,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 50,000 50,000 200,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - Bond Proceeds Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 50,000 50,000 200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - Right of Way - - Construction 50,000 50,000 200,000 Total Expenditures: 50,000 50,000 200,000 Grants / Other Sources: 105 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan STORM DRAINAGE FUND (432) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: E Basin Ditch Improvement Project No: Project Type: Capacity (Improvement) Project Manager: TBD Description: Capacity improvement to the exising downstream ditch serving the "Downtown Area". Project scope to be considered with the Auburn Environmental Park. The E Basin Ditch that is being considered for improvements runs north from 6th St NW to approximately 20th St NW to parallel with the Interurban Trail. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Annual maintenance cost is estimated to be approximately $2,000. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) Bond Proceeds Other Total Funding Sources: Capital Expenditures: Design Right of Way Construction Total Expenditures: - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 300,000 300,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - Bond Proceeds - Other - - Total Funding Sources:; 300,000 300,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 50,000 50,000 Right of Way - - Construction 250,000 250,000 Total Expenditures: 300,000 - 300,000 Grants / Other Sources: 106 • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan STORM DRAINAGE FUND (432) Capital Facilities Plan is Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds • • Project Title: 21st Street SE &V Street SE Project No: Project Type: Capacity (Expansion) Project Manager: TBD Description: Construct conveyance improvement to 21st Street SE in -lieu of on-site infiltration on school district property. Extend new conveyance line from 21st Street SE to 25th Street SE. Flow contributed to 21st Street Infiltration Facility. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - Grants (Fed,State,Local) Bond Proceeds Other Total Funding Sources: - Capital Expenditures: Design Right of Way Construction Total Expenditures: - - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 75,000 425,000 500,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - Bond Proceeds Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 75,000 425,000 500,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 75,000 - 75,000 Right of Way - - - Construction 425,000 425,000 Total Expenditures: 75,000 425,000 500,000 Grants / Other Sources: 107 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan STORM DRAINAGE FUND (432) Capital Facilities Plan • Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Terminal Park Infiltration Project No: Project Type: Capacity (Expansion) Project Manager: TBD Description: Capacity improvement to construct infiltration at or near Terminal Park to reduce localized flooding, particularly at Terminal Park Elementary School, and provide relief to downstream drainage system. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - Grants (Fed,State,Local) Bond Proceeds Other Total Funding Sources: Capital Expenditures: Design Right of Way Construction Total Expenditures: - - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 75,000 75,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - Bond Proceeds Other - - Total Funding Sources: 75,000 75,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 75,000 75,000 Right of Way - - Construction - - Total Expenditures: - 75,000 75,000 Grants / Other Sources: W • • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan STORM DRAINAGE FUND (432) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: North Central Storm Pond Project No: Project Type: Capacity (Expansion) Project Manager: TBD Description: Capacity project to provide regional storm water detention at the Crista Ministries property. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) Bond Proceeds Other Total Funding Sources: Capital Expenditures: Design Right of Way Construction Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 275,000 750,000 1,025,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - Bond Proceeds Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 275,000 750,000 1,025,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 275,000 - 275,000 Right of Way - - - Construction - 750,000 750,000 Total Expenditures: 275,000 750,000 1,025,000 Grants / Other Sources: 109 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan STORM DRAINAGE FUND (432) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: 15th Street NW Culvert Replacement Project No: cpO638 Project Type: Capacity Project Manager: Nix Description: This project will construct a new crossing culvert under 15th Street NW in order to improve flow within Mill Creek and allow for enhanced fish passage along Mill Creek Corridor. Progress Summary: Design and permitting will be completed by Spring of 2008. Construction is anticipated to be complete by the end of 2009. In 2007 the application has was made for $150,000 grant from King Conservation District. Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 35,000 365,000 400,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) 95,200 95,200 Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 35,000 460,200 495,200 Capital Expenditures: Design 35,000 - 35,000 Right of Way - - Construction - 460,200 460,200 Total Expenditures: 35,000 460,200 495,200 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 365,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) 95,200 Other Total Funding Sources: 460,200 Capital Expenditures: Design - Right of Way - Construction 460,200 Total Expenditures: - 460,200 Grant Sources: US Fish & Wildlife Service, other non -secured grant sources 110 • • • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan STORM DRAINAGE FUND (432) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Downtown Storm Water Quality Facility Project No: c518A0 Project Type: Capacity (Expansion) Project Manager: TBD Description: Storm drainage detention, water quality pump station to serve downtown drainage basin. Project is located on Clay Street. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: (Previous 2 Yrs) 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue 11,756 45,000 880,000 750,000 936,756 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - - Bond Proceeds Other - - - - - Total Funding Sources: 11,756 45,000 880,000 750,000 936,756 Capital Expenditures: Design 11,756 45,000 280,000 150,000 336,756 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 600,000 600,000 600,000 Total Expenditures: 11,756 45,000 880,000 750,000 936,756 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 1,000,000 500,000 3,130,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - Bond Proceeds Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 1,000,000 500,000 - - 3,130,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 200,000 100,000 730,000 Right of Way - - Construction 800,000 400,000 2,400,000 Total Expenditures: 1,000,000 500,000 3,130,000 Grants / Other Sources: 111 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan STORM DRAINAGE FUND (432) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: 17th Street SE & 'M' Street SE Project No: Cpxxxx Project Type: Capacity (Improvement) Project Manager. Thorn Description: New conveyance improvement within 'M' Street SE from 17th Street SE to 21st Street SE. Flow contributes to the 21st Street Infiltration Facility. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 250,000 250,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - Bond Proceeds Other - Total Funding Sources: - 250,000 250,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 20,000 20,000 Right of Way - - Construction 230,000 230,000 Total Expenditures: - 250,000 250,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 250,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) Bond Proceeds Other - Total Funding Sources: 250,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 20,000 Right of Way - Construction 230,000 Total Expenditures: - 250,000 Grants / Other Sources: 112 • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan •STORM DRAINAGE FUND (432) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds • • Project Title: 21st Street SE & R Street SE (BC -14 Modified) Project No: cpXXXX Project Type: Capacity (Improvement) Project Manager: TBD Description: New conveyance improvement within 21 st Street from M Street SE to R Street SE, then south on R Street to 25th Street SW. Flow contributed to 21st Street Infiltration Facility. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 50,000 900,000 950,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - Bond Proceeds Other - - Total Funding Sources: 50,000 900,000 950,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 50,000 50,000 Right of Way - - - Construction 50,000 850,000 900,000 Total Expenditures: 50,000 900,000 950,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 900,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - Bond Proceeds Other - Total Funding Sources: - 900,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 50,000 Right of Way - Construction 850,000 Total Expenditures: 900,000 Grants / Other Sources: 113 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan STORM DRAINAGE FUND (432) capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: West Main Street Storm Station Project No: cp0636 Project Type: Capacity (Improvement) Project Manager: Thorn Description: Install storm pump station to relieve impacts to West Main Street area storm system from high Mill Creek influence. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 25,000 175,000 200,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - Bond Proceeds Other Total Funding Sources: - 25,000 175,000 200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 25,000 25,000 50,000 Right of Way - - - Construction - 150,000 150,000 Total Expenditures: 25,000 175,000 200,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 175,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - Bond Proceeds Other - Total Funding Sources: 175,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 25,000 Right of Way - Construction 150,000 Total Expenditures: - 175,000 Grants / Other Sources: 114 is • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan STORM DRAINAGE FUND (432) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Regulatory Improvements Project No: cpXXXX Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Carlaw Description: Storm Drainage Comprehensive Plan revisions or regulatory responses. Storm Drainage Comprehensive Plan to be updated in 2008. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: (Previous 2 Yrs) 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue 100,000 250,000 50,000 350,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - Bond Proceeds Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: 100,000 250,000 50,000 350,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 100,000 250,000 50,000 350,000 Right of Way - - - - Construction - Total Expenditures: 100,000 250,000 50,000 350,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 500,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - - Bond Proceeds Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 500,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 500,000 Right of Way - - - - Construction - - - - - Total Expenditures: 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 500,000 Grants / Other Sources: 115 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan STORM DRAINAGE FUND (432) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Storm Facility Retrofit Program Project No: c406aO Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: TBD Description: Annual program to improve function and aesthetics of two existing storm ponds. Two ponds to be identified for 2007-2009 and the following years. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: (Previous 2 Yrs) 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue 197,745 200,000 400,000 397,745 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - Bond Proceeds Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: 197,745 200,000 400,000 397,745 Capital Expenditures: Design 34,796 50,000 100,000 84,796 Right of Way - - - - Construction 162,949 150,000 300,000 312,949 Total Expenditures: 197,745 200,000 400,000 397,745 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 400,000 400,000 1,200,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - Bond Proceeds Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 400,000 - 400,000 1,200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 100,000 100,000 300,000 Right of Way - - - Construction 300,000 300,000 900,000 Total Expenditures: 400,000 400,000 1,200,000 Grants f Other Sources: 116 • • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan STORM DRAINAGE FUND (432) capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: SCADA (Telemetry) Upgrades Project No: c524a0 Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Lee Description: The Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA, also known as the "Telemetry" system) is in need of upgrading. The existing system, based on an independent SCADA Assessment Study and the vulnerability study, has numerous obsolete components and does not allow control of the Sewer and Storm Utility stations. Upgrading the portion of the system utilizing antiquated equipment, while maintaining the portions of equipment that are compatible with the newer technologies available seems to be the logical course of action. The new system will utilize an open architecture so the City is no longer reliant on a single vendor for repairs and maintenance. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 55,000 172,000 55,000 227,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - Bond Proceeds Other - - - - Totai Funding Sources: 55,000 172,000 55,000 227,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 172,000 - 172,000 Right of Way - - - Construction 55,000 - 55,000 55,000 Total Expenditures: 55,000 172,000 55,000 227,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 58,000 285,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - Bond Proceeds Other - - Total Funding Sources: 58,000 285,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 172,000 Right of Way - - Construction 58,000 113,000 Total Expenditures: 58,000 285,000 Grants / Other Sources: 117 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan STORM DRAINAGE FUND (432) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2007-2012 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Pipeline Repair & Replacement Program Project No: c515a0 Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: TBD Description: Projects identified as those requiring replacement of existing infrastructure. These projects support Local Street and other utility replacement programs, requiring coordination. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: (Previous 2 Yrs) 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue 105,821 100,000 200,000 205,821 Grants (FectState,Local) - - - - Bond Proceeds Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: 105,821 100,000 200,000 205,821 Capital Expenditures: Design 105,821 20,000 40,000 125,821 Right of Way - - - - Constructlon - 80,000 160,000 80,000 Total Expenditures: 105,821 100,000 - 200,000 205,821 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 200,000 200,000 600,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - Bond Proceeds Other - - - Total Funding Sources: - 200,000 - 200,000 600,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 40,000 40,000 120,000 Right of Way - - - Construction 160,000 160,000 480,000 Total Expenditures: - 200,000 200,000 600,000 Grants / Other Sources: 118 is is • • TABLE SD -3 City -of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan Impact on Future Operating Budgets STORM DRAINAGE Pro'ect: 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total 1 Developer Participation $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 2 E Basin Ditch Improvements 2,000 2,000 2,000 6,000 3 21st St. SE & M St. SE - - - - 4 Terminal Park Infiltration 5 N. Central Storm Pond 6 15th Street Culvert Replacement - 7 Downtown Storm Water Quality Facility - 8 17th St. SE and M St. SE - - 9 21st St. SE and R St. SE - 10 W. Main St. Storm Station - - 11 Regulatory Improvements - - 12 Storm Facility Retrofit Program - - 13 SCADA - - 14 Pipeline Repair/Replacement - - Total $ - $ $ - $ 2,000 $ 2,000 $ 2,000 $ 6,000 119 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan SOLID WASTE Current Facilities The City of Auburn no longer has recycle drop stations facilities. The City now provides curbside service through a vendor who handles the disposal. 120 • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan 0 PARKS AND RECREATION Current Facilities The City of Auburn's park system consists of a total of 566.5 acres of neighborhood and community parks, special use areas, open space, and linear parks (trails). The 150 -acre Auburn Municipal Golf Course is identified as a separate public facility in this report, and is not included in the Parks and Recreation inventory. Table PR —1 "Facilities Inventory" lists all park and recreation land in the City's park system along with their current capacity and location. Level of Service (LOS) The current LOS provided by the City's park system represents the current inventory of City -owned park acres divided by the 2007 City population of 50,470. This equates to 1.05 acres per 1,000 population for neighborhood parks, 4.68 acres per 1,000 population for community parks, 0.63 acres for linear parks, 3.94 acres for open space, and 1.08 acres for special use areas. The proposed LOS provided by the City's park system represents the planned 2013 inventory of City -owned park acres divided by the 2013 projected City population of • 72,000. This equates to 0.74 acres per 1,000 population for neighborhood parks, 3.28 acres per 1,000 population for community parks, 0.44 acres per 1,000 population for linear parks, 2.76 acres per 1,000 population for open space, and 0.75 acres per 1,000 population for special use areas. • Capital Facilities Projects and Financing Parks and Recreation facilities include fourteen capital projects at a cost of $9,468,400. Table PR — 2a shows the proposed financing plan followed by individual worksheets showing the project detail. Impact on Future Operating Budgets As Table PR — 3 shows, operating budget impacts of $166,000 are forecasted for parks and recreation facilities during the six years 2009 — 2014. 121 TABLE PR -1 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan Facilities Inventory Parks and Recreation, Land ACILITY (Acres) LOCATION Existino Invento Auburndale Park 10.00 31700 108th NE Ballard Park 0.70 37th & 'R' Street SE Cameron Park 3.90 Lemon Tree Lane & Academy Dr. Cedar Lane Park 8.30 25th & 'K' Street SE Dykstra Park 1.70 1533 22nd Ave NE Forest Villa mini -park 0.20 17th & Fir Street SE Gaines Park 1.40 11th NW & W. Valley Highway Indian Tom Park 0.40 6th & Henry Road NE Lakeland Hills Park 5.00 5401 Olive Ave. SE Rotary Park 4.00 27th & Alpine Street SE Shaughnessy Park 3.50 21st & Hemlock SE Scootie Brown Park 1.70 8th & Henry Road NE Terminal Park 1.20 12th & 'C' Street SE Jornada Park 1.90 1440 'U' Court NW Auburndale 2 Park 9.30 29700 118th Street SE Total Neighborhood Parks 53.20 vuc - Total Proposed Capacity Projects - 2013 Projected Inventory Total - Neiahborhood Parks - 53.20 ommunity Parks: Brannan Park 21.70 26th & 'M' Street NE Veteran's Memorial Park 8.50 Park Ave. & AWN Fenster/Green River Access 13.40 10520 Auburn/Blk. Diamond Road Fulmer Field 5.00 5th & 'K' Street NE Game Farm Park 53.00 3226 'V' Street SE Game Farm Wilderness Park 20.00 2401 SE Stuck River Rd. GSA Park 6.60 'C' Street SW & 15th SW Isaac Evans Park 14.90 29627 Green River Road NE Les Gove Park 20.50 11th & AWS Mill Pond 4.00 600 Oravetz Road Olson Canyon Farmstead 15.00 28728 Green River Road Roegner Park 21.60 601 Oravetz Road Lea Hill Park 9.00 SE 319th & 124th Street SE Sunset Park 15.00 1306 69th Street SE Total Community Parks 228.20 122 • • • • • City of Aubum Capital Facilities Plan TABLE PR -1 (continued) 3keland Hills Community Park Total Proposed Capacity Projects 2013 Projected Inventory Total - Community Parks - !near Parks: Interurban Trail Lakeland Hills Trail White River Trail Total Linear Parks 40,61Ki] 25.40 2.30 5401 Olive Ave. SE 4.10 31.80 wune - 87.00 Total Proposed Capacity Projects - 29639 Green River Road 2013 Projected Inventory Total 28728 Green River Road - Linear Parks - 31.80 Special Use Areas: Existing Inventory: Bicentennial Park 1.40 SR -18 & AWS Centennial Viewpoint Park 0.70 600 Mountain View Drive City Hall Plaza 0.90 25 W. Main Clark Plaza 0.20 15th & AWN Downtown mini -mall 0.10 E. Main & 'B' Street SE Mountain View Cemetery 50.00 2020 Mountain View Drive Pioneer Cemetery 0.80 8th & AWN Slaughter Memorial 0.20 3100 AWN Total Special Use Areas 54.30 None Total Proposed Capacity Projects 2013 Projected Inventory Total - Special Use Areas - Open Space Areas: Clark Property Game Farm Open Space Golf Course Open Space Olson Canyon Open Space Total Open Space Areas Total Proposed Capacity Projects 2013 Projected Inventory Total - Open Space Areas - 54.30 25.00 1600 Oravetz Road 87.00 2400 SE Stuck River Road 42.00 29639 Green River Road 45.00 28728 Green River Road 199.00 123 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan TABLE PR -2a • CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING PARKS and RECREATION (Municipal Parks Construction Fund) 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total Capacity Projects: 2 Les Gove Park Improvements 1 Park Acquisitions Capital Costs 250,000 250,000 Capital Costs 200,000 200,000 400,000 200,000 1,000,000 Funding Sources: Grants (Fed, State, Local) 50,000 50,000 Municipal Park Fund - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 200,000 200,000 400,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - REET - 200,000 200,000 200,000 600,000 Subtotal, Capacity Projects: 590,900 - Capital Costs 200,000 200,000 400,000 200,000 - 1,000,000 Non -Capacity Projects: 2 Les Gove Park Improvements Capital Costs Capital Costs 250,000 250,000 Funding Sources: Municipal Park Fund - - Grants (Fed, State, Local) 50,000 50,000 BEET - - Other - 200,000 200,000 3 Fenster Farm Site Plan - Phase 1 Capital Costs 692,400 - - 692,400 Funding Sources: Funding Sources: Municipal Park Fund 101,500 101,500 Grants (Fed,State,Local) 590,900 590,900 4 Brannan Park Field Lighting Capital Costs 250,000 250,000 Funding Sources: Municipal Park Fund - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 75,000 75,000 BEET 175,000 175,000 Other _ _ 5 Jacobsen Tree Farm Site Plan Capital Costs 30,000 30,000 Funding Sources: Municipal Park Fund 30,000 30,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - 6 Fulmer Park Improvements Capital Costs 200,000 200,000 Funding Sources: Municipal Park Fund - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - REET - - Other - 200,000 200,000 7 Auburn Community Center Capital Costs 5,000,000 - 5,000,000 Funding Sources: Municipal Park Fund - REET - - Bond Proceeds 5,000,000 5,000,000 124 • • • TABLE PR -2a (continued) City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 8 Veteran's Park Improvements - Phase 1&2 10 Auburn Environmental Park Capital Costs 50,000 75,000 125,000 Funding Sources: Municipal Park Fund - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) - REET - - Other - - 50,000 75,000 125,000 9 Olson Canyon Farm Development Capital Costs 170,000 35,000 - - 205,000 Funding Sources: - Municipal Park Fund - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - REET 170,000 35,000 205,000 Other - - - - • 125 10 Auburn Environmental Park Capital Costs 1,136,000 1,136,000 Funding Sources: Municipal Park Fund - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 568,000 568,000 Bond Proceeds - - Cumulative Reserve Fund 568,000 568,000 Other - - - t 1 Shaughnessy Park Improvements Capital Costs 100,000 100,000 Funding Sources: • Municipal Park Fund Grants (Fed,State,Local) 50,000 _ 50,000 Other 50,000 50,000 12 Rotary Park Improvements Capital Costs 80,000 - 80,000 Funding Sources: Municipal Park Fund 40,000 40,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - Other 40,000 - - - - - 40,000 13 Misc. Parks Improvements Capital Costs - 50,000 100,000 50,000 100,000 50,000 350,000 Funding Sources: Municipal Park Fund - - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - - - - Other - 50,000 100,000 50,000 100,000 50,000 350,000 14 Lakeland Hills Park Capital Costs 50,000 - - - - - 50,000 Funding Sources: Municipal Park Fund 50,000 50,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - Other • 125 TABLE PR -2a (continued) SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects Non -Capacity Projects Total Costs FUNDING SOURCES: Municipal Park Fund Grants (Fed,State,Local) Bond Proceeds FEET Cumulative Reserve Fund Other Total Funding City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 200,000 - 200,000 400,000 200,000 - 1,000,000 7,378,400 665,000 150,000 125,000 100,000 50,000 8,468,400 7,578,400 665,000 350,000 525,000 300,000 50,000 9,468,400 191,500 80,000 - - - - 271,500 1,433,900 50,000 200,000 1,683,900 5,000,000 - - - - 5,000,000 345,000 35,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 980,000 568,000 - - - - 568,000 40,000 500,000 150,000 125,000 100,000 50,000 965,000 7,578,400 665,000 350,000 525,000 300,000 50,000 9,468,400 126 C7 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Park Acquisitions Project No: cpXXXX Project Type: Capacity Project Manager: Faber Description: Land acquisitions to occur based on demand and deficiencies including corridors and trails. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Municipal Parks Construction Fund - - - Grants (Fed, State, Local) 200,000 200,000 Bond Proceeds - - REET Other - - Total Funding Sources: - 200,000 - 200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - Right of Way - - - Construction - 200,000 200,000 Total Expenditures: - 200,000 - 200,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Municipal Parks Construction Fund - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 200,000 400,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - REET 200,000 200,000 200,000 600,000 Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: 200,000 400,000 200,000 1,000,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - Right of Way - - - Construction 200,000 400,000 200,000 1,000,000 Total Expenditures: 200,000 400,000 200,000 - 1,000,000 Grants / Other Sources: State grant 127 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Les Gove Park Improvements Project No: cpXXXX Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Description: Project to include irrigation improvements, playground improvements, addition of drinking fountains, ballfield enhancements and public restrooms. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Increased maintenance of approximately $10,000 annually Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Municipal Parks Construction Fund - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 50,000 Bond Proceeds - REET - Other 200,000 Total Funding Sources: - - - 250,000 - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - Right of Way - - - - Construction - - - 250,000 Total Expenditures: - - - 250,000 - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Municipal Parks Construction Fund - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 50,000 Bond Proceeds - REET - Other 200,000 Total Funding Sources: - 250,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - Right of Way - Construction 250,000 Total Expenditures: - - - 250,000 Grants f Other Sources: 128 • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Fenster Farm Site Plan - Phase 1 Project No: c521a0 Project Type: Non Capacity Project Manager: Description: Coordinate with King County and State of Washington on development with natural habitat area. Progress Summary: Preliminary design and wetland delineation completed in 2007. Design construction, phase 1, anticipated in spring/summer 2008. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Municipal Parks Construction Fund 18,954 - 15,000 101,500 135,454 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - 85,000 590,900 675,900 Bond Proceeds - - - REET Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: 18,954 100,000 692,400 811,354 Capital Expenditures: Design 18,954 100,000 - 118,954 Right or Way - - - - Construction - - 692,400 692,400 Total Expenditures: 18,954 100,000 692,400 811,354 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Municipal Parks Construction Fund 101,500 Grants (Fed, State, Local) 590,900 Bond Proceeds - REET Other - Total Funding Sources: 692,400 Capital Expenditures: Design - Right of Way - Construction 692,400 Total Expenditures: - 692,400 Grants / Other Sources: Local -Salmon Recovery Board 129 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Project Title: Brannan Park Field #2 & #3 - Replacement of Lighting Project No: cp0708 Project Type: Non Capacity Project Manager: Capital Projects Fund Description: Replace the existing field lights on Brannan #2 with new Musco "green" light system. Add new Musco "green" lights to field #3., The "green" light system uses 29% of the energy of the current lights. The lights at Brannan #2 were installed in 1972, and the light poles have reached the end of their useful life. The Musco lights have a 10 -year maintenance free contract, with every bulb being replaced at the end of the 10 -year contract. Field #3, used for baseball with 80' bases, has never had lights. These are the fields the City has the greatest need for, and with the addition of lights it would increase the capacity of the fields. Progress Summary: Preliminary design and application for grant completed in 2007. Design and construction anticipated in fall 2008. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Municipal Parks Construction Fund - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 75,000 75,000 Bond Proceeds - - REET 175,000 175,000 Other - - Total Funding Sources: 250,000 250,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - Right of Way - - Construction 250,000 250,000 Total Expenditures: 250,000 250,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Municipal Parks Construction Fund - Grants (Fed, State, Local) 75,000 Bond Proceeds - REET 175,000 Other - Total Funding Sources: 250,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - Right of Way - Construction 250,000 Total Expenditures: - 250,000 Grants / Other Sources: State Grant 130 • • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Project Title: Jacobsen Tree Farm Site Plan Project No: cp0609 Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Faber Capital Projects Fund Description: Coordinate with Auburn School District on Master Site Plan for this 29 acre site. This project is contingent upon incorporation and City Council direction. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Municipal Parks Construction Fund - 30,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - Bond Proceeds REET Other - Total Funding Sources: 30,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 30,000 Right of Way - Construction - Total Expenditures: 30,000 - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Municipal Parks Construction Fund 30,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - Bond Proceeds REET Other - Total Funding Sources: - - 30,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 30,000 Right of Way - Construction - Total Expenditures: 30,000 Grants / Other Sources: 131 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Fulmer Park Improvements Project No: cpXXXX Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager. Description: Develop additional park using land exchanged with Water Utility, increasing recreational amenities and parking facilities. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Increased maintenance of approximately $10,000 annually. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Municipal Parks Construction Fund - Grants (FedState,Local) Bond Proceeds REET - Other 200,000 Total Funding Sources: 200,000 - Capital Expenditures: Design 25,000 Right of Way - - Construction 175,000 Total Expenditures: - - 200,000 - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Municipal Parks Construction Fund - Grants (Fed,State,Local) Bond Proceeds REET - Other 200,000 Total Funding Sources: - - 200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 25,000 Right of Way - Construction 175,000 Total Expenditures: - - 200,000 Grants / Other Sources: 132 • • • is • City of Auburn Capital -Facilities Plan MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Project Title: Auburn Community Center Project No: cp0607 Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Faber Capital Projects Fund Description: Provide 20,000 sq. ft. community center and 9,000 sq. ft. gymnasium addition, as well as converting the existing parks administration building into youth/teen center. Progress Summary: Architecture and Engineering firms to be selected in 2007. Design in 2008 and construction in 2009. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Municipal Parks Construction Fund - Grants (Fed,State,Local) - Bond Proceeds - 5,000,000 5,000,000 REET 100,000 100,000 Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 100,000 5,000,000 - 5,100,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 100,000 200,000 300,000 Right of Way - - - Construction - 4,800,000 4,800,000 Total Expenditures: - 100,000 5,000,000 - 5,100,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Municipal Parks Construction Fund - Grants (Fed,State,Local) - Bond Proceeds 5,000,000 REET - Other Total Funding Sources: - 5,000,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 200,000 Right of Way - Construction 4,800,000 Total Expenditures: - - - - 5,000,000 Grants / Other Sources: 133 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Veteran's Park Improvements - Phase 1 & 2 Project No: cpXxxx Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Description: Phase 1 (2010): Replace existing concrete pathways, improve irrigation coverage, selective tree removal, and turf renovation. This project is referred to in the Parks, Arts and Recreation Plan. Phase 2 (2011): Add new concrete pathways along parking lot, overlay existing parking lot and add a climbing toy with safety surfacing. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Municipal Parks Construction Fund - Grants (Fed,State,Local) Bond Proceeds REET Other Total Funding Sources: - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design Right of Way Construction Total Expenditures: - - - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Municipal Parks Construction Fund - Grants (Fed,State,Local) Bond Proceeds REET - - - Other 50,000 75,000 125,000 Total Funding Sources: 50,000 75,000 125,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - Right of Way - - - Construction 50,000 75,000 125,000 Total Expenditures: 50,000 75,000 - - 125,000 Grants / Other Sources: 134 • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan •MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Capital Projects Fund • • Project Title: Olson Canyon Farm Restoration Project No: cp0715 Project Type: Non Capacity Project Manager: Cosgrove Description: Project is restoration and preparation for public use of the Mary Olson Farm. A Washington State Heritage Capital Projects grant has been awarded, $245,000. It will be used to fully restore the farmhouse, inside and out (2007, 2008 & 2009) and other buildings and landscape. The grant is awarded to the Museum (non-profit) and as such will not show up on the city's records. The cash match provided by the city will be used for design and construction of public parking, restrooms and other parks amenities. Upon completion of the parking, restrooms and park amenities, the Farm will be approximately 90% complete and available for public use. Progress Summary: City Match, 2007: design of parking and restroom to be completed once parcel of land is transferred from County to City. 2008: construction on these projects should be complete. 2009: other visitor amenities (fencing, entry, pathways, signage, etc) completed. Non-profit grant, 2007: exterior of house reconstructed. 2008; interior design complete, construction begun. 2009: interior complete, landscape restoration in progress. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Municipal Parks Construction Fund 2,726 2,726 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - Bond Proceeds - - - - REET 40,000 170,000 35,000 210,000 Other - - - - - Total Funding Sources: 2,726 40,000 170,000 35,000 212,726 Capital Expenditures: Design 2,726 40,000 10,000 - 52,726 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 160,000 35,000 160,000 Total Expenditures: 2,726 40,000 170,000 35,000 212,726 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Municipal Parks Construction Fund - Grants (Fed, State, Local) Bond Proceeds - REET 205,000 Other - - Total Funding Sources: - - 205,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 10,000 Right of Way - Construction 195,000 Total Expenditures: - - 205,000 Grants / Other Sources: 135 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Auburn Environmental Park Project No: c412a0 Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Nix Description: The Auburn Environmental Park (AEP) Project seeks to create open space within an urbanized area, which will provide many mutual benefits. The park will provide opportunities for local economic development, water quality improvement, storm water detention, flood control, fish and wildlife enhancement, public education and recreation, including hiking trails and bird viewing amenities. Progress Summary: The City has been awarded $578,000 grant from IAC and will require City match. The amount funded from the Cumulative Reserve fund will only be transferred as funds are required to match the grant award. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Municipal Parks Construction Fund - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 10,000 568,000 578,000 Bond Proceeds - - - REET - - Cumulative Reserve Fund - 10,000 568,000 578,000 Other 756,888 - - 756,888 Total Funding Sources: 756,888 20,000 1,136,000 - 1,912,888 Capital Expenditures: Design 168,402 20,000 300,000 488,402 Right of Way 588,486 - - 588,486 Construction - - 836,000 836,000 Total Expenditures: 756,888 20,000 1,136,000 1,912,888 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Municipal Parks Construction Fund - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 568,000 Bond Proceeds REET - Cumulative Reserve Fund 568,000 Other - Total Funding Sources: - 1,136,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 300,000 Right of Way - Construction 836,000 Total Expenditures: 1,136,000 Grants! Other Sources: Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation (IAC) $578,000 136 • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan •MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Capital Projects Fund • • Project Title: Shaughnessy Park Improvements Project No: CPXXXX Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Faber Description: Based on completed Master Plan, coordinate improvements with neighborhood, Muckleshoot tribe and service club(s). Improvements to include new playground, irrigation, improved entrance and soccer/baseball field development. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Increased mowing and utilities- $6,000 Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Municipal Parks Construction Fund - 50,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - Bond Proceeds - REET Other 50,000 Total Funding Sources: - - 100,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 10,000 Right of Way - Construction 90,000 Total Expenditures: 100,000 - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Municipal Parks Construction Fund 50,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - Bond Proceeds REET - Other 50,000 Total Funding Sources: 100,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 10,000 Right of Way - Construction 90,000 Total Expenditures: 100,000 Grants / Other Sources: Muckleshoot Tribe 137 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Rotary Park Improvements Project No: cpXXXX Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Faber Description: Based on completed Master Plan, coordinate improvements with neighborhood and Rotary Club of Auburn to add walking path, new playground, irrigation and signage to Rotary Park. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Increased mowing and utilities- $6,000 Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Municipal Parks Construction Fund - 40,000 40,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - Bond Proceeds - - REET Other 40,000 40,000 Total Funding Sources: - 80,000 80,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 8,000 8,000 Right of Way - Construction 72,000 72,000 Total Expenditures: - 80,000 80,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Municipal Parks Construction Fund 40,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - Bond Proceeds REET - Other 40,000 Total Funding Sources: - 80,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 8,000 Right of Way - Construction 72,000 Total Expenditures: 80,000 Grants / Other Sources: Auburn Rotary 138 • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan .MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Capital Projects Fund • Project Title: Misc. Parks Improvements Project No: cpXXX Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Faber Description: Minor park improvements including shelters, roofs, playgrounds, irrigation and restrooms as denoted in the Parks Master Plan. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Municipal Parks Construction Fund - - Grants (Fed, State, Local) - Bond Proceeds REET - Other 50,000 Total Funding Sources: - - 50,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - Right of Way - Construction 50,000 Total Expenditures: - - 50,000 - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Municipal Parks Construction Fund - Grants (Fed,State,Local) Bond Proceeds REET - - - - Other 100,000 50,000 100,000 50,000 350,000 Total Funding Sources: 100,000 50,000 100,000 50,000 350,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction 100,000 50,000 100,000 50,000 350,000 Total Expenditures: 100,000 50,000 100,000 50,000 350,000 Grants / Other Sources: 139 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Lakeland Hills Park Project No: Cp0610 Project Type: Non Capacity Project Manager: Description: Project to develop this passive park, including improved irrigation, playtoy, etc. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Municipal Parks Construction Fund - 50,000 50,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - Bond Proceeds - REET Other - Total Funding Sources: 50,000 - 50,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - Right of Way - - - Construction 50,000 50,000 Total Expenditures: - 50,000 - 50,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Municipal Parks Construction Fund 50,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - Bond Proceeds REET Other - Total Funding Sources: - - 50,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - Right of Way - Construction 50,000 Total Expenditures: - 50,000 Grants / Other Sources: 140 • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan TABLE PR -3 Ig Impact on Future Operating Budgets PARKS and RECREATION, Including MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION • L 1 Park Acquisitions 2 Les Gove Park Improvements 3 Fenster Farm Site Plan 4 Brannan Park Lighting 5 Jacobsen Tree Farm 6 Fulmer Park 7 Auburn Community Center 8 Veteran's Park Improv. 9 Olson Farm Development 10 Auburn Environmental Park 11 Shaughnessy Park Improv. 12 Rotary Park Improv. 13 Misc. Park Improvements 14 Lakeland Hills Park $ 6,000 $ 32,000 Total 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 50,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 50,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 30,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 36,000 $ 6,000 $ 32,000 $ 32,000 $ 32,000 $ 32,000 $ 32,000 $ 166,000 141 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan COMMUNITY CENTER Current Facilities The City of Auburn currently does not have a community center. Level of Service (LOS) The City does not have a current LOS for a community center. The proposed LOS of 486 square feet per 1,000 population is based on the projected inventory divided by the 2013 projected citywide population of 72,000. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing The proposed Community Center facility construction project will cost approximately $5,100,000. Impact on Future Operating Budgets Based on outcome of feasibility study, increased costs to the general fund may be seen. TABLE PR -4 Facilities Inventory Community Center ACILITY 'xisting Inventory: Total Existing Inventory LOCATION roposed Capacity Projects: ew Community Center 35,000 Total Proposed Capacity Projects 35,000 2013 Projected Inventory Total 35,000 142 • • • • 0 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan SENIOR CENTER Current Facilities The City of Auburn currently has one Senior Center. Table PR -5 Facilities Inventory lists the facility along with its current capacity and location. Level of Service (LOS) The current LOS of 249.65 square feet per 1,000 population is based on the existing inventory divided by the 2007 citywide population of 50,470. The proposed LOS of 175 square feet per 1,000 population is based on the projected inventory divided by the 2013 projected citywide population of 72,000. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing This CFP does not include any senior center capital facilities projects during 2008 — 2013. Impact on Future Operating Budgets There are no operating budget impacts forecasted for the senior center facility during the six years 2009 — 2014. TABLE PR -5 ACILITY Facilities Inventory Senior Center Total Existing Inventory Capacity Projects: Total Proposed Capacity Projects 2013 Projected Inventory Total Senior Center 143 uare LOCATION 12,600 808 9th Street SE 12,600 12,600 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan • GENERAL MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS. Current Facilities The current inventory of City government administration and operations facilities include 85,505 square feet for general government operations, 62,188 square feet for police services, and 31,673 square feet for fire protection, for a total of 179,346 square feet. Table GM — 1 "Facilities Inventory" lists the facilities along with their current capacity and location. Level of Service (LOS) The current LOS of 3,553.52 square feet per 1,000 population is based on the existing inventory divided by the 2007 citywide population of 50,470. The proposed LOS of 2,977.03 square feet per 1,000 population is based on the projected inventory divided by the 2013 projected citywide population of 72,000. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing The City's General Municipal Building facilities include four capital projects at a cost of $2,500,000. The projects include (1) $500,000 for Equipment Rental vehicle maintenance bay, (2) $200,000 for M&O vehicle bay and storage building, (3) $1,500,000 Facility Improvement Projects throughout the city, and (4) $300,000 for • HVAC Upgrades at City Hall. Table GM — 2 shows the proposed financing plan followed by individual worksheets showing the project detail. Impact on Future Operating Budgets Operating budget impacts annually are not yet forecast for general municipal buildings during the six years 2009 — 2014. • 144 • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan TABLE GM -1 Facilities Inventory General Municipal Buildings CAPACITY FACILITY Existing Inventory: LOCATION City Hall 37,700 25 W. Main Street City Maintenance & Operations Facility 25,855 1305'C' Street SW Parks & Recreation Admin. Facility 7,000 910 9th Street SE Street Waste Handling Facility 2,750 1305V Street SW Municipal Court (Justice Center) 12,200 340 E. Main Street Total 85,505 ers (Ju8tice Center) substation storage range qd vehicle parking stalls Total itions: North Station #31 South Station #32 GSA Station #33 ier Facilities: rth Station Maint. Facility Total Total Existing Inventory Capacity Projects: Fire Station Community Center (see project detail, Parks & Recreation section) Total Proposed Capacity Projects 2013 Projected Inventory Total 145 24,800 1,208 300 32,880 3,000 62,188 340 E. Main Street 1101 Supermall Way 15 N. Division Street 1600 Block 15th St. NW 'C' Street SW (GSA) 12,220 1101 'D' Street NE 5,200 1951 'R' Street SE 9,533 2815 'C' Street SW 4,700 1101 'D' Street NE 31,653 179,346 tbd 35,000 35,000 214,346 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan TABLE GM -2 • CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING GENERAL MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS • 146 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total Capacity Projects: none - Non -Capacity Projects: 1 Vehicle Maintenance Bay Capital Costs 500,000 - 500,000 Funding Sources: Equip. Rental Fund 500,000 500,000 2 M&O Vehicle Bay and Storage Capital Costs 200,000 200,000 Funding Sources: Equip. Rental Fund 200,000 - 200,000 3 Facility Improvement Projects Capital Costs 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,500,000 Funding Sources: Capital Improv. Fund - - - - - - - Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - - - - REET 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,500,000 4 City Hall HVAC System Upgrade Capital Costs 300,000 - - - - - 300,000 Funding Sources: • Capital Improv. Fund - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - - - - REET 300,000 - 300,000 SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects - - - - - - - Non -Capacity Projects 1,250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 2,500,000 Total Costs 1,250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 2,500,000 FUNDING SOURCES: General Fund - - - - - - - Equip. Rental Fund 700,000 - - - - 700,000 BEET 550,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,800,000 Total Funding 1,250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 2,500,000 • 146 • is City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND (550) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Equipment Rental Vehicle Maintenance Bay Project No: cp0710 Project Type: Project Manager: Description: Add additional vehicle bay at Equipment Rental shop for heavy equipment and large vehicles to improve efficiency and remove choke points. Adding a large vehicle bay with a maintenance pit will enable us to perform inspections and maintenance on more than one large vehicle at a time, and while loaded with product (i.e. sand, water, debris and sewage). Currently several hours of work have to be undone and then repeated due to our limitations. Not only is this counterproductive, but it can be catastrophic during critical operations. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Equip. Rental Revenue - 500,000 500,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - Other - - Total Funding Sources: - 500,000 - 500,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 25,000 25,000 Right of Way - - Construction 475,000 475,000 Total Expenditures: - 500,000 500,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Equip. Rental Revenue 500,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - Other - Total Funding Sources: - - 500,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 25,000 Right of Way - Construction 475,000 Total Expenditures: - 500,000 Grants / Other Sources: 147 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND (550) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Maintenance and Operations Vehicle Bay and Storage Project No: cp0710 Project Type: Project Manager: Description: Add three insulated vehicle bays for Vactor storage to provide year-round protection. These vehicles hold large quantities of water on board at all times enabling them to be immediately dispatched in the event of an emergency. This requires them to be protected from freezing temperatures. Draining their large tanks each day would cause a dispatch delay while refilling, that could result in extraordinary damage to public and private property in an emergency situation. Enclose existing bays to provide necessary weather protection for street sweepers, sanding, and snow plow equipment. Construct storage shed to facilitate removal of portable containers, improving space utilization and traffic flow throughout M&O. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Equip. Rental Revenue - 200,000 200,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) Other - Total Funding Sources: - - 200,000 200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - Right of Way - - Construction 200,000 200,000 Total Expenditures: - 200,000 200,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Equip. Rental Revenue 200,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - Other - Total Funding Sources: 200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - Right of Way - Construction 200,000 Total Expenditures: - 200,000 Grants / Other Sources: UM • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan •CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Capital Projects Fund • • Project Title: Facility Improvement Projects Project No: cp328d Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Omegna Description: Miscellaneous facility improvement projects throughout the city. Projects are identified and prioritized annually, and subject to delay to accommodate emergency repairs. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Cap. tmprov. Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - REET I 250,000 250,000 250,000 500,000 Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: - 250,000 250,000 250,000 500,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - Right of Way - - - - Construction 250,000 250,000 250,000 500,000 Total Expenditures: 250,000 250,000 250,000 500,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Cap. Improv. Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - - REET 1 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,500,000 Other - - - - - Total Funding Sources: ; 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,500,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,500,000 Total Expenditures: 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,500,000 Grants / Other Sources: 149 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: City Hall HVAC System Upgrade Project No: cp0716 Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager. Omegna Description: Design and implementation of upgrades to the City Hall heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning (HVAC) system. Improvements will allow for upgrades to the controls, air distribution and air handling components. It will also provide a systematic, phased implementation plan that can be put in place over the next several years. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Cap. Improv. Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - REET I 400,000 300,000 700,000 Other - - - Total Funding Sources: - 400,000 300,000 - 700,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 100,000 - 100,000 Right of Way - - - Construction 300,000 300,000 600,000 Total Expenditures: 400,000 300,000 - 700,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Cap. Improv. Revenue - Grants (Fed,State,Local) - REET l - - - - 300,000 Other - Total Funding Sources: - - 300,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - Right of Way - Construction 300,000 Total Expenditures: - - 300,000 Grants / Other Sources: 150 • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan 0 COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENTS Current Facilities In 2002, the City entered into a 99 -year lease with the Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority (Sound Transit) for the use of 180 parking stalls and the right to sublease the Commercial Tenant area of the transit center parking garage and retail area. Level of Service (LOS) No Level of Service for community improvement projects have been identified at this time. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing The City's proposed Community Improvements include eight capital projects at a cost of $6,753,000. Table CI -2 shows the proposed financing plan followed by individual work sheets showing the project detail. Impact on Future Operating Budgets • There are no operating budget impacts forecast for community improvement projects annually during the six years 2009 — 2014. • 151 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan TABLE CI -2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENTS 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total Capacity Proiects: 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 none Funding Sources: Non -Capacity Projects: Capital Improv. Fund - - 1 Gateway Program (Planning) - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) - Capital Costs 100,000 85,000 15,000 - Funding Sources: 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 General Fund 100,000 85,000 15,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - Other - - - - 2 Neighborhood Improvement (Planning) Capital Improv. Fund - Capital Costs 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Funding Sources: - - - General Fund 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - - Other - - - 3 Annual Sidewalk Improvements 500,000 500,000 Funding Sources: Capital Costs 200,000 200,000 Funding Sources: 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 Capital Improv. Fund - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - - Other Capital Projects 200,000 200,000 4 Traffic Calming Improvements 200,000 - 200,000 100,000 100,000 Capital Costs 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 Funding Sources: Capital Improv. Fund - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - - - REET 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 5 Traffic Signal Improvements Capital Costs 200,000 - 200,000 - 200,000 Funding Sources: Capital Improv. Fund - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - - REET 200,000 - 200,000 - 200,000 6 Downtown Revitalization Capital Costs 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 Funding Sources: General Fund 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - - - REET - - 7 Auburn Airport Wetland Mitigation Project (Planning) 100,000 600,000 100,000 600,000 400,000 - 400,000 200,000 1,200,000 200,000 1,200,000 - 600,000 - 600,000 500,000 3,000,000 500,000 3,000,000 Capital Costs 50,000 200,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 290,000 Funding Sources: General Fund 50,000 200,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 290,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - - - - - Other - - - - - 152 •I •I •I City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan • TABLE CI -2 (continued) 8 Mohawks Plastics Site Mitigation Project Capital Costs 200,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 250,000 Funding Sources: General Fund.98 - - - - - - - Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - - - - REET 2 200,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 250,000 9 M Street SE Sidewalk LID Capital Costs 213,800 - - - - - 213,800 Funding Sources: General Fund.98 213,800 213,800 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - - REET - SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects - - - - - - - Non -Capacity Projects 1,563,800 1,295,000 1,035,000 1,020,000 1,020,000 820,000 6,753,800 Total Costs 1,563,800 1,295,000 1,035,000 1,020,000 1,020,000 820,000 6,753,800 FUNDING SOURCES: Capital Improv. Fund - - - - - - - General Fund 963,800 885,000 625,000 610,000 610,000 610,000 4,303,800 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - - - - Other Capital Projects - 200,000 - 200,000 - - 400,000 REET 400,000 200,000 400,000 200,000 400,000 200,000 1,800,000 • REET 2 200,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 250,000 Total Funding 1,563,800 1,295,000 1,035,000 1,020,000 1,020,000 820,000 6,753,800 • 153 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan GENERAL FUND, Non -Departmental Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 General Fund Project Title: Gateway Program Project No: c221 a0 Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Description: Ongoing project to market the City and to design and initiate construction of gateways throughout the City. Gateway sign designs were developed and the first one has been completed at Peasley Canyon. Funding is needed for the next signs. Future sites in '07 include 277th at AWN, Lakeland Hills ('07) and SR164 near M Street ('08). Progress Summary: Funding is needed for the next sign. Costs my be offset by gifts and/or sponsorships. Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total General Fund.98 170,042 100,000 100,000 85,000 370,042 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - - Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: 170,042 100,000 100,000 85,000 370,042 Capital Expenditures: Design 32,077 15,000 15,000 10,000 62,077 Right of Way - - - Construction 137,966 85,000 85,000 75,000 307,966 Total Expenditures: 170,042 100,000 100,000 85,000 370,042 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: General Fund. 98 15,000 200,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - Other - - Total Funding Sources: 15,000 200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 25,000 Right of Way - - Construction 15,000 175,000 Total Expenditures: 15,000 200,000 Grants / Other Sources: 154 • • • • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan GENERAL FUND, Non -Departmental Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 General Fund Project Title: Neighborhood Improvement Plan Project No: cp0615 Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Description: Neighborhood revitalization has been a high priority for the Council for several years. The city has completed the Terminal Park Plan and the SE of Main Street Plan and has many additional neighborhood plans to complete. With an annual funding level of $100,000, the city can make neighborhood improvements such as traffic calming, sidewalks and other improvements for these and future neighborhoods. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total General Fund 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 300,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - - Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 300,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 18,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 48,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 82,000 85,000 85,000 85,000 252,000 Total Expenditures: 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 300,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: General Fund 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 600,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 600,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 90,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 85,000 85,000 85,000 85,000 510,000 Total Expenditures: 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 600,000 Grants / Other Sources: 155 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Citywide Sidewalk Improvements Project No: cp328a (prior to '06 - c308a, '06 - #c308ao) Project Type: Non -Capacity (Semi -Annual) Project Manager: TBD Description: Project will fund sidewalk improvements to a variety of locations throughout the city. A sidewalk inventory was completed in 2004. Annual projects are selected based upon criteria such as: gap closure, safe walking routes to schools, completion of downtown pedestrian corridor or "linkage", connectivity to transit services, ADA requirements, and "Save our Streets" (SOS) project locations. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Cap. Improv. Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) REET - - - - Other 148,480 200,000 200,000 348,480 Total Funding Sources: 148,480 200,000 200,000 348,480 Capital Expenditures: Design 21,445 20,000 20,000 41,445 Right of Way - - - - Construction 127,035 180,000 180,000 307,035 Total Expenditures: 148,480 200,000 200,000 348,480 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Cap. Improv. Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) REET - - Other 200,000 400,000 TotalFunding Sources: 200,000 400,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 20,000 40,000 Right of Way - - Construction 180,000 360,000 Total Expenditures: 200,000 400,000 Grants / Other Sources: 156 • is • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Traffic Calming Improvements Project No: cp328b ('os - #cpo82o) Project Type: Annual Project Manager: TBD Description: The City's Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program was adopted by City Council in November of 2005. Staff receives complaints from citizens and then gathers data to confirm that a speeding issue and/or cut through traffic issue is present. This money is for physical improvements to the streets once all other options have been exhausted. Physical improvements may include items such as speed humps, speed tables, chicanes, traffic circles, and median treatments. Progress Summary: 2006 is the first year of implementation. East Main neighborhood is the first neighborhood to go through the process. It is anticipated that some improvements will be completed prior to the end of 2006. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Cap. Improv. Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - REET 86 200,000 200,000 200,000 400,086 Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: 86 200,000 200,000 200,000 400,086 Capital Expenditures: Design 86 20,000 20,000 20,000 40,086 Right of Way - - - - Construction 180,000 180,000 180,000 360,000 Total Expenditures: 86 200,000 200,000 200,000 400,086 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Cap. Improv. Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - - REET 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 1,200,000 Other - - - - - Total Funding Sources: 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 1,200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 120,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 180,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 1,080,000 Total Expenditures: 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 1,200,000 Grants / Other Sources: 157 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Project Title: Traffic Signal Improvements Project No: cp328c (prior to 'o6 - c1 o18o, '06 - #cpo637) Project Type: Non -Capacity (Semi -Annual) Project Manager: Johnstone Capital Projects Fund Description: The City analyzes accident data and identifies locations with higher than acceptable rates. Typically these involve signal locations where volumes have grown significantly requiring signal modifications. Signals that have accident patterns that are correctable are identified and the modifications are implemented. Signals are also evaluated annually for potential capacity enhancements. Progress Summary- ummaryFuture FutureImpact on Operating Budget: Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Cap. Improv. Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - REET 5,138 200,000 205,138 Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 5,138 - 200,000 - 205,138 Capital Expenditures: Design - 20,000 20,000 Right of Way - - Construction 5,138 180,000 185,138 Total Expenditures: 5,138 200,000 - 205,138 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Cap. Improv. Revenue - Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - REET 200,000 200,000 600,000 Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 200,Q00 - 200,000 600,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 20,000 20,000 60,000 Right of Way - - - Construction 180,000 180,000 540,000 Total Expenditures: 200,000 - 200,000 - 600,000 Grants / Other Sources: 158 • is r� • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Downtown Revitalization Project No: cp328e Project Type: Annual Project Manager: Dowdy Description: Ongoing project to purchase property, construct new buildings, and renovate existing structures. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total General Fund - 500,000 500,000 500,000 1,000,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - REET Other - - - Total Funding Sources: - 500,000 500,000 500,000 1,000,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 100,000 100,000 100,000 200,000 Right of Way - - - - Construction 400,000 400,000 400,000 800,000 Total Expenditures: - 500,000 500,000 500,000 1,000,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: General Fund 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 3,000,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - - - REET Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 3,000,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 600,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 2,400,000 Total Expenditures: 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 3,000,000 Grants / Other Sources: 159 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan GENERAL FUND - PLANNING DEPT. Capital Facilities Plan • Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 General Fund Project Title: Auburn Airport Wetland Mitigation Project Project No: Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Nix Description: This site is one of the last remaining open space tracts within the Auburn Municipal Airport. This site will be developed based on a future sale of the property. Progress Summary: A consultant has been hired to begin design work for mitigating wetland impacts on this existing tract. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Design and permitting should be completed by summer of 2008. Construction is slated for the summer of 2009. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments 50,000 50,000 50,000 Adjusted Budget 50,000 50,000 (50,000) Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total General Fund - 50,000 50,000 200,000 100,000 Grants - - - Bond Proceeds Impact Fees - - - Total Funding Sources: 50,000 50,000 200,000 100,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 50,000 50,000 - 100,000 Right of Way - - - Construction - - 200,000 - Total Expenditures: 50,000 50,000 200,000 100,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: General Fund 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 290,000 Grants - - - - - Bond Proceeds Impact Fees - - - - Total Funding Sources: 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 290,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 50,000 Right of Way - - - - Construction 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 240,000 Total Expenditures: 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 290,000 160 • • is • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Mohawks Plastics Site Mitigation Project Project No: Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Nix Description: The project consists of developing a wetland mitigation plan and conduct construction within the Auburn Environmental Park in order to compensate wetland loss on the Mohawk Plastics property (Parcel # 1321049056). This budget is assumed that not permitting is required through the Army Corps of Engineers as this wetland is potentially isolated and not under Corps jurisdiction. Progress Summary: Design starting fall 2007. Construction is anticipated to be completed by the end of 2008. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget - Budget Amendments 80,000 200,000 80,000 Adjusted Budget 80,000 200,000 80,000 Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total General Fund - Grants Bond Proceeds - - - - REET 2 80,000 200,000 10,000 280,000 Total Funding Sources: 80,000 200,000 10,000 280,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 80,000 - - 80,000 Right of Way - - - Construction - 200,000 10,000 200,000 Total Expenditures: - 80,000 200,000 10,000 280,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: General Fund - Grants Bond Proceeds - - - - REET 2 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 250,000 Total Funding Sources: 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 250,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 250,000 Total Expenditures: 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 250,000 161 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328) Capital Facilities Plan • Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: M Street SE Sidewalk LID Project No: CP0752 Project Type: Non -Capacity Project Manager: Seth Wickstrom Description: Construct sidewalks, landscape strips, and driveways on the west side of M Street SE from 29th Street SE to 37th Street SE (approximately 2,220 feet in length). This project will be partial funded by some of the nearby property owners through a Local Improvement District (LID). Progress Summary: Design is expected to be completed in the beginning of 2008. Construction is anticipated to start in the spring of 2008. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Cap. Improv. Revenue - 26,500 213,800 240,300 Grants - - - REET Other - - - Total Funding Sources: - 26,500 213,800 - 240,300 Capital Expenditures: Design 26,500 9,500 36,000 Right of Way - - - Construction - 204,300 204,300 Total Expenditures: - 26,500 213,800 240,300 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Cap. Improv. Revenue 213,800 Grants - REET Other - Total Funding Sources: - - - - 213,800 Capital Expenditures: Design 9,500 Right of Way - Construction 204,300 Total Expenditures: - - 213,800 Grants 1 Other Sources: 162 • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan 0 AIRPORT Current Facilities The City of Auburn operates the Auburn Municipal Airport, providing hangar and tie - down facilities/leasing space for aircraft -related businesses. As of 2002, there were approximately 141,000 take -offs and landings (aircraft operations) at the airport annually. Table A-1 "Facilities Inventory" lists the facilities with current capacity and location. Level of Service (LOS) The Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update 2001-2020 provides a maximum runway capacity (LOS standard) of 231,000 aircraft operations annually; one take -off or landing equals one aircraft operation. This LOS is recognized by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The FAA requires the airport to have the capital facilities capacity (i.e., runways, taxiways, holding areas, terminal, hangars, water/sewer system, etc.) necessary to accommodate 100% of aircraft operations during any one year. By 2020 the Airport Master Plan forecasts the number of operations to be 193,189 — well below the capacity of the airport runway. • Capital Facilities Projects and Financing The City's Airport facilities include six non -capacity capital projects at a cost of $4,135,400. These projects are for facilities repairs and improvements. Table A-2 shows the proposed financing plan followed by individual worksheets showing the project detail. Impact on Future Operating Budgets As Table A-3 shows, operating budget impacts of $76,800 are forecasted for Airport facilities during the six years 2009 — 2014. 163 TABLE A-1 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan Facilities Inventory Airport CAPACITY # of Aircraft # of Feet LOCATION Hangars 145 400 23rd Street NE Tiedowns 214 400 23rd Street NE Air Strip 3,400 400 23rd Street NE Total Existing Inventory 359 3,400 Proposed Capacity Projects: None - - Total Proposed Capacity Projects - - 2013 Projected Inventory Total 359 3,400 164 • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan • TABLE A-2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING AIRPORT - - - - 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total Non -Capacity Projects 3,110,400 Capacity Proiects: 175,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 4,135,400 none 3,110,400 325,000 - 175,000 175,000 Non -Capacity Proiects: 4,135,400 FUNDING SOURCES: 1 Airport Security Airport Fund 263,000 Capital Costs 51,000 - - - 51,000 - 278,000 Funding Sources: 2,847,400 310,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 Airport Fund 51,000 - - 51,000 325,000 2 Hangar Repair 175,000 175,000 4,135,400 Capital Costs 70,000 - - - - 70,000 Funding Sources: Airport Fund 70,000 - - - - 70,000 3 Update Airport Master Plan Capital Costs - 150,000 - - - 150,000 Funding Sources: Airport Fund 15,000 - - - 15,000 Grants (Fed - FAA) - 135,000 - - - 135,000 4 Parallel Taxiway Construction Capital Costs 2,577,400 - - - - - 2,577,400 Funding Sources: Airport Fund 128,900 - _ - - 128,900 • Grants (Fed - FAA) 2,448,500 2,448,500 5 Taxiway Lighting and Signage Capital Costs 262,000 - - - - - 262,000 Funding Sources: Airport Fund 13,100 - - - - 13,100 Grants (Fed - FAA) 248,900 - - - - - 248,900 6 General Repair & Maint. Projects Capital Costs 150,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 1,025,000 Funding Sources: Airport Fund - - - - - - - Grants (Fed - FAA) 150,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 1,025,000 • SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects - - - - - - - Non -Capacity Projects 3,110,400 325,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 4,135,400 Total Costs 3,110,400 325,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 4,135,400 FUNDING SOURCES: Airport Fund 263,000 15,000 - - - - 278,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) 2,847,400 310,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 3,857,400 Total Funding 3,110,400 325,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 4,135,400 165 City of Amburn Capital Facilities Plan AIRPORT FUND (435) Capital Facilities Plan • Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Airport Security Projects Project No: cp0713 Project Type: Project Manager: Garcia Description: Increased security identified as one of the highest priority needs for the airport in the 2005 Development Plan. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Airport Revenue - 50,000 51,000 101,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - Other - - Total Funding Sources: 50,000 51,000 - 101,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - Right of Way - - - Construction 50,000 51,000 101,000 Total Expenditures: 50,000 51,000 - 101,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Airport Revenue 51,000 Grants (FedState,Local) - Other - Total Funding Sources: 51,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - Right of Way - Construction 51,000 Total Expenditures: - 51,000 Grant / Other Sources: 166 • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan •AIRPORT FUND (435) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds • • Project Title: Hangars -Header Beam Evaluation, Repair & Replacement Project No: cp0717 Project Type: Project Manager: Garcia Description: Evaluate and structurally test suspected failing header beams on hangars 2 through 8. Once the headers are identified, they will be prioritized and scheduled for replacement. Following evaluation, repair and/or replacement will begin. Those beams in the worst condition will be repaired and/or replaced first, proceeding with less critical repairs. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Bi -annual maintenance and inspection cost for this project is estimated at $6,000 per year. Maintenance includes cleaning, painting or sealing as recommended by the manufacturer. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Airport Revenue - 30,000 70,000 100,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 30,000 70,000 100,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - Right of Way - - - Construction 30,000 70,000 100,000 Total Expenditures: 30,000 70,000 100,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Airport Revenue 70,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - Other - Total Funding Sources: - 70,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - Right of Way - Construction 70,000 Total Expenditures: 70,000 Grant / Other Sources: 167 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan AIRPORT FUND (435) Capital Facilities Plan is Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Airport Master Plan Update Project No: cp0718 Project Type: Project Manager: Garcia Description: Update of the Airport Master Plan. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Airport Revenue - 1,200 15,000 1,200 Grants (Fed,State,Local) 23,800 135,000 23,800 Other - - - Total Funding Sources: 25,000 - 150,000 25,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 25,000 150,000 25,000 Right of Way - - - Construction - - - Total Expenditures: - 25,000 150,000 25,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Airport Revenue 15,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) 135,000 Other - . Total Funding Sources: - 150,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 150,000 Right of Way - Construction - Total Expenditures: - 150,000 Grant / Other Sources: Federal grant (FAA) 9 •i • is • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan AIRPORT FUND (435) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Parallel East Taxiway Design & Construction Project No: cp0720 Project Type: Project Manager: Garcia Description: Removal of current east taxiway and replace with new taxiway which will meet current FAA design modifications. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Maintenance of asphalt and repairs, est $6,800 annually Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Airport Revenue 8,700 7,900 128,900 145,500 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - 150,000 2,448,500 2,598,500 Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: 8,700 157,900 2,577,400 2,744,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 700 157,900 - 158,600 Right of Way - - - - Construction 8,000 - 2,577,400 2,585,400 Total Expenditures: 8,700 157,900 2,577,400 2,744,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Airport Revenue 128,900 Grants (Fed,State,Local) 2,448,500 Other Total Funding Sources: - 2,577,400 Capital Expenditures: Design - Right of Way - Construction 2,577,400 Total Expenditures: - 2,577,400 Grant / Other Sources: Federal grant (FAA) 169 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan AIRPORT FUND (435) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Taxiway Lighting and Airport Signage Project No: cp0719 Project Type: Project Manager: Garcia Description: Update airport lighting and signage to meet current FAA standards. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Airport Revenue - 13,000 13,100 26,100 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - 247,000 248,900 495,900 Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: - 260,000 262,000 - 522,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 260,000 - 260,000 Right of Way - - - - Construction - - 262,000 262,000 Total Expenditures: - 260,000 262,000 522,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Airport Revenue 13,100 Grants (Fed, State, Local) 248,900 Other - Total Funding Sources: - 262,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - Right of Way - Construction 262,000 Total Expenditures: - - - 262,000 Grant / Other Sources: Federal grant (FAA) 170 • • • City of Auburn Capital -Facilities Plan • AIRPORT FUND (435) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Airport Projects - General Repair & Maintenance Project No: cp435a Project Type: Project Manager: Garcia Description: Various airport projects will be identified and prioritized on an annual basis as grant funding is secured. Airport security fencing will be the primary project in 2007. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Airport Revenue - - - - Grants (Fed, State, Local) 150,000 150,000 175,000 300,000 Other - - Total Funding Sources: 150,000 150,000 175,000 300,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 15,000 15,000 17,500 30,000 Right of Way - - - - Construction 135,000 135,000 157,500 270,000 Total Expenditures: 150,000 150,000 175,000 300,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Airport Revenue - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local) 175,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 1,025,000 Other - - - - Total Funding Sources: 175,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 1,025,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 102,500 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 157,500 157,500 157,500 157,500 922,500 Total Expenditures: 175,000 175,000 175,000 175,000 1,025,000 Grant / Other Sources: C 171 TABLE A-3 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan Impact on Future Operating Budgets AIRPORT 172 • • • Project: 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total 1 Airport Security $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 2 HangarlHeader Evaluation, Repair & Replacement 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 36,000 3 Airport Master Plan - - - - - - - 4 Parallel Taxiway Construction 6,800 6,800 6,800 6,800 6,800 6,800 40,800 5 Taxiway Lighting & Signage 6 General Repair & Maintenance Projects - - - - - - - Total $ 12,800 $ 12,800 $ 12,800 $ 12,800 $ 12,800 $ 12,800 $ 76,800 172 • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan • CEMETERY Current Facilities The City owns two cemeteries. The Mountain View Cemetery is a fully developed facility (50 acres and four buildings) that provides burial services and related merchandise for the community. The Pioneer Cemetery is a historic cemetery which is no longer used for burial purposes. Table C-1 "Facilities Inventory" lists the facilities along with their current capacity and location. Level of Service (LOS) The current LOS of 60.63 burial plots/niches per 1,000 population is based on the existing inventory divided by the 2007 citywide population of 50,470. The proposed LOS of 42.5 burial plots/niches per 1,000 population is based on the projected inventory divided by the 2013 projected citywide population of 72,000. In addition, the cemetery will be able to offer a natural cremation garden. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing The City's Mountain View Cemetery facilities include one capital project at a cost of . $15,000 for repairs and maintenance. Table C-2 shows the proposed financing plan followed by an individual worksheet showing the project detail. • Impact on Future Operating Budgets There are no operating budget impacts forecast for the cemetery during the six years 2009-2014. 173 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan TABLE C-1 Facilities Inventory Cemetery FACILITY Existing Inventory: Mountain View Cemetery Pioneer Cemetery Chapel/Niche Mausoleum Total Existing Inventory Capacity Projects: Total Proposed Capacity Projects 2013 Projected Inventory Total CAPACITY # of burial Diotstniches LOCATION 174 2,560 2020 Mountain View Dr. - 8th & Auburn Way No. 500 3,060 3,060 • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan • 175 TABLE C-2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING CEMETERY 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total Non -Capacity Projects: 1 Cemetery - Facilities Repair & Maintenance Capital Costs 15,000 - - - - - 15,000 Funding Sources: Cemetery Fund 15,000 - 15,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local) - - - - Other - - - - SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects - - - - - Non -Capacity Projects 15,000 - - - 15,000 Total Costs 15,000 - - - - - 15,000 FUNDING SOURCES: Cemetery Fund 15,000 - - - 15,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - _ _ - • _ _ Bond Proceeds Total Funding 15,000 - - - - - 15,000 • 175 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan CEMETERY FUND (436) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Cemetery - Facilities Repair & Maintenance Project No: cp436a Project Type: Project Manager: Description: 1) Mausoleum repair: Repair and replace niche and crypt fasteners which are failing. 2) Cascadia Columbarium: Replace broken and deteriorating top caps. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget - Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Cemetery Revenue - 15,000 15,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - Other - - Total Funding Sources: - 15,000 - 15,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - Right of Way - - Construction 15,000 15,000 Total Expenditures: - - 15,000 15,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Cemetery Revenue 15,000 Grants (Fed, State, Local) - Other - Total Funding Sources: - 15,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - Right of Way - Construction 15,000 Total Expenditures: Grants / Other Sources: 176 • • • • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan GOLF COURSE Current Facilities The City of Auburn owns and operates the 18 -hole Auburn Municipal Golf Course. A PGA Class A professional is contracted to collect greens fees, operate the pro shop and snack bar, provide golf carts for rent, and offer a lesson program. Table GC -1 Facilities Inventory lists the facilities along with their current capacity and location. Level of Service (LOS) The current LOS of .36 holes per 1,000 population is based on the existing inventory divided by the 2007 citywide population of 50,470. The proposed LOS of .25 holes per 1,000 population is based on the projected inventory divided by the 2013 projected citywide population of 72,000. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing City golf course facilities include two capital projects at a cost of $350,000, which include (1) clubhouse & parking lot construction to be completed in 2007, and (2) $350,000 for rebuilding fairways and greens. Table GC -2 shows the proposed financing plan followed by individual work sheets showing the project detail. Impact on Future Operating Budgets There are no operating budget impacts forecast for new golf course facilities during the six years 2009 — 2014. TABLE GC -1 Facilities Inventory Golf Course CAPACITY FACILITY # of holes LOCATION Municipal Golf Course Total Existing Inventory Capacity Projects: Total Proposed Capacity Projects 2013 Projected Inventory Total 177 18 29639 Green River Road 18 18 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan TABLE GC -2 • CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING GOLF COURSE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total Capacity Projects: 1 New Clubhouse and Parking Facilities Capital Costs - - - - - - - Funding Sources: Golf Course Fund - - - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - REET - - - - - - - Non -Capacity Projects: 2 Reconstruct Holes 1, 2, 10 Capital Costs - - - - 350,000 - 350,000 Funding Sources: Golf Course Fund - - - - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - 350,000 - 350,000 Other - - - - - - - SUMMARY: • CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects - - - - - Non -Capacity Projects - 350,000 - 350,000 Total Costs - - - - 350,000 - 350,000 FUNDING SOURCES: Golf Course Fund - - - - - Bond Proceeds - - 350,000 - 350,000 REET - - - - - Total Funding - - - 350,000 - 350,000 • 178 • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan GOLF COURSE FUND (437) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Clubhouse / Parking Lot Construction Project No: c327a0 (non-taxable), c327b0 (utility improvements) and c327c0 (taxable) Project Type: Project Manager: Faber Description: Design and construct Golf Course Clubhouse, including increased parking facilities. This project will replace the existing clubhouse and inadequate parking. In 2006 a budget amendment added $700,000 Transfer In of REET for Clubhouse utility improvements. Progress Summary: Construction continues with completion of the major portion of the public area, with the exception of the restaurant and kitchen. Exterior lighting, paving and curbing, and shaping and seeding of new tree boxes and greens are all complete, with only final landscaping installation to complete. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The Golf Course will generate revenue sufficient to pay off bond debt. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Golf Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - - Bond Proceeds 576,800 4,145,600 4,722,400 REET 285,519 414,481 700,000 Total Funding Sources: 862,319 4,560,081 5,422,400 Capital Expenditures: Design 261,885 111,604 373,489 Right of Way - - - Construction 600,434 4,448,477 5,048,911 Total Expenditures: 862,319 4,560,081 5,422,400 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Golf Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) Bond Proceeds REET Total Funding Sources: Capital Expenditures: Design Right of Way Construction Total Expenditures: Grants / Other Sources: 179 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan GOLF COURSE FUND. (437) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Reconstruct Holes 1, 2, 10 Project No: cpXXXX Project Type: Project Manager: Van Description: Renovate portion of golf course, specifically holes 1, 2 and 10. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will increase the number of rounds played throughout the course. It will complete all major golf renovations which began in 1988. Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2007 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Goff Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) Bond Proceeds Other Total Funding Sources: Capital Expenditures: Design Right of Way Construction Total Expenditures: - Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Goff Revenue - Grants (Fed, State, Local) - - Bond Proceeds 350,000 350,000 Other - - Total Funding Sources: 350,000 350,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 15,000 15,000 Right of Way - - Construction 335,000 335,000 Total Expenditures: 350,000 350,000 Grants / Other Sources: • • City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan POLICE Current Facilities The City of Auburn Police Department provides a full range of law enforcement services, including jail services, to the City of Auburn. Table P-1 Facilities Inventory shows the correctional facilities inventory with the current capacity and location. Level of Service (LOS) The current LOS of 1.07 beds per 1,000 population is based on the existing inventory divided by the 2007 citywide population of 50,470. The proposed LOS of 0.75 beds per 1,000 population is based on the projected inventory divided by the 2013 projected citywide population of 72,000. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing The CFP does not include any Police capital facilities projects during 2008 — 2013. Impact on Future Operating Budgets There are no operating budget impacts forecasted for jail facilities during the six years 2009-2014. TABLE P-1 FACILITY Facilities Inventory Police xisting Inventory: uburn Correctional Facility Total Existing Inventory Capacity Projects: Total Proposed Capacity Projects 2013 Projected Inventory Total • 181 CAPACITY LOCATION 54 25 West Main St. 54 54 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan FIRE PROTECTION Current Facilities • The Auburn Fire Department provides fire protection and rescue services to a 25 -square mile area which includes the City of Auburn, the City of Algona, the City of Pacific and King County Fire Protection District 31. The Fire Department operates out of four stations, which are manned 24 hours per day. The North Station #31 also serves as the department headquarters and includes a hose and training tower. Each station is assigned fire apparatus (Engines and Aid Vehicles). Table F-1 "Facilities Inventory" lists the facilities along with their current capacity and location. Level of Service (LOS) The current LOS of 0.20 fire apparatus per 1,000 population is based on the existing inventory (10 fire apparatus) divided by the 2007 citywide population of 50,470. The proposed LOS of 0.14 fire apparatus per 1,000 is based on the 2013 planned inventory (10 fire apparatus) divided by the 2013 projected citywide population of 72,000. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing The Valley Regional Fire Authority includes one capital project at a cost of $78,200 for Fire Station Facility Relocation, Enhancements & Improvements. Table F-2 shows the • proposed financing plan followed by an individual worksheet showing the project detail. Impact on Future Operating Budgets There are no operating budget impacts forecasted for fire protection during the six years 2009-2014. • 182 • TABLE F-1 City of Aubuxn Capital Facilities Plan Facilities Inventory Valley Regional Fire Authority * Bus, Reserve Van, Disaster Response Vehicle ** Telesquirt 183 CAPACITY FACILITY Fire Apparatus Aid Vehicles Other LOCATION Existing Inventory. Stations: North Station #31 1101 'D' Street NE, Auburn First Line 1 1 - Reserve 1 1 - South Station #32 1951 'R' Street SE, Auburn First Line 1 1 - Reserve 1 1 - GSA Station #33 First Line 1 - - 2815 'C' Street SW, Auburn Reserve 1** - 3* Total Existing Inventory 6 4 3 Proposed Inventory Additions: None - - - Total Proposed Capacity Projects - - - 2013 Projected Inventory Total 6 4 3 * Bus, Reserve Van, Disaster Response Vehicle ** Telesquirt 183 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan TABLE F-2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING VALLEY REGIONAL FIRE AUTHORITY 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total Non -Capacity Projects: 1 Fire Station Facility Relocation, Enhancements & Improvements Capital Costs 78,200 - - - - - 78,200 Funding Sources: Grants - - - Bond Proceeds - - - Impact/Mitigation Fees 78,200 - 78,200 SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects Non -Capacity Projects Total Costs FUNDING SOURCES: Cemetery Fund Grants (Fed, State, Local) Bond Proceeds Total Funding 78,200 - 78,200 78,200 - - - - - 78,200 78,200 - - 78,200 78,200 - - - - - 78,200 • • • • is City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan - Valley Regional Fire Authority (653) Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2008-2013 Project Title: Fire Station Facility Relocation, Enhancements & Improvements Project No: cp0639 Project Type: Project Manager: Paul Berry Agency Fund Description: Continue study of other Fire station needs for VRFA. Facility improvement projects are identified and prioritized annually, and subject to delay to accommodate emergency repairs. Progress Summary: Fire mitigation and impact fees will be transferred to the Valley Regional Fire Authority to pay for design contracts for the study of fire station relocation, construction projects and facility improvements. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Budget: 2007 YTD Actual 2008 07 Budget Budget Expenditures Budget Balance Adopted Budget Budget Amendments Adjusted Budget Activity: 2007 YE 2008 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2006 Estimate 2008 Budget 2009 Budget Project Total Grants - Bond Proceeds - - - - Impact/Mitigation Fees 87,033 635,100 78,200 800,333 Total Funding Sources: 87,033 635,100 78,200 800,333 Capital Expenditures: Design 12,996 635,100 78,200 726,296 Right of Way - - - Construction 74,037 - - 74,037 Total Expenditures: 87,033 635,100 78,200 800,333 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008-2013 Funding Sources: Grants - Bond Proceeds - Impact/Mitigation Fees 78,200 Total Funding Sources: 78,200 Capital Expenditures: - Design 78,200 Right of Way - Construction Total Expenditures: 78,200 185