Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-08-2021 City Council Study Session AgendaCity Council Study Session Muni Serv ices S FA Nov ember 8, 2021 - 5:30 P M City Hall Council Chambers and Virtual A GE NDA Watch the meeting L I V E ! Watch the meeting video Meeting videos are not available until 72 hours after the meeting has concluded. I .C A L L TO O R D E R I I .P UB L I C PA RT I C I PAT I O N A .P ublic P articipation The A uburn City Council Meeting scheduled for Monday, November 8, 2021 at 5:30 p.m. will be held in person and virtually. Virtual Participation L ink: To attend the meeting virtually please click one of the below links, enter the meeting I D into the Zoom app, or call into the meeting at the phone number listed below. T he link to the Virtual Meeting is: Zoom: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/89168348645 The public can also view the meeting on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/watchauburn/live/?nomobile=1 To join the meeting by phone, please use the below call-in information: 253 215 8782 877 853 5257 (Toll Free) Webinar I D: 891 6834 8645 B .Roll Call I I I .A NNO UNC E ME NT S , R E P O RT S , A ND P R E S E NTAT I O NS I V.A G E ND A I T E MS F O R C O UNC I L D I S C US S I O N A .A uburn S ymphony Orchestra 2021 Contract Report (Faber)(20 Minutes) B .A uburn I nt'l F armers Market 2021 Season Recap (Faber)(15 Minutes) Page 1 of 967 C.Ordinance No. 6838 (Tate)(25 Minutes) A n Ordinance relating to the regulation of land uses on and surrounding the Auburn Municipal Airport, amending Chapters 18.38 and 18.04, and S ections 18.01.030 and 18.23.030 of the A uburn City Code; and, amending the Comprehensive Zoning Map creating a new airport overlay D.Ordinance No. 6840 (Tate)(25 Minutes) A n Ordinance relating to planning; adopting 2020 Annual Comprehensive P lan Map and Text amendments pursuant to the provisions of R C W Chapter 36.70A and adopting corresponding rezones related to certain map amendments E .Ordinance No. 6841 (Tate)(5 Minutes) A n Ordinance amending S ections 19.02.115, 19.02.120, 19.02.130 and 19.02.140 of the A uburn City Code relating to S chool I mpact F ees F.Resolution No. 5623 (Comeau)(5 Minutes) A Resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an A ccess E asement in favor of K ing County for access across a portion of City owned property – Tract E of Auburn 40 P. U. D. G.Resolution No. 5628 (Tate)(30 Minutes) A Resolution adopting the 2022 Community Development B lock Grant A ction Plan for the Consolidated Plan Years 2020-2024 V.MUNI C I PA L S E RV I C E S D I S C US S I O N I T E MS A .B olaWrap P resentation (Caillier)(30 Minutes) B .PA C Update (Caillier)(30 Minutes) V I .O T HE R D I S C US S I O N I T E MS V I I .NE W B US I NE S S V I I I .A D J O UR NME NT Agendas and minutes are available to the public at the City Clerk's Office, on the City website (http://www.auburnwa.gov), and via e-mail. Complete agenda packets are available for review at the City Clerk's Office. Page 2 of 967 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Auburn Symphony Orchestra 2021 Contract Report (Faber)(20 Minutes) Date: October 1, 2021 Department: Parks/Art and Recreation Attachments: Auburn Symphony Orches tra Presentation Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrativ e Recommendation: For discussion only. Background for Motion: Background Summary: T he City of Auburn has a contract with the Auburn Symphony Orchestra to assist in promoting and marketing Auburn as a destination for arts and events that in turn contribute to the economy. Performing art programs serve as an economic driver and the activities of the Auburn Symphony Orchestra assists in attracting visitors to Auburn. Representatives from the Auburn Symphony Orchestra will present their report on 2021 services and their plans for 2022. Rev iewed by Council Committees: Councilmember:Brown Staff:Faber Meeting Date:November 8, 2021 Item Number: Page 3 of 967 Auburn Symphony Orchestra 2020-21 Annual Report Press Coverage Date Publication Notes 7/2/20 Auburn Reporter Celebrate the 4th of July with Auburn Symphony 7/8/20 The Hub Auburn Symphony moves online with playlists, archival concerts, music education content 8/13/20 Auburn Reporter Auburn Symphony moves online for rest of 2020 9/13/20 Auburn Examiner Auburn Symphony begins Digital Series with Stunning Performance 10/21/20 Auburn Examiner Auburn Symphony: The Planets Streaming for a Limited Time 10/28/20 Auburn Examiner Percussion Takes Center Stage in Auburn Symphony Orchestra’s Latest Performance 11/9/20 Auburn Examiner Enjoy a Variety of Performances from Auburn Symphony Orchestra in November 11/11/20 Auburn Examiner Auburn Symphony Orchestra Unites with over 30 Orchestras to Co-Commission and Share Repertoire by Black and Latinx Composers 11/10/20 Billboard ASCAP, Wise Music Trust Sign on to Classical Music Diversity Initiative “Amplifying Voices” 11/23/20 Auburn Examiner Go Home for the Holidays with Auburn Symphony Orchestra 12/4/20 South Sound Magazine Feel Good Friday: Music, Holiday Outfits, and Christmas Traditions Page 4 of 967 12/22/20 Auburn Reporter Auburn Symphony Present ‘Home for the Holidays” through January 3 1/20/21 Auburn Examiner Auburn Symphony Invites to Let Music Be Your Vacation 1/25/21 Auburn Reporter Art Inspires Art: Antonio Vivaldi’s Four Seasons Art Project for Kids 1/29/21 Auburn Reporter Auburn Symphony Presents Free Videos for Kids 1/29/21 Auburn Reporter Auburn Symphony Presents Winter Schedule 2/6/21 Seattle PI Auburn Symphony Orchestra and Interurban Center for the Arts 2/22/21 Auburn Reporter Auburn Homegrown: Meet Bill Cowart, a business leader with local roots 3/31/21 South Sound Talk Auburn Symphony Orchestra Presents The Four Seasons Featuring Emilie Choi 4/19/21 South Sound Talk Auburn Symphony: On the Nature of Daylight 4/21/21 Auburn Examiner Auburn Symphony On the Nature of Daylight 5/5/21 Auburn Examiner Auburn Symphony Celebrates Music from Mexico 5/19/21 Auburn Examiner Auburn Symphony Finishes Season with Out of this World Performance 5/20/21 South Sound Talk 3 To See: Mozart, Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage and Flea Market Print Advertising Date Publication Notes Monthly Lake Tapps Living Digital content promotion Per concert/quarterly Auburn Magazine Digital content promotion Year-round Window of Office on Main Street Digital content promotion with seasonal display Per program Press releases to various regional Sent via email Page 5 of 967 outlets Digital Advertising Date Publication Notes 9/23/20 Facebook Paid Advertising Reach 2,672 10/8/20 Facebook Paid Advertising Reach 2,879 10/15/20 Facebook Paid Advertising Reach 11,492 11/9/20 Facebook Paid Advertising Reach 2,198 11/23/20 Facebook Paid Advertising Reach 2,133 12/7/20 Facebook Paid Advertising Reach 1,671 1/18/21 Facebook Paid Advertising Reach 1,987 2/18/21 Facebook Paid Advertising Reach 892 3/18/21 Facebook Paid Advertising Reach 2,657 4/4-9/21 Facebook Paid Advertising Reach 3,068 4/15-22/21 Facebook Paid Advertising Reach 1,431 5/24-28/21 Facebook Paid Advertising Reach 1,537 Print Collateral Date Description Notes April 2020 2020-21 Season Brochures Sent to internal list of 2,300 December Annual fund letter Sent to 400 patrons August, November, January, March Newsletters Sent to list of 2,500 Electronic Promotions Date Description Notes Per Program Live Music Project, Seattle Times, Explore Auburn, The Stranger, SoCoCulture Online calendar Emails to their constituents Page 6 of 967 Per Program Facebook 960 followers Per Program Twitter 217 followers Per Program Instagram 625 followers Per Program YouTube 182 subscribers, 9,094 views, 1,000 hours of watch time Per Program SoundCloud 2,155 plays Per Program MailChimp Emails to list of 2,490 2020-21 Digital Programs Title Date Musicians YouTube Views to Date Digital Programs Overture to Ruslan and Ludmilla by Mikhail Glinka 4/9/20 45 253 Creatively Connected Solo Series: Christina Siemens, piano 9/15/20 1 80 Creatively Connected Solo Series: Shannon Spicciati, oboe 10/1/20 1 144 Creatively Connected Solo Series: Emilie Choi, violin 10/2/20 1 134 Creatively Connected Concert Series: Around the World String Quartet 10/8/20 4 420 Creatively Connected Concert Series: Uncommon Voices 10/15/20 5 289 The Planets by Gustav Holst with Visual Accompaniment by Adrian Wyard 10/22/20 45 248 Creatively Connected Concert Series: Percussionists in Recital 10/29/20 3 197 Creatively Connected Solo Series: Sarah Viens, trumpet 11/5/20 1 100 Pictures at an Exhibition by 11/12/20 45 126 Page 7 of 967 Adam Schoenberg Creatively Connected Concert Series: String Quartet Music of Emilie Mayer and Ludwig van Beethoven 11/19/20 4 262 Home for the Holidays 12/3/20 13 1,005 Cello Concerto by Eduard Lalo 1/21/21 45 166 Brahms’ Piano Quintet 2/18/21 5 182 Nonets of Bohuslav Jan Martinů and Louise Farrenc 3/18/21 10 259 Antonio Vivaldi’s The Four Season 4/8/21 18 528 On the Nature of Daylight 4/22/21 17 292 Viva Mexico!5/6/21 31 209 Season Finale 5/27/21 38 57 Education & Community Engagement Videos Art Inspires Art: Vivaldi’s Autumn 11/17/20 2 150 Art Inspires Art: Vivaldi’s Winter 1/18/21 2 50 Art Inspires Art: Vivaldi’s Spring 3/25/21 2 27 Art Inspires Art: Vivaldi’s Summer 6/7/21 2 51 Page 8 of 967 Return Service RequestedAuburn Symphony AssociationPO Box 2186, Auburn, WA 98071info@auburnsymphony.orgNon Profit Org.U.S. PostagePAIDSeattle, WAPermit No. 1628Wesley Schulz, Music Director Anton Nel, piano Sunday, October 3, 2:30 PM Federal Way Performing Arts and Event Center A Triumphant Return Reignite theSpark2021-2022A Triumphant ReturnSunday, October 3, 2:30 PMAnton Nel, PianoHoliday SpectacularMonday, December 13, 7:30 PMTchaikovsky’s PathétiqueSunday, January 30, 2:30 PM Bella Hristova, ViolinHollywood Takes FlightSaturday, March 5, 7:30 PMCopland’s Appalachian SpringSunday, April 3, 2:30 PM The Guild Dance Company Oxana Ejokinoa and Cristina Valdes, pianosFinale FantastiqueSunday, May 15, 2:30 PM John Carrington, HarpPage 9 of 967 A Triumphant Return Sunday, October 3, 2:30 PM Anton Nel, piano Federal Way Performing Arts Center Tickets and more information at auburnsymphony.org We're so pleased to be able to see people in person. These connections nourish us. We are grateful for the warm reception we've received this summer. In July and August, two quintets of ASO musicians performed for children at Auburn Valley YMCA's day camp. Kids, counselors, and musicians all loved the experience! Sol Im, Lynn Bartlett-Johnson, violins; Sue Jane Bryant, viola; Olga Ruvinov, cello; and Jennifer Nelson, clarinet performed a program honoring Rebecca Clarke (1886-1979) a British born violist and composer who also lived and composed in the United States. While listening to the music, some children created drawings and paintings inspired by the experience of seeing musicians perform in person for them. This performance was funded by ASO's microgrant program which empowered musicians to create connections with community members. ASO staff and board members were a part of the vendor village at Auburn Valley Humane Society's Barkfest. The demonstrations were impressive and we had fun playing mutt-sicle chairs. The best part was meeting people and their dogs. One lucky woman won two tickets for A Triumphant Return in October! The end of August provided perfect weather for a sold out concert at beautiful Soos Creek Botanical Garden and Heritage Center. It was heart warming to be able to play for a full audience for the first time since March 2020. Emilie Choi, Ingrid Fredrickson, violins; Betty Agent, viola; and Brian Wharton, cello delighted the crowd with a variety of short pieces both familiar and new. Looking out for your health and safety As we look forward to reuniting with you in the concert hall, we are committed to creating a safe and healthy environment to enjoy live performances again. To that end, we are joining with most other arts organizations in the region to require proof of vaccination OR a negative COVID-19 test for entry, as well as masks at all times except when actively eating or drinking. In addition to these safety protocols, Federal Way Performing Arts and Event Center follows strict cleaning regimens, provides hand sanitizing stations throughout the facility, and is equipped with upgraded MERV 13 air filters. For more details visit auburnsymphony.org. Auburn Symphony has been out and about in the Auburn community. Welcome back to the concert hall! In this energetic, spectacular season opener we’re bringing back Anton Nel to perform Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s Piano Concerto No. 21. You won’t want to miss our first live concert in 595 days! This concerto by Mozart is an excellent example of [Nel's] ability to make the piano both sing and dance. Symphony No. 2 in D major by Joseph Bologne Chevalier de Saint-Georges Piano Concerto No. 21 in C Major by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Symphony No. 1 in C minor by Felix Mendelssohn BIPOC composer Celebratory Piano soloist Quick Take Summary Program Soloist: Anton Nel, piano Page 10 of 967 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Auburn Int'l Farmers Market 2021 Season Recap (Faber)(15 Minutes) Date: October 1, 2021 Department: Parks/Art and Recreation Attachments: AIFM 2021 Pres entation Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrativ e Recommendation: For discussion only. Background for Motion: Background Summary: The Auburn Int’l Farmers Market had a tremendous season in 2021 and will present data and statistics from the 2021 season along with plans for 2022. Rev iewed by Council Committees: Councilmember:Brown Staff:Faber Meeting Date:November 8, 2021 Item Number: Page 11 of 967 Sundays | June 6 –September 19 10 AM –3 PM | Les Gove Park Page 12 of 967 Modifying a Market June 2021 June 2021: •King County Public Health Restrictions still in place •Revised one-way only market layout •No entertainment •Limited to two people per booth Page 13 of 967 July 2021: •Removed fencing and one-way traffic •Added entertainment •Removed customer limit •Expanded Market layout from Auburn Way into Les Gove Park •Added sampling Modifying a Market July 2021 –KC Public Health restrictions removed Page 14 of 967 Page 15 of 967 40,991 customers in 2021 …compared to 17,249 customers in 2020 …compared to 24,326 customers in 2019 Page 16 of 967 Vendor sales 2021: $407,361 Vendor sales 2020: $255,301 Vendor participation 2020 •Unique vendors –40 •Total number of vendor opportunities -491 Vendor participation 2021 •Unique vendors –55 •Total number of vendor opportunities -627 $0.00 $50,000.00 $100,000.00 $150,000.00 $200,000.00 $250,000.00 $300,000.00 $350,000.00 $400,000.00 $450,000.00 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total Vendor Sales by Year Good News! 2021 Total Vendor Sales increased by 60% Page 17 of 967 $0.00 $5,000.00 $10,000.00 $15,000.00 $20,000.00 $25,000.00 $30,000.00 $35,000.00 $40,000.00 Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 Week 9 Week 10 Week 11 Week 12 Week 13 Week 14 Week 15 Week 16 Week 17 Vendor Sales by Week 2019 2020 2021 *2021 was a 16-week season * Page 18 of 967 2020 EBT Redemption: $7,678 SNAP Market Match redemption: $7,528 Food Assistance Programs 2021 EBT Redemption: $25,179 SNAP Market Match redemption: $22,009 $0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Food Assistance Program Redemption KEY Yellow line = EBT Grey line = Match Page 19 of 967 Other Market Info •230 volunteer hours •4,365 pounds of fresh produce donated to the Auburn Food Bank Add pictures from 2021 Page 20 of 967 Voted 1st place in Washington state! 247 votes 8th in the Pacific Northwest 60th Nationwide Page 21 of 967 Plans for 2022: •More vendors •Increasing volunteers •Hiring Staff •Bi-weekly Entertainment Growing with every season Page 22 of 967 See you next year! Sunday June 5, 2022! Page 23 of 967 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Ordinance No. 6838 (Tate)(25 Minutes) Date: November 1, 2021 Department: Community Development Attachments: Ordinance No. 6838 Exhibit A - Airport Zoning Code Text Amendment Exhibit B - Airport Overlay Map Amendment Exhibit C - Airport Zoning Code Text Amendment (clean version) Exhibit D - WSDOT City of Auburn Aviation Cons ultation Confirmation Letter Airport Code Update Study Session Presentation Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrativ e Recommendation: For discussion only. Background for Motion: Background Summary: The City of Auburn has the regulatory authority over how development occurs within the community, including the ability to plan for, abate, mitigate, and otherwise respond to land use concerns. The primary tool is through the City’s zoning and land use regulations. The City also has the role of defining the current, short term, and long-term vision for growth and development within the City and this is completed through the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan. During Auburn’s 2020 annual amendment cycle staff proposed and prepared text amendments for the Comprehensive Plan. These amendments were reviewed by the Planning Commission and subsequently reviewed and approved by the City Council on December 2, 2020 under Ordinance No. 6803. The goal of the text amendments was to reinforce in the policy language the importance of the airport and recognize the significant investment that has been made, not only by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), but also by the City. As a follow up to Ordinance No. 6803, staff has prepared, and the Planning Commission is recommending, updates to the airport-related zoning code regulations. The majority of airport- related zoning code regulations are contained in Chapter 18.38, the “LF Airport Landing Field District” of the Auburn City Code (ACC). The purpose of the zoning code, or land use regulations, is to implement the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and its appendices to Page 24 of 967 ensure consistency. The initial regulations for the LF Airport Landing Field District Chapter date back to 1964 (under Chapter 18.40 ACC, Ordinance No. 1702), five years prior to the construction of the Auburn Municipal Airport, also known as Dick Scobee Field. The most recent update to the LF District regulations (now Chapter 18.38 ACC) occurred in 1997 (under Ordinance No. 5026). So, while staff strengthened the protection of the airport and its operations in the policy statements of Comprehensive Plan during the 2020 annual amendment cycle, this policy guidance must be implemented by corresponding regulations in the zoning code. Rev iewed by Council Committees: Councilmember:Stearns Staff:Tate Meeting Date:November 8, 2021 Item Number: Page 25 of 967 -------------------------------- Ordinance No. 6838 October 25, 2021 Page 1 Rev. 2020 ORDINANCE NO. 6838 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO THE REGULATION OF LAND USES ON AND SURROUNDING THE AUBURN MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, AMENDING CHAPTERS 18.38 AND 18.04, AND SECTIONS 18.01.030 AND 18.23.030 OF THE AUBURN CITY CODE; AND, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING MAP CREATING A NEW AIRPORT OVERLAY WHEREAS, the Auburn Municipal Airport is classified as a Public-Use, General Aviation Regional-Reliever Airport within the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS); and WHEREAS, during Auburn’s 2020 annual Comprehensive Plan amendment cycle, the City Council adopted text amendments to the Comprehensive Plan intended to reinforce in the policy language the importance of the airport, and recognize the significant investment that has been made, not only by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), but also by the City; and WHEREAS, the City of Auburn has regulatory authority over the manner of development occurring within the community, including the ability to plan for, abate, mitigate, and otherwise respond to land use concerns; and WHEREAS, the most recent update to the regulations governing the airport s occurred in 1997; and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36.70.547 every county, city, and town in which there is located a general aviation airport that is operated for the benefit of the general public must, through its comprehensive plan and development regulations, must discourage the siting of incompatible uses adjacent to said airport; and Page 26 of 967 -------------------------------- Ordinance No. 6838 October 25, 2021 Page 2 Rev. 2020 WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36.70A the proposed code language contained herein was transmitted to the Washington State Department of Commerce on August 5, 2021 for comment, and no comments were received by the comment expiration date of October 4, 2021; and WHEREAS, the code amendments were reviewed according to the process established by the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) was issued on September 1, 2021, and no comments or appeals were received within the fourteen-day public comment period; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments and considered the effect of the changes on public and private property owners at its August 3, 2021 and September 8, 2021 virtual meetings; and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36.70.547 and 36.70A.510 local jurisdictions are required to formally consult with airport owners, managers, private airport operators, general aviation pilots, ports, and the Aviation Division of WSDOT prior to adoption of comprehensive plan policies or development of regulations that may affect property adjacent to public use airports; and WHEREAS, a formal consultation with aviation stakeholders and the Aviation Division of WSDOT was held virtually on August 23, 2021; and WHEREAS, on October 5, 2021 the Planning Commission held a virtual public hearing regarding the proposed amendments, heard and considered public testimony, examined exhibits presented by the city, and afterwards forwarded a recommendation for approval to the City Council. No written comments were offered by the public; and WHEREAS, the purpose of the amendments offered herein are to ensure safety and the continued operation of the Auburn Municipal Airport. Page 27 of 967 -------------------------------- Ordinance No. 6838 October 25, 2021 Page 3 Rev. 2020 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN as follows: Section 1. Amendment to City Code. Chapters 18.38 and 18.04, and Sections 18.01.030 and 18.23.030 of the Auburn City Code are amended to read as shown in Exhibit A. Section 2. Amendment to Comprehensive Zoning Map. The Comprehensive Zoning Map is amended as shown in Exhibit B. Section 3. Implementation. The Mayor is authorized to implement those administrative procedures necessary to carry out the directives of this legislation. Section 4. Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or portion of this ordinance, or the invalidity of the application of it to any person or circumstance, will not affect the validity of the remainder of this ordinance, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. Section 5. Effective date. This Ordinance will take effect and be in force five days from and after its passage, approval, and publication as provided by law. INTRODUCED: _______________ PASSED: ____________________ APPROVED: _________________ ____________________________ NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR Page 28 of 967 -------------------------------- Ordinance No. 6838 October 25, 2021 Page 4 Rev. 2020 ATTEST: ____________________________ Shawn Campbell, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ Kendra Comeau, City Attorney Published: ____________________ Page 29 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 1 of 29 Chapter 18.38 LF AIRPORT LANDING FIELD DISTRICT, OVERLAY, AND FAR PART 77 SURFACES Sections: 18.38.010 Intent. 18.38.020 Purpose. 18.38.030020 LF Airport Landing Field District Permitted uUses. 18.38.040 LF Airport Landing Field District Development Standards. 18.38.050 Airport Overlay Intent and Boundary. 18.38.030 Restricted uses. 18.38.060040 Zones established generally.Airport Overlay Restrictions and Standards. 18.38.070 Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77 Surfaces and Other Surfaces. 18.38.050 Approach zone. 18.38.060 Transitional zone. 18.38.070 Horizontal zone. 18.38.080 Conical zone. 18.38.085 Obstacle free area. 18.38.090 Height limitations – Generally. 18.38.100 Height limitations – Noninstrument approach zone. 18.38.110 Height limitations – Transition zones. 18.38.120 Height limitations – Horizontal zones. 18.38.130 Height limitations – Conical zones. 18.38.080140 Nonconforming uUses, sStructures, and tTrees. – Continuation allowed when. 18.38.150 Nonconforming structures and trees – Marking and lighting. 18.38.160 Structure and use permits. 18.38.170 Nonconforming structures or trees – Alteration. 18.38.180 Nonconforming structures or trees – Abandoned or destroyed – Permit prohibited. 18.38.090190 Requirements for vVariances. 18.38.200 Variance – Grant conditions. 18.38.100210 Decision aAppeals – Generally. EXHIBIT A Page 30 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 2 of 29 18.38.110220 Conflicting Rregulations. 18.38.120230 Enforcement. 18.38.130240 Violation – Penalty. 18.38.250 Development standards. 18.38.010 Purpose. The provisions of this chapter apply to lands located within the LF Airport Landing Field Zoning District, Airport Zoning Overlay, and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Federal Regulation Title 14 Part 77 Imaginary Surfaces (FAR Part 77 Surfaces) and other Surfaces. The airport overlay and the FAR Part 77 Surfaces and other surfaces are supplemental to the existing zoning districts and may be more restrictive than the underlying zoning designation. The restrictions, performance standards, and requirements of the airport overlay shall be in addition to those of the underlying zone and, where explicitly noted, supersede the underlying zoning. If implementation of this chapter conflicts with other provisions of the City Code, State, or federal law, the more restrictive requirement applies. 18.38.010020 Intent. The intent of this chapter is to provide for the operation and management of the Auburn Municipal Airport. This chapter seeks to apply the City’s Comprehensive Plan and to implement certain land use and zoning development standards to reduce or avoid potential for airport related hazards. It is found that an airport hazard endangers the lives and property of users of the municipal airport and of occupants of land or property in its vicinity, and also, if of the obstruction type, in effect reduces the size of the area available for the landing, taking off, and maneuvering of aircraft, thus tending to destroy or impair the utility of the municipal airport and the public investment therein. Accordingly, it is declared that: A. The creation or establishment of an airport hazard is a public nuisance and an injury to the region served by the municipal airport; B. It is necessary in the interest of the public health, public safety, and general welfare that the creation or establishment of airport hazards be prevented; and C. The prevention of these airport hazards should be accomplished, to the extent legally possible, by the exercise of the police power without compensation. It is further declared that both the prevention or the creation or establishment of airport hazards and the elimination, removal, alteration, mitigation Page 31 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 3 of 29 or marking and lighting of existing airport hazards are public purposes for which political subdivisions may raise and expend public funds and acquire land or interests in land. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) D. For the purpose of this chapter structure means any object constructed or installed by a human being, including, but not limited to buildings, signs, fences, towers, devices, and overhead transmission lines, and tree means any object of natural growth. 18.38.020030 LF Airport Landing Field District Permitted usesUses. A. Permitted Uses. Hereafter the effective date of this ordinance all buildings, structures, or parcels of land shall only be used for the following, unless otherwise provided for in this title: 1A. Landing, taking off, taxiing, and flying of aircraft, excluding ultralights as defined by ACC 8.36.010; 2B. Aviation related business, manufacturing, service-related uses including Bbusinesses incidental to and necessary or convenient for airport operations, including offices, eating establishments, restrooms, hangars, shops for light repairs, gasoline and oil sales and accessory structures; and 3C. Other uses as determined by the Planning Director in consultation with the Airport Manager as defined in Chapter 12.56 ACC hearing examiner to be related to operation and use of the airport. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.030 Restricted uses. Restricted uses shall be as follows: no use may be made of land within any airport zone in such a manner as to create electrical interference with radio communication between the airport and aircraft, making it difficult for fliers using the airport, impair visibility in the vicinity thereof, or otherwise endanger the landing, taking off or maneuvering of aircraft. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.040 LF Airport Landing Field District Zoning Development Standards. Table 18.38.040 Development Standards A Minimum lot area (square feet) None B Minimum lot width None Page 32 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 4 of 29 C Minimum lot depth None D Minimum lot coverage None E Maximum structure height 45 ft1 3 F Minimum front setback (feet) None2 G Minimum interior side setback (feet) None H Minimum street side setback (feet) None2 I Minimum rear setback (feet) None2 J Fences See ACC 18.31.0203 K Landscaping See Chapter 18.50 ACC3 L Parking See Chapter 18.52 ACC M Signs See Chapter 18.56 ACC3 N Outdoor lighting See Chapter 18.55 ACC3 1 Buildings and/or structures necessary for airport operations are exempt from the height requirements of this title when approved by the Airport Manager. 2 Must meet sight distance provisions of the engineering design standards. 3 Except as restricted elsewhere by this chapter. 18.38.050 Airport Overlay Intent and Boundaries. The purpose of the airport overlay, as identified on the City of Auburn Comprehensive Zoning Map, is to protect the utility and viability of Auburn Airport by discouraging incompatible land uses and requiring the evaluation and consideration of potential safety impacts when siting certain land uses in proximity to the airport. The airport overlay is supplemental to the established zoning districts and may be more restrictive than the underlying zoning district. The overlay is composed of six zones based on use and proximity to the airport runway. The zones were modeled after the WSDOT Aviation Airport Compatibility Zones 1-6, and the Airport’s published traffic pattern. Page 33 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 5 of 29 A. Zone 1 - Runway Overlay Zone. Zone 1 is a rectangular area that encompasses the trapezoidal runway protection zone (RPZ) at each end of the runway as shown in the “Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan,” dated May 2015, as may be amended. The purpose of Zone 1 is to maintain areas that are generally free of obstructions and significant concentrations of people. Zone 1 extends one thousand (1,000) feet in length from the ends of the future configuration of Runway 34/16 and is seven hundred and fifty (750) feet in width. B. Zone 2 - Inner Safety Zone. Zone 2 is a rectangular area that extends beyond Zone 1 along the extension of the runway centerline. Next to the Zone 1 it represents the area where the risk of aircraft accidents is the greatest. This zone extends one thousand five hundred (1,500) feet from Zone 1 and is seven hundred and fifty feet (750) in width. C. Zone 3 – Inner Turning Zone. Zone 3 is defined by a triangular shaped area that is positioned along each side of Zones 1 and 2. When operating visually, departing aircraft may begin turning over this area to fly toward their destination or to remain in the traffic pattern. Arriving aircraft often overfly this area as well. This zone extends three thousand (3,000) feet from the Zone 3 vertex offsets (a point that is on the runway centerline) and inward within a thirty degree sector towards the extended runway centerline. D. Zone 4 - Outer Safety Zone. Zone 4 is a rectangular area that lies beyond Zone 3 along the extended runway centerline. Aircraft flying straight out or in, overfly this area at low altitude. This zone is particularly significant on runways where airport operations use instrument procedures and at busy airports where elongated traffic patterns are common. This zone extends two thousand five hundred (2,500) feet beyond Zone 3 and is five hundred (500) feet in width. E. Zone 5 - Sideline Safety Zone. Zone 5 consists of narrow bands along each side of the runway and encompasses the Object Free Area (OFA), as defined by the Airport Master Plan, dated 2015, as may be amended). This zone is defined by a five hundred (500) foot centerline offset on each side of the runway. Aircraft do not normally fly over the sideline zone. The principal risk is from aircraft that lose directional control while landing or just after take off. F. Zone 6 – Airport Operations Zone. Zone 6 contains the remainder of the airport environment where aircraft fly as they approach and depart the airport. This zone extends six thousand five hundred (6,500) feet in length from the Zone 3 vertex offsets and six thousand (6,000) feet in width from the runway centerline. ircraft Page 34 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 6 of 29 18.38.060 Airport Overlay Restrictions and Standards. A. Zones 1 and 2. The following regulations shall apply within the boundaries of Zones 1 and 2: 1. The following new uses established hereafter the effective date of this ordinance are prohibited in Zones 1 and 2: a. Multiple-family dwellings, stand-alone; b. Mixed-Use development; c. Nursing home; d. Assisted living facility; e. Supportive housing; f. Hospitals; g. Senior housing; h. Schools, elementary, middle/junior high, and secondary or high school; i. Daycare center and nursery schools/preschools; j. Detached single-family dwellings, except caretakers quarters; and k. Other uses, similar to those above, or activities determined by the Planning Director in consultation with the Airport Manager to be incompatible with aviation, aviation safety, or any activity that has the potential to interfere with the airport, airport traffic patterns, and aircraft operations. 2. The following standards apply in Zones 1 and 2: a. All property owners seeking permit(s) for grading (excluding minor grading permits), building (exceed 50 percent of the value of the building or structure), extension or replacement of public utilities, subdivision, or development activity that triggers public improvements per Chapter 12.64A ACC, shall dedicate an avigation easement to the City of Auburn over the affected portion of their property prior to issuance of said permit(s). The language of the easement shall be provided by the City. b. No use may create an electrical interference with navigational signals or radio communications at the airport, or with radio or electronic communications between the airport and aircraft, or aircraft to aircraft. 18.38.030 Restricted uses. Page 35 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 7 of 29 c. Restricted uses shall be as follows:No structure or tree shall be placed, erected, or allowed to grow no use may be made of land within any airport zone in such a manner as to create electrical interference with radio communication between the airport and aircraft, that makesing it difficult for fliers usingpilots the airport to distinguish between airport lights and other lights, results in glare to pilots, impairs visibility in the vicinity thereof, or otherwise endanger the landing, taking off or maneuvering of aircraft. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) b.d. No use or structure shall emit emissions of fly ash, dust, vapor, gases, steam, or other forms of emissions that may conflict with any operations of the airport. e. No use or activity shall be permitted that would foster an increase in bird population and thereby increase the likelihood of aircraft and bird impact, as determined by the Planning Director in consultation with the Airport Manager. f. In order to deter the congregation of wildlife, stormwater facilities must meet or exceed recommendations found in Appendix I-H, Airport Operations of the SWMM, as defined in ACC 12.04.010(B). B. Zone 3. The following regulations shall apply within the boundary of Zone 3: 1. The new uses contained in (A)(1) are prohibited in Zone 3. 2. The standards of (A)(2)(a) through (d) apply. C. Zone 4. The following regulations shall apply with the boundary of Zone 4: 1. The standards of (A)(2)(a) through (d) apply. D. Zone 5. The following regulations shall apply within the boundary of Zone 5: 1. The standards of (A)(2)(a) through (f) apply. E. Zone 6. The following regulations shall apply within the boundary of Zone 6: 1. The standards of (A)(2)(b) and (c) apply. Page 36 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 8 of 29 2. All property owners within 1,000 feet of properties zoned LF, Landing Field District seeking permit(s) for grading (excluding minor grading permits), building (exceed 50 percent of the value of the building or structure), extension or replacement of public utilities, subdivision, or development activity that triggers public improvements per Chapter 12.64A ACC, shall record aviation disclosure notice with the King County Recorder’s Office notifying, in writing, to future owners and tenants prior to signing a lease or sale, of the possible affects from aviation activities. The language of the notice shall be provided by the City. 18.38.040070 Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77 Surfaces and Other Surfaces. Zones established generally. A. In order to carry out the provisionspurpose and intent of this chapter, there are created and established certain zones surfaces, including: which include all of the land lying within the primary surface, non-instrument approach surfacezone, transition surfacezone, horizontal surfacezone, conical surfacezone, as well as the Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) airspace surfaces. and obstacle free areasThese. Such areas and zones surfaces, with exception of the TERPS, are shown on the “City of Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update, 1993-2013, dated February 1995, and the Federal Air Regulations (FAR) Part 77 drawing, as amended, which is on file in the city clerk’s office. Other surfaces not provided for here, are included in the “Auburn Municipal Airport Layout Plan”, dated May 2015, as may be amended. The surfaces defined for the runway summarized below are consistent with the currently adopted airport layout plan (ALP) and FAR Part 77 Airspace Plan drawings for the airport. The various zones are established and defined as follows in ACC 18.38.050 through 18.38.085. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 1. Primary surface. The primary surface, is centered on top of the runway and extends two hundred feet beyond each end. The primary surface is longitudinally centered on the runway with a width of two hundred and fifty (250) feet and extends two hundred (200) feet beyond each end of the runway. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) (250)(1,000) 18.38.0502. Approach zone.surface. A non-instrument approach surface is established at each end of all non-instrument runways for landings and takeoffs. The inner width of the approach surface is two hundred and fifty (250) feet Page 37 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 9 of 29 at a distance of two hundred (200) feet beyond the physical end of the runway, and it expands uniformly to a width of one thousand, and two hundred and fifty (1,250) feet. This approach surface extends for a horizontal distance of five thousand (5,000) feet at a slope of twenty to one (20:1). The elevation of the inner width of the approach surface is the same as the elevation of the nearest point on the runway centerline. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.0603. Transitional zone.surface. The transitional surface extends outward and upward at right angles to the runway centerline and the runway centerline extends at a slope of seven to one (7:1) from a line one hundred and twenty five (125) feet from the runway centerline or runway end and from the sides of the approach surfaces. The elevation of the line one hundred and twenty five (125) feet from the runway centerline or runway centerline extended for two hundred (200) feet beyond each runway end is the same as the elevation of the nearest point on the runway centerline. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.0704. Horizontal zone.surface. A horizontal surface is established above the airport. This horizontal surface is a plane one hundred and fifty (150) feet above the established airport elevation, the perimeter of which is constructed by swinging arcs which swing five thousand (5,000) feet in a radius from the center of each end of the primary surface of the runway and connecting the adjacent arcs by lines tangent to those arcs. The primary surface is longitudinally centered on the runway with a width of 250 feet and extends 200 feet beyond each end of the runway. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) Page 38 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 10 of 29 18.38.0805. Conical zone.surface. A conical surface is established which extends outward and upward from the periphery of the horizontal surface at a slope of twenty to one (20:1) for a horizontal distance of four thousand (4,000) feet. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 6. Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) Surfaces. Airspace surfaces associated with instrument approach and departure of aircraft to and from the ianairport as determined by the Airport Manager. 18.38.085 Obstacle free area. An area extending 250 feet either side of the runway and 600 feet off either end of the runway. The obstacle free area (OFA) must be kept clear of any structures, fencing, landscaping, parking, or vehicular circulation not directly related to aircraft operations at the Auburn Municipal Airport. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997.) 18.38.090B. Height limitations – Established Generally. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, no structure or tree shall be permitted, approved, erected, altered, allowed to grow, or maintained in any zone surface created in this chapter to have a height in excess of the height limits established in ACC 18.38.100 through 18.38.130 for such zonebelow. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.1001. Height limitations – Noninstrument approach zoneApproach Surface (Non- instrument). The height limitations for non-instrument approach surfaces begin at a point two hundred (200) feet from and at the centerline elevation of the end of the runway and extend for a horizontal distance of five thousand (5,000) feet at a slope of twenty to one (20:1). (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.1102. Height limitations – Transition zones.Transition surface. Page 39 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 11 of 29 The height limitations for transition zones shall be as follows: One foot in height for each seven feet in horizontal distance beginning at any point one hundred and twenty five (125) feet normal to and at the elevation of the centerline of non-instrument runways, extending two hundred (200) feet beyond each end thereof, extending to a height of one hundred and fifty (150) feet above the airport elevation which is sixty three (63)59 feet above mean sea level. In addition to the foregoing, there are established height limits of one foot vertical height for each seven feet horizontal distance measured from the edges of all approach zones for the entire length of the approach zones and extending upward and outward to the points where they intersect the horizontal or conical surfaces. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.1203. Height limitations – Horizontal zonesHorizontal surface. The height limitation for a horizontal zone shall be as follows: one hundred and fifty (150) feet above the airport elevation or a height of two hundred and thirteen (213)209 feet above mean sea level. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.1304. Height limitations – Conical zones.Conical surface. The conical surface involves a slope of twenty to one (20:1) for a horizontal distance of four thousand (4,000) feet. The relative difference in elevation between the inner and outer edge of the conical surface is two hundred (200) feet. The elevation of the outer edge of the conical surface is three hundred and fifty (350) 300 feet above the established airport elevation. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) C. Height limitations – Compliance. Where the height of any new structure or tree, has the potential to exceed the surfaces established in ACC 18.38.070(A), applicants must demonstrate compliance with the height limitation. Except as specifically provided in subsections A, B and C of this section, no material change shall be made in the use of land and no structure or tree shall be erected, altered, planted or otherwise established in any zone created by this chapter unless a permit has been applied for and granted by the building department of the city. Each application for a permit shall indicate the purpose for which the permit is desired, withcontain sufficient information to permit it to be determine d whether the resulting use, structure or tree wouldwill conform to the regulations thereinherein prescribed. If such determination is in the affirmative, the permit shall be granted Page 40 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 12 of 29 1. The Planning Director in consultation with the Airport Manager may require one or all of the following documentation to demonstrate compliance with the surfaces established in ACC 18.38.070(A): a. A certificate from a Washington state licensed professional, engineer, or land surveyor, stating that no airspace obstruction will result from the proposed structure or tree being constructed or installed. b. The maximum elevation of proposed structures based on the established airport elevation. c. Prepare and submit FAA Form 7460 “Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration”. d. Other documentation as determined by the Airport Manager. D. Height limitations – Mitigation and Maintenance. Where the height of any new structure or tree, exceeds the surfaces established in ACC 18.38.070(A), applicants will be responsible for the following mitigation and ongoing maintenance activities: 1. The Airport Manager may require the installation of markers and lights or markers as a warning to aircraft. The markers and lights shall meet FAA specifications, be installed, operated, and maintained at the expense of the owner of the structure. A public maintenance easement granting city access to the markers and lights shall be required. 2. Trees shall be maintained such that they do not penetrate the airspace. 3. Exceptions may include the following: a. Because of natural terrain, land contour, or topographic features, a structure or object would extend above the height limits of each surface. b. Structures necessary and incidental to airport operations. 18.38.08140 Nonconforming structures, trees, and uses. structures and trees – Continuation allowed when. A. Applicability. This section describes the circumstances in which a structure, tree, or use is considered nonconforming and when nonconforming provisions apply. Any structure or tree that legally existed prior to the regulations as of March 22, 1969 is considered nonconforming. Any use in ACC 18.38.030 that legally existed prior to the effective date of this ordinance is considered nonconforming. Any use in ACC 18.38.060 that legally existed prior to the effective date of this ordinance is not considered nonconforming. Nonconforming structures, trees, and uses are generally exempt from this chapter Page 41 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 13 of 29 except as may be compelled by state or federal regulations or if it loses its nonconforming status pursuant to the regulations contained in this section. The regulations prescribed by this chapter shall not be construed to require the removal, lowering or other change or alteration of any structure or tree not conforming to the regulations as of March 22, 1969, or otherwise interfere with the continuance of any nonconforming use. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) Page 42 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 14 of 29 18.38.150 Nonconforming structures and trees – B. Marking and lighting. Notwithstanding the provisions of ACC 18.38.070(A) 18.38.140, the owner of any nonconforming structure or tree is required to permit the installation, operation, and maintenance thereon of such markers and lights as are deemed necessary by the Airport Manager to indicate to the operators of aircraft in the vicinity of the airport the presence of such aircraft hazards. Such markers and lights shall meet FAA specifications, be installed at City cost to the City, and operated and maintained by the cityCity.. A public maintenance easement agreement granting city access shall be required. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) C. Alteration. Alteration of nonconforming structures, trees, and uses are subject to the following regulations. 1. Nonconforming structures may be maintained, repaired, restored, added onto, enlarged, or relocated in accordance with the provisions of ACC 18.54.060. A nonconforming structure that is restored or repaired at a valuation exceeding 50 percent of the assessed valuation of such structure as established by the most current county assessor’s tax roll, relocated, enlarged, or added onto must conform to ACC 18.38.070. 2. Nonconforming uses may continue subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.54 ACC. 3. Nonconforming signs shall be subject to the nonconforming provisions of Chapter 18.56 ACC. A nonconforming sign that is enlarged, made taller, relocated, or loses its nonconforming status per ACC 18.56.030(J), must conform to ACC 18.38.070. 4. Alteration of a nonconforming tree, including replacement, replanting and trimming, must conform to ACC 18.38.070. 5. Notwithstanding the provisions of ACC 18.38.080(C)(1) through (4), . Nno permit shall be granted that would allow the establishment or creation of an airport hazard or permit a nonconforming use, structure, or tree to be made or become higher, or become a greater hazard to air navigation., than it was on March 22, 1969, or than it is when the application for a permit is made. Except as indicated, all applications for such a permit shall be granted. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) D. Abatement. Nonconforming structures and uses shall be abated according to the provisions of ACC 18.54.070. Any tree that is diseased, decayed, dead, or dying must be removed, and if required, replaced with tree that conforms to ACC 18.38.070. Page 43 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 15 of 29 18.38.160 Structure and use permits. Except as specifically provided in subsections A, B and C of this section, no material change shall be made in the use of land and no structure or tree shall be erected, altered, planted or otherwise established in any zone created by this chapter unless a permit has been applied for and granted by the building department of the city. Each application for a permit shall indicate the purpose for which the permit is desired, with sufficient information to permit it to be determined whether the resulting use, structure or tree would conform to the regulations therein prescribed. If such determination is in the affirmative, the permit shall be granted. A. In the area lying within the limits of the horizontal zone and the conical zone, no permit shall be required for any tree or structure less than 75 feet of vertical height above the ground, except when because of terrain, land contour or topographic features such tree or structure would extend above the height limits prescribed for such zone. B. In the area lying within the limits of the noninstrument approach surface but at a horizontal distance of not less than 5,000 feet from a point 200 feet from each end of the runway, no permit shall be required for any tree or structure less than 75 feet of vertical height above the ground, except when such trees or structures would extend above the height limit prescribed for such noninstrument approach zone. C. The transitional surface does not extend beyond the perimeter of the horizontal surface. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) Page 44 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 16 of 29 18.38.170 Nonconforming structures or trees – Alteration. A. Before any nonconforming structure or tree may be replaced, substantially altered or repaired, rebuilt, allowed to grow higher or replanted, a permit must be secured from the airport manager and, if applicable, the building official. B. No permit shall be granted that would allow the establishment or creation of an airport hazard or permit a nonconforming use, structure or tree to be made or become higher, or become a greater hazard to air navigation, than it was on March 22, 1969, or than it is when the application for a permit is made. Except as indicated, all applications for such a permit shall be granted. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.180 Nonconforming structures or trees – Abandoned or destroyed – Permit prohibited. Whenever the airport manager determines that a nonconforming structure or tree has been abandoned or more than 80 percent torn down, physically deteriorated or decayed, no permit shall be granted that would allow such structure or tree to exceed the applicable height limit or otherwise deviate from the zoning regulations. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.190090 Variances. Requirements for variances. A. Requirements. If the applicant seeks a variance to erect or increase the height of any structure, or permit the growth of any tree, or use their property, not in accordance with the regulations prescribed in this chapter, the variance shall be subject to the criteria contained in ACC 18.70.010 and processed according to the applicable provisions of Chapter 18.70 ACC. Any person desiring to erect or increase the height of any structure, or permit the growth of any tree, or use their property, not in accordance with the regulations prescribed in this chapter, may apply to the hearing examiner for a variance from such regulation. Such variances shall be allowed where it is duly found that a literal application or enforcement of the regulation should result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship and the relief granted would not be contrary to the public interest but will do substantial justice and be in accordance with the spirit of this chapter. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.200 Variance – Grant conditions. B. Approval conditions. Any variance granted may, if such action is deemed advisable to effectuate the purpose of this chapter and is reasonable in the circumstances, be so conditioned as to require the Page 45 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 17 of 29 owner of the structure or tree requesting a variance to install, operate and maintain at their own expense such markers and lights as determined by the Airport Manager may be necessary to indicate to aircraft operatorsfliers the presence of an airport hazard. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.210100 Decision appeals – Generally. Any person aggrieved, or any property ownertaxpayer affected, by any decision of the city made in its administration of this chapter may appeal to the hearing examiner. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.220110 Conflicting regulations. Where there exists a conflict between any of the regulations or limitations prescribed in this chapter and any other regulations applicable to the same area, whether the conflict is with respect to the height of structures or trees, the use of land, or any other matter, the more stringent limitation or requirement shall govern and prevail. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.230120 Enforcement. It shall be the duty of the airport manager and building officialDepartment of Public Works and the Department of Community Development to administer and enforce the regulations prescribed in this chapter. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.240130 Violation – Penalty. Each violation of this chapter or of any regulation, order or ruling promulgated under this chapter constitutes a misdemeanor and is punishable as provided in ACC 1.24.010. Each day a violation continues to exist constitutes a separate offense. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.250 Development standards. Development standards in a LF district are as follows: A. Minimum lot area: none required; B. Minimum lot width: none required; C. Minimum lot depth: none required; D. Maximum lot coverage: none required; Page 46 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 18 of 29 E. Maximum building height: 45 feet, except as restricted elsewhere by this chapter; F. Minimum yard setbacks: 1. Front: 20 feet, 2. Side, interior: none required, 3. Side, street: 15 feet, 4. Rear: none required; G. Fences and hedges: see Chapter 18.31 ACC; H. Parking: see Chapter 18.52 ACC; I. Landscaping: see Chapter 18.50 ACC; J. Signs: see Chapter 18.56 ACC. (Ord. 5777 § 1, 2003; Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) Chapter 18.01 USER GUIDE 18.01.030 How do I determine what uses are allowed on a particular property? The first step in determining allowed uses is verifying the zoning on the property, which can be done by speaking with city of Auburn planning department staff or by consulting the city’s official zoning map. When verifying a property’s zoning, it is also important to note any overlays that may be marked on the zoning map. Overlays may have additional requirements or otherwise modify the allowed uses and development standards for a zone. The overlay Rregulations for overlays , such as those established for Lea Hill, West Hill, and designated urban separator areas, are contained in Chapter 18.21 ACC, and for the airport are contained in Chapter 18.38 ACC.. The sections devoted to particular zones described on the zoning map form the framework of the zoning code. Each of these sections contains the intent statement for the particular zone, a table of allowed uses, as well as tables for dimensional standards (building height, setbacks, and lot coverage) and cross- references to other standards such as landscaping and parking requirements. It is important to note that each section contains only regulations that apply specifically to that zone, and development standards that apply to all zones are addressed through cross-references to other chapters of the zoning code. (Ord. 6245 § 1, 2009.) Page 47 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 19 of 29 Chapter 18.04 DEFINITIONS 18.04.039 Aircraft Operations. The movement of aircraft operating in the airport traffic pattern or within sight of the airport. A landing or takeoff is one operation. An aircraft that takes off and then lands creates two aircraft operations. 18.04.072 Airport Manager. See definition in Chapter 12.56 ACC. 18.04.040 Airport, heliport or aircraft landing field. “Airport,” “heliport,” or “aircraft landing field” means any runway, landing area or other facility whether publicly or privately owned or operated, and which is designed, used or intended to be used either by public carriers or by private aircraft for landing and taking off of aircraft, including ultralights as defined by ACC 8.36.010. This definition includes all necessary taxiways, aircraft storage and tie-down areas, hangars and other necessary buildings and open spaces. This definition does not include manufacturing, servicing or testing facilities located in the vicinity of any landing area associated with the manufacturing or testing of commercial or military aircraft or activities associated therewith 18.04.365 FAR Part 77 Surfaces. The Federal Aviation Administration’s Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77 Surfaces are the imaginary airspace surfaces established with any relation to each runway of an airport. There are five types of surfaces: (1) primary, (2) approach, (3) transitional, (4) horizontal, and (5) conical. These surfaces are above and around airports and require protection from potential obstructions that might interfere with airport traffic and potentially create a safety risk to aircraft occupants and persons on the ground. An object or structure with an elevation higher than the FAR Part 77 surface elevation is considered to penetrate the FAR Part 77 Surfaces and constitute an obstruction to navigable airspace. Navigable airspace is defined by the FAA pursuant to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 77, Imaginary Surfaces. Page 48 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 20 of 29 18.04.676.1 Overlay Zone. “Overlay zone” is supplemental to the underlying zoning district and may establish additional or stricter standards and criteria for properties in addition to those of the underling zoning district. Chapter 18.23 COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONES 18.23.030 Uses. A. General Permit Requirements. Table 18.23.030 identifies the uses of land allowed in each commercial and industrial zone and the land use approval process required to establish each use. B. Requirements for Certain Specific Land Uses. Where the last column in Table 18.23.030 (“Standards for Specific Land Uses”) includes a reference to a code section number, the referenced section determines other requirements and standards applicable to the use regardless of whether it is permitted outright or requires an administrative or conditional use permit. C. Uses Affected by the Airport Overlay. Refer to Chapter 18.38 ACC to determine whether uses are separately prohibited by that chapter or will be required to comply with additional regulations that are associated with the airport overlay. Table 18.23.030. Permitted, Administrative, Conditional and Prohibited Uses by Zone, Commercial and Industrial Zones PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 INDUSTRIAL, MANUFACTURING AND PROCESSING, WHOLESALING Building contractor, light X X X P X P X P Building contractor, heavy X X X X X A X P Page 49 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 21 of 29 PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Manufacturing, assembling and packaging – Light intensity X X X P X P P P ACC 18.31.180 Manufacturing, assembling and packaging – Medium intensity X X X A X P A P ACC 18.31.180 Manufacturing, assembling and packaging – Heavy intensity X X X X X X X A ACC 18.31.180 Marijuana processor X X X X X C C C Chapter 18.59 ACC Marijuana producer X X X X X C C C Chapter 18.59 ACC Marijuana researcher X X X X X C C C Chapter 18.59 ACC Marijuana retailer X X X C X C C C Chapter 18.59 ACC Marijuana transporter business X X X X X C C C Chapter 18.59 ACC Outdoor storage, incidental to principal permitted use on property X X X P X P P P ACC 18.57.020(A) Storage – Personal household storage facility (mini-storage) X P X P X P X P ACC 18.57.020(B) Page 50 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 22 of 29 PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Warehousing and distribution X X X X X P P C ACC 18.57.020(C) Warehousing and distribution, bonded and located within a designated foreign trade zone X X X P X P P P Wholesaling with on-site retail as an incidental use (coffee, bakery, e.g.) X X X P X P P P RECREATION, EDUCATION AND PUBLIC ASSEMBLY USES Commercial recreation facility, indoor X P P P P P P A Commercial recreation facility, outdoor X X X A A P A A ACC 18.57.025(A) Conference/convention facility X X A A X A X X Library, museum X A A A X A P X Meeting facility, public or private A P P P X A P A Movie theater, except drive-in X P P P P X X X Private school – Specialized education/training (for profit) A A P P P P P P Page 51 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 23 of 29 PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Religious institutions, lot size less than one acre A P P P A A A A Religious institutions, lot size more than one acre C P P P A A A A Sexually oriented businesses X X X P X P X P Chapter 18.74 ACC Sports and entertainment assembly facility X X A A X A X A Studio – Art, dance, martial arts, music, etc. P P P P P P A A RESIDENTIAL Caretaker apartment X P P P X P P P Live/work unit X X P P P P P X Work/live unit X P P P P P P X Marijuana cooperative X X X X X X X X Multiple-family dwellings as part of a mixed-use development2 X X P P P P P X ACC 18.57.030 Multiple-family dwellings, stand-alone X X X X X X X X Nursing home, assisted living facility X P P P C X X X Senior housing2 X X A A X X X X Page 52 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 24 of 29 PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 RETAIL Building and landscape materials sales X X X P X P X P ACC 18.57.035(A) Construction and heavy equipment sales and rental X X X X X A X P Convenience store A A P P X P P P Drive-through espresso stands A A A P A P A A Drive-through facility, including banks and restaurants A A A P P P X P ACC 18.52.040 Entertainment, commercial X A P P X A X A Groceries, specialty food stores P P P P P P P X ACC 18.57.035(B) Nursery X X X P A P X P ACC 18.57.035(C) Outdoor displays and sales associated with a permitted use (auto/vehicle sales not included in this category) P P P P P P P P ACC 18.57.035(D) Restaurant, cafe, coffee shop P P P P P P P P Retail Page 53 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 25 of 29 PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Community retail establishment A P P P P P X P Neighborhood retail establishment P P P P P P X P Regional retail establishment X X X P P P X A Tasting room P P P P P P P P Tavern P P X P P P X A Wine production facility, small craft distillery, small craft brewery A P P P P P P P SERVICES Animal daycare (excluding kennels and animal boarding) A A A P A P X P ACC 18.57.040(A) Animal sales and services (excluding kennels and veterinary clinics) P P P P P P X P ACC 18.57.040(B) Banking and related financial institutions, excluding drive-through facilities P P P P P P P P Catering service P P P P A P A P Daycare, including mini daycare, daycare center, A P P P P P P X Page 54 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 26 of 29 PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 preschools or nursery schools Dry cleaning and laundry service (personal) P P P P P P P P Equipment rental and leasing X X X P X P X P Kennel, animal boarding X X X A X A X A ACC 18.57.040(C) Government facilities; this excludes offices and related uses that are permitted outright A A A A A A A A Hospital X P P P X P X P Lodging – Hotel or motel X P P P P A P A Medical – Dental clinic P P P P P P X X Mortuary, funeral home, crematorium A P X P X P X X Personal service shops P P P P P P X X Pharmacies P P P P P X X X Print and copy shop P P P P P P X X Printing and publishing (of books, newspaper and other printed matter) X A P P P P P P Professional offices P P P P P P P P Page 55 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 27 of 29 PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Repair service – Equipment, appliances X A P P P P X P ACC 18.57.040(D) Veterinary clinic, animal hospital A P P P P P X X Youth community support facility X P X X X X X X ACC 18.57.040(E) TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS AND INFRASTRUCTURE Ambulance, taxi, and specialized transportation facility X X X A X P X P Broadcasting studio X P X P X P X P Heliport X X X C X C X C Motor freight terminal1 X X X X X X X X See Footnote No. 1 Parking facility, public or commercial, surface X P P P P P P X Parking facility, public or commercial, structured X P P P P P P X Towing storage yard X X X X X A X P ACC 18.57.045(A) Utility transmission or distribution line or substation A A A A A A A A Wireless communications facility (WCF) (See ACC 18.04.912(W)) * * * * * * * * *See ACC 18.31.100 for use regulations and zoning development standards. Page 56 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 28 of 29 PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Eligible facilities request (EFR) (wireless communications facility) (See ACC 18.04.912(H)) P P P P P P P P Small wireless facilities (ACC 18.04.912(Q)) P P P P P P P P VEHICLE SALES AND SERVICES Automobile washes (automatic, full or self- service) X A X P P P X P ACC 18.57.050(A) Auto parts sales with installation services X A A P P P X P Auto/vehicle sales and rental X A X P X P X P ACC 18.57.050(B) Fueling station X A A P P P X P ACC 18.57.050(C) Mobile home, boat, or RV sales X X X P X P X P Vehicle services – Repair/body work X X A P X P X P ACC 18.57.050(D) OTHER Any commercial use abutting a residential zone which has hours of operation outside of the following: Sunday: 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. or A A A A A A A A Page 57 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 29 of 29 PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Monday – Saturday: 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Other uses may be permitted by the planning director or designee if the use is determined to be consistent with the intent of the zone and is of the same general character of the uses permitted. See ACC 18.02.120(C)(6), Unclassified Uses. P P P P P P P P 1 Any motor freight terminal, as defined by ACC 18.04.635, in existence as of the effective date of the ordinance codified in this section, is an outright permitted use in the M-1 and M-2 zones. Any maintenance, alterations and additions to an existing motor freight terminal which are consistent with ACC 18.23.040, Development standards, are allowed. 2 Any mixed-use development or senior housing project vested prior to Resolution No. 5187 (December 7, 2015) is an outright permitted use in the C-1 zone. Subsequently, if a nonresidential use within a vested mixed-use development changes, then the nonresidential use shall maintain a minimum of 10 percent of the cumulative building ground floor square footage consisting of the uses permitted outright, administratively, or conditionally, listed under “Recreation, Education, and Public Assembly,” “Retail,” or “Services” of the C-1 zone. (Ord. 6799 § 6 (Exh. F), 2020; Ord. 6728 § 3 (Exh. C), 2019; Ord. 6688 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2018; Ord. 6644 § 2, 2017; Ord. 6642 § 9, 2017; Ord. 6508 § 1, 2014; Ord. 6433 § 26, 2012.) Page 58 of 967 EXHIBIT BPage 59 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 1 of 25 Chapter 18.38 LF AIRPORT LANDING FIELD DISTRICT, OVERLAY, AND FAR PART 77 SURFACES Sections: 18.38.010 Intent. 18.38.020 Purpose. 18.38.030 LF Airport Landing Field District Permitted Uses. 18.38.040 LF Airport Landing Field District Development Standards. 18.38.050 Airport Overlay Intent and Boundary. 18.38.060 Airport Overlay Restrictions and Standards. 18.38.070 Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77 Surfaces and Other Surfaces. 18.38.080 Nonconforming Uses, Structures, and Trees. 18.38.090 Variances. 18.38.100 Decision Appeals – Generally. 18.38.110 Conflicting Regulations. 18.38.120 Enforcement. 18.38.130 Violation – Penalty. 18.38.010 Purpose. The provisions of this chapter apply to lands located within the LF Airport Landing Field Zoning District, Airport Zoning Overlay, and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Federal Regulation Title 14 Part 77 Imaginary Surfaces (FAR Part 77 Surfaces) and other Surfaces. The airport overlay and the FAR Part 77 Surfaces and other surfaces are supplemental to the existing zoning districts and may be more restrictive than the underlying zoning designation. The restrictions, performance standards, and requirements of the airport overlay shall be in addition to those of the underlying zone and, where explicitly noted, supersede the underlying zoning. If implementation of this chapter conflicts with other provisions of the City Code, State, or federal law, the more restrictive requirement applies. 18.38.020 Intent. The intent of this chapter is to apply the City’s Comprehensive Plan and to implement certain land use and zoning development standards to reduce or avoid potential for airport related hazards. It is found that an airport hazard endangers the lives and property of users of the municipal airport and of EXHIBIT C Page 60 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 2 of 25 occupants of land or property in its vicinity, and also, if of the obstruction type, in effect reduces the size of the area available for the landing, taking off, and maneuvering of aircraft, thus tending to destroy or impair the utility of the municipal airport and the public investment therein. Accordingly, it is declared that: A. The creation or establishment of an airport hazard is a public nuisance and an injury to the region served by the municipal airport; B. It is necessary in the interest of the public health, public safety, and general welfare that the creation or establishment of airport hazards be prevented; and C. The prevention of these airport hazards should be accomplished, to the extent legally possible, by the exercise of the police power without compensation. It is further declared that both the prevention or the creation or establishment of airport hazards and the elimination, removal, alteration, mitigation or marking and lighting of existing airport hazards are public purposes for which political subdivisions may raise and expend public funds and acquire land or interests in land. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) D. For the purpose of this chapter structure means any object constructed or installed by a human being, including, but not limited to buildings, signs, fences, towers, devices, and overhead transmission lines, and tree means any object of natural growth. Page 61 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 3 of 25 18.38.030 LF Airport Landing Field District Uses. A. Permitted Uses. Hereafter the effective date of this ordinance all buildings, structures, or parcels of land shall only be used for the following, unless otherwise provided for in this title: 1. Landing, taking off, taxiing, and flying of aircraft; 2. Aviation related business, manufacturing, service-related uses including businesses incidental to and necessary or convenient for airport operations, including offices, eating establishments, restrooms, hangars, shops for light repairs, gasoline and oil sales and accessory structures; and 3. Other uses as determined by the Planning Director in consultation with the Airport Manager as defined in Chapter 12.56 ACC to be related to operation and use of the airport. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.040 LF Airport Landing Field District Zoning Development Standards. Table 18.38.040 Development Standards A Minimum lot area (square feet) None B Minimum lot width None C Minimum lot depth None D Minimum lot coverage None E Maximum structure height 45 ft1 3 F Minimum front setback (feet) None2 G Minimum interior side setback (feet) None H Minimum street side setback (feet) None2 I Minimum rear setback (feet) None2 J Fences See ACC 18.31.0203 K Landscaping See Chapter 18.50 ACC3 L Parking See Chapter 18.52 ACC Page 62 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 4 of 25 M Signs See Chapter 18.56 ACC3 N Outdoor lighting See Chapter 18.55 ACC3 1 Buildings and/or structures necessary for airport operations are exempt from the height requirements of this title when approved by the Airport Manager. 2 Must meet sight distance provisions of the engineering design standards. 3 Except as restricted elsewhere by this chapter. 18.38.050 Airport Overlay Intent and Boundaries. The purpose of the airport overlay, as identified on the City of Auburn Comprehensive Zoning Map, is to protect the utility and viability of Auburn Airport by discouraging incompatible land uses and requiring the evaluation and consideration of potential safety impacts when siting certain land uses in proximity to the airport. The airport overlay is supplemental to the established zoning districts and may be more restrictive than the underlying zoning district. The overlay is composed of six zones based on use and proximity to the airport runway. The zones were modeled after the WSDOT Aviation Airport Compatibility Zones 1-6, and the Airport’s published traffic pattern. A. Zone 1 - Runway Overlay Zone. Zone 1 is a rectangular area that encompasses the trapezoidal runway protection zone (RPZ) at each end of the runway as shown in the “Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan,” dated May 2015, as may be amended. The purpose of Zone 1 is to maintain areas that are generally free of obstructions and significant concentrations of people. Zone 1 extends one thousand (1,000) feet in length from the ends of the future configuration of Runway 34/16 and is seven hundred and fifty (750) feet in width. B. Zone 2 - Inner Safety Zone. Zone 2 is a rectangular area that extends beyond Zone 1 along the extension of the runway centerline. Next to the Zone 1 it represents the area where the risk of aircraft accidents is the greatest. This zone extends one thousand five hundred (1,500) feet from Zone 1 and is seven hundred and fifty feet (750) in width. C. Zone 3 – Inner Turning Zone. Zone 3 is defined by a triangular shaped area that is positioned along each side of Zones 1 and 2. When operating visually, departing aircraft may begin turning over this area to fly toward their destination or to remain in the traffic pattern. Arriving aircraft often overfly this area as well. This zone extends three thousand (3,000) feet from the Zone 3 vertex offsets (a point that is on Page 63 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 5 of 25 the runway centerline) and inward within a thirty degree sector towards the extended runway centerline. D. Zone 4 - Outer Safety Zone. Zone 4 is a rectangular area that lies beyond Zone 3 along the extended runway centerline. Aircraft flying straight out or in, overfly this area at low altitude. This zone is particularly significant on runways where airport operations use instrument procedures and at busy airports where elongated traffic patterns are common. This zone extends two thousand five hundred (2,500) feet beyond Zone 3 and is five hundred (500) feet in width. E. Zone 5 - Sideline Safety Zone. Zone 5 consists of narrow bands along each side of the runway and encompasses the Object Free Area (OFA), as defined by the Airport Master Plan, dated 2015, as may be amended. This zone is defined by a five hundred (500) foot centerline offset on each side of the runway. Aircraft do not normally fly over the sideline zone. The principal risk is from aircraft that lose directional control while landing or just after takeoff. F. Zone 6 – Airport Operations Zone. Zone 6 contains the remainder of the airport environment where aircraft fly as they approach and depart the airport. This zone extends six thousand five hundred (6,500) feet in length from the Zone 3 vertex offsets and six thousand (6,000) feet in width from the runway centerline. Page 64 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 6 of 25 18.38.060 Airport Overlay Restrictions and Standards. A. Zones 1 and 2. The following regulations shall apply within the boundaries of Zones 1 and 2: 1. The following new uses established hereafter the effective date of this ordinance are prohibited in Zones 1 and 2: a. Multiple-family dwellings, stand-alone; b. Mixed-Use development; c. Nursing home; d. Assisted living facility; e. Supportive housing; f. Hospitals; g. Senior housing; h. Schools, elementary, middle/junior high, and secondary or high school; i. Daycare center and nursery schools/preschools; j. Detached single-family dwellings, except caretakers quarters; and k. Other uses, similar to those above, or activities determined by the Planning Director in consultation with the Airport Manager to be incompatible with aviation, aviation safety, or any activity that has the potential to interfere with the airport, airport traffic patterns, and aircraft operations. 2. The following standards apply in Zones 1 and 2: a. All property owners seeking permit(s) for grading (excluding minor grading permits), building (exceed 50 percent of the value of the building or structure), extension or replacement of public utilities, subdivision, or development activity that triggers public improvements per Chapter 12.64A ACC, shall dedicate an avigation easement to the City of Auburn over the affected portion of their property prior to issuance of said permit(s). The language of the easement shall be provided by the City. b. No use may create an electrical interference with navigational signals or radio communications at the airport, or with radio or electronic communications between the airport and aircraft, or aircraft to aircraft. c. No structure or tree shall be placed, erected, or allowed to grow that makes it difficult for pilots to distinguish between airport lights and other lights, results in glare to pilots, impairs visibility in the vicinity thereof, or otherwise endanger the landing, taking off or maneuvering of aircraft. Page 65 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 7 of 25 d. No use or structure shall emit emissions of fly ash, dust, vapor, gases, steam, or other forms of emissions that may conflict with any operations of the airport. e. No use or activity shall be permitted that would foster an increase in bird population and thereby increase the likelihood of aircraft and bird impact, as determined by the Planning Director in consultation with the Airport Manager. f. In order to deter the congregation of wildlife, stormwater facilities must meet or exceed recommendations found in Appendix I-H, Airport Operations of the SWMM, as defined in ACC 12.04.010(B). B. Zone 3. The following regulations shall apply within the boundary of Zone 3: 1. The new uses contained in (A)(1) are prohibited in Zone 3. 2. The standards of (A)(2)(a) through (d) apply. C. Zone 4. The following regulations shall apply with the boundary of Zone 4: 1. The standards of (A)(2)(a) through (d) apply. D. Zone 5. The following regulations shall apply within the boundary of Zone 5: 1. The standards of (A)(2)(a) through (f) apply. E. Zone 6. The following regulations shall apply within the boundary of Zone 6: 1. The standards of (A)(2)(b) and (c) apply. 2. All property owners within 1,000 feet of properties zoned LF, Landing Field District seeking permit(s) for grading (excluding minor grading permits), building (exceed 50 percent of the value of the building or structure), extension or replacement of public utilities, subdivision, or development activity that triggers public improvements per Chapter 12.64A ACC, shall record aviation disclosure notice with the King County Recorder’s Office notifying, in writing, to future owners and tenants prior to signing a lease or sale, of the possible affects from aviation activities. The language of the notice shall be provided by the City. 18.38.070 Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77 Surfaces and Other Surfaces. A. In order to carry out the purpose and intent of this chapter, there are created and established certain surfaces, including: all of the land lying within the primary surface, non-instrument approach surface, Page 66 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 8 of 25 transition surface, horizontal surface, conical surface, as well as the Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) airspace surfaces. These surfaces, with exception of the TERPS, are shown on the FAR Part 77 drawing, as amended, which is on file in the city clerk’s office. Other surfaces not provided for here, are included in the “Auburn Municipal Airport Layout Plan”, dated May 2015, as may be amended. The surfaces defined for the runway summarized below are consistent with the currently adopted airport layout plan (ALP) and FAR Part 77 Airspace Plan drawings for the airport. 1. Primary surface. The primary surface, is centered on top of the runway and extends two hundred feet beyond each end. The primary surface is longitudinally centered on the runway with a width of two hundred and fifty (250) feet and extends two hundred (200) feet beyond each end of the runway. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 2. Approach surface. A non-instrument approach surface is established at each end of all non- instrument runways for landings and takeoffs. The inner width of the approach surface is two hundred and fifty (250) feet at a distance of two hundred (200) feet beyond the physical end of the runway, and it expands uniformly to a width of one thousand, two hundred and fifty (1,250) feet. This approach surface extends for a horizontal distance of five thousand (5,000) feet at a slope of twenty to one (20:1). The elevation of the inner width of the approach surface is the same as the elevation of the nearest point on the runway centerline. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 3. Transitional surface. The transitional surface extends outward and upward at right angles to the runway centerline and the runway centerline extends at a slope of seven to one (7:1) from a line one hundred and twenty five (125) feet from the runway centerline or runway end and from the sides of the approach surfaces. The elevation of the line one hundred and twenty five (125) feet from the runway centerline or runway centerline extended for two hundred (200) feet beyond each runway end is the same as the elevation of the nearest point on the runway centerline. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) Page 67 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 9 of 25 4. Horizontal surface. A horizontal surface is established above the airport. This horizontal surface is a plane one hundred and fifty (150) feet above the established airport elevation, the perimeter of which is constructed by arcs which swing five thousand (5,000) feet in a radius from the center of each end of the primary surface of the runway and connecting the adjacent arcs by lines tangent to those arcs. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 5. Conical surface. A conical surface is established which extends outward and upward from the periphery of the horizontal surface at a slope of twenty to one (20:1) for a horizontal distance of four thousand (4,000) feet. 6. Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) Surfaces. Airspace surfaces associated with instrument approach and departure of aircraft to and from the airport as determined by the Airport Manager. B. Height limitations – Established. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, no structure or tree shall be permitted, approved, erected, altered, allowed to grow, or maintained in any surface created in this chapter to have a height in excess of the height limits established below. 1. Approach Surface (Non-instrument). The height limitations for non-instrument approach surfaces begin at a point two hundred (200) feet from and at the centerline elevation of the end of the runway and extend for a horizontal distance of five thousand (5,000) feet at a slope of twenty to one (20:1). (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 2. Transition surface. The height limitations for transition zones shall be as follows: One foot in height for each seven feet in horizontal distance beginning at any point one hundred and twenty five (125) feet normal to and at the elevation of the centerline of non-instrument runways, extending two hundred (200) feet beyond each end thereof, extending to a height of one hundred and fifty (150) feet above the airport elevation which is sixty three (63) feet above mean sea level. In addition to the foregoing, there are established height limits of one foot vertical height for each seven feet horizontal distance measured from the edges of all approach zones for the entire length of the approach zones and extending upward and outward to the points where they intersect the horizontal or conical surfaces. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 3. Horizontal surface. The height limitation for a horizontal zone shall be as follows: one hundred and fifty (150) feet above the airport elevation or a height of two hundred and thirteen (213) feet above mean sea level. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) Page 68 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 10 of 25 4. Conical surface. The conical surface involves a slope of twenty to one (20:1) for a horizontal distance of four thousand (4,000) feet. The relative difference in elevation between the inner and outer edge of the conical surface is two hundred (200) feet. The elevation of the outer edge of the conical surface is three hundred and fifty (350) feet above the established airport elevation. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) C. Height limitations – Compliance. Where the height of any new structure or tree, has the potential to exceed the surfaces established in ACC 18.38.070(A), applicants must demonstrate compliance with the height limitation. Each application for a permit shall contain sufficient information to determine whether the resulting structure or tree will conform to the regulations herein prescribed. 1. The Planning Director in consultation with the Airport Manager may require one or all of the following documentation to demonstrate compliance with the surfaces established in ACC 18.38.070(A): a. A certificate from a Washington state licensed professional, engineer, or land surveyor, stating that no airspace obstruction will result from the proposed structure or tree being constructed or installed. b. The maximum elevation of proposed structures based on the established airport elevation. c. Prepare and submit FAA Form 7460 “Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration”. d. Other documentation as determined by the Airport Manager. D. Height limitations – Mitigation and Maintenance. Where the height of any new structure or tree, exceeds the surfaces established in ACC 18.38.070(A), applicants will be responsible for the following mitigation and ongoing maintenance activities: 1. The Airport Manager may require the installation of markers and lights or markers as a warning to aircraft. The markers and lights shall meet FAA specifications, be installed, operated, and maintained at the expense of the owner of the structure. A public maintenance easement granting city access to the markers and lights shall be required. 2. Trees shall be maintained such that they do not penetrate the airspace. 3. Exceptions may include the following: a. Because of natural terrain, land contour, or topographic features, a structure or object would extend above the height limits of each surface. b. Structures necessary and incidental to airport operations. Page 69 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 11 of 25 18.38.080 Nonconforming structures, trees, and uses. A. Applicability. This section describes the circumstances in which a structure, tree, or use is considered nonconforming and when nonconforming provisions apply. Any structure or tree that legally existed prior to the regulations as of March 22, 1969 is considered nonconforming. Any use in ACC 18.38.030 that legally existed prior to the effective date of this ordinance is considered nonconforming. Any use in ACC 18.38.060 that legally existed prior to the effective date of this ordinance is not considered nonconforming. Nonconforming structures, trees, and uses are generally exempt from this chapter except as may be compelled by state or federal regulations or if it loses its nonconforming status pursuant to the regulations contained in this section. Page 70 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 12 of 25 B. Marking and lighting. Notwithstanding the provisions of ACC 18.38.070(A), the owner of any nonconforming structure or tree is required to permit the installation, operation, and maintenance thereon of such markers and lights as are deemed necessary by the Airport Manager to indicate to the operators of aircraft in the vicinity of the airport the presence of such aircraft hazards. Such markers and lights shall meet FAA specifications, be installed at City cost, and operated and maintained by the City. A public maintenance easement agreement granting city access shall be required. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) C. Alteration. Alteration of nonconforming structures, trees, and uses are subject to the following regulations. 1. Nonconforming structures may be maintained, repaired, restored, added onto, enlarged, or relocated in accordance with the provisions of ACC 18.54.060. A nonconforming structure that is restored or repaired at a valuation exceeding 50 percent of the assessed valuation of such structure as established by the most current county assessor’s tax roll, relocated, enlarged, or added onto must conform to ACC 18.38.070. 2. Nonconforming uses may continue subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.54 ACC. 3. Nonconforming signs shall be subject to the nonconforming provisions of Chapter 18.56 ACC. A nonconforming sign that is enlarged, made taller, relocated, or loses its nonconforming status per ACC 18.56.030(J), must conform to ACC 18.38.070. 4. Alteration of a nonconforming tree, including replacement, replanting and trimming, must conform to ACC 18.38.070. 5. Notwithstanding the provisions of ACC 18.38.080(C)(1) through (4), no permit shall be granted that would allow the establishment or creation of an airport hazard or permit a nonconforming use, structure, or tree to be made or become higher, or become a greater hazard to air navigation. D. Abatement. Nonconforming structures and uses shall be abated according to the provisions of ACC 18.54.070. Any tree that is diseased, decayed, dead, or dying must be removed, and if required, replaced with tree that conforms to ACC 18.38.070. 18.38.090 Variances. A. Requirements. If the applicant seeks a variance to erect or increase the height of any structure, or permit the growth of any tree, or use their property, not in accordance with the regulations prescribed Page 71 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 13 of 25 in this chapter, the variance shall be subject to the criteria contained in ACC 18.70.010 and processed according to the applicable provisions of Chapter 18.70 ACC. B. Approval conditions. Any variance granted may, if such action is deemed advisable to effectuate the purpose of this chapter and is reasonable in the circumstances, be so conditioned as to require the owner of the structure or tree requesting a variance to install, operate and maintain at their own expense such markers and lights as determined by the Airport Manager to indicate to aircraft operators the presence of an airport hazard. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.100 Decision appeals – Generally. Any person aggrieved, or any property owner affected, by any decision of the city made in its administration of this chapter may appeal to the hearing examiner. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.110 Conflicting regulations. Where there exists a conflict between any of the regulations or limitations prescribed in this chapter and any other regulations applicable to the same area, whether the conflict is with respect to the height of structures or trees, the use of land, or any other matter, the more stringent limitation or requirement shall govern and prevail. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.120 Enforcement. It shall be the duty of the Department of Public Works and the Department of Community Development to administer and enforce the regulations prescribed in this chapter. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) 18.38.130 Violation – Penalty. Each violation of this chapter or of any regulation, order or ruling promulgated under this chapter constitutes a misdemeanor and is punishable as provided in ACC 1.24.010. Each day a violation continues to exist constitutes a separate offense. (Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.) Page 72 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 14 of 25 Chapter 18.01 USER GUIDE 18.01.030 How do I determine what uses are allowed on a particular property? The first step in determining allowed uses is verifying the zoning on the property, which can be done by speaking with city of Auburn planning department staff or by consulting the city’s official zoning map. When verifying a property’s zoning, it is also important to note any overlays that may be marked on the zoning map. Overlays may have additional requirements or otherwise modify the allowed uses and development standards for a zone. The overlay regulations established for Lea Hill, West Hill, and designated urban separator areas, are contained in Chapter 18.21 ACC, and for the airport are contained in Chapter 18.38 ACC. The sections devoted to particular zones described on the zoning map form the framework of the zoning code. Each of these sections contains the intent statement for the particular zone, a table of allowed uses, as well as tables for dimensional standards (building height, setbacks, and lot coverage) and cross- references to other standards such as landscaping and parking requirements. It is important to note that each section contains only regulations that apply specifically to that zone, and development standards that apply to all zones are addressed through cross-references to other chapters of the zoning code. (Ord. 6245 § 1, 2009.) Chapter 18.04 DEFINITIONS 18.04.039 Aircraft Operations. The movement of aircraft operating in the airport traffic pattern or within sight of the airport. A landing or takeoff is one operation. An aircraft that takes off and then lands creates two aircraft operations. 18.04.072 Airport Manager. See definition in Chapter 12.56 ACC. 18.04.040 Airport, heliport or aircraft landing field. Page 73 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 15 of 25 “Airport,” “heliport,” or “aircraft landing field” means any runway, landing area or other facility whether publicly or privately owned or operated, and which is designed, used or intended to be used either by public carriers or by private aircraft for landing and taking off of aircraft. This definition includes all necessary taxiways, aircraft storage and tie-down areas, hangars and other necessary buildings and open spaces. This definition does not include manufacturing, servicing or testing facilities located in the vicinity of any landing area associated with the manufacturing or testing of commercial or military aircraft or activities associated therewith 18.04.365 FAR Part 77 Surfaces. The Federal Aviation Administration’s Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77 Surfaces are the imaginary airspace surfaces established with any relation to each runway of an airport. There are five types of surfaces: (1) primary, (2) approach, (3) transitional, (4) horizontal, and (5) conical. These surfaces are above and around airports and require protection from potential obstructions that might interfere with airport traffic and potentially create a safety risk to aircraft occupants and persons on the ground. An object or structure with an elevation higher than the FAR Part 77 surface elevation is considered to penetrate the FAR Part 77 Surfaces and constitute an obstruction to navigable airspace. Navigable airspace is defined by the FAA pursuant to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 77, Imaginary Surfaces. 18.04.676.1 Overlay Zone. “Overlay zone” is supplemental to the underlying zoning district and may establish additional or stricter standards and criteria for properties in addition to those of the underling zoning district. Chapter 18.23 COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONES 18.23.030 Uses. A. General Permit Requirements. Table 18.23.030 identifies the uses of land allowed in each commercial and industrial zone and the land use approval process required to establish each use. B. Requirements for Certain Specific Land Uses. Where the last column in Table 18.23.030 (“Standards for Specific Land Uses”) includes a reference to a code section number, the referenced section Page 74 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 16 of 25 determines other requirements and standards applicable to the use regardless of whether it is permitted outright or requires an administrative or conditional use permit. C. Uses Affected by the Airport Overlay. Refer to Chapter 18.38 ACC to determine whether uses are separately prohibited by that chapter or will be required to comply with additional regulations that are associated with the airport overlay. Table 18.23.030. Permitted, Administrative, Conditional and Prohibited Uses by Zone, Commercial and Industrial Zones PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 INDUSTRIAL, MANUFACTURING AND PROCESSING, WHOLESALING Building contractor, light X X X P X P X P Building contractor, heavy X X X X X A X P Manufacturing, assembling and packaging – Light intensity X X X P X P P P ACC 18.31.180 Manufacturing, assembling and packaging – Medium intensity X X X A X P A P ACC 18.31.180 Manufacturing, assembling and packaging – Heavy intensity X X X X X X X A ACC 18.31.180 Marijuana processor X X X X X C C C Chapter 18.59 ACC Page 75 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 17 of 25 PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Marijuana producer X X X X X C C C Chapter 18.59 ACC Marijuana researcher X X X X X C C C Chapter 18.59 ACC Marijuana retailer X X X C X C C C Chapter 18.59 ACC Marijuana transporter business X X X X X C C C Chapter 18.59 ACC Outdoor storage, incidental to principal permitted use on property X X X P X P P P ACC 18.57.020(A) Storage – Personal household storage facility (mini-storage) X P X P X P X P ACC 18.57.020(B) Warehousing and distribution X X X X X P P C ACC 18.57.020(C) Warehousing and distribution, bonded and located within a designated foreign trade zone X X X P X P P P Wholesaling with on-site retail as an incidental use (coffee, bakery, e.g.) X X X P X P P P RECREATION, EDUCATION AND PUBLIC ASSEMBLY USES Commercial recreation facility, indoor X P P P P P P A Page 76 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 18 of 25 PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Commercial recreation facility, outdoor X X X A A P A A ACC 18.57.025(A) Conference/convention facility X X A A X A X X Library, museum X A A A X A P X Meeting facility, public or private A P P P X A P A Movie theater, except drive-in X P P P P X X X Private school – Specialized education/training (for profit) A A P P P P P P Religious institutions, lot size less than one acre A P P P A A A A Religious institutions, lot size more than one acre C P P P A A A A Sexually oriented businesses X X X P X P X P Chapter 18.74 ACC Sports and entertainment assembly facility X X A A X A X A Studio – Art, dance, martial arts, music, etc. P P P P P P A A RESIDENTIAL Page 77 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 19 of 25 PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Caretaker apartment X P P P X P P P Live/work unit X X P P P P P X Work/live unit X P P P P P P X Marijuana cooperative X X X X X X X X Multiple-family dwellings as part of a mixed-use development2 X X P P P P P X ACC 18.57.030 Multiple-family dwellings, stand-alone X X X X X X X X Nursing home, assisted living facility X P P P C X X X Senior housing2 X X A A X X X X RETAIL Building and landscape materials sales X X X P X P X P ACC 18.57.035(A) Construction and heavy equipment sales and rental X X X X X A X P Convenience store A A P P X P P P Drive-through espresso stands A A A P A P A A Drive-through facility, including banks and restaurants A A A P P P X P ACC 18.52.040 Page 78 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 20 of 25 PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Entertainment, commercial X A P P X A X A Groceries, specialty food stores P P P P P P P X ACC 18.57.035(B) Nursery X X X P A P X P ACC 18.57.035(C) Outdoor displays and sales associated with a permitted use (auto/vehicle sales not included in this category) P P P P P P P P ACC 18.57.035(D) Restaurant, cafe, coffee shop P P P P P P P P Retail Community retail establishment A P P P P P X P Neighborhood retail establishment P P P P P P X P Regional retail establishment X X X P P P X A Tasting room P P P P P P P P Tavern P P X P P P X A Wine production facility, small craft distillery, small craft brewery A P P P P P P P SERVICES Page 79 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 21 of 25 PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Animal daycare (excluding kennels and animal boarding) A A A P A P X P ACC 18.57.040(A) Animal sales and services (excluding kennels and veterinary clinics) P P P P P P X P ACC 18.57.040(B) Banking and related financial institutions, excluding drive-through facilities P P P P P P P P Catering service P P P P A P A P Daycare, including mini daycare, daycare center, preschools or nursery schools A P P P P P P X Dry cleaning and laundry service (personal) P P P P P P P P Equipment rental and leasing X X X P X P X P Kennel, animal boarding X X X A X A X A ACC 18.57.040(C) Government facilities; this excludes offices and related uses that are permitted outright A A A A A A A A Hospital X P P P X P X P Lodging – Hotel or motel X P P P P A P A Page 80 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 22 of 25 PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Medical – Dental clinic P P P P P P X X Mortuary, funeral home, crematorium A P X P X P X X Personal service shops P P P P P P X X Pharmacies P P P P P X X X Print and copy shop P P P P P P X X Printing and publishing (of books, newspaper and other printed matter) X A P P P P P P Professional offices P P P P P P P P Repair service – Equipment, appliances X A P P P P X P ACC 18.57.040(D) Veterinary clinic, animal hospital A P P P P P X X Youth community support facility X P X X X X X X ACC 18.57.040(E) TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS AND INFRASTRUCTURE Ambulance, taxi, and specialized transportation facility X X X A X P X P Broadcasting studio X P X P X P X P Heliport X X X C X C X C Motor freight terminal1 X X X X X X X X See Footnote No. 1 Page 81 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 23 of 25 PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Parking facility, public or commercial, surface X P P P P P P X Parking facility, public or commercial, structured X P P P P P P X Towing storage yard X X X X X A X P ACC 18.57.045(A) Utility transmission or distribution line or substation A A A A A A A A Wireless communications facility (WCF) (See ACC 18.04.912(W)) * * * * * * * * *See ACC 18.31.100 for use regulations and zoning development standards. Eligible facilities request (EFR) (wireless communications facility) (See ACC 18.04.912(H)) P P P P P P P P Small wireless facilities (ACC 18.04.912(Q)) P P P P P P P P VEHICLE SALES AND SERVICES Automobile washes (automatic, full or self- service) X A X P P P X P ACC 18.57.050(A) Auto parts sales with installation services X A A P P P X P Auto/vehicle sales and rental X A X P X P X P ACC 18.57.050(B) Page 82 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 24 of 25 PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Fueling station X A A P P P X P ACC 18.57.050(C) Mobile home, boat, or RV sales X X X P X P X P Vehicle services – Repair/body work X X A P X P X P ACC 18.57.050(D) OTHER Any commercial use abutting a residential zone which has hours of operation outside of the following: Sunday: 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. or Monday – Saturday: 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. A A A A A A A A Other uses may be permitted by the planning director or designee if the use is determined to be consistent with the intent of the zone and is of the same general character of the uses permitted. See ACC 18.02.120(C)(6), Unclassified Uses. P P P P P P P P Page 83 of 967 ZOA20-0002 Page 25 of 25 1 Any motor freight terminal, as defined by ACC 18.04.635, in existence as of the effective date of the ordinance codified in this section, is an outright permitted use in the M-1 and M-2 zones. Any maintenance, alterations and additions to an existing motor freight terminal which are consistent with ACC 18.23.040, Development standards, are allowed. 2 Any mixed-use development or senior housing project vested prior to Resolution No. 5187 (December 7, 2015) is an outright permitted use in the C-1 zone. Subsequently, if a nonresidential use within a vested mixed-use development changes, then the nonresidential use shall maintain a minimum of 10 percent of the cumulative building ground floor square footage consisting of the uses permitted outright, administratively, or conditionally, listed under “Recreation, Education, and Public Assembly,” “Retail,” or “Services” of the C-1 zone. (Ord. 6799 § 6 (Exh. F), 2020; Ord. 6728 § 3 (Exh. C), 2019; Ord. 6688 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2018; Ord. 6644 § 2, 2017; Ord. 6642 § 9, 2017; Ord. 6508 § 1, 2014; Ord. 6433 § 26, 2012.) Page 84 of 967 September 3, 2021 City of Auburn 25 West Main Street Auburn, WA 98002 RE: City of Auburn Aviation Consultation Dear Alexandria Teague: This correspondence is to confirm that the City of Auburn has formally consulted with the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Aviation Division regarding the comprehensive plan update. WSDOT appreciates the city’s efforts and recognizes the substantial time and resources this represents. RCW 36.70.547 and 36.70A.510 requires local jurisdictions to formally consult with airport owners, managers, private airport operators, general aviation pilots, ports, and the Aviation Division of WSDOT prior to adoption of comprehensive plan policies or development of regulations that may affect property adjacent to public use airports. The main goals of the formal consultation are to avoid, minimize, and resolve potential land use conflicts with airports through the comprehensive plan and development of regulations. WSDOT recommends that local jurisdictions initiate formal consultation as early as possible in the planning process. This is to assure that all parties have an opportunity to work together to find comprehensive solutions of mutual benefit that fulfill the intent of the legislation, consistent with local jurisdictions’ land use planning authorities and obligations under law. The following is a general summary of recommendations discussed during the formal consultation meeting: − The City of Auburn with the support of WSDOT Aviation has commited to implementing airport compatibility zoning to prevent incompatible land use near the airport. − WSDOT Aviation is available for consultation and technical guidance. We appreciate the City of Auburn’s commitment to working with stakeholders to achieve a compatible outcome and adopt zoning to protect the Auburn Municipal EXHIBIT D Page 85 of 967 Airport. It is critical that every effort be made to discourage incompatible land uses that impair the airport’s ability to operate as an essential public facility. We thank you again for the opportunity to comment, and remain available to formally consult and provide technical assistance. Please don’t hesitate to contact me at 360-890-5258 or max.platts@wsdot.wa.gov if you have any questions. Sincerely, T.S. “Max” Platts Aviation Planner Page 86 of 967 AUBURN VALUES SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION CIT OF AUBURN AIRPORT CODE UPDATE ALEXANDRIA D. TEAGUE, AICP STUDY SESSION NOVEMBER 8, 2021 Department of Community Development Planning Building Development Engineering Permit Center Economic Development Community Services ●Code Enforcement Page 87 of 967 A brief recap: The Auburn Municipal Airport (also known as Dick Scobee Field was built in 1969. The airport runway has been extended over the years to increase operational safety. It is classified as a Public-Use, General Aviation Regional-Reliever Airport within the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS). The airport is a base for 330 aircraft, and averages approx. 450 flights a day. Auburn’s airport is self-funded and no local tax monies are used at the airport. BACKGROUND –AIRPORT OPERATIONS SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONPage 88 of 967 A brief recap: The airport receives FAA and WSDOT Aviation Division grants. The Airport Master Plan (AMP) is a comprehensive document intended to guide development on an airport. The Airport Layout Plan (ALP) is a conceptual map that current and proposed airport features and infrastructure. BACKGROUND –THE AMP & ALP SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONPage 89 of 967 A brief recap: The FAA does not have the authority to regulate off airport land use. The FAA regulates on-airport land use through approval of the ALP and through the grant assurances. Under the Federal Air Regulation (FAR) Part 77, the FAA has the authority to review proposed construction on and off the airport. The FAA reviews for “hazards to air navigation” associated with obstructions and penetration to the airspace. BACKGROUND –THE FAA’S ROLE SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONPage 90 of 967 A brief recap: WSDOT Aviation Division does not have regulatory authority over local land use decisions. WSDOT does, however, have a role in promoting land use compatibility of off airport land uses and activities. WSDOT promotes land use compatibility through grants the review of local Comprehensive Plans and regulations. BACKGROUND –WSDOT’S ROLE SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONPage 91 of 967 A brief recap: The City has the regulatory authority over how development occurs within the community. Majority of airport related regulations are contained in Chapter 18.38 ACC. Regulations were last updated in 1997. BACKGROUND –AUBURN’S ROLE SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONPage 92 of 967 AUBURN AIRPORT INFLUENCE AREA Page 93 of 967 North ^ 1990 GOOGLE EARTH IMAGE Page 94 of 967 North ^ 2002 GOOGLE EARTH IMAGE Page 95 of 967 North ^ 2018 GOOGLE EARTH IMAGE Page 96 of 967 Key changes to Chapter 18.38 ACC: 1.NEW Airport overlay 2.NEW Airport overlay restrictions and standards 3.REVISED Height compliance standards 4.NEW Height mitigation and maintenance standards 5.REVISED Nonconforming structures, trees, land, and uses section TEXT AND MAP AMENDMENT Page 97 of 967 NEW AIRPORT OVERLAY Page 98 of 967 NEW AIRPORT OVERLAY RESTRICTIONS AND STANDARDS SECTION Page 99 of 967 NEW AIRPORT OVERLAY RESTRICTIONS AND STANDARDS SECTION CONTINUED Page 100 of 967 Applicants: May be required to install and maintain of markers and lights (such as the light you see in this picture) AND Must maintain their trees such that they do not grow to penetrate the airspace. NEW HEIGHT MITIGATION AND MAINTENANCE SECTION SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONPage 101 of 967 Planning Director in consultation with the Airport Manager may one or all ofthe following: A certificate from a Washington state licensed professional, engineer, or land surveyor The maximum elevation of proposed structures based on the established airport elevation. Prepare and submit FAA Form 7460 “Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration” Other documentation as determined by the Airport Manager REVISED HEIGHT COMPLIANCE SECTION SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONPage 102 of 967 REVISED NON-CONFORMING SECTION SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONPage 103 of 967 NEXT STEPS SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION S chedule for code update: August 3rd regular Planning Commission meeting August 23rd WSDOT Aviation Division Consultation September 8th regular Planning Commission meeting October 5th Planning Commission Public Hearing November 8th City Council Study Session *November 15th City Council Meeting *Anticipated dates Page 104 of 967 QUESTIONS? SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONPage 105 of 967 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Ordinance No. 6840 (Tate)(25 Minutes) Date: November 2, 2021 Department: Community Development Attachments: Ordinance No. 6840 (2021 Annual Comprehensive Plan amendments) Exhibit A Exhibit A – Staff Report (All 2021 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments ) Exhibit B Exhibit B Comp Plan Binder Files 1 of 7 Exhibit B Comp Plan Binder Files 2 of 7 Exhibit B Comp Plan Binder Files 3 of 7 Exhibit B Comp Plan Binder Files 4 of 7 Exhibit B Comp Plan Binder Files 5 of 7 Exhibit B Comp Plan Binder Files 6 of 7 Exhibit B Comp Plan Binder Files 7 of 7 Power Point Presentation Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrativ e Recommendation: For discussion only. Background for Motion: Background Summary: On October 19, 2021, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, held a public hearing on and recommended approval of the following policy/text and map amendments. City Comprehensive Plan Amendments CPA21-0001 P/T #1 – Incorporate Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan P/T #2 – Incorporate Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan P/T #3 – Incorporate Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plan P/T #4 – Incorporate Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan P/T #5 – Incorporate City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan P/T #6 –Changes to Capital Facilities Element (Plan) Volume 5, updates Page 106 of 967 (incorporated by reference) P/T #7 –Changes to Transportation Element (Plan) Volume 3, updates (incorporated by reference) P/T #8 –Changes to Housing Element (Plan) Volume 2, updates P/T #9 –Changes to Land Use Element (Plan) Volume 1, updates CPM #1 Volume 5: Transportation Plan Element: Several maps found throughout Volume 5 are proposed for update to reflect changed conditions. The attached staff report (EXHIBIT A) comprehensively addresses the full set of 2021 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments, including private and city-initiated changes, and all related rezones. EXHIBIT B is the ‘working binder’ that contains the staff report for City initiated amendments as provided to the Planning Commission. These are under the ‘Staff Reports’ tab. Rev iewed by Council Committees: Councilmember:Stearns Staff:Tate Meeting Date:November 8, 2021 Item Number: Page 107 of 967 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6840 November 8, 2021 Page 1 ORDINANCE NO. 6 840 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO PLANNING; ADOPTING 2020 ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AND TEXT AMENDMENTS PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF RCW CHAPTER 36.70A AND ADOPTING CORRESPONDING REZONES RELATED TO CERTAIN MAP AMENDMENTS WHEREAS, since 1986 the City of Auburn has maintained a Comprehensive Plan, periodically updated and reaffirmed by the City Council, that includes a Map establishing the location of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations throughout the City; and WHEREAS, on December 14, 2015, the Auburn City Council adopted an updated Comprehensive Plan by Ordinance No. 6584; and WHEREAS, the City of Auburn initiated one map amendment and ten policy/text amendments (File No. CPA21-0001); and WHEREAS, to maintain consistency between the city’s zoning map and its Comprehensive Plan, both the private initiated map amendments have an associated rezone (zoning map amendment) to maintain consistency with the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan text/policy amendments and map amendments were processed by the Community Development Department as proposed Year 2021 annual amendments to the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act, RCW 36.70A, requires the City to maintain a current Capital Facilities Plan; and WHEREAS, the environmental impacts of the proposed Year 2021 Comprehensive Plan amendments and rezones were considered in accordance with Page 108 of 967 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6840 November 8, 2021 Page 2 procedures of the State Environmental Policy Act File No. SEP21-0023 (city-initiated amendments) were determined to have no environmental significance; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendments were transmitted to the Washington State Department of Commerce, Growth Management Services Division, and other State agencies for the 60-day review period in accordance with RCW 36.70A.106; and WHEREAS, after proper notice published in the City’s official newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the hearings, the Auburn Planning Commission on October 19, 2021 conducted public hearings on the proposed amendments, heard and considered public testimony, viewed the evidence and exhibits presented to it, and made recommendations to the City Council on the proposed Year 2021 annual Comprehensive Plan map and text amendments; and WHEREAS, on November 8, 2021, the Auburn City Council reviewed the Planning Commission’s recommendations. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The 2021 annual Comprehensive Plan city-initiated Text Amendments (CPA21-0001), as set forth in Exhibit "B," are approved. The full text of the Capital Facilities Plan of the City and the four school district’s Capital Facilities Plans are adopted, copies of which shall be on file with the Office of the City Clerk, and the Findings and Conclusions outlined in the November 8, 2021 staff report to City Council, as set forth in Exhibit “A”, are adopted. Section 2. The 2021 Comprehensive Plan city-initiated Map Amendments (CPA21-0001) are approved, as set forth in Exhibit “B,” and the findings and conclusions Page 109 of 967 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6840 November 8, 2021 Page 3 contained in the November 8, 2021 staff report to City Council, as set forth in Exhibit “A”, are adopted. Section 3. The adopted Comprehensive Plan as amended is 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. 43.21C.060. Section 4. 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 as Exhibit A and Exhibit B, when preparing and publishing the amended Comprehensive Plan. Section 8. The provisions of this ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section or portion of this ordinance, or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this ordinance, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. Section 9. 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: ___________________________ CITY OF AUBURN Page 110 of 967 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6840 November 8, 2021 Page 4 Nancy Backus MAYOR ATTEST: __________________________ Shawn Campbell, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________ Kendra Comeau, City Attorney Published: _____________________ Page 111 of 967 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6840 November 8, 2021 Page 5 Exhibit A November 8, 2021 staff report to the City Council for all 2021 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments for the City Council Study Session on November 8, 2021. (See EXHIBIT A provided in packet) Page 112 of 967 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6840 November 8, 2021 Page 6 Exhibit B Annual Comprehensive Plan Policy/Text (P/T) Amendments (CPA21-0001 – City Initiated) P/T #1 – Incorporate Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan P/T #2 – Incorporate Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan P/T #3 – Incorporate Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plan P/T #4 – Incorporate Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan P/T #5 – Incorporate City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan P/T #6 – Capital Facilities Element (Plan) Volume 3, (incorporated by reference) Water is in the process of applying for an extension of their Comprehensive Water Plan (separate document incorporated by reference) effective to 2026 through the Washington State Department of Health, at which time a full update will be completed. Water believes this request is valid because the capital projects, water demands, and population growth projections presented in the current Water System Plan are still accurate projections of the City’s current planning efforts. • No text changes to the Capital Facilities Element are needed, although the referenced Comprehensive Water Plan in Policy CF-13 is expected to be updated by 2024 with current data as part of the Periodic Update. P/T #7 – Transportation Element (Plan) Volume 5, (incorporated by reference) As part of the 2021 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments, the city seeks to change the Comprehensive Plan to update the Transportation Element. The main changes to the Comprehensive Plan document include: • Update Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) information/project list; • Re-designate one project from Comprehensive Plan list to the (TIP) list to maintain continuity in the future transportation network conditions; • Additional minor changes will relate to grammar, punctuation, choice of words, references, etc. P/T #8 – Housing Element (Plan) Volume 2 The City adopted a Housing Action Plan (HAP) in July 2021, which was also presented to the Planning Commission in February and June 2021 by City staff. The HAP provides recommendations on policies and code changes to implement HAP strategies. The proposed policy revision allows for better alignment with PSRC Vision 2050 policy MPP-H-11 which addresses supporting identification of potential physical, economic, and cultural displacement, and mitigating to the extent feasible. • Include reference and brief description of Housing Action Plan in Conditions and Trends section beginning on page H-1 of the Housing Element. • Revise Policy H-24(f) to include text regarding minimizing displacement impacts. The revision of this policy will better align with PSRC Vision 2050’s recognition of displacement risk. Revising this policy allows for alignment with PSRC requirements in advance of the 2024 Periodic Update. • Address text formatting for Policy H-24 sub-policies P/T # 9 – Land Use Element (Plan) Volume 1 The City adopted a Housing Action Plan (HAP) in July 2021, which was also presented to the Planning Commission in February and June 2021 by City staff. The HAP provides recommendations on policies and code changes to Page 113 of 967 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6840 November 8, 2021 Page 7 implement HAP strategies. One such policy is located in the Land Use Element (additional detail below). • Revise Policy LU-39 to include affordable housing and mixed-income development. In addition to allowing additional height or density in exchange for supplemental amenities identified in this policy, this revision would include affordable housing development as eligible uses for deviations in height, density, or intensity. (See “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab in the working binder and EXHIBIT B in packet) Annual Comprehensive Plan Map (CPM) Amendments (CPA21-0001 – City Initiated) CPM #1 – Volume 5: Transportation Element, map updates (See “Comp. Plan Map Amendments” tab in the working binder and EXHIBIT B in packet) Page 114 of 967 Ordinance No. 6840 Exhibit A Page 115 of 967 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM City Council Agenda Subject/Title: Ordinance No. 6840, CPA21-0001, 2021 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Specifically, City Initiated Plan Policy/Text & Map Amendments Date: November 8, 2021 Department: Community Development Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrative Recommendation: Planning Commission to conduct public hearing and recommend to City Council approval of the 2021 City-Initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendments (Policy/Text & Map Amendments). Background Summary: The City of Auburn adopted amendments to its Comprehensive Plan in 1995 in response to the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements, as amended. Since then the Auburn Comprehensive Plan has been amended annually. At the end of 2015, the City adopted a substantially updated Comprehensive Plan in compliance with state-required periodic updates. Annual Comprehensive plan amendments can be initiated by the City of Auburn (city-initiated) and by private parties (private-initiated). This year the city is initiating: • Nine policy/text amendments • One map amendment This staff report and recommendation addresses the City initiated amendments and specifically: • Policy/Text (P/T) Amendments P/T # 1 through # 9, and; • Map (CPM) Amendment CPM # 1. In terms of process, the Comprehensive plan amendments are initially reviewed during a public hearing process before the City of Auburn Planning Commission, who then provides a recommendation to the City Council for final action. City Council consideration and action on the amendments generally occurs but is not required prior to the end of the year. A. Findings 1. RCW 36.70A.130 (Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA)) provides for amendments to locally adopted GMA comprehensive plans. Except in limited circumstances as provided for in State law and City Code, comprehensive plan amendments shall be considered by the city legislative body no more frequently than once per year. Page 116 of 967 Staff Member: Tate Date: November 8, 2021 Page 2 of 10 2. The City of Auburn established a June 7, 2021 deadline for the submittal of private initiated comprehensive plan applications (map or policy/text). Notice to the public of the application submittal deadline was provided on the City’s website. The City did not receive any private initiated map or policy/text amendments by the submittal deadline. 3. The City of Auburn received annual updates to the four (4) school district Capital Facilities Plans whose districts occur within the City of Auburn. These Capital Facilities Plans, as well as the City’s Capital Facilities Plan are proposed to be incorporated by reference in the current Capital Facilities Element (Volume 3), of the 2015 Auburn Comprehensive Plan and are processed as Policy/Text (P/T) amendments. 4. The environmental review decision under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) for the school district capital facilities plans were prepared separately by each school district acting as their own lead agency, as allowed by State law (State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)). 5. The environmental review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) for the remaining city-initiated amendments, the City Capital Facilities Plan, and the remaining policy/text and map amendments resulted in a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) issued for the City-initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendments on September 23, 2021 (City File # SEP21-0023). The comment period ended at 5:00 p.m. October 8, 2021 and the appeal period ended at 5:00 p.m. October 23, 2021. A copy of the DNS and environmental checklist application is provided in the working binder behind the “Environmental Review” tab. 6. Auburn City Code (ACC) Chapter 14.22 outlines the process for submittal of privately- initiated amendments and the general processing of comprehensive plan amendments as follows: “Section 14.22.100 A. The planning commission shall hold at least one public hearing on all proposed amendments to the comprehensive plan. Notice of such public hearing shall be given pursuant to Chapter 1.27 ACC and, at a minimum, include the following: 1. For site-specific plan map amendments: a. Notice shall be published once in the official newspaper of the city not less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of public hearing; b. Notice shall be mailed by first class mail to all property owners of record within a radius of 300 feet of the proposed map amendment request, not less than 10 calendar days prior to the public hearing; 2. For area-wide plan map amendments: a. Notice shall be published once in the official newspaper of the city not less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of public hearing; b. Notice shall be mailed by first class mail to all property owners of record within the area subject to the proposed amendment; c. Notice shall be posted in at least two conspicuous locations in the area subject to the proposed amendment not less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of the public hearing. B. Notwithstanding the above, the director may expand the minimum noticing provisions noted above as deemed necessary. Page 117 of 967 Staff Member: Tate Date: November 8, 2021 Page 3 of 10 C. Planning Commission Recommendation. The planning commission shall conduct a public hearing on all potential comprehensive plan amendments and shall make and forward a recommendation on each to the city council. The planning commission shall adopt written findings and make a recommendation consistent with those findings to the city council. D. The city council, if it elects to amend the comprehensive plan, shall adopt written findings and adopt said amendments by ordinance. E. State Review. All comprehensive plan amendments considered by the planning commission shall be forwarded for state agency review consistent with RCW 36.70A.106. F. Any appeal of an amendment to the comprehensive plan shall be made in accordance with Chapter 36.70A RCW. (Ord. 6172 § 1, 2008.)” 7. As provided in the City code, the Comprehensive Plan amendments are initially reviewed during a public hearing process before the City of Auburn Planning Commission, who then provides a recommendation to the City Council for final action which generally occurs, but is not required to, prior to the end of the year. 8. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, the proposed comprehensive plan amendments outlined in this agenda bill were sent to the Washington State Department of Commerce and other state agencies for the required state review. The Washington State Department of Commerce acknowledged receipt on September 22, 2021, by Submittal ID: # 2021-S-3159. No comments have been received from the Washington State Department of Commerce or other state agencies as of the writing of this report. A copy of the transmittal and acknowledgement is provided in the working binder behind the “General Information & Correspondence” tab. 9. Due to the nature of policy/text changes, and the minimal amount of private-initiated map amendments, the optional process for holding a public open house as provided for in the city code, was not conducted. 10. The notice of Determination of Non-Significance was published on September 23, 2021, and notice Public Hearing was published on October 6, 2021 in the Seattle Times Newspaper and on the city website which is at least 10 days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing on October 19, 2021. A copy of the Determination of Non-Significance request to publish is provided in the working binder behind the “General Information & Correspondence” tab. Since, there are no city initiated site-specific map changes, only city- wide map changes, the site-specific noticing by mailing by first class mail to all property owners of record within a radius of 300 feet was not conducted. 11. The following report identifies Comprehensive Plan Policy/Text (P/T) and Map (CPM) amendments scheduled for the City Council Study Session on November 8, 2021. Page 118 of 967 Staff Member: Tate Date: November 8, 2021 Page 4 of 10 Comprehensive Plan Policy/Text Amendments (File No. CPA21-0001, City initiated) The Planning Commission conducted one hearing on October 19, 2021 on Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendments, consisting of map and policy/text amendments. The Planning Commission considered the following set of Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments. P/T #1 Incorporate the Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan 2021 through 2027 into the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. The CFP is provided in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab. Discussion The Auburn School District has provided the City with its annually updated Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) covering from 2021-2027. The CFP was prepared by the District staff and adopted by the Auburn School District School Board of Directors on June 14, 2021 and has been subject to separate SEPA review and a Determination of Non- Significance (DNS) prepared by the District. Information contained in the School District CFP serves as the basis for the City’s collection of school impact fees on behalf of the school district. The Planning Commission action is to incorporate the Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan into the City’s Comprehensive Plan by reference. The CFP includes the following: • six–year enrollment projections • Auburn school district level of service standards • An inventory of existing facilities • The district’s overall capacity of the 6-year period • District capital construction Plan • Impact fee calculations A review of the Auburn School District’s updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the District is requesting a decrease in the fee obligations. The net fee obligation for single-family dwellings is proposed to be $3,652.19, a decrease of $2,804.12 and the requested fee for multiple-family dwellings is $8,938.23, a decrease of $7,387.57. The District provided only impact fees for single family and multi-family dwellings, instead of by bedrooms per unit like in previous years. The actual impact fees are established by ordinance through subsequent City Council action. Recommendation Planning Commission recommended approval of the Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan 2021 through 2027 to the City Council. P/T#2 Incorporate the Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2021-2027 into the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. The CFP is provided in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab. Discussion Page 119 of 967 Staff Member: Tate Date: November 8, 2021 Page 5 of 10 The Dieringer School District has provided the City with its annually updated Capital Facilities Plan 2021 - 2027. The CFP was adopted by the Dieringer School District Board of Directors in June 2021. The CFP has been subject to separate SEPA review and a DNS prepared by the District. Information contained in the School District CFP serves as the basis for the City’s collection of school impact fees on behalf of the school district. The Planning Commission action is to incorporate the School District Capital Facilities Plan into the City’s Comprehensive Plan by reference. The CFP includes the following: • Overview • An inventory of existing facilities • Six–year enrollment projections • Standard of service • Capacity projects • Finance plan • Impact fee calculations A review of the Dieringer School District’s updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the District has calculated an increase in fees compared to those currently adopted. The net fee obligation for single-family dwellings is $6,247, an increase of $2,071; and the fee for multiple family dwellings is $1,903, an increase of $1,114. However, as noted in an impact fee letter provided by the District, they are requesting to maintain impact fees consistent with those currently adopted (no increase). By ordinance No. 2021-111, Pierce County Council has “capped” by a “Maximum Fee Obligation” (MFO) which changes annually based on the Construction Cost Index published by the Engineering News Record. The previous year’s MFO for single family development was $4,200 and the MFO for multi-family development was $2,230. The District is requesting that impact fees remain at the rate calculated in their 2021-2026 Capital Facilities Plan of $4,176 for single family units and $789 for multifamily units. The actual impact fees are established by ordinance through subsequent City Council action. Recommendation Planning Commission recommended approval of the Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2021-2027 to the City Council. P/T #3 Incorporate Federal Way Public Schools’ 2022 Capital Facilities Plan into the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. The CFP is provided in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab. Discussion Federal Way Public Schools has provided the City with its annually updated Capital Facilities Plan 2022. The CFP was adopted by the Federal Way Public Schools School Board June 29, 2021. The CFP has been subject to separate SEPA review and a DNS prepared by the District. Information contained in the School District CFP serves as the basis for the City’s collection of school impact fees on behalf of the school district. The Page 120 of 967 Staff Member: Tate Date: November 8, 2021 Page 6 of 10 Planning Commission action is to incorporate the School District Capital Facilities Plan into the City’s Comprehensive Plan by reference. The CFP includes the following: • Introduction • Inventory of educational facilities & non-instructional facilities • Needs forecast, existing & new facilities • Six–year finance plan • Maps of district boundaries • Building capacities & portable locations • Student forecast • Capacity summaries • Student forecasts • Impact fee calculations • Summary of changes from the year 2021 plan A review of Federal Way Public Schools’ updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the District is requesting a change in the fee obligations. The net fee obligation for single-family dwellings is proposed to be $1,845, representing a decrease of $1,398 and the requested fee for multi-family dwellings is $15,073, a decrease of $930. The actual impact fees are established by ordinance through subsequent City Council action. Recommendation Planning Commission recommended approval of Federal Way Public Schools’ 2022 Capital Facilities Plan to the City Council. P/T #4 Incorporate the Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan 2020-2021 to 2025-2026 into the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. The CFP is provided in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab. Discussion The Kent School District has provided its annually updated 2020-2021 to 2026-2027 Capital Facilities Plan. The CFP was adopted by the Kent School District School Board in June 2021 and has been subject to separate SEPA review and a DNS prepared by the District. Information contained in the School District CFP serves as the basis for the City’s collection of school impact fees on behalf of the school district. The Planning Commission action is to incorporate the School District Capital Facilities Plan into the City’s Comprehensive Plan by reference. The CFP includes the following: • Executive Summary • Six-year enrollment projection & history • District standard of service • Inventory, capacity & maps of existing schools • Six-year planning & construction plan Page 121 of 967 Staff Member: Tate Date: November 8, 2021 Page 7 of 10 • Portable classrooms • Projected classroom capacity • Finance Plan, cost basis and impact fee schedules • Summary of changes to previous plan A review of the Kent School District’s updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the District is requesting a change in the fee obligations. The net fee obligation for single-family dwellings is proposed to be $5,818.09, representing an increase of $125.24 and the requested fee for multi-family dwellings is $2,457.53, an increase of $53.90. Both increases are tied to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) of 2.2% for the Seattle Metropolitan Area in 2021. The actual impact fees are established by ordinance through subsequent City Council action. Recommendation Planning Commission recommended approval of the Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan 2019-2020 to 2026-2027 to the City Council. P/T #5 Incorporate the City of Auburn’s 6-year Capital Facilities Plan 2022-2027, into the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The CFP is provided in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab. Discussion A Capital Facilities Plan is one of the comprehensive plan elements required by the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) (RCW 36.70A). The GMA requires that a capital facilities plan 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 a minimum of a six-year plan to finance capital facilities with identified sources of funding. The proposed City of Auburn 6-year Capital Facilities Plan 2022-2027 satisfies the GMA requirements for a capital facilities element as part of the Comprehensive Plan. Each comprehensive plan prepared under the GMA must include a capital facilities plan element. More specifically, RCW 36.70A.070(3) of the GMA requires the following: “A capital facilities plan element consisting of: (a) An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities, showing the locations and capacities of the capital facilities; (b) a forecast of the future needs of such capital facilities; (c) the proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital facilities; (d) at least a six-year plan that will finance such capital facilities within projected funding capacities and clearly identifies sources of public money for such purposes; and (e) a requirement to reassess the land use element if probable funding falls short of meeting existing needs and to ensure that the land use element, capital facilities plan element, and financing plan within the capital facilities Page 122 of 967 Staff Member: Tate Date: November 8, 2021 Page 8 of 10 plan element are coordinated and consistent. Park and recreation facilities shall be included in the capital facilities plan element.” A capital facility is defined as a structure, street or utility system improvement, or other long- lasting major asset, including land. Capital facilities are provided for public purposes. Capital facilities include, but are not limited to, the following: streets, roads, highways, sidewalks, street and road lighting systems, traffic signals, domestic water systems, storm and sanitary sewer systems, parks and recreation facilities, and police and fire protection facilities. These capital facilities include necessary ancillary and support facilities. The City of Auburn 6-year Capital Facilities Plan 2022-2027 is proposed to be incorporated by reference in the Comprehensive Plan, Capital Facilities Element (Volume No. 3). Recommendation Planning Commission recommended approval of the City of Auburn’s 6-year Capital Facilities Plan 2022-2027 to the City Council. P/T #6 Amend text reference of Volume 3, Capital Facilities Element of Comprehensive Plan. The changes are shown in strike through and underline in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab. Key Changes/Points: Water is in the process of applying for an extension of their Comprehensive Water Plan (separate document incorporated by reference) effective to 2026 through the Washington State Department of Health, at which time a full update will be completed. Water believes this request is valid because the capital projects, water demands, and population growth projections presented in the current Water System Plan are still accurate projections of the City’s current planning efforts. • No text changes to the Capital Facilities Element are needed, although the referenced Comprehensive Water Plan in Policy CF-13 is expected to be updated by 2024 with current data as part of the Periodic Update. Recommendation Planning Commission recommended approval of text reference amendments to Volume 3, Capital Facilities Element of Comprehensive Plan. P/T #7 Amend text of Volume 5, Transportation Element of Comprehensive Plan. The changes are shown in strike through and underline in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab. Key Changes/Points: As part of the 2021 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments, the city seeks to change the Comprehensive Plan to update the Transportation Element. The main changes to the Comprehensive Plan document include: • Update Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) information/project list; Page 123 of 967 Staff Member: Tate Date: November 8, 2021 Page 9 of 10 • Add one project from Comprehensive Plan list to the (TIP) list to maintain continuity in the future transportation network conditions; • Additional minor changes will relate to grammar, punctuation, choice of words, references, etc. In addition to the strike through and underline in the working binder, a memorandum prepared by Cecile Malik, Senior Transportation Planner, for the Planning Commission is included in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab. The memorandum explores the summary of text changes. Recommendation Planning Commission recommended approval of policy text amendments to Volume 5, Transportation Element of Comprehensive Plan. P/T #8 Amend text of Volume 2, Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The changes are shown in strike through and underline in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab. Key Changes/Points: The City adopted a Housing Action Plan (HAP) in July 2021, which was also presented to the Planning Commission in February and June 2021 by City staff. The HAP provides recommendations on policies and code changes to implement HAP strategies. The proposed policy revision allows for better alignment with PSRC Vision 2050 policy MPP-H- 11 which addresses supporting identification of potential physical, economic, and cultural displacement, and mitigating to the extent feasible. • Include reference and brief description of Housing Action Plan in Conditions and Trends section beginning on page H-1 of the Housing Element. • Revise Policy H-24(f) to include text regarding minimizing displacement impacts. The revision of this policy will better align with PSRC Vision 2050’s recognition of displacement risk. Revising this policy allows for alignment with PSRC requirements in advance of the 2024 Periodic Update. • Address text formatting for Policy H-24 sub-policies Recommendation Planning Commission recommended approval of policy text amendments to Volume 2, Housing Element of Comprehensive Plan. P/T #9 Amend text of Volume 1, Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The changes are shown in strike through and underline in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab. Key Changes/Points: The City adopted a Housing Action Plan (HAP) in July 2021, which was also presented to the Planning Commission in February and June 2021 by City staff. The HAP provides recommendations on policies and code changes to implement HAP strategies. One such Page 124 of 967 Staff Member: Tate Date: November 8, 2021 Page 10 of 10 policy is located in the Land Use Element (additional detail below). • Revise Policy LU-39 to include affordable housing and mixed-income development. In addition to allowing additional height or density in exchange for supplemental amenities identified in this policy, this revision would include affordable housing development as eligible uses for deviations in height, density, or intensity. Recommendation Planning Commission recommended approval of policy text amendments to Volume 1, Land Use Element of Comprehensive Plan. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments (File No. CPA21-0001, City initiated map changes) CPM #1 This proposed amendment updates a number of maps found throughout the city’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan, which is adopted by reference in the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. This is consistent and in conjunction with P/T #7. The changes are shown in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Map Amendments” tab. Discussion (This is the same topic as text amendment P/T #7 but is repeated as a map amendment since it requires revision to both the text and map of the comprehensive plan document. See discussion and analysis under text amendment P/T #7.) Recommendation Planning Commission recommend approval with conditions of map amendments to the Comprehensive Transportation Plan, adopted as a reference to the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. The conditions concern removal of John Reddington Rd NE street label and inclusion of Green River Rd on all maps. This change is reflected in the maps provided in both the binder and electronic files transmitted to Council. Page 125 of 967 Ordinance No. 6840 Exhibit B Page 126 of 967 Revised 10-28-2021 Page 1 Overview of Contents 2021 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments Working Binder 2021 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Schedule, dated 9-16-2021 2021 Comprehensive Plan Docket (spreadsheet listing) Tab: Staff Reports/Presentations: a. Staff report of City-initiated Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments (File No. CPA21-0001) b. Memorandum for Planning Commission meeting 9-8-21 describing overview of Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments dated 9-8-21 c. Staff presentation to Planning Commission on 9-8-21 providing overview of Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments Tab: Environmental Review: a) Notice of Application and Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) (File No. SEP21-0023) b) (SEPA) Completed Environmental Checklist Application (File No. SEP21-0023) Tab: General Info. & Correspondence a. Agency Correspondence i. Washington State Dept. of Commerce acknowledgement of receipt of 2021 City-initiated Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments to WA State Dept. of Commerce for review (File No. CPA21-0001). b. Notice of Determination of Non-Significance i. Notice of Determination of Non-Significance – September 23, 2021 (Seattle Times) Page 127 of 967 Revised 10-28-2021 Page 2 c. Notice of Public Hearing i. Notice of October 19, 2021 Public Hearing – October 6, 2021 (Seattle Times) Tab: Comp Plan Policy/Text Amendments P/T #1 POLICY/TEXT AMENDMENT AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT CAPITAL FACILITES PLAN i. Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan 2021 thru 2027 ii. Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) iii. (SEPA) Environmental Checklist Application P/T #2 POLICY/TEXT AMENDMENT DIERINGER SCHOOL DISTRICT CAPITAL FACILITES PLAN i. Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2021-2027 ii. Cover letter describing impact fee rates (rates remain the same as previous year) iii. Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) iv. (SEPA) Environmental Checklist Application v. Pierce County Ordinance No 2021-111 – School Impact Fees P/T #3 POLICY/TEXT AMENDMENT FEDERAL WAY SCHOOL DISTRICT CAPITAL FACILITES PLAN i.Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plan 2022 ii.Cover letter with Resolution No. 2021-14 Authorizing Provision of CFP to Auburn and request to decrease Impact Fees iii.Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) iv.(SEPA) Environmental Checklist Application P/T #4 POLICY/TEXT AMENDMENT KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT CAPITAL FACILITES PLAN i. Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan 2020/2021 through 2026/2027 ii. Cover Letter requesting fee increase iii. Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) iv. (SEPA) Environmental Checklist Application P/T #5 POLICY/TEXT AMENDMENT INCORPORATE THE CITY’S CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2020- 2025 INTO THE CITY’S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN i. Capital Facilities Plan 2022-2027 Memorandum ii. Draft Capital Facilities Plan 2022-2027 Page 128 of 967 Revised 10-28-2021 Page 3 P/T #6 THROUGH #9, CITY INITIATED POLICY/TEXT AMENDMENTS (Excerpt of Comprehensive Plan with strike through and underlines for deletions and additions.) P/T #6 – Volume 3, Capital Facilities Element. Water is in the process of applying for an extension of their Comprehensive Water Plan (separate document incorporated by reference) effective to 2026 through the Washington State Department of Health, at which time a full update will be completed. Water believes this request is valid because the capital projects, water demands, and population growth projections presented in the current Water System Plan are still accurate projections of the City’s current planning efforts. • No text changes to the Capital Facilities Element are needed, although the referenced Comprehensive Water Plan in Policy CF-13 is expected to be updated by 2024 with current data as part of the Periodic Update. P/T #7 –Volume 5, Transportation Element (Separate document incorporated by reference). Changes in the Transportation Element consist of the following: • Update Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) information/project list; • Re-designate one project from Comprehensive Plan list to the (TIP) list to maintain continuity in the future transportation network conditions; • Update maps as needed to reflect current data and conditions (addressed by CMP #1, below); • Additional minor changes will relate to grammar, punctuation, choice of words, references, etc. P/T #8 – Volume 2, Housing Element. The City adopted a Housing Action Plan (HAP) in July 2021, which was also presented to the Planning Commission in February and June 2021 by City staff. The HAP provides recommendations on policies and code changes to implement HAP strategies. The proposed policy revision allows for better alignment with PSRC Vision 2050 policy MPP-H-11 which addresses supporting identification of potential physical, economic, and cultural displacement, and mitigating to the extent feasible. • Include reference and brief description of Housing Action Plan in Conditions and Trends section beginning on page H-1 of the Housing Element. Page 129 of 967 Revised 10-28-2021 Page 4 • Revise Policy H-24(f) to include text regarding minimizing displacement impacts. The revision of this policy will better align with PSRC Vision 2050’s recognition of displacement risk. Revising this policy allows for alignment with PSRC requirements in advance of the 2024 Periodic Update. • Address text formatting for Policy H-24 sub-policies P/T #9 – Volume 1, Land Use Element and Volume 5. The City adopted a Housing Action Plan (HAP) in July 2021, which was also presented to the Planning Commission in February and June 2021 by City staff. The HAP provides recommendations on policies and code changes to implement HAP strategies. One such policy is located in the Land Use Element (additional detail below). • Revise Policy LU-39 to include affordable housing and mixed- income development. In addition to allowing additional height or density in exchange for supplemental amenities identified in this policy, this revision would include affordable housing development as eligible uses for deviations in height, density, or intensity. Tab: Comp. Plan Map Amendments CPM#1 (CPA21-001) Volume 5: Transportation Element (Separate document incorporated by reference): Several maps found throughout Volume 5 have been updated to reflect current conditions. This section includes both the edited with comments version of maps and fully-revised version of maps. Page 130 of 967 City of Auburn 2021 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Proposed Schedule Page 1 of 1 Revised 10/25/2021 9-8-21 9-21-21 10-5-21 10-19-21 11-3-21 11-8-21 11-15-21 12-6-21 12-20-21 Planning Commission (PC) Regular Meeting Planning Commission Extra Meeting Planning Commission Regular Meeting Planning Commission Extra Meeting Planning Commission Regular Meeting City Council Study Session City Council Regular Meeting City Council Regular Meeting City Council Regular Meeting City-initiated Text Amendments CPA21-0001 • School district CFP’s P/T #1-4 • City Capital Facilities Plan P/T #5 City Text Amendments • P/T #6-9 City-initiated Map Amendments CPA21-0001 • Transportation CPM #1 Introduction to 2021 Comp Plan Amendment docket Update to 2021 Comp Plan amendments, Conduct Public Hearing #1 Suggested agenda order: School District Amendments (SD staff, if present) City staff briefing on City Capital Facilities Plan City Staff briefing on Capital Facilities Element City Staff briefing on Transportation City Staff briefing on Housing and Land use Continued PC Public Hearing, if needed Discussion of PC recommendation. Continued discussion of PC recommendation, if needed. Council Action Council Action, if needed Page 131 of 967 Item Page(s)Area to be changed Change Reason Pros Cons Comments P/T # 1 Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Volume 3: Capital Facilities Element (District document is incorporated by reference on Page CF-2). N/A Incorporate updated information Reflect new projects and remove projects that have been completed as well as updated information related to development activity and projection of student levels. None The Auburn School District Board of Directors adopted the CFP on June 14, 2021. P/T # 2 Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan Volume 3: Capital Facilities Element (District document is incorporated by reference on page CF-2). N/A Incorporate updated information Reflect new projects and remove projects that have been completed as well as updated information related to development activity and projection of student levels. None P/T # 3 Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plan Volume 3: Capital Facilities Element (District document is incorporated by reference on Page CF-2). N/A Incorporate updated information Reflect new projects and remove projects that have been completed as well as updated information related to development and projection of student levels. None The Federal Way Public School's Board of Education adopted the CFP on June 29, 2021. P/T # 4 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan Volume 3: Capital Facilities Element (District document is incorporated by reference on Page CF-2). N/A Incorporate updated information Reflect new projects and remove projects that have been completed as well as updated information related to development activity and projection of student levels. None The Kent School Board adopted the CFP on TBD, 2021. P/T # 5 COA Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Volume 3: Capital Facilities Element (City document is incorporated by reference on Page CF-2). N/A Incorporate updated information Add new projects to the CFP and remove projects that have been completed to remain current. None Finance Dept. originates the CFP document with information from all other City Depts. P/T # 6 TBD Volume 3: Capital Facilities Element (Water Service) • Update reference to Comprehensive Water Plan Water is requesting a 4-year extension of their Comprehensive Water Plan through the Department of Health. The currently referenced plan is expected to be updated in 2024. Will reflect current conditions when plan is complete.None There are no changes to the Capital Facilities Element needed for this Annual Update, and is only included because the referenced plan is expected to change when the plan is complete. 2021 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANNUAL AMENDMENTS DOCKET CITY INITIATED TEXT AMENDMENTS CPA21-0001 9/22/2021 1Page 132 of 967 Item Page(s)Area to be changed Change Reason Pros Cons Comments CITY INITIATED TEXT AMENDMENTS CPA21-0001 P/T #7 TBD Volume 5: Transportation Element and Appendix • Update Comprehensive Plan Project List; • Re-designate one project from Comprehensive Plan list to Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) list maintain continuity in the future transportation network conditions; • Additional minor changes will relate to grammar, punctuation, choice of words, references, etc.. Periodic evaluation of priority and availability of funding of capital projects; Update maps to reflect current data and to improve legibility. Reflects current conditions Maintains projects in planning pipeline None Scope and scale of this effort is underway, but expected to contain at least an update to maps reflecting updated conditions, clarifying text revisions, and the transition of capital projects to the TIP. P/T #8 TBD Volume 2: Housing Element and Appendix • Include reference to Housing Action Plan in text • Revise Policy H-24(f) regarding minimizing displacement impacts • Address text formatting for Policy H- 24 Revision per recommendation in Housing Action Plan and for consistency with Vision 2050. Update text to address improve legibility. Reference acknowledges recent Council approved document. Policy revision is consistent with HAP and Vision 2050 policies in advance of 2024 Periodic Update. None P/T #9 TBD Volume 1: Land Use Element and Appendix • Revise Policy LU-39 to include affordable housing as approved amentiy that allows for building deviation Revision per recommendation in Housing Action Plan Policy revisions are consistent with HAP in advance of 2024 Periodic Update. None 9/22/2021 2Page 133 of 967 CPM #Page Area to be changed Potential change Reason Pros Cons Comments Corresponding Zoning Map Change CPM #1 Map Numbers To Be Determined by Public Works Volume 5: Transportation Element and Appendix Update maps to reflect current projects and existing conditions, and to better display data. Periodic evaluation of project status and to improve map readability.Reflects current conditions.None Maps labeled within Transportation Element numbered separately from the remaining maps found throughout the comprehensive plan. A final list and map numbers are being produced by Transportation Planning Division. None CITY INITIATED MAP AMENDMENTS CPA21-0002 Page 134 of 967 STAFF REPORTS/PRESENTATIONSPage 135 of 967 24 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Subject/Title: CPA21-0001, 2021 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Specifically, City Initiated Plan Policy/Text & Map Amendments Date: October 5, 2021 Department: Community Development Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrative Recommendation: Planning Commission to conduct public hearing and recommend to City Council approval of the 2021 City-Initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendments (Policy/Text & Map Amendments). Background Summary: The City of Auburn adopted amendments to its Comprehensive Plan in 1995 in response to the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements, as amended. Since then the Auburn Comprehensive Plan has been amended annually. At the end of 2015, the City adopted a substantially updated Comprehensive Plan in compliance with state-required periodic updates. Annual Comprehensive plan amendments can be initiated by the City of Auburn (city-initiated) and by private parties (private-initiated). This year the city is initiating: • Nine policy/text amendments • One map amendment This staff report and recommendation addresses the City initiated amendments and specifically: • Policy/Text (P/T) Amendments P/T # 1 through # 9, and; • Map (CPM) Amendment CPM # 1. In terms of process, the Comprehensive plan amendments are initially reviewed during a public hearing process before the City of Auburn Planning Commission, who then provides a recommendation to the City Council for final action. City Council consideration and action on the amendments generally occurs but is not required prior to the end of the year. A. Findings 1. RCW 36.70A.130 (Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA)) provides for amendments to locally adopted GMA comprehensive plans. Except in limited circumstances as provided for in State law and City Code, comprehensive plan amendments shall be considered by the city legislative body no more frequently than once per year. Page 136 of 967 Staff Member: Steiner Date: October 5, 2021 Page 2 of 10 2. The City of Auburn established a June 7, 2021 deadline for the submittal of private initiated comprehensive plan applications (map or policy/text). Notice to the public of the application submittal deadline was provided on the City’s website. The City did not receive any private initiated map or policy/text amendments by the submittal deadline. 3. The City of Auburn received annual updates to the four (4) school district Capital Facilities Plans whose districts occur within the City of Auburn. These Capital Facilities Plans, as well as the City’s Capital Facilities Plan are proposed to be incorporated by reference in the current Capital Facilities Element (Volume 3), of the 2015 Auburn Comprehensive Plan and are processed as Policy/Text (P/T) amendments. 4. The environmental review decision under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) for the school district capital facilities plans were prepared separately by each school district acting as their own lead agency, as allowed by State law (State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)). 5. The environmental review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) for the remaining city initiated amendments, the City Capital Facilities Plan, and the remaining policy/text and map amendments resulted in a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) issued for the City-initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendments on September 23, 2021 (City File # SEP21-0023). The comment period will end at 5:00 p.m. October 8, 2021 and the appeal period will end at 5:00 p.m. October 23, 2021. A copy of the DNS and environmental checklist application is provided in the working binder behind the “Environmental Review” tab. 6. Auburn City Code (ACC) Chapter 14.22 outlines the process for submittal of privately- initiated amendments and the general processing of comprehensive plan amendments as follows: “Section 14.22.100 A. The planning commission shall hold at least one public hearing on all proposed amendments to the comprehensive plan. Notice of such public hearing shall be given pursuant to Chapter 1.27 ACC and, at a minimum, include the following: 1. For site-specific plan map amendments: a. Notice shall be published once in the official newspaper of the city not less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of public hearing; b. Notice shall be mailed by first class mail to all property owners of record within a radius of 300 feet of the proposed map amendment request, not less than 10 calendar days prior to the public hearing; 2. For area-wide plan map amendments: a. Notice shall be published once in the official newspaper of the city not less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of public hearing; b. Notice shall be mailed by first class mail to all property owners of record within the area subject to the proposed amendment; c. Notice shall be posted in at least two conspicuous locations in the area subject to the proposed amendment not less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of the public hearing. B. Notwithstanding the above, the director may expand the minimum noticing provisions noted above as deemed necessary. Page 137 of 967 Staff Member: Steiner Date: October 5, 2021 Page 3 of 10 C. Planning Commission Recommendation. The planning commission shall conduct a public hearing on all potential comprehensive plan amendments and shall make and forward a recommendation on each to the city council. The planning commission shall adopt written findings and make a recommendation consistent with those findings to the city council. D. The city council, if it elects to amend the comprehensive plan, shall adopt written findings and adopt said amendments by ordinance. E. State Review. All comprehensive plan amendments considered by the planning commission shall be forwarded for state agency review consistent with RCW 36.70A.106. F. Any appeal of an amendment to the comprehensive plan shall be made in accordance with Chapter 36.70A RCW. (Ord. 6172 § 1, 2008.)” 7. As provided in the City code, the Comprehensive Plan amendments are initially reviewed during a public hearing process before the City of Auburn Planning Commission, who then provides a recommendation to the City Council for final action which generally occurs, but is not required to, prior to the end of the year. 8. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, the proposed comprehensive plan amendments outlined in this agenda bill were sent to the Washington State Department of Commerce and other state agencies for the required state review. The Washington State Department of Commerce acknowledged receipt on September 22, 2021, by Submittal ID: # 2021-S-3159. No comments have been received from the Washington State Department of Commerce or other state agencies as of the writing of this report. A copy of the transmittal and acknowledgement is provided in the working binder behind the “General Information & Correspondence” tab. 9. Due to the nature of policy/text changes, and the minimal amount of private-initiated map amendments, the optional process for holding a public open house as provided for in the city code, was not conducted. 10. The notice of Determination of Non-Significance was published on September 23, 2021, and notice Public Hearing is to be published on October 6, 2021 in the Seattle Times Newspaper and on the city website which is at least 10 days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing scheduled for October 19, 2021. A copy of the Determination of Non-Significance request to publish is provided in the working binder behind the “General Information & Correspondence” tab. Since, there are no city initiated site-specific map changes, only city- wide map changes, the site-specific noticing by mailing by first class mail to all property owners of record within a radius of 300 feet was not conducted. 11. The following report identifies Comprehensive Plan Policy/Text (P/T) and Map (CPM) amendments scheduled for the Planning Commission’s October 19, 2021 public hearing with a staff recommendation. Page 138 of 967 Staff Member: Steiner Date: October 5, 2021 Page 4 of 10 Comprehensive Plan Policy/Text Amendments (File No. CPA21-0001, City initiated) P/T #1 Incorporate the Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan 2021 through 2027 into the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. The CFP is provided in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab. Discussion The Auburn School District has provided the City with its annually updated Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) covering from 2021-2027. The CFP was prepared by the District staff and adopted by the Auburn School District School Board of Directors on June 14, 2021 and has been subject to separate SEPA review and a Determination of Non- Significance (DNS) prepared by the District. Information contained in the School District CFP serves as the basis for the City’s collection of school impact fees on behalf of the school district. The Planning Commission action is to incorporate the Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan into the City’s Comprehensive Plan by reference. The CFP includes the following: • six–year enrollment projections • Auburn school district level of service standards • An inventory of existing facilities • The district’s overall capacity of the 6-year period • District capital construction Plan • Impact fee calculations A review of the Auburn School District’s updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the District is requesting a decrease in the fee obligations. The net fee obligation for single-family dwellings is proposed to be $3,652.19, a decrease of $2,804.12 and the requested fee for multiple-family dwellings is $8,938.23, a decrease of $7,387.57. The District provided only impact fees for single family and multi-family dwellings, instead of by bedrooms per unit like in previous years. The actual impact fees are established by ordinance through subsequent City Council action. Recommendation Planning Commission to recommend approval of the Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan 2021 through 2027 to the City Council. P/T#2 Incorporate the Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2021-2027 into the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. The CFP is provided in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab. Discussion The Dieringer School District has provided the City with its annually updated Capital Facilities Plan 2021 - 2027. The CFP was adopted by the Dieringer School District Board of Directors in June 2021. The CFP has been subject to separate SEPA review and a DNS prepared by the District. Information contained in the School District CFP Page 139 of 967 Staff Member: Steiner Date: October 5, 2021 Page 5 of 10 serves as the basis for the City’s collection of school impact fees on behalf of the school district. The Planning Commission action is to incorporate the School District Capital Facilities Plan into the City’s Comprehensive Plan by reference. The CFP includes the following: • Overview • An inventory of existing facilities • Six–year enrollment projections • Standard of service • Capacity projects • Finance plan • Impact fee calculations A review of the Dieringer School District’s updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the District has calculated an increase in fees compared to those currently adopted. The net fee obligation for single-family dwellings is $6,247, an increase of $2,071; and the fee for multiple family dwellings is $1,903, an increase of $1,114. However, as noted in an impact fee letter provided by the District, they are requesting to maintain impact fees consistent with those currently adopted (no increase). By ordinance No. 2018-88s, Pierce County Council has “capped” by a “Maximum Fee Obligation” (MFO) which changes annually based on the Construction Cost Index published by the Engineering News Record. The previous year’s MFO for single family development was $3,890 and the MFO for multi-family development was $789. The actual impact fees are established by ordinance through subsequent City Council action. Recommendation Planning Commission to recommend approval of the Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2021-2027 to the City Council. P/T #3 Incorporate the Federal Way School District 2022 Capital Facilities Plan into the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. The CFP is provided in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab. Discussion The Federal Way School District has provided the City with its annually updated Capital Facilities Plan 2022. The CFP was adopted by the Federal Way School District School Board June 29, 2021. The CFP has been subject to separate SEPA review and a DNS prepared by the District. Information contained in the School District CFP serves as the basis for the City’s collection of school impact fees on behalf of the school district. The Planning Commission action is to incorporate the School District Capital Facilities Plan into the City’s Comprehensive Plan by reference. The CFP includes the following: • Introduction • Inventory of educational facilities & non-instructional facilities Page 140 of 967 Staff Member: Steiner Date: October 5, 2021 Page 6 of 10 • Needs forecast, existing & new facilities • Six–year finance plan • Maps of district boundaries • Building capacities & portable locations • Student forecast • Capacity summaries • Student forecasts • Impact fee calculations • Summary of changes from the year 2021 plan A review of the Federal Way School District’s updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the District is requesting a change in the fee obligations. The net fee obligation for single-family dwellings is proposed to be $1,845, representing a decrease of $1,398 and the requested fee for multi-family dwellings is $15,073, a decrease of $930. The actual impact fees are established by ordinance through subsequent City Council action. Recommendation Planning Commission to recommend approval of the Federal Way School District’s 2022 Capital Facilities Plan to the City Council. P/T #4 Incorporate the Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan 2020-2021 to 2025-2026 into the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. The CFP is provided in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab. Discussion The Kent School District has provided its annually updated 2020-2021 to 2026-2027 Capital Facilities Plan. The CFP was adopted by the Kent School District School Board in June 2021 and has been subject to separate SEPA review and a DNS prepared by the District. Information contained in the School District CFP serves as the basis for the City’s collection of school impact fees on behalf of the school district. The Planning Commission action is to incorporate the School District Capital Facilities Plan into the City’s Comprehensive Plan by reference. The CFP includes the following: • Executive Summary • Six-year enrollment projection & history • District standard of service • Inventory, capacity & maps of existing schools • Six-year planning & construction plan • Portable classrooms • Projected classroom capacity • Finance Plan, cost basis and impact fee schedules • Summary of changes to previous plan A review of the Kent School District’s updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the Page 141 of 967 Staff Member: Steiner Date: October 5, 2021 Page 7 of 10 District is requesting a change in the fee obligations. The net fee obligation for single-family dwellings is proposed to be $5,818.09, representing an increase of $125.24 and the requested fee for multi-family dwellings is $2,457.53, an increase of $53.90. Both increases are tied to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) of 2.2% for the Seattle Metropolitan Area in 2021. The actual impact fees are established by ordinance through subsequent City Council action. Recommendation Planning Commission to recommend approval of the Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan 2020-2021 to 2026-2027 to the City Council. P/T #5 Incorporate the City of Auburn’s 6-year Capital Facilities Plan 2022-2027, into the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The CFP is provided in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab. Discussion A Capital Facilities Plan is one of the comprehensive plan elements required by the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) (RCW 36.70A). The GMA requires that a capital facilities plan 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 a minimum of a six-year plan to finance capital facilities with identified sources of funding. The proposed City of Auburn 6-year Capital Facilities Plan 2022-2027 satisfies the GMA requirements for a capital facilities element as part of the Comprehensive Plan. Each comprehensive plan prepared under the GMA must include a capital facilities plan element. More specifically, RCW 36.70A.070(3) of the GMA requires the following: “A capital facilities plan element consisting of: (a) An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities, showing the locations and capacities of the capital facilities; (b) a forecast of the future needs of such capital facilities; (c) the proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital facilities; (d) at least a six-year plan that will finance such capital facilities within projected funding capacities and clearly identifies sources of public money for such purposes; and (e) a requirement to reassess the land use element if probable funding falls short of meeting existing needs and to ensure that the land use element, capital facilities plan element, and financing plan within the capital facilities plan element are coordinated and consistent. Park and recreation facilities shall be included in the capital facilities plan element.” A capital facility is defined as a structure, street or utility system improvement, or other long- lasting major asset, including land. Capital facilities are provided for public purposes. Capital facilities include, but are not limited to, the following: streets, roads, highways, sidewalks, street and road lighting systems, traffic signals, domestic water systems, storm Page 142 of 967 Staff Member: Steiner Date: October 5, 2021 Page 8 of 10 and sanitary sewer systems, parks and recreation facilities, and police and fire protection facilities. These capital facilities include necessary ancillary and support facilities. The City of Auburn 6-year Capital Facilities Plan 2022-2027 is proposed to be incorporated by reference in the Comprehensive Plan, Capital Facilities Element (Volume No. 3). Recommendation Planning Commission to recommend approval of the City of Auburn’s 6-year Capital Facilities Plan 2022-2027 to the City Council. P/T #6 Amend text reference of Volume 3, Capital Facilities Element of Comprehensive Plan. The changes are shown in strike through and underline in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab. Key Changes/Points: Water is in the process of applying for an extension of their Comprehensive Water Plan (separate document incorporated by reference) effective to 2026 through the Washington State Department of Health, at which time a full update will be completed. Water believes this request is valid because the capital projects, water demands, and population growth projections presented in the current Water System Plan are still accurate projections of the City’s current planning efforts. • No text changes to the Capital Facilities Element are needed, although the referenced Comprehensive Water Plan in Policy CF-13 is expected to be updated by 2024 with current data as part of the Periodic Update. Recommendation Planning Commission to recommend approval of text reference amendments to Volume 3, Capital Facilities Element of Comprehensive Plan. P/T #7 Amend text of Volume 5, Transportation Element of Comprehensive Plan. The changes are shown in strike through and underline in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab. Key Changes/Points: As part of the 2021 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments, the city seeks to change the Comprehensive Plan to update the Transportation Element. The main changes to the Comprehensive Plan document include: • Update Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) information/project list; • Re-designate one project from Comprehensive Plan list to the (TIP) list to maintain continuity in the future transportation network conditions; • Additional minor changes will relate to grammar, punctuation, choice of words, references, etc. In addition to the strike through and underline in the working binder, a memorandum prepared by Cecile Malik, Senior Transportation Planner, for the Planning Commission is Page 143 of 967 Staff Member: Steiner Date: October 5, 2021 Page 9 of 10 included in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab. The memorandum explores the summary of text changes. Recommendation Planning Commission to recommend approval of policy text amendments to Volume 5, Transportation Element of Comprehensive Plan. P/T #8 Amend text of Volume 2, Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan . The changes are shown in strike through and underline in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab. Key Changes/Points: The City adopted a Housing Action Plan (HAP) in July 2021, which was also presented to the Planning Commission in February and June 2021 by City staff. The HAP provides recommendations on policies and code changes to implement HAP strategies. The proposed policy revision allows for better alignment with PSRC Vision 2050 policy MPP-H- 11 which addresses supporting identification of potential physical, economic, and cultural displacement, and mitigating to the extent feasible. • Include reference and brief description of Housing Action Plan in Conditions and Trends section beginning on page H-1 of the Housing Element. • Revise Policy H-24(f) to include text regarding minimizing displacement impacts. The revision of this policy will better align with PSRC Vision 2050’s recognition of displacement risk. Revising this policy allows for alignment with PSRC requirements in advance of the 2024 Periodic Update. • Address text formatting for Policy H-24 sub-policies Recommendation Planning Commission to recommend approval of policy text amendments to Volume 2, Housing Element of Comprehensive Plan. P/T #9 Amend text of Volume 1, Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan . The changes are shown in strike through and underline in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab. Key Changes/Points: The City adopted a Housing Action Plan (HAP) in July 2021, which was also presented to the Planning Commission in February and June 2021 by City staff. The HAP provides recommendations on policies and code changes to implement HAP strategies. One such policy is located in the Land Use Element (additional detail below). • Revise Policy LU-39 to include affordable housing and mixed-income development. In addition to allowing additional height or density in exchange for supplemental amenities identified in this policy, this revision would include affordable housing development as eligible uses for deviations in height, density, or intensity. Recommendation Page 144 of 967 Staff Member: Steiner Date: October 5, 2021 Page 10 of 10 Planning Commission to recommend approval of policy text amendments to Volume 1, Land Use Element of Comprehensive Plan. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments (File No. CPA19-0005, City initiated map changes) CPM #1 This proposed amendment updates a number of maps found throughout the city’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan, which is adopted by reference in the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. This is consistent and in conjunction with P/T #7. The changes are shown in the working binder behind the “Comp. Plan Map Amendments” tab. Discussion (This is the same topic as text amendment P/T #7 but is repeated as a map amendment since it requires revision to both the text and map of the comprehensive plan document. See discussion and analysis under text amendment P/T #7.) Recommendation Planning Commission to recommend approval of map amendments the Comprehensive Transportation Plan, adopted as a reference to the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, updates to reflect the most current data as identified in a staff memorandum included within the working binder behind the “Comp Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab associated with P/T #7. Page 145 of 967 MEMORANDUM TO: Judi Roland, Chair, Planning Commission Roger Lee, Vice-Chair, Planning Commission Planning Commission Members FROM: Josh Steiner, Senior Planner, Comm. Development Dept. Jeff Dixon, Planning Services Manager, Comm. Development Dept. DATE: September 8, 2021 RE: Discussion Topic: Introductory discussion of Docket of 2021 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments BACKGROUND: Annually the City amends its Comprehensive Plan (“Comp. Plan”). These are the “annual amendments” that the City considers routinely each year as distinguished from the periodic “major update” of the Comp Plan as required by the Growth Management Act (GMA) that was adopted at the end of year 2015. Side note: While the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A.130) originally required the next periodic update be completed by the year 2023, the state legislature passed ESHB 2342 in 2020 that extends the timeframe for updates until 2024. Pushing this timetable aligns comprehensive plan update to coordinate with regional initiatives that are required to be considered in comprehensive plans and that are scheduled to be completed in 2023, for example, Puget Sound Regional Council’s Vision 2050. There are two types of amendments: A. Map; and B. Text. In addition, there are two sources for these annual amendments: 1. City-initiated amendments which are typically items that Staff, Planning Commission, or the City Council have identified as items or issues that should be addressed in the next Comp Plan Amendment cycle; and, 2. Private-initiated amendments, which are in response to applications that are submitted. For the 2021 Comp Plan Amendment cycle, no private amendment applications were submitted, Page 146 of 967 Page 2 of 3 DISCUSSION At the September 8, 2021 Planning Commission meeting, staff would like to introduce and briefly discuss: 1. The docket of annual comprehensive plan amendments is proposed to consist of the following: City Initiated Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments (CPA21-0001) (each capital facilities plan is incorporated by reference) • P/T #1 – Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan • P/T #2 – Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan • P/T #3 – Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plan • P/T #4 – Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan • P/T #5 – City of Auburn (COA) Capital Facilities Plan • P/T #6 – Volume 3, Capital Facilities Element. Water is in the process of applying for an extension of their Comprehensive Water Plan (separate document incorporated by reference) effective to 2026 through the Washington State Department of Health, at which time a full update will be completed. Water believes this request is valid because the capital projects, water demands, and population growth projections presented in the current Water System Plan are still accurate projections of the City’s current planning efforts. • No text changes to the Capital Facilities Element are needed, although the referenced Comprehensive Water Plan in Policy CF-13 is expected to be updated by 2024 with current data as part of the Periodic Update. • P/T #7 –Volume 5, Transportation Element (Separate document incorporated by reference). Changes in the Transportation Element consist of the following: • Update Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) information/project list; • Re-designate one project from Comprehensive Plan list to the (TIP) list to maintain continuity in the future transportation network conditions; • Update maps as needed to reflect current data and conditions (addressed by CMP #1, below); • Additional minor changes will relate to grammar, punctuation, choice of words, references, etc. • P/T #8 – Volume 2, Housing Element. The City adopted a Housing Action Plan (HAP) in July 2021, which was also presented to the Planning Commission in February and June 2021 by City staff. The HAP provides recommendations on policies and code changes to implement HAP strategies. The proposed policy Page 147 of 967 Page 3 of 3 revision allows for better alignment with PSRC Vision 2050 policy MPP-H-11 which addresses supporting identification of potential physical, economic, and cultural displacement, and mitigating to the extent feasible. • Include reference and brief description of Housing Action Plan in Conditions and Trends section beginning on page H-1 of the Housing Element. • Revise Policy H-24(f) to include text regarding minimizing displacement impacts. The revision of this policy will better align with PSRC Vision 2050’s recognition of displacement risk. Revising this policy allows for alignment with PSRC requirements in advance of the 2024 Periodic Update. • Address text formatting for Policy H-24 sub-policies • P/T #9 – Volume 1, Land Use Element and Volume 5. The City adopted a Housing Action Plan (HAP) in July 2021, which was also presented to the Planning Commission in February and June 2021 by City staff. The HAP provides recommendations on policies and code changes to implement HAP strategies. One such policy is located in the Land Use Element (additional detail below). • Revise Policy LU-39 to include affordable housing and mixed-income development. In addition to allowing additional height or density in exchange for supplemental amenities identified in this policy, this revision would include affordable housing development as eligible uses for deviations in height, density, or intensity. City-Initiated Map Amendments (CPA21-0002): • CPM #1 – Volume 5: Transportation Element (Separate document incorporated by reference): Several maps found throughout Volume 5 have been updated to reflect current conditions. A final list of maps and corresponding page numbers is under development by Transportation Planning. SUMMARY: Staff to is to provide an introductory overview of the subjects under consideration for amendments this year. Additional information and more detailed analysis will be presented to the Planning Commission at future meetings. Page 148 of 967 AUBURN VALUES SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2021 ANNUAL AMENDMENTS PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 8, 2021 JOSH STEINER, AICP Department of Community Development Planning Building Development Engineering Permit Center Sustainability Community Services ●Code Enforcement Page 149 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONSERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2021 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANNUAL AMENDMENTS Annually the City amends its Comprehensive Plan. These routine amendments are distinguished from the “periodic update” completed on 8-year cycles. There are two sources: “city –initiated amendments”in response to items that are “docketed” (text or map). “private–initiated amendments” in response to applications that are submitted (text or map). Private-initiated Comprehensive Plan amendment applications (text or map) were publicly advertised in advance and accepted until Friday, June 7, 2021, this year. Page 150 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION The 2021 Comprehensive Plan amendment docket currently includes a total of 10 proposed amendments. Five updates are annually provided capital facilities plan updates for the city & school districts located within the City. Five updates to various elements (chapters) of the comprehensive plan including issues relating to Transportation; Housing; Land Use, and Capital Facilities. Four text amendments, one map amendment PROPOSED 2021 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT DOCKET Page 151 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION P/T #1 –Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update for Auburn School District P/T #2 –Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update for Dieringer School District P/T #3 –Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update for Federal Way School District P/T #4 –Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update for Kent School District P/T #5 –City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update CITY INITIATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS Page 152 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION P/T #1 –Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update for Auburn School District CITY INITIATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS Page 153 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION P/T #2 –Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update for Dieringer School District CITY INITIATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS Page 154 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION P/T #3 –Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update for Federal Way School District CITY INITIATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS Page 155 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION P/T #4 –Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update for Kent School District CITY INITIATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS Page 156 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION P/T #5 –City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan Update CITY INITIATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS Page 157 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION P/T #6 –Comprehensive Plan Volume 3, Capital Facilities Element, Update Water Services is requesting a 4-year extension of the Comprehensive Water Plan (CWP) through the Department of Health, which will then allow for a full update in 2024. The current plan analysis period is through 2026. Capital projects, water demand, and growth projections are still valid and accurate. Element text remains the same, however the referenced CWP document will be updated. P/T #7 –Comprehensive Plan Volume 5, Transportation Element, Update Update Comprehensive Plan to remove one project transferred to TIP and add Main Street TOD projects. Update maps to reflect current conditions. CITY INITIATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS Page 158 of 967 AUBURN VALUES SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 2021 ANNUAL AMENDMENTS PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 8, 2021 CECILE MALIK, SENIOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNER Department of Community Development Planning Building Development Engineering Permit Center Sustainability Community Services ●Code Enforcement Page 159 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONSERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2021 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN ANNUAL AMENDMENTS Annual amendments to the Comprehensive Transportation Plan to reflect current conditions: Project list update: Added new projects: Main Street TOD Maps updated: Improve visual Combined redundant maps Updated data to current conditions Added future signals Updated project map to reflect updated list Page 160 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION New Projects added: Main Street TOD Page 161 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2.1 Functional Classification MAP CHANGES Page 162 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2.3 Truck Routes MAP CHANGES Page 163 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2.7 Intelligent Transportation Systems MAP CHANGES Page 164 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2.8 Comprehensive Plan Projects MAP CHANGES Page 165 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 3.1 Priority Sidewalk Corridors MAP CHANGES Page 166 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 3.2 Existing and Future Bicycle Facilities and Multi-Use Trails MAP CHANGES Page 167 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 4.1 & 4.2 Transit Routes and Transit Dependent Areas MAP CHANGES Page 168 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2.2 Average Daily Traffic Volume 2.4 Freight Classification 2.5 LOS Corridors 3.3 Bicycle Corridors and Connectors MAP CHANGES Page 169 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONSERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2021 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN ANNUAL AMENDMENTS Any questions? Page 170 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION P/T #8 –Comprehensive Plan Volume 2, Housing Element Update Add language referencing Housing Action Plan (HAP) adoption Updated policy H-24 to reflect HAP recommendation of including minimizing displacement impacts, which is also consistent with PSRC Vision 2050 policy (MPP-H -11) supporting identifying potential physical, economic, and cultural displacement and mitigating to the extent feasible. P/T #9 –Comprehensive Plan Volume 1, Land Use Element, Update Update policy LU-39 to include affordable housing as an approved supplemental amenity that would allow deviations in height, density, or intensity limitations. Supports HAP recommendation. CITY INITIATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS Page 171 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION CPM #1 –Several maps found throughout Volume 5 (Transportation Element) have been updated to reflect current conditions. A final list of maps and corresponding page numbers is under development by Transportation Division. CITY-INITIATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENTS Page 172 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION City staff is reviewing the private applications for consistency with intent and goals stated within the city’s Comprehensive Plan and conducting the state required environmental review process (SEPA). Staff will provide additional information, including copies of the applications, to the Planning Commission identifying the results of analysis and a staff recommendation at future meetings. Generally, this is done by the “notebooks” prepared & distributed. Staff will schedule future briefings for the Planning Commission and public hearings in order that the Commission may make recommendations on all proposed amendments to City Council. NEXT STEPS Page 173 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2021 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANNUAL AMENDMENTS Page 174 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONSERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2021 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANNUAL AMENDMENTS Any questions? Page 175 of 967 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWPage 176 of 967 Planning and Development Department Page 1 of 21 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST APPLICATION Note: This environmental checklist does not address all proposed year 2021 comprehensive plan amendments. Other year 2021 amendments (school district CFP text amendments) are undergoing, have undergone, or will undergo separate environmental review. The timing of these other amendments may be dependent on processing timing. 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: City of Auburn’s 2021 Comprehensive Plan Map and Policy/Text Amendments 2. Name of Applicant: City of Auburn, Washington 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: Department of Community Development City of Auburn 25 West Main Street Auburn, WA 98001 Josh Steiner, Senior Planner jsteiner@auburnwa.gov 253-804-5064 4. Date checklist prepared: September 16, 2021 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Auburn 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): A Planning Commission public hearing on the proposed amendments covered by this checklist is tentatively scheduled for (but no earlier than) October 19, 2021. City Council consideration of the proposed amendments is planned for December. City Council action on plan amendments typically occurs prior to the end of the calendar year, but is not required to occur. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. There are no additions anticipated as part of this 2021 Annual Comprehensive Plan process. Page 177 of 967 Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Page 2 of 21 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Auburn School District. Determination of Non-Significance – 2021-2027 Capital Facilities Plan. May 27, 2021. Dieringer School District Determination of Non-Significance - Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2021. August 24, 2021. Federal Way School District. Determination of Non-Significance – 2022 Capital Facilities Plan. June 9, 2021. Kent School District. Determination of Non-Significance – 2021-2027 Capital Facilities Plan. May 7, 2021. In addition to environmental information related to this year’s annual comprehensive plan amendments (2021), other environmental information includes information related to historical decisions related to the City’s Comprehensive Plan. These decisions include: City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendments, City-initiated, (SEP20-0018) Issued September 25, 2020. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance – 2019 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendments, City-initiated, (SEP19-0028) Issued September 23, 2019. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance – 2018 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendments, City-initiated, (SEP18-0010) Issued September 19, 2018. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance – 2017 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendments, City-initiated, (SEP17-0014) Issued September 19, 2017. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance – 2016 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendments, City-initiated, (SEP16-0010) Issued September 28, 2016. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance – Major update in compliance with the periodic update required under the Growth Management Act (GMA) and in response to community visioning programs and community changes. 2015 Comprehensive Plan, (SEP15-0031) Issued November 2, 2015. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance – 2014 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendments, City-initiated, (SEP14-0011) Issued September 16, 2014. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance – 2013 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendments, City-initiated, (SEP13-0028) Issued September 17, 2013. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance – 2012 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendments, City-initiated, (SEP12-0023) Issued September 10, 2012. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance – 2011 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendments, City-initiated, (SEP11-0021) Issued October 18, 2011. Page 178 of 967 Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Page 3 of 21 City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance – 2010 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendments, City-initiated, Group 1, (SEP10-0019) 2010 City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance – 2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments, City-initiated, Group 2, (SEP10-0028) 2010 City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance – 2010 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendments, Privately-initiated, Group 2, (SEP10-0013) 2010 City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance – 2009 Amendments to the Auburn Zoning Code and Land Division Ordinance. 2009 Puget Sound Regional Council - Final Environmental Impact Statement - Vision 2040: Growth Strategy for the Central Puget Sound Region. March 2008. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance – 2008 Comprehensive Plan amendments. August 2008. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance—2007 Comprehensive Plan amendments. August 2007. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance – 2006 Comprehensive Plan amendments. August 2006. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance – 2005 Comprehensive Plan amendments. September 2005. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance - 2004 Comprehensive Plan amendments. September 2004. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance - 2003 Comprehensive Plan amendments. October 2003. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance - 2002 Comprehensive Plan amendments. October 2002. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance - 2001 Comprehensive Plan amendments. October 2001. City of Auburn - Auburn Downtown Plan/Final EIS. April 2001. City of Auburn - Addendum to the Final Determination of Non-Significance - 1996 Comprehensive Plan Amendments. November 1996. City of Auburn - Addendum to the Final Determination of Non-Significance - Comprehensive Plan Amendments to Comply with the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board Decision. October 1996. City of Auburn - Addendum to the Final Determination of Non-Significance - 1995 Comprehensive Plan Amendments. November 1995. Page 179 of 967 Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Page 4 of 21 City of Auburn - Final Determination of Non-Significance - Comprehensive Plan Amendments to Comply with the Washington State Growth Management Act. October 1994. City of Auburn - Final Environmental Impact Statement - City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan: Staff Draft and Recommendations. May 1986. City of Auburn. - Final Determination of Non-Significance - Downtown Design Study. April 1990. City of Auburn - Final Determination of Non-Significance - Comprehensive Plan Amendments on City Expansion and Urban Growth. July 1991. City of Auburn - Final Environmental Impact Statement: Auburn North CBD Analysis. November 1991. City of Auburn -Final Determination of Non-Significance - Comprehensive Plan Amendments on Sensitive and Critical Lands. January 1992. King County Parks, Planning and Resources Department - Final Environmental Impact Statement: Soos Creek Community Plan Update. December 1991. King County Parks, Planning and Resources Department - Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement: Countywide Planning Policies Proposed Amendments. May 1994. King County Parks, Planning and Resources Department - Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement: King County Comprehensive Plan. July 1994. Pierce County, Department of Planning and Land Services - Proposed Lakeland Hills South Mining and Reclamation Plan and Planned Community Development: Final Environmental Impact Statement. July 21, 1992. Pierce County, Department of Planning and Land Services - Comprehensive Plan for Pierce County, Washington: Final EIS. September 20, 1993. Pierce County, Department of Planning and Land Services - Final Supplemental EIS for the Comprehensive Plan for Pierce County, Washington. June 1994. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. The City of Auburn Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the proposed 2021 comprehensive plan map and policy/text amendments addressed in this environmental checklist and others and will forward a recommendation to the Auburn City Council. The City Council Page 180 of 967 Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Page 5 of 21 may or may not hold a public hearing prior to taking action adopting, adopting in part, or not adopting the amendments. Although the proposed action is not an approval or permit, the proposed amendments are also subject to the 60-day State Agency review process pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106. 11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You need not repeat those answers on this page. The City of Auburn annually amends its Comprehensive Plan in accordance with state law. In summary, the 2021 City of Auburn Annual Comprehensive Plan and Map amendments addressed by this environmental checklist include policy/text amendments (denoted by P/T) and plan map amendments (denoted by CPM). These amendments are described as follows: Comprehensive Plan Amendments (policy/text) A. Policy/Text Amendments (File No. CPA21-0001) (Nine changes) P/T #1 – Auburn School District 2021-2027 Capital Facilities Plan. (Separate Environmental Review) P/T #2 – Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2021. (Separate Environmental Review) P/T #3 – Federal Way School District 2022 Capital Facilities Plan. (Separate Environmental Review) P/T #4 – Kent School District 2020/2021 – 2026/2027 Capital Facilities Plan (Separate Environmental Review) P/T #5 – City of Auburn 2022-2027 Capital Facilities Plan P/T #6 - Volume 3, Capital Facilities Element. Water is in the process of applying for an extension of their Comprehensive Water Plan (separate document incorporated by reference) effective to 2026 through the Washington State Department of Health, at which time a full update will be completed. Water believes this request is valid because the capital projects, water demands, and population growth projections presented in the current Water System Plan are still accurate projections of the City’s current planning efforts. • No text changes to the Capital Facilities Element are needed, although the referenced Comprehensive Water Plan in Policy CF-13 is expected to be updated by 2024 with current data as part of the Periodic Update. P/T #7 – Volume 5, Transportation Element (Separate document incorporated by reference). Changes in the Transportation Element consist of the following: • Update Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) information/project list; • Re-designate one project from Comprehensive Plan list to the (TIP) list to maintain continuity in the future transportation network conditions; Page 181 of 967 Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Page 6 of 21 • Update maps as needed to reflect current data and conditions (addressed by CMP #1, below); • Additional minor changes will relate to grammar, punctuation, choice of words, references, etc. P/T #8 – Volume 2, Housing Element. The City adopted a Housing Action Plan (HAP) in July 2021, which was also presented to the Planning Commission in February and June 2021 by City staff. The HAP provides recommendations on policies and code changes to implement HAP strategies. The proposed policy revision allows for better alignment with PSRC Vision 2050 policy MPP-H-11 which addresses supporting identification of potential physical, economic, and cultural displacement, and mitigating to the extent feasible. • Include reference and brief description of Housing Action Plan in Conditions and Trends section beginning on page H-1 of the Housing Element. • Revise Policy H-24(f) to include text regarding minimizing displacement impacts. The revision of this policy will better align with PSRC Vision 2050’s recognition of displacement risk. Revising this policy allows for alignment with PSRC requirements in advance of the 2024 Periodic Update. • Address text formatting for Policy H-24 sub-policies P/T #9 – Volume 1, Land Use Element and Volume 5. The City adopted a Housing Action Plan (HAP) in July 2021, which was also presented to the Planning Commission in February and June 2021 by City staff. The HAP provides recommendations on policies and code changes to implement HAP strategies. One such policy is located in the Land Use Element (additional detail below). • Revise Policy LU-39 to include affordable housing and mixed-income development. In addition to allowing additional height or density in exchange for supplemental amenities identified in this policy, this revision would include affordable housing development as eligible uses for deviations in height, density, or intensity. Comprehensive Plan Amendments (Map changes) B. City-Initiated Map Amendments (File No. CPA21-0001) (One Change) CPM #1 - Volume 5: Transportation Element (Separate document incorporated by reference): Several maps found throughout Volume 5 have been updated to reflect current conditions. A final list of maps and corresponding page numbers is under development by Transportation Planning. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by Page 182 of 967 Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Page 7 of 21 the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan covers the area within the municipal boundaries of the City of Auburn, but also identifies properties in the City’s Potential Annexation Area (PAA). Both the Growth Management Act and the King and Pierce County Countywide Planning Policies, emphasize the need for consistent planning between cities and the County within each city’s urban growth area. The City’s municipal boundaries and its remaining potential annexation areas are shown within the City’s Comprehensive Plan. For the specific map locations of individual changes, see the locations specified under Item 11.B, above. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: 1. Earth: A. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other. The City of Auburn and its Potential Annexation Area (PAA) are characterized by a relatively flat central valley floor bordered by steep hillsides and upland plateaus to the west, east and southeast. B. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The slopes vary in areas of the city and the PAA, but in some location, slopes associated with the valley walls reach nearly 100%. C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The valley floor is made up primarily of soils of the Oridia, Renton, Snohomish, and Briscott series. These soils are generally poorly drained and formed in the alluvium (river sediments) associated with the White and Green Rivers. These are considered good agricultural soils, though in many areas, are not well-drained. There is no designated farmland within the City of Auburn. The hillsides and plateaus are made up of primarily Alderwood associated soils and a small amount of Everett associated soils (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1973). Alderwood soils are moderately well drained gravelly sandy loams 20-40 inches deep. Beneath these soils is glacial till with low permeability. Roots penetrate easily to the hardpan layer. Runoff potential is slow to medium. Erosion and slippage hazard is moderate; ranging to severe on steeper slope phases The Everett series consists of somewhat excessively drained soils that are underlain by very gravelly sand. These soils formed in very gravelly glacial outwash deposits under conifers. They are found on terraces and terrace fronts and are gently undulating to moderately steep. D. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Many factors affect slope stability including soil type, parent material, slope and drainage. These factors can be further affected by human intervention such as slope alteration, and vegetation Page 183 of 967 Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Page 8 of 21 removal. The City has identified categories of geologic hazard areas and inventoried these areas. Maps of the erosion, seismic, and landslide hazard areas are provided as maps that are part of the critical areas ordinance inventory E. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Not applicable. The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments are non-project actions, no site alteration, construction, or earthwork is proposed. F. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. G. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Not applicable. The action does not involve site specific development proposals. H. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion or other impacts to the earth. This is a non-project action; no site specific erosion control measures are proposed. However, the existing comprehensive plan includes numerous policies to reduce or control erosion through the use of best management practices, landscaping requirements, limitations on alteration of steep slopes and other critical areas protections. Impacts to earth/soil resources will be identified and, if necessary, mitigated during the development review process as specific development proposals are made that might be associated with these plan amendments. These potential impacts would be avoided by implementing best management practices and complying with 2014 WA State Dept. of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington with City of Auburn Supplement. 2. Air: A. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, and industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if know. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. B. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odors that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 3. Water: A. Surface: Page 184 of 967 Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Page 9 of 21 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands): If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. The major bodies of water within Auburn are the Green River, the White (Stuck) River, Bowman Creek, Cobble Creek, Mill Creek, Lea Hill Creek, Olson Creek and White Lake. The City has conducted an inventory of wetlands and streams within the city limits. These are shown on City’s critical area inventory maps. Shorelines of the State are reflected in Auburn’s Shorelines Master Program adopted in May 2020 under Ordinance No. 6733 and the shoreline environment designations are shown within the Shoreline Management Program. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Not applicable. This is non-project action. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Not applicable. This is non-project action. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Several areas within Auburn lie within the 100-year floodplain of the Green or White Rivers and Mill Creek and Mullen Slough. Floodplain as well as flood hazard areas as defined by the City are shown on the city critical area maps and floodplain maps. The Riparian Habitat Zone, as a FEMA special flood hazard area is shown on the city’s inventory and addressed in the city’s regulations. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. Not applicable. This is non-project action. B. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Not applicable. This is non-project action. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: domestic sewage; industrial, containing any toxic chemicals; Page 185 of 967 Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Page 10 of 21 agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) is (are) expected to serve. Not applicable. This is non-project action. C. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Not applicable. This is non-project action. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. This is non-project action. D. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Not applicable. This is non-project action. 4. Plants: A. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other. X evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other. X shrubs. X grass. X pasture. X crop or grain. X wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other. X water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other. X other types of vegetation. X B. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Not applicable. This is a non-project action. However, in general urban development results in the removal or alteration of many types of vegetation. C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site: None known at this time. D. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 5. Animals: Page 186 of 967 Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Page 11 of 21 A. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: geese, ducks, crows, etc. Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: urban animals such as cats, dogs, rabbits, raccoons, rodents, squirrels, opossums, etc. are also present in the city. B. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. There are nesting/breeding sites of great blue herons and green backed herons within Auburn as shown on critical area inventory maps. Wildlife The Environmental Impact Statement for the NE Auburn/Robertson Properties Special area plan and addendum indicate the bald eagle was delisted as ‘threatened’ in 2008 and is now a federal ‘species of concern’. There are several species that potentially occur within King County including: gray wolf (federally and state endangered), grizzly bear (federally threatened and state endangered), Canada lynx (federally and state threatened), marbled murrelet (federally and state threatened), and northern spotted owl (federally threatened and state endangered) (USFWS 2007). Due to their limited range and specific habitat requirements, the gray wolf, grizzly bear, Canada lynx, marbled murrelet, and northern spotted owl would not be expected to occur within the urban areas of King County. The 2004 EIS also identified several federal species of concern that may occur in King County. The list was updated in 2007 to include: tailed frog, Larch Mountain salamander, and northern sea otter (USFWS, 2007). The project area does not contain suitable habitat to support these species at this time. The 2004 EIS did not include the Oregon spotted frog or yellow-billed cuckoo, which are federal candidate species. Though given the current range and distribution of the species and the degraded conditions of on-site wetlands and stream, the likelihood of Oregon spotted frog occurring within the city is very low. Yellow-billed cuckoos breed in large blocks of riparian habitats (particularly woodlands containing cottonwoods and willows) (Erhlich et al., 1988). This species may now be extirpated from Washington (66 Federal Register 210). There have been documented sightings of yellow- billed cuckoo in King County and the Green River riparian corridor may provide some limited foraging and breeding habitat; however, areas of Auburn are devoid of mature dense cottonwood stands of significant size to support the species and their presence is not anticipated. Fish The 2004 EIS identified the Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia Coho salmon as a candidate species; however, their current federal status has been down-graded to a species of concern. Other listing changes that have occurred since that time includes the 2007 listing of the Puget Sound Distinct Population Segment (DPS) steelhead as threatened under the ESA (72 Federal Register 91), and the 2005 listing of designated critical habitat for the Puget Sound Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) Chinook salmon and Coastal-Puget Sound DPS bull trout in the Green River (70 Federal Register 170; 70 Federal Register 185). Since the 2004 EIS, a Biological Opinion was issued by NMFS that determined the effects of certain elements of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) throughout Puget Sound is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the following species listed under the ESA: Puget Sound Chinook salmon, Puget Sound steelhead, Hood Canal summer-run chum salmon, and Southern Resident killer whales. The Biological Opinion also determined that NFIP is likely to Page 187 of 967 Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Page 12 of 21 adversely modify the following ESA designated critical habitats: Puget Sound Chinook salmon, Hood Canal summer-run chum salmon, and Southern Resident killer whale critical habitats. The biological opinion provides a reasonable and prudent alternative which can be implemented to avoid jeopardy and adverse modification of critical habitat. In response to the Biological Opinion, FEMA developed a model ordinance for NFIP participating communities, which includes the City of Auburn. The City of Auburn incorporated substantive terms of the model ordinance into their interim floodplain regulations (Ordinance No. 6295). By letter dated September 21, 2011 FEMA acknowledged that the city’s ordinance complies with their model ordinance and as a result, the interim ordinance becomes permanent. The Biological Opinion originally established a 2010 timeline for compliance for all NFIP participating communities within the Puget Sound Basin (NMFS, 2008). C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Auburn is a portion of the Pacific Flyway for migratory birds. D. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 6. Energy and Natural Resources: A. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project’s energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. B. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 7. Environmental Health: A. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required: Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Page 188 of 967 Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Page 13 of 21 Not applicable. This is a non-project action. B. Noise: 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impact, if any: Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 8. Land and Shoreline Use: A. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The City and Potential Annexation Area (PAA) contain a variety of land uses including residential, industrial, institutional, commercial, open space, and public land uses. B. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe: Much of Green and White River Valleys and the City of Auburn were used for agriculture at some time in the past. Over the last several decades, rapid growth in the area resulted in much of the agricultural land converting to urban uses. No land within the city is formally designated as Agricultural Land, though some parcels continue in agricultural use. C. Describe any structures on the site: Structures within the city and PAA range from small single family detached homes to large industrial manufacturing and warehousing facilities. Properties subject to the plan map amendments range in use, as examples, from vacant land, schools, residential, commercial to those that appear as primarily wetlands. D. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Not applicable. This is a non-project action. E. What is the current zoning classification of the site? City zoning districts include: RC (Residential Conservancy); R-1 (1 du/acre) R-5 (5 du/acre); R-7 (7 du/acre); R-10 (10 du/acre); R-16 (16 du/acre); R-20 (20 du/acre); R-MHC (Manufactured/Mobile Home Community); RT (Residential Transition); CN (Neighborhood Commercial) C1; (Light Commercial); C2 (Central Business District); DUC (Downtown Urban Center Zone); C3 (Heavy Commercial); C4, Mixed Use Commercial, M1 (Light Industrial); M2 (Heavy Industrial); LF (Airport Landing Field); UNC (Unclassified Use); I (Institutional Use); P- 1, Public Use; Lakeland Hills South PUD; and TV (Terrace View Zoning District). Page 189 of 967 Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Page 14 of 21 F. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? A Comprehensive Plan map of the City is contained in the City’s Comprehensive Plan and includes various different plan designations similar to, and implemented by the zoning categories. G. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Portions of the City along the Green and White Rivers fall under the Shoreline Master Program. A map of the shoreline designations for those areas is contained in the shoreline management program. Shorelines of the State are reflected in Auburn’s Shorelines Management Program adopted in May 2020. H. Has any part of the site been classified as an “environmentally sensitive” area? If so, specify: Not applicable. This is a non-project action. However, areas of the city do contain environmentally sensitive or critical areas and the regulation and protection of environmentally sensitive areas are addressed through the city’s critical areas ordinance (ACC 16.10). I. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Not applicable. This is a non-project action and no specific development is proposed. J. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None, specifically. This proposal is a non-project action. K. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None, specifically. This proposal is a non-project action. L. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: This proposal is to amend the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan as described in response to the environmental checklist application question A.11 above. The evaluation by staff and the public hearing and review process that occurs as part of the comprehensive plan amendment process will be used to help evaluate whether a particular proposal is consistent with existing plans. Also, the proposed amendments are circulated to State agencies for a State Agency review process in accordance with RCW 36.70A.106, 9. Housing: A. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. B. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Page 190 of 967 Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Page 15 of 21 None. This proposal is a non-project action. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None specifically, as this is a non-project action. 10. Aesthetics: A. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. B. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. 11. Light and Glare: A. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. B. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. C. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. D. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. 12. Recreation: A. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The City of Auburn provides a full range of parks and recreational facilities. The City’s 2015 Parks, Art, Recreation and Open Space Plan shows the location of these facilities. B. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. Page 191 of 967 Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Page 16 of 21 C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation: A. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe: Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. However, as a matter of information, in Auburn, the Blomeen House located at 324 B Street NE is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The Carnegie Library Building at 306 Auburn Avenue (currently Auburn Dance and Music Center) and the Auburn Post Office (formerly the Seattle-King County Health Department) at 20 Auburn Avenue NE are listed local and county landmarks. The Olson Farm, located at 28728 Green River Road South, was designated as King County Landmark in 2000 and the Masonic Temple Building at the southeast corner of Auburn Way South and East Main Street was designated as a King County Historical Landmark in 2002. The Pioneer Cemetery at Auburn Way North & 9th ST NE was designated as a City of Auburn Landmark in 2016. B. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. Several historic Indian campsites have been identified along the Green and White Rivers in the Auburn Thoroughbred Racetrack EIS and in preliminary work for the Army Corps of Engineers’ Special Area Management Plan (SAMP). C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. 14. Transportation: A. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The Comprehensive Transportation Plan (The transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan) shows the City’s current and future classified street system. B. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Figure 4-1 of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan (Transportation element) shows the location of public transit routes within the City. A commuter rail station exists along the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad right-of-way just south of West Main Street and east of C Street SW. C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. Page 192 of 967 Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Page 17 of 21 D. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private): Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. E. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe: There is no water transportation in the Auburn area other than for recreational uses. The area is particularly well served by rail. At this time, local freight service is available. Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Union Pacific both operate freight railroad lines within Auburn. Auburn is also a commuter rail station site for the Sounder commuter rail line between Tacoma, Seattle and Everett. Service began September 18, 2000. Amtrak trains pass through Auburn but do not stop in the city. The Auburn Airport is a general purpose airport located north of 15th and D Streets NE. F. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. G. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. 15. Public Services: A. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe: Not applicable. This is a non-project action. B. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impact on public services, if any: The Comprehensive Plan contains policies that seek to maintain a sufficient level of service for public services as development occurs. Also, Auburn reviews under SEPA, the impacts of significant development on these public services. Mitigation measures are required to reduce significant adverse impacts. Also, several Policy/Text amendments as part of this checklist include the capital facilities plan’s for the four school districts within Auburn city limits and PAA. Those school districts are Auburn, and Dieringer, Federal Way, and Kent. 16. Utilities: A. Circle utilities currently available at the site: Electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other – Cable TV. All of the above utilities are available within the City of Auburn. The City provides water, sewer and storm facilities. There are also private water and sewer utility districts and private utility providers with service area boundaries within the city. Page 193 of 967 Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Page 18 of 21 B. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed: This is a non-project action. However, the Comprehensive Plan includes a private and a public utilities element (as required by the Growth Management Act), which describes the utilities that serve the Auburn area and includes policies for their provision. Also, the city actively engages in planning for public facilities. The Comprehensive Water Plan, Comprehensive Sewer Plan and Comprehensive Stormwater Drainage Plan were adopted by the City in 2015. A new six-year Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) was adopted in 2017 (2018-2023) and plan amendments this year will include an update consisting of the City of Auburn 2022-2027. The City seeks to update the CFP a minimum of every two years, and more commonly, yearly. These plans ensure that utility impacts are adequately monitored and evaluated on a project level and city-wide basis. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. OWNER/AGENT SIGNATURE: ______________ Josh Steiner, Senior Planner DATE PREPARED: September 23, 2021_ Page 194 of 967 Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Page 19 of 21 D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (Do not use this sheet for project actions.) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent of the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal that would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Taken as a whole, there should be a minimal change in discharges to water, emissions to air, production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances or the production of noise. The proposed amendments themselves will not create a change in intensity of discharge to water, emissions to air, production, storage or release of toxic or hazardous substances or the production of noise from those levels expected under the existing plan. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: The City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan contains provisions to reduce increases or emissions caused by new development. Emphasis in the Comprehensive Plan on reducing the reliance on the automobile for transportation should reduce the amount of emissions to the air. Policies in the Plan also provide guidance in the review of development proposals to encourage use and retention of native vegetation. This supports wildlife habitat areas, particularly near streams, as the policies assist the City in addressing adverse impacts to water quality and wildlife habitat from runoff since native plantings can retain and treat runoff and may require less pesticide use. The proposed amendments set the framework where properties and uses would in the future be in compliance with expansion, site redevelopment or new development. City policy and code regulates such impacts through the storm drainage requirements and critical area regulations as applicable. An environmental review of all non-exempt (from SEPA) development will be conducted to evaluate and mitigate impacts related to discharges, emissions, and the release of toxic substances. Evaluation of the subsequent site-specific proposals will be based on the policies of the Comprehensive Plan, development regulations and appropriate mitigation will take place on a case by case basis. City development standards including but not limited to the critical areas ordinance, shoreline master program regulations, Stormwater Management Manual, Floodplain permit regulations, and the Public Works Design and Construction Manual, also provide additional protection for these types of impacts. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? This proposal will amend the Auburn Comprehensive Plan. The plan recognizes the Shoreline Master Program that was adopted in May 2020 which governs development within the Shoreline Management Area, reducing the impacts from new development on plants, animals. The changes will not change any policy which would have a direct effect on flora, fauna, or marine life. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Page 195 of 967 Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Page 20 of 21 Generally, the adopted Auburn Comprehensive Plan and critical areas ordinance seek to protect and conserve plants, animals, fish, and marine life. An environmental review under SEPA of all non- exempt development is conducted to measure impacts. Evaluation based on the policies of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan and appropriate mitigation will take place on a case-by-case basis. Policies within the Plan also provide guidance in the review of development proposals to encourage native vegetation be used and/or retained. This should support wildlife habitat areas, particularly near streams as the policies assist the city in addressing adverse runoff impacts to water quality and wildlife habitat since native plantings may require less pesticide use. City development standards including but not limited to the critical areas ordinance and the shoreline master program regulations also provide additional protection for these types of impacts. The proposed map amendments are bringing the land use designations more in line with actual property uses. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Future development will use natural gas, petroleum and electricity and could result in increased automobile uses. However, there does not appear to be any significant adverse increases in the use of energy of natural resources resulting from the amendments being proposed to the existing comprehensive plan over what might occur under existing plan designations. In fact, it is possible that use of energy or natural resources could decrease depending on the land use. The city’s amendment for alternative powered vehicles and for preparation of a greenhouse gas inventory establishes a baseline for future energy conservation measures. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: None specifically, as this is a non-project action. However, Comprehensive Plan policies encourage energy conservation in public buildings, street lighting, and recycling, it places an emphasis on providing for alternative methods of travel to the automobile such as transit, walking, and biking. An environmental review under SEPA of all significant development will be conducted to measure the project impacts. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? This proposal will amend the Comprehensive Plan. Taken as a whole, the increase in impacts from the proposed comprehensive plan amendments on environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated for government protection should be minor, if at all. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: The Comprehensive Plan and, in particular, the critical areas ordinance, seek to protect environmentally sensitive areas (wetlands, streams, geologically hazard areas, floodplain, wildlife habitat, and aquifer recharge areas) and to reduce the impacts of development on them. The Auburn Comprehensive Plan provides for the implementation of innovative land management techniques to protect these resources. An environmental review under SEPA for all non-exempt development will be conducted to evaluate impacts. Page 196 of 967 Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Page 21 of 21 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? Amendments can only be approved if it can be assured that future development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and its policies and related regulations. Those proposals that are not consistent with the comprehensive plan policies or other existing plans will not be approved. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: The comprehensive plan, critical areas ordinance, and other development regulations, such as the zoning ordinance and shoreline master program, seek to protect these land and shoreline resources and to reduce the effects of development on them. An environmental review under SEPA of all development that is non-exempt will also be conducted to evaluate a proposal’s land use and environmental impacts. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? This proposal will amend portions of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan for Capital Facilities Elements. The existing plan assumes a growth target of approximately 6,000 households and a job capacity of 1,200 jobs in the King County portion of the city to the year 2022 (based on city limits as of 2003) and to approximately 8,000 people in the Pierce County portion of the city (based on 2002 city limits in Pierce County). The proposal will not result in an increase in demands on transportation and public services. Rather, the six-year CFP responds to growth by identifying the public facilities and improvement needed to address future growth. The growth projections mentioned above would occur with or without these amendments. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: As stated above, no measurable increase in demands to these subject areas will result from the proposed map amendments. However, the Auburn Comprehensive Plan presently incorporates an adoption of the City of Auburn 2021-2026 Capital Facilities Plan, which seeks to maintain a sufficient level of service for public services as development occurs. The City of Auburn Six-Year CFP will be updated as part of the 2021 Comprehensive Plan process to balance public facility needs against projected growth. An environmental review under SEPA for non-exempt development proposals identified in the CFP will be conducted to measure and evaluate impacts. The city actively engages in planning for public facilities. The Comprehensive Water Plan, Comprehensive Sewer Plan and Comprehensive Stormwater Drainage Plan were adopted by the city in 2015. An update to the Comprehensive Transportation Plan was adopted in 2015. These specific plans help ensure that infrastructure impacts are adequately monitored and evaluated on a project level and city-wide basis. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. The proposal does not appear to present any conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements. Page 197 of 967 NOTICE OF DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) 2021 Annual Comprehensive Plan Text & Map Amendments SEP21-0023 / CPA21-0001 The City of Auburn is issuing a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the following described proposal. The applications and listed studies may be reviewed at the Community Development & Public Works Department at One E Main St., 2nd Floor, Customer Service Center, Auburn, WA 98001. Proposal and Location: Adopt amendments to the City’s Comprehensive Plan consisting of the following Text (P/T) and Map (CPM) Amendments. Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments P/T #5 – City of Auburn 2022-2027 Capital Facilities Plan P/T #6 – Volume 3, Capital Facilities Element. Water is in the process of applying for an extension of their Comprehensive Water Plan (separate document incorporated by reference) effective to 2026 through the Washington State Department of Health, at which time a full update will be completed. Water believes this request is valid because the capital projects, water demands, and population growth projections presented in the current Water System Plan are still accurate projections of the City’s current planning efforts. •No text changes to the Capital Facilities Element are needed, although the referenced Comprehensive Water Plan in Policy CF-13 is expected to be updated by 2024 with current data as part of the Periodic Update. P/T #7 –Volume 5, Transportation Element (Separate document incorporated by reference). Changes in the Transportation Element consist of the following: •Update Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) information/project list; •Re-designate one project from Comprehensive Plan list to the (TIP) list to maintain continuity in the future transportation network conditions; •Update maps as needed to reflect current data and conditions (addressed by CMP #1, below); •Additional minor changes will relate to grammar, punctuation, choice of words, references, etc. P/T #8 – Volume 2, Housing Element. The City adopted a Housing Action Plan (HAP) in July 2021, which was also presented to the Planning Commission in February and June 2021 by City staff. The HAP provides recommendations on policies and code changes to implement HAP strategies. The proposed policy revision allows for better alignment with PSRC Vision 2050 policy MPP-H-11 which addresses supporting identification of potential physical, economic, and cultural displacement, and mitigating to the extent feasible. •Include reference and brief description of Housing Action Plan in Conditions and T rends section beginning on page H-1 of the Housing Element. •Revise Policy H-24(f) to include text regarding minimizing displacement impacts. The revision of this policy will better align with PSRC Vision 2050’s recognition of displacement risk. Revising this policy allows for alignment with PSRC requirements in advance of the 2024 Periodic Update. •Address text formatting for Policy H-24 sub-policies Page 198 of 967 NOTICE OF APPLICATION and DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE SEP21-0023 / CPA21-0001 (Continued) Page 2 of 3 P/T #9 – Volume 1, Land Use Element and Volume 5. The City adopted a Housing Action Plan (HAP) in July 2021, which was also presented to the Planning Commission in February and June 2021 by City staff. The HAP provides recommendations on policies and code changes to implement HAP strategies. One such policy is located in the Land Use Element (additional detail below). •Revise Policy LU-39 to include affordable housing and mixed-income development. In addition to allowing additional height or density in exchange for supplemental amenities identified in this policy, this revision would include affordable housing development as eligible uses for deviations in height, density, or intensity. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments CPM #1 - Volume 5: Transportation Element (Separate document incorporated by reference): Several maps found throughout Volume 5 have been updated to reflect current conditions and to address formatting. Notice of Application: September 23, 2021 Application Complete: September 16, 2021 Permit Application: August 19, 2021 File Nos. SEP21-0023 CPA21-0001 Applicant: Josh Steiner, Senior Planner Community Dev. & Public Works City of Auburn 25 W Main ST Auburn, WA 98001 Studies/Plans Submitted With Application: • None Other Permits, Plans, and Approvals Needed: •None Statement of Consistency and List of Applicable Development Regulations: This proposal is subject to and shall be consistent with the Auburn City Code, Comprehensive Plan, and Public Works Design and Construction Standards. Lead Agency: City of Auburn The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not requir ed under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. Public Comment Period: This may be your only opportunity to comment on the environmental impact of the proposal. All persons may comment on this application. This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11- 340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date issued below. Comments must be in writing and submitted by 5:00 pm on October 8, 2021 to the mailing address of 25 W Main ST, Auburn, WA, 98001 or emailed to the contact below. Any person wishing to become a party of record, shall include in their comments that they wish to receive notice of and participate in any hearings, if relevant, and request a copy of decisions once made. Any person aggrieved of the City's determination may file an appeal with the Auburn City Clerk at 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA 98001- 4998 within 14 days of the close of the comment period, or by 5:00 p.m. on October 23, 2021. Page 199 of 967 Page 3 of 3 NOTICE OF APPLICATION and DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE SEP21-0023 / CPA21-0001 (Continued) For questions regarding this project, please contact Josh Steiner, Senior Planner, at planning@auburnwa.gov or 253-804-5064. Project materials are available here: https://www.auburnwa.gov/cms/one.aspx?portalId=11470638&pageId=12522857 Public Hearing: A public hearing is required and is scheduled for October 19th, 2021 at 7 PM. The public hearing may be accessed via Zoom meeting or phone using the links below. Zoom Meeting: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/89925187826 Phone: (253) 215-8782 – Meeting ID 899 2518 7826 RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Jeff Tate POSITION/TITLE: Director, Dept. of Community Dev. ADDRESS: 25 West Main Street Auburn, Washington 98001 253-931-3090 DATE ISSUED: SIGNATURE: Note: This determination does not constitute approval of the proposal. Approval of the proposal can only be made by the legislative or administrative body vested with that authority. The proposal is required to meet all applicable regulations. September 23, 2021 Page 200 of 967 GENERAL INFO & CORRESPONDENCEPage 201 of 967 THANK YOU We have received your amendment submission. Please allow 1-3 business days for review. Please keep the Submittal ID as your receipt and for any future questions. We will also send an email receipt to all contacts listed in the submittal. Submittal ID: 2021-S-3159 Submittal Date Time: 09/22/2021 Submittal Information Jurisdiction City of Auburn Submittal Type 60-day Notice of Intent to Adopt Amendment Amendment Type Comprehensive Plan Amendment Amendment Information Brief Description Proposed comprehensive plan amendment for the annual comprehensive plan update. o Yes, this is a part of the 8-year periodic update schedule, required under RCW 36.70A.130. Anticipated/Proposed Date of Adoption 12/06/2021 Attachments Attachment Type File Name Upload Date Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Draft PT1 - ASD 2021 CFP.pdf 09/22/2021 10:44 AM Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Draft PT2 - DSD 2021 CFP.pdf 09/22/2021 10:44 AM Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Draft PT3 - FWPS 2021 CFP.pdf 09/22/2021 10:44 AM Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Draft PT4 - KSD 2021 CFP.pdf 09/22/2021 10:44 AM Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Draft PT5 Draft Auburn 2022 -2027 Capital Facilities Plan.pdf 09/22/2021 10:44 AM Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Draft PT7 DRAFT Comprehensive Transportation Plan.pdf 09/22/2021 10:45 AM Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Draft PT8 DRAFT Housing Element edits.pdf 09/22/2021 10:45 AM Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Draft PT9 DRAFT Land Use Element edits.pdf 09/22/2021 10:45 AM Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Draft CPM1 Comprehensive Transportation Plan Maps.pdf 09/22/2021 10:46 AM Contact Information Page 202 of 967 Prefix Mr. First Name Josh Last Name Steiner Title Senior Planner Work (253) 804-5064 Cell Email jsteiner@auburnwa.gov o Yes, I would like to be contacted for Technical Assistance. Certification n I certify that I am authorized to submit this Amendment for the Jurisdiction identified in this Submittal and all information provided is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Full Name Josh Steiner Email jsteiner@auburnwa.gov Page 203 of 967 Page 204 of 967 Page 205 of 967 1 Josh Steiner From:Legals <legals@seattletimes.com> Sent:Thursday, September 23, 2021 3:52 PM To:Josh Steiner Subject:RE: 15339 - REQUEST TO PUBLISH Attachments:15339Proof.pdf Hi Josh,  This notice is scheduled to publish on 10/6, the total is $332.27.   Thank you,    Holly Botts  Legal Advertising Representative  p: (206) 652‐6604  e: hbotts@seattletimes.com     From: Josh Steiner <JSteiner@auburnwa.gov>   Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 2:48 PM  To: Legals <legals@seattletimes.com>  Subject: 15339 ‐ REQUEST TO PUBLISH    Hello,    We would like to publish the attached public notice in the October 6th edition of the Seattle Times. In addition to  sending billing to the contact information noted in the attachment, please email me a copy of the receipt. Please let me  know if you have any questions.    Thanks,    Josh Steiner, AICP  Senior Planner  Community Development  City of Auburn | www.auburnwa.gov   253.804.5064 | jsteiner@auburnwa.gov  Mailing Address: 25 W Main Street, Auburn, WA 98001  Customer Service Survey | Zoning Maps     The information contained in this electronic communication is personal, privileged and/or confidential information  intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity(ies) to which it has been addressed. If you read this  communication and are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or  copying of this communication, other than delivery to the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you have received  this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e‐mail. Thank you.   CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you  recognize the sender and know the content is safe.  Page 206 of 967 Page 207 of 967 COMP PLAN POLICY/TEXT AMENDMENTSPage 208 of 967 POLICY/TEXT AMENDMENT (P/T) #1 INCORPORATE AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT #408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 - 2027 Page 209 of 967 Page 210 of 967 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 Auburn School District No. 408 Adopted by the Auburn School District Board of Directors June 14, 2021 Page 211 of 967 Dr. Alan Spicciati, Superintendent City of Algona City of Kent City of Pacific City of Black Diamond BOARD of DIRECTORS Tracy Arnold Laurie Bishop Unincorporated King County City of Auburn Arlista Holman Sheilia McLaughlin Laura Theimer 915 Fourth Street NE Auburn, Washington 98002 (253) 931-4900 Serving Students in: Page 212 of 967 Section I Executive Summary........................................................................Page 1 Section II Enrollment Projections and Student Generation Factors................Page 7 Section III Standard of Service........................................................................Page 18 Section IV Inventory of Facilities......................................................................Page 26 Section V Pupil Capacity.................................................................................Page 30 Section VI Capital Construction Plan...............................................................Page 33 Section VII Impact Fees....................................................................................Page 37 Table of Contents Page 213 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 Capital Facilities Plan 2021 through 2027 Section I Executive Summary Page 214 of 967 2 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 I. Executive Summary This six-year Capital Facilities Plan (the “Plan”) has been prepared by the Auburn School District (the “District”) as the District’s principal planning document, in compliance with the requirements of Washington’s Growth Management Act and the adopted ordinances of the counties and cities served by the District. This Plan was prepared using data available in the spring of 2021. 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 Cities of Auburn, Black Diamond and Kent; the King County Council, the City of Auburn, the City of Black Diamond, 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 and the local ordinances, this 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-3 should not exceed 17 students and class size for grades 4-5 should not exceed 27 students. When averaged over the six elementary school grades, this computes to 20.33 students per classroom. Class size for grade 6 should not exceed 27 students and class size for grades 7 and 8 should not exceed 28.53 students. When averaged over the three middle school grades, this computes to 28.02 students per classroom. Class size for 9-12 should not exceed 28.74 students, with some subject areas restricted to lesser numbers. Decisions by current legislative actions may create the need for additional classrooms. (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 Page 215 of 967 3 2020-21 capacity was 17,082. The actual number of individual students was 16,702 as of October 1, 2020. (See Section V for more specific information.) The Capital Construction Plan shown in Section VI addresses the additions and proposed modernization to the District’s existing facilities. The plan includes the ongoing replacement of five elementary schools and one middle school, construction of two new elementary schools, and acquisition of future school sites to accommodate growth. The new facilities are required to meet the projected elementary school class size reductions mandated by the State of Washington and student population increases generated by the large development areas within the Auburn School District. Three areas that have significant impact on the school district are the Lakeland South, Lea Hill, and the valley areas of the district. There are also other development pockets that impact the District. The District completed a comprehensive review of all district facilities in October 2008. A Steering Committee made recommendations to the Board for capital improvements to existing facilities and replacement of seven schools over the next ten years. These recommendations led to a capital improvements levy and a bond issue that was placed on the ballot in March 2009. Both ballot measures were unsuccessful in March. The Board determined to rerun only the capital improvements levy in November 2009, which the voters approved. In the fall of 2011, the Board determined to move forward with the Auburn High School Modernization and Reconstruction Project and placed the project before the voters in February of 2012. The bond issue was supported by the community at nearly 57% approval rate, but was short of the super majority requirement of 60%. In March of 2012, the Board determined to rerun the bond in November of 2012. In November 2012, the bond passed at 62%. The project was completed during the summer of 2016. In the spring of 2016, the Board determined to move forward with the replacement of six schools and the construction of two new elementary schools. The project was placed before the voters in November 2016 and the bond passed at 62.83%. The first of the projects, the replacement of Olympic Middle School, started construction in May 2018 and opened in Fall 2019. The district’s new elementary, Bowman Creek Elementary, started construction in May 2019 and opened in August 2020.Construction for replacement of Dick Scobee Elementary School started in June 2019 and the school opened in August 2020. Construction of new Elementary School #16 and construction of the replacement Pioneer Elementary School started May 2020. Both are scheduled to open in the Fall of 2021. Construction for the replacement of both Lea Hill Elementary School and Chinook Elementary School started in June 2021. The School Impact Fee Ordinances adopted by King County, the City of Auburn, City of Black Diamond and City of Kent provide for the assessment of impact fees to assist in meeting some of the fiscal impacts 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 developed 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. There have been dramatic changes in the student generation factors for single and multi-family in the past five years. The District plans to carefully monitor the numbers over the next several years to determine if this is a trend or an anomaly. The method of collecting the data is with the use of GIS mapping software, data from King County and Pierce County Page 216 of 967 4 GIS, data from Davis Demographics and integration of the mapping with student data from the District’s student 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. For purposes of this 2021 update, the District is choosing to continue to use the 2020 Student Generation Factor data given that remote learning and COVID-related enrollment disruption likely presents an inaccurate data set of the students generated from recent new development. The District will obtain updated data to calculate Student Generation Factors for the 2022 update to this Plan. Page 217 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 Listed below is a summary level outline of the changes from the 2020 Capital Facilities Plan that are a part of the 2021 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 II Enrollment Projections A. Updated projections. See Section II & Appendices A.1. Section III Standard of Service A. Updated to reflect current number of classrooms allocated to non-standard classroom uses. Section IV Inventory of Facilities A.Add 2 portables at Mt. Baker Middle School B.Add 3 portables at Cascade Middle School. C.Add 4 portables at Olympic Middle School. D.Add 2 portables at Rainier Middle School. E.Add 2 portables at Auburn High School. F.Add 2 portables at Auburn Mountainveiw High School. G.Add 2 portables at Auburn Riverside High School. H.Remove 13 portables from Lea Hill Elementary School.* I.Remove 6 portables from Chinook Elementary School.** J.Remove 1 portable from Gildo Rey Elementary School. K.Remove 1 portable from Terminal Park Elementary School. *Note; Two portable classrooms at Lea Hill Elementary School will move to JPF Admininstration Bldg. **Note: Two portable classrooms at Chinook Elementary School will be demolished. Section V Pupil Capacity The 19 portables to be relocated in July 2021 are needed to accommodate enrollment increases. Page 218 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 Impact Fees CHANGES TO IMPACT FEE DATA ELEMENTS 2020 to 2021 CPF CPF 2020 2021 EXPLANATION Student Generation Factors Single Family Consistent with King County Ordinance 11621, Elementary 0.2500 0.2500 Student Generation Factors are calculated Middle School 0.1310 0.1310 by the school district based on district Sr. High 0.1520 0.1520 records of average actual student generation Multi-Family rates for new developments constructed Elementary 0.4330 0.4330 over the last five years. Middle School 0.1850 0.1850 Sr. High 0.1750 0.1750 For the purposes of this 2021 update, the District is choosing to continue to use the 2020 Student Generation Factor data given that remote learning and COVID-related enrollment disruption likely presents an inaccurate data set of the students generated from recent new development. The District will obtain updated data to calculate Student Generation Factors for the 2022 update to this Plan. School Construction Costs Elementary $60,200,000 Middle $112,000,000 Site Acquisition Costs Cost per acre $404,377 $444,771 Updated estimate based on 10% annual inflation. Area Cost Allowance Boeckh Index $225.97 $238.22 Updated to current OSPI schedule. (July 2020) Match % - State 66.32%62.87%Updated to current OSPI schedule (May 2020) Match % - District 33.68%37.13%Computed District Average AV Single Family $374,661 $402,640 Updated from March 2021 King County Dept of Assessments data. Multi-Family $160,501 $197,141 Updated from March 2021 King County Dept of Assessments data using average AV for apartments and condominiums. Debt Serv Tax Rate $2.41 $2.31 Current Fiscal Year GO Bond Int Rate 2.44%2.44%Current Rate (Bond Buyers 20 Index 3-14) DATA ELEMENTS From new school construction cost estimate in April 2021. Page 219 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 Capital Facilities Plan 2021 through 2027 Section II Enrollment Projections and Student Generation Factors Page 220 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 7 Student Enrollment Projections Projection techniques give consideration to historical and current data as a basis for forecasting the future. In addition, certain assumptions must be made about the variables in the data being used. Forecasting can be defined as the extrapolation or logical extension from history to the future or from the known to the unknown. 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. An example of this is with the COVID-19 pandemic. 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 time. The basis of enrollment projections in the Auburn School District has been cohort survival analysis. Cohort survival is the analysis of a group of students in a grade level as it progresses through time. This analysis uses historical information to develop averages and project the averages forward. If all students in one grade level progress to the next, the cohort number would be 1.00. If fewer students from the group progress the number will be less than 1. The district has used this method with varying years of history (3 years, 6 years, 10 years and 13 years) as well as weighted factors to study several projections. 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 creditably of the projections derived by these techniques. Summary of 2021-22 Enrollment Projections Table 1 shows historical enrollment for the October 1 count in the Auburn School District over the past 20 years. The data shows overall average growth over the recent 10 years is 1.24%. This average, however, includes the -4.22% decrease in October 2020 enrollment due to the COVID pandemic. Without this anomaly year, the average growth is at 1.58%. Enrollment growth between 2012 and 2019 averaged over 2%. Page 221 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 8 Page 222 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 9 Due to the pandemic, it was important to consider the impact the current enrollment will have on future projections. Using the Cohort Survival method, the decrease in enrollment of 4.22% in October 2020 will skew enrollment projections for 2021 and beyond. Some of the assumptions made in calculating projections for the 2021-22 school year are: 1. Kindergarten enrollment will return to pre-pandemic levels. a. ASD Kindergarten classes are approximately 5% of births in King County. In the year 2016, there were 26,011 live births in King County projecting approximately 1,300 students will be in Kindergarten in October 2021. 2. 2020-21 Kindergarteners who will be first graders in 2021 will return to “normal” pre- COVID levels. 3. ASD will realize the enrollment growth due to new housing in 2021. Calculations were made to create cohort scenarios based upon the following survival ratios: 3- year average, 3-year weighted average, 6-year average, 6-year median, and the 10-year average. Two of the scenarios (3-year weighted average and 3-year average) were not considered because of the impact October 2020 had on the calculation. The decision was made to use the 6-year median scenario which is found in Table 2 below. Page 223 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 10 Page 224 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 11 Student Generation Factors Planned residential development data is collected to determine the number of new residential units that may be built in the near future. The projected units will have the appropriate Student Generation Factor applied to determine the number of new students that planned residential development might yield. This data was obtained through discussions with the major developers within the District boundaries, the City of Algona, Auburn, Kent, Pacific, King County, and District officials. The student population by residence includes all approved and tentative tract maps in addition to any planned or proposed development that possibly will occur within the project timeframe. The planned residential development information and phasing estimates are a snapshot of the District as of this time. The information may change and is updated annually. Closely related to the planned residential development units are Student Generation Factors. When applied to planned residential development units, the Student Generation Factors determine how many additional students will be generated from new construction within the District. Two sets of data are used to calculate Student Generation Factors: current student enrollment and current housing data. This information associates each student with a housing unit. Two general housing categories are analyzed: Single Family and Multi-Family. Data showing the number of students generated from previous single- and multi-family developments generates the Student Generation Factor to be applied to future developments. The tables on the next two pages show the information for both single-and multi-family developments. The components include: ● “Development Name” is a list of developments in process of filling occupancy. Fully occupied developments stay on the list for five years contributing to the Student Generation Factor. Once the five years is up, the development is removed from the list. This component includes the name of the development, year of full occupancy (if applicable), the number of units, the amount of current units occupancy and the remaining units to be occupied. ● “Feeder Pattern” shows the elementary, middle and high school feeder pattern associated with the development. ● “Actual Students” is the data of actual students generated from the units already occupied. ● “Student Generation Factors” is the calculation of actual students divided by the number of occupied units. ● “Single Family--2021 and beyond” lists the developments that are in process, but have not yet started to occupy units. ● The units for these developments are multiplied by the Student Generation Factor for each to determine the “Estimated Students Based on Student Generation Factors” Page 225 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 12 The table at the bottom of the page shows an estimated timeline of when the unoccupied units are scheduled to be occupied. Table 3 shows the single- and multiple-family units to be occupied, the estimated number of students generated and a timeline by year of when those students would potentially be enrolled. The bottom table reflects a cumulative number over a period of 7 school years. The final page repeats enrollment projections by grade and summarized into grade bands. Table 5 takes the projected enrollment by school year and added the projected students generated for each school year to get an updated total projected enrollment. Page 226 of 967 13 SINGLE FAMILY Elem Middle HS Total Elem Middle HS Total Alicia Glenn 2016 28 28 0 Elementary 16 6 10 13 29 0.214 0.357 0.464 1.036 Anthem (formerly Megan's Meadows)2018 13 13 0 Ilalko 14 4 1 19 1.077 0.308 0.077 1.462 Bridges 380 355 25 Aurthur Jacobsen 69 31 57 157 0.194 0.087 0.161 0.442 Canyon Creek 2018 151 151 0 Evergreen Hts.29 9 9 47 0.192 0.060 0.060 0.311 Dulcinea 2018 6 6 0 Lea Hill 1 2 0 3 0.167 0.333 0.000 0.500 Hastings 10 7 3 Evergreen Hts.0 0 0 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Hazel View 2018 22 22 0 Lea Hill 8 8 4 20 0.364 0.364 0.182 0.909 Kendall Ridge 2015 106 106 0 Elementary 16 28 13 14 55 0.264 0.123 0.132 0.519 Lakeland East Portola 2015 130 130 0 Bowman Creek 43 26 32 101 0.331 0.200 0.246 0.777 Lakeland Hills Estates 2017 66 66 0 Bowman Creek 21 8 11 40 0.318 0.121 0.167 0.606 Edgeview at Lakeland Hills 2015 368 368 0 Bowman Creek 81 40 50 171 0.220 0.109 0.136 0.465 Lakeland: Pinnacle Estates 2018 99 99 0 Bowman Creek 51 32 24 107 0.515 0.323 0.242 1.081 Villas at Lakeland Hills 2015 81 81 0 Bowman Creek 30 15 7 52 0.370 0.185 0.086 0.642 Lozier Ranch 18 4 14 Chinook 0 0 0 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Monterey Park 2016 238 238 0 Evergreen Hts.50 30 29 109 0.210 0.126 0.122 0.458 Mountain View 2018 55 55 0 Evergreen Hts.6 0 7 13 0.109 0.000 0.127 0.236 Omnia Palisades Plate 16 3 13 Alpac 0 1 1 2 0.000 0.333 0.333 0.667 Seremounte 2019 30 30 0 Aurthur Jacobsen 7 5 8 20 0.233 0.167 0.267 0.667 Sonata Hills 2017 69 69 0 Lea Hill 10 2 8 20 0.145 0.029 0.116 0.290 Spencer Place 2017 13 13 0 Hazelwood 10 7 3 20 0.769 0.538 0.231 1.538 Vasiliy 8 1 7 Terminal Park 0 0 0 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Willow Place 11 10 1 Elementary 16 0 0 4 4 0.000 0.000 0.400 0.400 Totals 1918 1855 63 464 243 282 989 0.250 0.131 0.152 0.533 Auburn School District Development Growth since 1/1/15 May 2020 (Based on Oct 1, 2019 Enrollment) Development Name Year of Full Occupancy Units/ Parcels Current Occupancy To Be Occupied Feeder Elementary Actual Students Student Generation Factors For purposes of this 2021 update, the District is choosing to continue to use the 2020 Student Generation Factor data given that remote learning and COVID-related enrollment disruption likely presents an inaccurate data set of the students generated from recent new development. The District will obtain updated data to calculate Student Generation Factors for the 2022 update to this Plan. Page 227 of 967 14 SINGLE FAMILY--2020 and beyond Middle HS Total Anderson Acres 14 0 14 2 2 7 Backbone Ridge 7 0 7 1 1 4 Bridle Estates 18 0 18 2 3 10 Hastings 10 *10 0 10 1 2 5 Greenvale 17 0 17 2 3 Lakeland: Forest Glen At ..30 0 30 4 5 16 Lakeland: Park Ridge 256 0 256 34 39 136 Lakeland: River Rock*14 0 14 2 2 7 Pacific Lane 11 0 11 1 2 6 Ridge At Tall Timbers 104 0 104 14 16 55 Richardson BLA/Plat 6 0 6 1 1 3 Huntionton Woods 74 0 74 10 11 39 Topaz Short Plat 4 0 4 1 1 2 Oxbow Acres 3 0 3 0 0 2 Wyncrest II 41 0 41 5 6 22 Wesport Capital 306 0 306 40 47 163 Current Partially Occupied Developments 1918 1855 63 8 10 34 2833 978 Totals 128 149 521 * currently under construction 8 64 4 For purposes of this 2021 update, the District is choosing to continue to use the 2020 Student Generation Factor data given that remote learning and COVID-related enrollment disruption likely presents an inaccurate data set of the students generated from recent new development. The District will obtain updated data to calculate Student Generation Factors for the 2022 update to this Plan. 19 1 1 26 2 3 10 77 16 245 Current Occupancy To Be Occupied 3 4 4 2 5 Student Generation Factors Elem Auburn School District Development Growth since 1/1/15 May 2020 (Based on Oct 1, 2019 Enrollment) Estimated Students Based on Development Name Units/ Parcels Page 228 of 967 15 MULTI FAMILY Elem Middle HS Total Elem Middle HS Total Promenade Apts 2018 294 294 0 Lea Hill 205 98 90 393 0.697 0.333 0.306 1.337 The Villas at Auburn 2018 295 295 0 Washington 50 11 13 74 0.169 0.037 0.044 0.251 Totals 589 589 0 255 109 103 467 0.433 0.185 0.175 0.793 2020 and beyond Sundallen Condos 48 0 48 21 9 8 38 Auburn Town Center Apt 226 0 226 98 42 40 179 Copper Gate Apt.500 0 500 216 93 87 396 Current Partially Occupied Developments 589 589 0 0 0 0 0 1363 774 Total 335 143 135 614 Feeder Elementary Actual Students Student Generation Factors Auburn School District Development Growth since 1/1/15 May 2020 (Based on Oct 1, 2019 Enrollment) For purposes of this 2021 update, the District is choosing to continue to use the 2020 Student Generation Factor data given that remote learning and COVID-related enrollment disruption likely presents an inaccurate data set of the students generated from recent new development. The District will obtain updated data to calculate Student Generation Factors for the 2022 update to this Plan. Units/ Parcels Units/ Parcels Current Occupancy To Be Occupied Estimated Students Based on Student Generation Factors Development Name Year of Full Occupancy Current Occupancy To Be Occupied Page 229 of 967 16 BASE DATA - BUILDOUT SCHEDULE ASSUMPTIONS:2021 Single Family Multi-Family Elementary 0.25 0.433 2. Some development data received from Davis Demographics. Middle 0.131 0.185 High 0.152 0.175 Total 0.533 0.793 TABLE 3 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Single Family Units 22 65 82 44 9 1 1 224 Elementary (K-5)6 16 21 11 2 0 0 56 Middle (6-8)3 9 11 6 1 0 0 29 High (9-12)3 10 12 7 1 0 0 34 Total K-12 12 35 44 23 5 1 1 119 Multi-Family Units 350 126 0 0 0 0 0 476 Elementary (K-5)152 55 0 0 0 0 0 206 Middle (6-8)65 23 0 0 0 0 0 88 High (9-12)61 22 0 0 0 0 0 83 Total K-12 278 100 0 0 0 0 0 377 Total Housing Units 372 191 82 44 9 1 1 700 Projected Students Elementary (K-5)157 71 21 11 2 0 0 262 Middle (6-8)68 32 11 6 1 0 0 117 High (9-12)65 32 12 7 1 0 0 117 Total K-12 289 135 44 23 5 1 1 497 Cumulative Projection 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 Elementary (K-5)157 228 248 259 262 262 262 Middle (6-8)68 99 110 116 117 117 117 High (9-12)65 97 109 116 117 117 117 Total K-12 289 424 468 491 496 496 497 STUDENT GENERATION FACTORS 1. Build out estimates are received from developers. Units to be Occupied Projected Students Projected Students Page 230 of 967 17 TABLE 4 Enrollment Projections by Grade GRADE 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 Kinder 1,038 1,308 1,271 1,224 1,212 1,254 1,240 1 1,236 1,066 1,344 1,306 1,258 1,245 1,288 2 1,243 1,263 1,090 1,373 1,335 1,285 1,272 3 1,243 1,268 1,289 1,112 1,401 1,362 1,311 4 1,257 1,267 1,293 1,313 1,133 1,428 1,388 5 1,294 1,274 1,284 1,310 1,331 1,148 1,447 6 1,306 1,287 1,267 1,276 1,302 1,323 1,142 7 1,319 1,330 1,310 1,290 1,300 1,326 1,348 8 1,264 1,335 1,346 1,326 1,305 1,315 1,342 9*1,351 1,431 1,511 1,523 1,501 1,477 1,489 10 1,376 1,391 1,473 1,555 1,568 1,545 1,521 11 1,174 1,291 1,304 1,382 1,459 1,471 1,449 12 1,090 1,140 1,253 1,266 1,341 1,416 1,428 Totals 16,191 16,650 17,034 17,257 17,446 17,596 17,665 *Grades 9-12 include Full-Time Running Start, Open Doors and Grad Alliance program enrollment. TABLE 4a Enrollment Projections by Grade Band 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 K-5 7,311 7,446 7,571 7,638 7,670 7,722 7,946 6-8 3,889 3,952 3,923 3,892 3,907 3,965 3,832 9-12 4,991 5,253 5,541 5,726 5,869 5,910 5,887 Totals 16,191 16,651 17,035 17,256 17,446 17,596 17,665 TABLE 5 Enrollment Projections by Grade Band plus Estimated Students Generated Based upon Developments 2020-21 projection projected students generated total projection projection projected students generated total projection projection projected students generated total projection projection projected students generated total projection projection projected students generated total projection K-5 7,311 7,446 157 7,603 7,571 71 7,642 7,638 21 7,659 7,670 11 7,681 7,722 2 7,724 6-8 3,889 3,952 68 4,020 3,923 32 3,955 3,892 11 3,903 3,907 6 3,913 3,965 1 3,966 9-12 4,991 5,253 65 5,318 5,541 32 5,573 5,726 12 5,738 5,869 7 5,876 5,910 1 5,911 Totals 16,191 16,651 289 16,940 17,035 135 17,170 17,256 44 17,300 17,446 23 17,469 17,596 5 17,601 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 Page 231 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 Capital Facilities Plan 2021 through 2027 Section III Standard of Service Page 232 of 967 19 The School Impact Fee Ordinances adopted by King County, the City of Auburn, City of Black Diamond and the City of Kent indicatethat each school district must establish a "Standard of Service" in order to ascertain the overall capacity to houseits projected student population. The Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes square footage "capacity" guidelines for computing state funding support. The fundamental purpose of the OSPI 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 OSPI 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 OSPI 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 As reflected in enrollment numbers for the 2020-21 school year, the Auburn School District operates fifteen elementary schools housing 7,311 students in grades K through 5. The four middle schools house 3,889 students in grades 6 through 8. The District operates three comprehensive senior high schools and one alternative high school, housing 4,991 students in grades 9 through 12. (Source: October 1, 2020 Enrollment) CLASS SIZE The number of pupils per classroom determines the number of classrooms required to house the student population. Specialists create additional space needs. Class sizes are subject to collective bargaining agreements. 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 20.33 students per teacher. Consistent with this staffing limit, room capacities are set at 20.33 students per room at grades K - 5. At grades 6 - 8 the limit is set at 28.02 students per room. At grades 9 - 12 the limit is set at 28.74 students per room. The OSPI 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. STRUCTURED LEARNING FOR DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED SPECIAL EDUCATION The Auburn School District operates a structured learning program for students with moderate to severe disabilities at the elementary school level which currently uses 15 classrooms to provide for 135 students. The housing requirements for this program are provided for in the OSPI space guidelines. No loss of capacity is expected unless population with disabilities grows at a disproportionate rate compared to total elementary population. PATHWAYS SPECIAL EDUCATION The Auburn School District operates an adaptive behavior program for students with behavior disabilities at the elementary school level. The program uses three classrooms to provide for 24 students. The housing requirements for this program exceed the OSPI space allocations. (Three classrooms @ 20.33 - 8 = 12.33) Loss of Permanent Capacity 3 rooms @ 12.33 each =(37) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 12.33 each =0 Total Capacity Loss =(37) Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 STANDARD OF SERVICE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS Page 233 of 967 20 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 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. Twenty standard classrooms are required to house this program. The housing requirements for this program are provided for in the OSPI space guidelines at Lakeland Hills, Dick Scobee, and Bowman Creek Elementary Schools. Continued loss of capacity is expected as growth in program is larger than the total elementary population. Loss of Permanent Capacity 17 (20-3) rooms @ 20.33 each =(346) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 20.33 each =0 Total Capacity Loss =(346) 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 @ 20.33 each =(20) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 20.33 each =0 Total Capacity Loss =(20) EARLY CHILDHOOD SPECIAL EDUCATION The Auburn School District operates a pre-school program for young children below age five with disabilities. This program is housed at eleven different elementary schools and currently uses 13 standard classrooms. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the OSPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 13 rooms @ 20.33 each =(264) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 20.33 each =0 Total Capacity Loss =(264) 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 OSPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 5 rooms @ 20.33 each =(102) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 20.33 each =0 Total Capacity Loss =(102) MUSIC ROOMS The Auburn School District elementary music programs require one acoustically-modified classroom at each school for music instruction. The housing requirements are not provided for in the OSPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 15 rooms @ 20.33 each =(305) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 20.33 each =0 Total Capacity Loss =(305) Page 234 of 967 21 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 STANDARD OF SERVICE ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS PROGRAM The Auburn School District operates pullout programs at the elementary school level for students learning English as a second language. This program requires 30 standard classrooms that are not provided for in the OSPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 30 rooms @ 20.33 each =(610) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 20.33 each =0 Total Capacity Loss =(610) SECOND GRADE TOSA PROGRAM The Auburn School District provides a TOSA reading specialist program for eight 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 OSPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 8 rooms @ 20.33 each =(163) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 20.33 each =0 Total Capacity Loss =(163) 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 was originally created from the I-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 15 rooms @ 20.33 each =(305) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 20.33 each =0 Total Capacity Loss =(305) EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM The Auburn School District operates an ECEAP program for 236 pre-school aged children in twelve sections of half-day length and one full-day program. The program is housed at seven elementary schools and utilizes seven standard elementary classrooms and one additional classroom space and seven auxiliary office spaces. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the OSPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 7 rooms @ 20.33 each =(142) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 20.33 each =0 Total Capacity Loss =(142) Page 235 of 967 22 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 STANDARD OF SERVICE 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. Eleven classrooms are required at the middle school level to provide for approximately 330 students. The housing requirements for this program are not entirely provided for in the OSPI space guidelines. PATHWAYS SPECIAL EDUCATION The Auburn School District offers a self-contained program for students with moderate to severe behavior disabilities. The program is housed at one of the middle schools and uses two classrooms. One of the two classrooms for this program are provided for in the OSPI space allocations. Loss of Permanent Capacity 1 rooms @ 28.02 each =(28) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 28.02 each =0 Total Capacity Loss (28) STRUCTURED LEARNING CENTER AND DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED SPECIAL EDUCATION The Auburn School District operates seven structured learning classrooms at the middle school level for students with moderate to severe disabilities. Two of the seven classrooms for this program are provided for in the OSPI space allocations. Loss of Permanent Capacity 5 rooms @ 28.02 each =(140) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 28.02 each =0 Total Capacity Loss (140) NATIVE AMERICAN RESOURCE ROOM The Auburn School District operates one resource room to support the education of Native American students at the middle school level. One standard classroom is fully dedicated to serve these students. Loss of Permanent Capacity 1 room @ 28.02 each =(28) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 28.02 each =0 Total Capacity Loss (28) ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS PROGRAM The Auburn School District operates a pullout program at the middle school level for English Language Learner students. This program requires ten standard classrooms that are not provide for in the OSPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 10 rooms @ 28.02 each =(280) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 28.02 each =0 Total Capacity Loss (280) MIDDLE SCHOOLS Page 236 of 967 23 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 STANDARD OF SERVICE ROOM UTILIZATION The Auburn School District provides a comprehensive middle school program that includes elective options in special interest areas. Facilities to accommodate special interest activities are not amenable to standard classroom usage. The district averages 95% utilization of all available teaching stations. OSPI Report #3 dated 12/14/11 identifies 148 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 @ 28.02 each =(224) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 28.02 each =0 Total Capacity Loss (224) Page 237 of 967 24 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 STANDARD OF SERVICE NATIVE AMERICAN RESOURCE ROOM The Auburn School District operates one resource room to support the education of Native American students at the high school level. One standard classroom is fully dedicated to serve these students. Loss of Permanent Capacity 1 room @ 28.74 each =(29) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 28.74 each =0 Total Capacity Loss (29) SENIOR HIGH COMPUTER LABS The Auburn School District support standard allows for one open computer lab at each of the senior high schools. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the OSPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 4 rooms @ 28.74 each =(115) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 28.74 each =0 Total Capacity Loss (115) ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS PROGRAM The Auburn School District operates a pullout program at three comprehensive high schools for English Language Learner students. This program requires twelve standard classrooms that are not provided for in the OSPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 12 rooms @ 28.74 each =(345) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 28.74 each =0 Total Capacity Loss (345) PATHWAYS SPECIAL EDUCATION The Auburn School District offers a self-contained program for students with moderate to severe behavior diabilities. The program is housed at one of the high schools and uses two classrooms. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the OSPI space allocations. Loss of Permanent Capacity 2 rooms @ 28.74 each =(57) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 28.74 each =0 Total Capacity Loss (57) STRUCTURED LEARNING CENTER PROGRAM The Auburn School District operates twelve structured learning center classrooms for students with moderate to severe disabilities. This program is housed at three high schools requiring standard classrooms that are not provided for in the OSPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 12 rooms @ 28.74 each =(345) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 28.74 each =0 Total Capacity Loss (345) SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS Page 238 of 967 25 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 STANDARD OF SERVICE 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 high school program requires 15 classrooms to provide program to meet educational needs of the students. The OSPI space guidelines provide for one of the 15 teaching stations. Loss of Permanent Capacity 14 rooms @ 28.74 each =(402) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 28.74 each =0 Total Capacity Loss (402) PERFORMING ARTS CENTERS Auburn High School includes 25,000 square feet used exclusively for a Performing Arts Center. The OSPI 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 OSPI capacity guidelines, 25,000 square feet computes to 208 unhoused students or 7.25 classrooms. Loss of Permanent Capacity 7.25 rooms @ 28.74 each =(208) 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. There are 185 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 @ 28.74 each =(287) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 28.74 each =0 Total Capacity Loss (287) STANDARD OF SERVICE COMPUTED TOTALS ELEMENTARY Loss of Permanent Capacity (2,294) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 Total Capacity Loss (2,294) MIDDLE SCHOOL Loss of Permanent Capacity (701) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 Total Capacity Loss (701) SENIOR HIGH Loss of Permanent Capacity (1,789) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 Total Capacity Loss (1,789) TOTAL Loss of Permanent Capacity (4,783) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 Total Capacity Loss (4,783) Page 239 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 Capital Facilities Plan 2021 through 2027 Section IV Inventory of Facilities Page 240 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 INVENTORY OF FACILITIES 27 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 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. District School Facilities Building Capacity Acres Address Elementary Schools Washington Elementary 494 5.33 20 E Street Northeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Terminal Park Elementary 415 6.09 1101 D Street Southeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Dick Scobee Elementary 819 8.90 1031 14th Street Northeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Pioneer Elementary 441 8.40 2301 M Street Southeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Chinook Elementary 461 10.99 3502 Auburn Way South, Auburn WA, 98092 Lea Hill Elementary 450 20.24 30908 124th Avenue Southeast, Auburn WA, 98092 Gildo Rey Elementary 566 10.05 1005 37th Street Southeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Evergreen Heights Elem. 463 10.10 5602 South 316th, Auburn WA, 98001 Alpac Elementary 505 10.68 310 Milwaukee Boulevard North, Pacific WA, 98047 Lake View Elementary 581 16.44 16401 Southeast 318th Street, Auburn WA, 98092 Hazelwood Elementary 594 13.08 11815 Southeast 304th Street, Auburn WA, 98092 Ilalko Elementary 592 14.23 301 Oravetz Place Southeast, Auburn WA, 98092 Lakeland Hills Elementary 594 12.00 1020 Evergreen Way SE, Auburn WA, 98092 Arthur Jacobsen Elementary 614 10.02 29205 132nd Street SE, Auburn WA, 98092 Bowman Creek Elementary 812 22.03 5701 Kersey Way SE, Auburn, WA 98092 ELEMENTARY CAPACITY 8401 Middle Schools Cascade Middle School 837 16.94 1015 24th Street Northeast, Auburn WA, 98002 Olympic Middle School 974 17.45 839 21st Street SE, Auburn WA, 98002 Rainier Middle School 843 25.54 30620 116th Avenue Southeast, Auburn WA, 98092 Mt. Baker Middle School 837 30.00 620 37th Street Southeast, Auburn WA, 98002 MIDDLE SCHOOL CAPACITY 3491 Senior High Schools West Auburn HS 233 5.26 401 West Main Street, Auburn WA, 98001 Auburn HS 2,127 23.74 711 East Main Street, Auburn WA, 98002 Auburn Riverside HS 1,387 35.32 501 Oravetz Road, Auburn WA, 98092 Auburn Mountainview HS 1,443 39.42 28900 124th Ave SE, Auburn WA, 98092 HIGH SCHOOL CAPACITY 5,190 TOTAL CAPACITY 17082 Table Permanent Facilities IV.1 @ OSPI Rated Capacity (March 2021) Page 241 of 967 nmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmknmnmAdministration BuildingAlpac ESArthur Jacobsen ESAuburn HSAuburn Mountainview HSAuburn Riverside HSBowman Creek ESCascade MSChinook ESDick Scobee ESElementary 16Evergreen Heights ESGildo Rey ESHazelwood ESIlalko ESLake View ESLakeland Hills ESLea Hill ESMt Baker MSOlympic MSPioneer ESRainier MSTerminal Park ESWashington ESWest Auburn HSS T A T E R O U T E 1 6 7AUBURN WAY NAUBURN WAY SA U B U R N -E N U M C L A W R D S E SR 167SR 167SR 18SR 18Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID,IGN, and the GIS User CommunityAUrban Growth BoundarySSSnlEPage 242 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 INVENTORY OF FACILITIES 29 TABLE TEMPORARY/RELOCATABLE IV.2 FACILITIES INVENTORY (June 2021) Elementary Location 2020-21 2021-22 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 2025-2026 2026-2027 Washington 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 Terminal Park 8 7 0 0 0 0 0 Dick Scobee 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pioneer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chinook 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lea Hill 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gildo Rey 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 Evergreen Heights 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Alpac 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 Lake View 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Hazelwood 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Ilalko 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 Lakeland Hills 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 Arthur Jacobsen 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Bowman Creek 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Elementary #16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL UNITS 72 51 44 44 44 44 44 TOTAL CAPACITY 1,464 1,037 895 895 895 895 895 Middle School Location 2020-21 2021-22 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 2025-2026 2026-2027 Cascade 1 4 6 6 6 6 6 Olympic 4 8 8 8 8 8 8 Rainier 9 11 11 11 11 11 11 Mt. Baker 10 12 12 12 12 12 12 TOTAL UNITS 24 35 37 37 37 37 37 TOTAL CAPACITY 672 981 1,037 1,037 1,037 1,037 1,037 Sr. High School Location 2020-21 2021-22 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 2025-2026 2026-2027 West Auburn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Auburn High School 0 2 4 4 4 4 4 Auburn High School - *TAP 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Auburn Riverside 13 15 16 16 16 16 16 Auburn Mountainview 4 6 8 8 8 8 8 TOTAL UNITS 18 24 29 29 29 29 29 TOTAL CAPACITY 517 690 833 833 833 833 833 *TAP - Transition Assistance Program for 18-21 year old students with special needs. COMBINED TOTAL UNITS 114 110 110 110 110 110 110 COMBINED TOTAL CAPACITY 2,654 2,707 2,765 2,765 2,765 2,765 2,765 Page 243 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 Capital Facilities Plan 2021 through 2027 Section V Pupil Capacity Page 244 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 PUPIL CAPACITY 31 While the Auburn School District uses the OSPI 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 funded facilities. The combined effect of these adjustments is shown on Line B in Tables V.1 and V.2 below. Table V.1 shows the Distict's capacity with relocatable units included and Table V.2 without these units. Table V.1 20-21 21-22 22-23 23-24 24-25 25-26 26-27 27-28 A.SPI Capacity 17,082 17,082 17,291 18,330 18,565 18,565 18,565 18,565 A.1 SPI Capacity-New Elem 650 A.2 SPI Capacity-Replacements 209 389 235 A.3 SPI Capacity-New MS 800 B.Capacity Adjustments (2,129)(2,018)(2,018)(2,018)(2,018)(2,018)(2,018)(2,018) C.Net Capacity 14,953 15,273 16,312 16,547 16,547 16,547 16,547.17,347. D.ASD Enrollment 16,702 16,650 17,034 17,257 17,446 17,596 17,665 17,665 3/E.ASD Surplus/Deficit (1,749)(1,377)(722)(710)(899)(1,049)(1,118)(318) CAPACITY ADJUSTMENTS Include Relocatable 2,654 2,765 2,765 2,765 2,765 2,765 2,765 2,765 2/Exclude SOS (pg 17)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783) Total Adjustments (2,129)(2,018)(2,018)(2,018)(2,018)(2,018)(2,018)(2,018) Table V.2 20-21 21-22 22-23 23-24 24-25 25-26 26-27 27-28 A.SPI Capacity 17,082 17,082 17,291 18,330 18,565 18,565 18,565 18,565 A.1 SPI Capacity-New Elem 650 A.2 SPI Capacity-Replacements 0 209 389 235 A.3 SPI Capacity-New MS 800 B.Capacity Adjustments (4,783)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783) C.Net Capacity 12,299 12,508 13,547 13,782 13,782 13,782 28,364 14,582 D.ASD Enrollment 16,702 16,650 17,034 17,257 17,446 17,596 17,665 17,665 3/E.ASD Surplus/Deficit (4,403)(4,142)(3,487)(3,475)(3,664)(3,814)10,699 (3,083) CAPACITY ADJUSTMENTS 2/Exclude SOS (pg 17)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783) Total Adjustments (4,783)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783)(4,783) 1/New facilities shown in 2019-20 through 2023-24 are funded by the 2016 School Bond Issue. 2/The Standard of Service represents 27.69% of OSPI capacity. When new facilities are added the Standard of Service computations are decreased to 24.16% of SPI capacity. 3/Students beyond the capacity are accommodated in other spaces (commons, library, theater, shared teaching space). Capacity WITH relocatables Capacity WITHOUT relocatables Page 245 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 PUPIL CAPACITY 32 A.Elementary Schools Building 20-21 21-22 22-23 23-24 24-25 25-26 26-27 27-28 Washington 494 494 494 494 494 494 494 494 Terminal Park 415 415 415 650 650 650 650 650 Dick Scobee 819 819 819 819 819 819 819 819 Pioneer 441 650 650 650 650 650 650 650 Chinook 461 461 650 650 650 650 650 650 Lea Hill 450 450 650 650 650 650 650 650 Gildo Rey 566 566 566 566 566 566 566 566 Evergreen Heights 463 463 463 463 463 463 463 463 Alpac 505 505 505 505 505 505 505 505 Lake View 581 581 581 581 581 581 581 581 Hazelwood 594 594 594 594 594 594 594 594 Ilalko 592 592 592 592 592 592 592 592 Lakeland Hills 594 594 594 594 594 594 594 594 Arthur Jacobsen 614 614 614 614 614 614 614 614 Bowman Creek 812 812 812 812 812 812 812 812 Elementary #16 ----650 650 650 650 650 650 ELEMENTARY CAPACITY 8,401 8,610 9,649 9,884 9,884 9,884 9,884 9,884 B.Middle Schools Building 20-21 21-22 22-23 23-24 24-25 25-26 26-27 27-28 Cascade 837 837 837 837 837 837 837 837 Olympic 974 974 974 974 974 974 974 974 Rainier 843 843 843 843 843 843 843 843 Mt. Baker 837 837 837 837 837 837 837 837 Middle School #5 --------------800 MIDDLE SCHOOL CAPACITY 3,491 3,491 3,491 3,491 3,491 3,491 3,491 4,291 C.Senior High Schools Building 20-21 21-22 22-23 23-24 24-25 25-26 26-27 27-28 West Auburn 233 233 233 233 233 233 233 233 Auburn 2,127 2,127 2,127 2,127 2,127 2,127 2,127 2,127 Auburn Riverside 1,387 1,387 1,387 1,387 1,387 1,387 1,387 1,387 Auburn Mountainview 1,443 1,443 1,443 1,443 1,443 1,443 1,443 1,443 HIGH SCHOOL CAPACITY 5,190 5,190 5,190 5,190 5,190 5,190 5,190 5,190 COMBINED CAPACITY 17,082 17,291 18,330 18,565 18,565 18,565 18,565 19,365 @ SPI Rated Capacity (March 2021) PERMANENT FACILITIES Page 246 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 Capital Facilities Plan 2021 through 2027 Section VI Capital Construction Plan Page 247 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN 34 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 further 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, 2014, and 2020, replacement technology levies were 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 tax assessments. A proposition was approved by the voters on April 28, 1998 that provided $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 from an area that includes a large development known as Lakeland South. Lakeland South at that time was 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. Property for the third comprehensive high school was acquired in 1999. The Board placed the proposition to construct a new high school on the ballot four times. Each election was extremely close to passing. After the fourth failure a community meeting was held and from that meeting the Board determined need for further community study. 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 included 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. Page 248 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN 35 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 Board directed the administration to begin the planning and design for Elementary #13 and Elementary #14. In the fall of 2004, the Board passed Resolution No. 1054 to place two elementary schools on the ballot in February 2005. 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 located in the Lea Hill area and opened in the fall of 2007. These two elementary schools were built to accommodate the housing growth in Lakeland Hills and Lea Hill areas of the school district. 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. 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 the Kent School District to the Auburn School District effective September 29, 2006. In October of 2008, after two years of review and study, a Steering Committee made recommendations to the Board regarding the capital improvements program to modernize or replace facilities as recommended by the 2004-05 Citizen’s Ad Hoc Committee. These recommendations, based on specific criteria, led to the Board placing a school improvement bond and capital improvements levy on the ballot in March 2009. Voters did not approve either measure that would have updated 24 facilities and replaced three aging schools. The Board decided to place only a six- year Capital Levy on the ballot in November of 2009, which passed at 55.17%. The levy funded $46.4 million of needed improvement projects at 24 sites over the following seven school years. Planning for the replacement of aging schools was started with educational specifications and schematic design process for the replacement of Auburn High School. The District acquired a site for a future high school in 2008 and a second site for a future middle school in 2009. The District also continued efforts to acquire property around Auburn High School. The Special Education Transition Facility opened in February of 2010. This facility is designed for students with disabilities that are 18 to 21 years old. In the November 2012 election, the community supported the $110 million bond issue for the Auburn High School Modernization and Reconstruction Project at 62%. Construction began in February 2013. The entire new building was occupied by Auburn High School students and staff in the fall of 2015, with site improvements being completed during the 2015-16 school year. Page 249 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN 36 In January 2015, a citizen’s ad hoc committee was convened by direction of the Board to address growth and facilities. The major recommendations were to construct two new elementary schools in the next four years and to acquire 3 new elementary school sites as soon as possible. In the November 2016 election, the community supported the $456 million bond issue for the replacement of six schools and the construction of two new elementary schools at 62.83%. Construction for the replacement of Olympic Middle School began in May 2018 and was completed in Fall 2019. Construction for New Elementary School #15 began in May 2019 and was completed in Fall 2020. Construction for the replacement of Dick Scobee Elementary School began in June 2019 and was completed in Fall 2020. Construction for New Elementary School #16 and replacement of Pioneer Elementary School began in May 2020 and will be completed in Fall 2021. Construction for replacement of Chinook and Lea HIll Elementary Schools began in June 2021 and will be completed in Fall of 2022. Construction for replacement of Terminal Park Elementary School will begin in June 2022 and will be completed in Fall of 2023. We anticipate running a Capital Bond Measure in 2026. Funds will be used to construct a new middle school on property currently owned by the District, and may include funds to replace one or more existing schools. 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. 2021-27 Capital Construction Plan (May 2021) Projected Fund Project Timelines Project Funded Cost Source 21-22 22-23 23-24 24-25 25-26 26-27 27-28 Technology Modernization 2020 Yes $35,000,000 6 Year XX XX XX XX XX XX Cap. Levy 1/ Portable Relocation Yes $1,400,000 Impact Fees XX 1/ Property Purchase - 1 New Elementary Yes $7,500,000 Bond Impact Fee XX 2/ Middle School #5 Yes $112,000,000 Bond Impact Fee XX plan XX const XX const XX open 1/ Replacement of five Elementary Schools Yes $242,500,000 Bond XX const XX const XX open 1/ These funds may be secured through a combination of the 2016 Bond Issue, sale of real property, impact fees, and state matching funds. 2/ These funds may be secured through a combination of a bond issue, impact fees, and state matching funds. Page 250 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 Capital Facilities Plan 2021 through 2027 Section VII Impact Fees Page 251 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 38 IMPACT FEE COMPUTATION (Spring 2021) I. SITE COST PER RESIDENCE Formula: ((Acres x Cost per Acre)/Facility Size) x Student Factor Site Cost/ Facility Student Generation Factor Cost/Cost/ Acreage Acre Capacity Single Family Multi Family Single Family Multi Family Elem (K - 5)15 $0 650 0.2500 0.4330 $0.00 $0.00 Middle Sch (6 - 8)25 $0 800 0.1310 0.1850 $0.00 $0.00 Sr High (9 - 12)40 $0 1500 0.1520 0.1750 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 II. PERMANENT FACILITY CONSTRUCTION COST PER RESIDENCE Formula: ((Facility Cost/Facility Size) x Student Factor) x (Permanent to Total Square Footage Percentage) Facility Facility % Perm Sq Ft/Student Generation Factor Cost/Cost/ Single Family Cost Size Total Sq Ft Single Family Multi Family Single Family Multi Family Elem (K - 5)$0 650 0.9459 0.2500 0.4330 $0.00 $0.00 Mid Sch (6 - 8)$112,000,000 800 0.9459 0.1310 0.1850 $17,348.09 $24,499.22 Sr High (9 - 12)$0 1500 0.9459 0.1520 0.1750 $0.00 $0.00 $17,348.09 $24,499.22 III. TEMPORARY FACILITY CONSTRUCTION COST PER RESIDENCE Formula: ((Facility Cost/Facility Size) x Student Factor) x (Temporary to Total Square Footage Ratio) Facility Facility % Temp Sq Ft/Student Generation Factor Cost/Cost/ Single Family Cost Size Total Sq Ft Single Family Multi Family Single Family Multi Family Elem (K - 5)$200,000 20.33 0.0541 0.2500 0.4330 $133.02 $230.38 Mid Sch (6 - 8)$200,000 28.02 0.0541 0.1310 0.1850 $50.57 $71.42 Sr High (9 - 12)$200,000 28.74 0.0541 0.1520 0.1750 $57.21 $65.86 $240.79 $367.67 IV. STATE MATCH CREDIT PER RESIDENCE Formula: (Boeckh Index x SPI Footage x District Match x Student Factor) Boeckh SPI State Cost/Cost/ Index Footage Match Single Family Multi Family Single Family Multi Family Elem (K - 5)$0.00 90 62.87%0.2500 0.4330 $0.00 $0.00 Mid Sch (6 - 8)$238.22 108 62.87%0.1310 0.1850 $2,118.93 $2,992.38 Sr High (9 - 12)$0.00 130 62.87%0.1520 0.1750 $0.00 $0.00 $2,118.93 $2,992.39 Student Generation Factor Page 252 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 39 V. TAX CREDIT PER RESIDENCE Formula: Expressed as the present value of an annuity TC = PV(interest rate,discount period,average assd value x tax rate) Ave Resid Curr Dbt Serv Bnd Byr Indx Number of Tax Credit Tax Credit Assd Value Tax Rate Ann Int Rate Years Single Family Multi Family Single Family $402,640 $2.31 2.44%10 $8,165.58 Multi Family $197,141 $2.31 2.44%10 $3,998.04 VI. DEVELOPER PROVIDED FACILITY CREDIT Formula: (Value of Site or Facility/Number of dwelling units) Value No. of Units Facility Credit Single Family $0.00 1 $0.00 Multi Family $0.00 1 $0.00 FEE PER UNIT IMPACT FEES RECAP Single Multiple SUMMARY Family Family Site Costs $0.00 $0.00 Permanent Facility Const Costs $17,348.09 $24,499.22 Temporary Facility Costs $240.79 $367.67 State Match Credit ($2,118.93)($2,992.39) Tax Credit ($8,165.58)($3,998.04) FEE (No Discount)$7,304.37 $17,876.45 FEE (50% Discount)$3,652.19 $8,938.23 Less ASD Discount $0.00 $0.00 Facility Credit $0.00 $0.00 Net Fee Obligation $3,652.19 $8,938.23 Page 253 of 967 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021 through 2027 40 SINGLE FAMILY MULTI FAMILY IMPACT FEE ELEMENTS Elem Mid Sch Sr High Elem Mid Sch Sr High K - 5 6 - 8 9 - 12 K - 5 6 - 8 9 - 12 Student Factor Single Family - Auburn actual count April 2020 0.250 0.131 0.152 0.433 0.185 0.175 New Fac Capacity 650 800 1500 650 800 1500 New Facility Cost Middle School Cost Estimate May 2021 $112,000,000 $0 $112,000,000 Temp Rm Capacity ASD District Standard of Service.20.33 28.02 28.74 20.33 28.02 28.74 Grades K - 5 @ 20.33, 6 - 8 @ 28.02, & 9 - 12 @ 28.74. Temp Facility Cost Relocatables, including site work, set up, and furnishing.$200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 Site Acreage ASD District Standard or SPI Minimum 12 25 40 12 25 40 Site Cost/Acre See below $444,771 $444,771 $444,771 $444,771 $444,771 $444,771 Perm Sq Footage 15 Elementary, 4 Middle, and 4 High Schools 1,799,423 1,799,423 1,799,423 1,799,423 1,799,423 1,799,423 Temp Sq Footage 2 x 768 SF + 24 x 864 SF + 87 x 896 SF + TAP 2661 102,885 102,885 102,885 102,885 102,885 102,885 Total Sq Footage Sum of Permanent and Temporary above 1,902,308 1,902,308 1,902,308 1,902,308 1,902,308 1,902,308 % - Perm Facilities Permanent Sq. Footage divided by Total Sq. Footage 94.59%94.59%94.59%94.59%94.59%94.59% % - Temp Facilities Temporary Sq. Footage divided by Total Sq. Footage 5.41%5.41%5.41%5.41%5.41%5.41% SPI Sq Ft/Student From OSPI Regulations (WAC 392-343-035)90 108 130 90 108 130 Boeckh Index From OSPI projection for July 2020 $238.22 $238.22 $238.22 $238.22 $238.22 $238.22 Match % - State From OSPI May 2020 62.87%62.87%62.87%62.87%62.87%62.87% Match % - District Computed 37.13%37.13%37.13%37.13%37.13%37.13% Dist Aver AV King County Department of Assessments March 2020 $402,640 $402,640 $402,640 $197,141 $197,141 $197,141 Debt Serv Tax Rate Current Fiscal Year $2.31 $2.31 $2.31 $2.31 $2.31 $2.31 G. O Bond Int Rate Current Rate - (Bond Buyer 20 Index Feb. 2020 avg)2.44%2.44%2.44%2.44%2.44%2.44%e Site Cost Projections Recent Property Purchase Purchase Purchase Adjusted Projected Annual Sites Latest Date Projected Acquisitions Acreage Year Price Cost/Acre Present Day Inflation Factor Required of Acquisition Cost/Acre Elem. #16 Parcel 1 1.26 2019 $480,000 $382,166 $441,401 10.00%Elementary 2022 $489,248 Elem. #16 Parcel 2 8.19 2019 $2,959,561 $361,363 $417,374 2019 Annual 2020 Annual 2021 Annual Elem. #16 Parcel 3 0.80 2018 $460,000 $575,000 $730,538 Inflation Factor Inflation Factor Inflation Factor Total 10.25 $3,899,561 $380,593 $444,771 10.00%5%10.00% Page 254 of 967 Page 255 of 967 Page 256 of 967 Page 257 of 967 Page 258 of 967 Page 259 of 967 Page 260 of 967 Page 261 of 967 Page 262 of 967 Page 263 of 967 Page 264 of 967 Page 265 of 967 Page 266 of 967 Page 267 of 967 Page 268 of 967 Page 269 of 967 Page 270 of 967 Page 271 of 967 Page 272 of 967 Page 273 of 967 Page 274 of 967 Page 275 of 967 Page 276 of 967 Page 277 of 967 Page 278 of 967 Page 279 of 967 Page 280 of 967 POLICY/TEXT AMENDMENT (P/T) #2 INCORPORATE DIERINGER SCHOOL DISTRICT #343 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021-2027 Page 281 of 967 Page 282 of 967 Page 283 of 967 Page 284 of 967 Page 285 of 967 Page 286 of 967 Page 287 of 967 Page 288 of 967 Page 289 of 967 Page 290 of 967 Page 291 of 967 Page 292 of 967 Page 293 of 967 Page 294 of 967 Page 295 of 967 Page 296 of 967 Page 297 of 967 Page 298 of 967 IERINGER SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 343 Ed u c at in g e v e ry c hi l d f o r C on f id e n c e t od a y a nd C o nt ri bu t io n t om orro w August 24, 2021 Jeff Tate Director of Planning City of Auburn 25 West Main Street Auburn, WA 98001-4998 Subject: Dieringer School District – Mitigation Impact Fees Dear Mr. Tate: The Dieringer School District has completed the Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan for 2020-2021 to 2029-2030. In preparing the updated Capital Facilities Plan the District once more reviewed the question of the School Impact Fee Calculation. Based on the analysis of the District’s site acquisition and permanent facility costs, the Dieringer School District Board of Directors has determined that the appropriate mitigation impact fee for the permitting of a single family residence is $4,176 and $789 per unit for a multiple family residence. A review of the fees collected by the City of Auburn, on behalf of other school districts within the city, serves to support the validity of the Dieringer requested fee of $4,176 and $789 per unit for a multiple family residence. The property values within the boundaries of the Dieringer School District are the highest in Pierce County; this causes site acquisition to be expensive and contributes to overall higher construction costs than other school districts experience. Therefore, it is most appropriate for the mitigation impact fees collected on behalf of the Dieringer School District to be adjusted to more closely approximate the fees collected for other local school districts. The Dieringer School District requests that the City of Auburn adjust the mitigation impact fees collected on behalf of the District to the $4,176 and $789 per unit for a multiple family residence established in the Capital Facilities Plan for 2020-2021 to 2029-2030. Please let me know if you need further information by contacting me at (253) 862-2537. Sincerely, Michael Farmer Superintendent 1320 – 178th Avenue East * Lake Tapps, Washington 98391 * (253 )862-2537 * FAX (253) 862-8472 Page 299 of 967 DRAFT - DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE for Dieringer School District No. 343 2021 Capital Facilities Plan Issued with a 14-day comment and appeal period Description of Proposal: This threshold determination analyzes the environmental impacts associated with the following actions, which are so closely related to each other that they are in effect a single action: 1.The adoption of the Dieringer School District Amended 2021 Ten-Year Capital Facilities Plan by the Dieringer School District for the purposes of planning for the facilities needs of the District. 2.The amendment of the Pierce County Comprehensive Plan to include the Dieringer School District Amended 2021 Capital Facilities Plan as a part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the Pierce County Comprehensive Plan. 3.The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Auburn to include the Dieringer School District's Amended 2021 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Auburn. 4.The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Sumner to include the Dieringer School District's Amended 2021 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Sumner. Proponent: Dieringer School District No. 343 Page 300 of 967 Location of the Proposal: The Dieringer School District includes an area of approximately 5.5 square miles. Portions of the cities of Auburn and Sumner fall within the District's boundaries, as do parts of unincorporated Pierce County. Lead Agency: Dieringer School District No. 343 is the lead agency pursuant to WAC 197-11-926. The lead agency for this proposal has determined that the proposal does not pose a probable significant adverse impact to the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21 C.030 (2) (c). This decision was made after a review of the completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public upon request. This Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2). The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date of issue. Comments must be submitted by 4:00 p.m., September 9, 2021. The responsible official will reconsider the DNS based on timely comments and may retain, modify, or, if significant adverse impacts are likely, withdraw the DNS. If the DNS is retained, it will be final after the expiration of the comment deadline. Responsible Official: Michael Farmer Superintendent Dieringer School District No. 343 Telephone: (253) 862-2537 Address: 1320 178th Ave E. Lake Tapps, Washington 98391 Appeals of this determination are governed by Board Policy No. 6890 which can be obtained from Michael Farmer, Superintendent, Dieringer School District No. 343, 1320 178th Ave E., Lake Tapps, Washington 98391 and pursuant to WAC 680 and RCW 43.21 C.075. Date of Issue: Date Published August 24, 2021 August 30, 2021 Page 301 of 967 ENVIRONMENTAL CHFCKI ISTWAC 197-11-960 Environmental Checklist.Purpose of Checklist:The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21 C RCW, requires allgovernmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before makingdecisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals withprobable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklistis to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and toreduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whetheran EIS is required.Instructions for Applicants:This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about yourproposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impactsof your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, withthe most precise information known, or give the best description you can.You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. Inmost cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project planswithout the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not applyto your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the questions nowmay avoid unnecessary delays later.Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, andlandmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmentalagencies can assist you.The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over aperiod of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describeyour proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may askyou to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining ifthere may be significant adverse impact.Use of checklist for nonproject proposals:Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered"does not apply." In addition, complete the Supplemental Sheet for nonproject actions (part D).For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and"property or site" should be read as "proposal," "prepares," and "affected geographic area,"respectively.Page 302 of 967 A.BACKGROUND 1.Name of proposed project, if applicable The adoption of a ten-year Capital Facilities Plan by the Dieringer School District. The Comprehensive Plans of Pierce County, City of Auburn and City of Sumner have been and/or will be amended to include the Dieringer School District 2021 Capital Facilities Plan in the Capital Facilities Plan Element of each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. A copy of the District's Plan is available for review in the District Office. 2.Name of applicant: Dieringer School District No. 343 3.Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Dieringer School District No. 343 1320 178th Ave E. Lake Tapps, WA 98391 Contact Person: Michael Farmer, Superintendent Telephone: (253) 862-2537 4.Date checklist prepared: August 24, 2021. 5.Agency requesting checklist: Dieringer School District No. 343 6.Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The 2021 Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan was adopted in August 16, 2021 and forwarded to Pierce County, Cities of Auburn and Sumner for possible inclusion in each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. The Capital Facilities Plan will be updated annually. Site-specific projects have been or will be subject to project-specific environmental review. 7.Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. The Capital Facilities Plan reviews the purchase of additional property and the construction of a new elementary school. Page 303 of 967 8.List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. The above-referenced projects will undergo environmental review at the time of formal proposal. 9.Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No. 10.List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Pierce County and Cities of Auburn and Sumner will review and approve the Capital Facilities Plan for the purposes of impact fee ordinances and will need to adopt the Plan as an amendment to the Capital Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive Plans of Pierce County and Cities of Auburn and Sumner. 11.Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) This is a non-project action. This proposal involves the adoption of the Dieringer School District 2021 Capital Facilities Plan for the purpose of planning the facilities needs of the District and for inclusion in the Capital Facilities Plan element and possible amendment of the Comprehensive Plans for Pierce County, City of Auburn and City of Sumner. A copy of the Capital Facilities Plan may be viewed at the Dieringer School District Office. 12.Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The 2021 Capital Facilities Plan will affect the Dieringer School District. The District includes an area of approximately 5.5 square miles. Portions of the City of Auburn and the City of Sumner, and parts of unincorporated Pierce County, fall within the District's boundaries. Page 304 of 967 B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS1.Eartha. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes,mountainous, and more than 2/3 of Lake Tapps.The Dieringer School District is comprised of a variety of topographic Iand forms andgradients, including all of those Iisted. Specific topographic characteristics willidentified during the planning and permit process for each capital project.b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?Specific slope characteristics will be identified during the planning and permitprocess for each capital project.c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel,peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and noteany prime farmland.'Specific soil types will be identified during the planning and permit process for eachcapital project.d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity?If so, describe.Unstable soils may exist within the Dieringer School District. Specific soil limitationson individual project sites will be identified at the time of environmental review.e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or gradingproposed. Indicate source of fill.Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to projectspecific environmental review and Iocal approval at the time of proposal. Proposedgrading projects, as well as the purpose, type, quantity, and source of fill materialswill be identified as appropriate to each project.f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generallydescribe.It is possible that erosion could occur as a result of construction projects currentlyproposed in the Capital Facilities Plan. Individual projects and their erosion impactswill be evaluated on a site-specific basis. Individual projects will be subject toenvironmental review and Iocal approval at the time of proposal.g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious projectconstruction (for example, asphalt or buildings?)Percentage of impervious cover with vary with each capital facilities project and willPage 305 of 967 be addressed during project-specific environmental review.h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, ifany:Erosion potential on individual project sites will be addressed during project-specificenvironmental review. Relevant erosion reduction and control requirements will bemet.2.Aira. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (ie., dust,automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the projectis completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known.Various emissions, many construction-related, may result from individual projects.Air-quality impacts will be evaluated during project-specific environmental review.Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal?If so, generally describe.Off-site sources and necessary mitigation will be addressed during project-specificenvironmental review.c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any:Plans for individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or willbe subject to environmental review and relevant local approval processes, includingobtaining of any necessary air quality permits, at the time individual projects areformally proposed. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.3.Watera. Surface:1) Isthereanysurfacewaterbodyonorintheimmediatevicinityofthesite (including year-round and seasonal streams, Iakes, ponds, wetlands)? Ifyes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream orriver it flows into.There is a network of surface water bodies within the Dieringer SchoolDistrict. The surface water regimes and flow patterns have been or will beresearched and incorporated in the design of each individual project2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach availableplans.Some projects may require work near these described waters. Individualprojects in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to environmental reviewand Iocal approval requirements at the time the project is formally proposed.Page 306 of 967 3) Estimatetheamountoffillanddredgematerialthatbeplacedinorremoved from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site thatwould be affected. Indicate the source of fill material.Information with respect to placement or removal of fill or dredge materialwill be addressed at the time of project-specific environmental review.Applicable Iocal regulations have been or will be satisfied.4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions?Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.Any surface water withdrawals or diversions have been or will be addressedduring project-specific environmental review.5) Doestheproposalliewithinal00-yearfloodplain?lfso,notelocationon the site plan.Each capital facilities project, if located in a floodplain area, will be required tomeet applicable local regulations for flood areas.6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials tosurface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume ofdischarge.Specific information regarding discharges of waste materials, if any, will beaddressed during project-specific environmental review. Please see theSupplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.b.Ground:1) Willgroundwaterbewithdrawn,orwillwaterbedischargedtogroundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities ifknown.Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may impact groundwater resources. Each project will be evaluated during project-specificenvironmental review. Applicable Iocal regulations have been or will besatisfied. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground fromseptic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage?industrial, containing the following chemicals. .; agricultural; etc.). Describethe general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number ofhouses to served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans thesystem(s) are expected to serve.Impacts of discharged waste material, if any, have been or will be addressedduring site-specific, project-level environmental review.Page 307 of 967 C.Water Runoff (including storm water):1) Describethesourceofrunoff(includingstormlvater)andmethodofcollection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will thiswater flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe.Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may have varyingstorm water runoff consequences. Each project will be subject toenvironmental review and applicable Iocal regulations.2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so,generally describe.Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will have varyingenvironmental impacts and will be subject to appropriate review and localregulations prior to construction. Information regarding waste materials willbe presented at the time of such review. Please see the Supplemental Sheetfor Nonproject Actions.d. Proposedmeasurestoreduceorcontrolsurface,ground,andrunoffwaterimpacts, if any:Specific measures to reduce or control runoff impacts have been or will be developedon a project-specific basis in cooperation with the appropriate jurisdiction.4.Plants:a.Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other.? evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, othershrubs? grasspasturecrop or grainwet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage. Otherother water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, otherother types of vegetationThere are various vegetative zones within the Dieringer School District. An inventoryof species has been or will be produced as part of project-specific environmentalrevievv.b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?Impacts on vegetation will be determined at the time of project-specific environmentalreview at the time the project is formally proposed. Please see the SupplementalSheet for Nonproject Actions.C.List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.Page 308 of 967 Specific impacts to these species from individual projects has been or be determinedat the time of project proposal and will be addressed during site-specific, project-levelenvironmental review.d. Proposed Iandscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve orenhance vegetation on the site, if any:Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject toenvironmental review and local approval at the time of project proposal.s.Animals:a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site orare known to be on or near the site:birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:fish: bass, salmon, trout, perch, crappies, tiger muskies other:An inventory of species observed on or near sites has been or will be developedduring project-specific environmental review.b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.Specific impacts to these species from individual projects will be determined at thetime of project proposal and will be reviewed in cooperation with the affectedjurisdictions.C.Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.Impacts on migration routes, if any, will addressed during site-specific, project-levelenvironmental review.d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:Appropriate measures to preserve or enhance wildlife have been or will bedetermined at the time of site-specific, project-level environmental review.6.Energy and Natural Resources:a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will bemeet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used forheating, manufacturing, etc.The State Board of Education requires a Iife-cycle cost analysis of all heating,Page 309 of 967 Iighting, and insulating systems prior to allowing specific projects to proceed. Energyneeds will be decided at the time of specific engineering and site design planning.Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacentproperties? If so, generally describe:Individual projects of this Capital Facilities Plan will be evaluated as to their impacton the solar potential of adjacent projects during environmental review.C.What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of thisproposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any:Energy conservation measures will be considered at the project-specific designphase and environmental review.7.Environmental Healtha.Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxicchemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as aresult of this proposal? If so, describe.Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.1) Describespecialemergencyservicesthatmightrequired.Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental healthhazards, if any:Proposed projects will comply with all current codes, standards, and rulesand regulations. Individual projects have been or will be subject toenvironmental review and local approval at the time of formal submittal.Noise:1) Whattypesofnoiseexistintheareawhichmayaffectyourproject(for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)?A variety of noises exist within the Dieringer School District. Specific noisesources have been or will be identified during project-specific environmentalreview.2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associatedwith the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic,construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come fromthe site.Normal construction noises would exist on a short-term basis during schoolconstruction. There could be an increase in traffic or operations-related noiseb.Page 310 of 967 which would be addressed during project specific environmental review.Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions.3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:Project noise impacts have been or will be evaluated and mitigated duringthe project-specific environmental review. Each project is or will be subject toapplicable Iocal regulations.8.Land and Shoreline Use:a. Whatisthecurrentuseofthesiteandadjacentproperties?There are a variety of Iand uses within the Dieringer School District, includingresidential, commercial, industrial, institutional, utility, agricultural, forestry, openspace, recreational, etc.b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe.This question will be addressed during site-specific, project-Ievel environmentalreview.c. Describe any structures on the site.Structures Iocated on proposed sites have been or will be identified and describedduring project-specific environmental review when appropriate.d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?Structures to be demolished, if any, will be identified as part of the project-specificenvironmental review process.e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?There are a variety of zoning classifications within the Dieringer School District. Sitespecific zoning information has been or will be identified during project-specificenvironmental review.f.What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?An inventory of comprehensive plan designations has been or will be completedduring project-specific environmental reviewg. lfapplicable,whatisthecurrentshorelinemasterprogramdesignationofthesite?Any shoreline master program designations have been or will be identified duringproject-specific environmental review.h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive"Page 311 of 967 area? If so, specify.Environmentally sensitive areas, if any, will be identified during project-specificenvironmental revievv.I.Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completedproject?This information has been or will be provided at the time of project-specificenvironmental review.j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?It is not anticipated that proposed projects will displace any people. Displacement ofpeople, if any, will be evaluated during project-specific environmental review.k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to projectspecific environmental review and Iocal approval at the time the project is formallyproposed.1.Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing andprojected land uses and plans, if any:Compatibility of the proposal and specific projects with existing uses and plans havebeen or will be assessed as part of the comprehensive planning process and duringproject-specific environmental review.9.Housinga. Approximately how many units would be provided if any? Indicate whetherhigh, middle, or Iow-income housing.No housing units would be provided.b. Approximatelyhowmanyunits,ifany,wouldbeeliminated?lndicatewhetherhigh, middle, or Iow-income housing.Any impact of project proposals on existing housing have been or would beevaluated during project-specific environmental review procedures.c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:Measures to reduce or control any housing impacts have been or will be addressedduring site-specific, project-Ievel environmental review.Page 312 of 967 10. Aesthetics:a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not includingantennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed?Aesthetic impacts have been or will be determined at the time of site-specific,project-Ievel environmental review.b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?Aesthetic impacts have been or will be determined at the time of site-specific,project-Ievel environmental review.c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:Appropriate measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts have been or will bedetermined at the time of project-specific environmental review.11 . Light and Glare:a. What type of Iight or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day wouldit mainly occur?Light or glare impacts have been or will be determined at the time of project-specificenvironmental review.b. Could Iight or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interferewith views?Light or glare impacts have been or will be determined at the time of the project-specific environmental review.c. What existing off-site sources of Iight or glare may affect your proposal?Off-site sources of Iight or glare have been or will be evaluated at the time of projectspecific environmental review.d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:Mitigation of Iight and glare impacts have been or will be addressed during projectspecific environmental review.12.Recreation:a.What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediatevicinity?There are a variety of formal and informal recreational facilities within the DieringerSchool District.Page 313 of 967 b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so,describe.Recreational impacts have been or will be addressed during project specificenvironmental review. Projects in the Capital Facilities Plan may enhancerecreational opportunities and uses.c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, includingrecreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:Any adverse effects on recreation stemming from individual project proposals havebeen or will be subject to mitigation during the environmental review procedure. Aschool site usually provides recreational facilities to the community in the form ofadditional play fields and gymnasiums.13. HistoricandCulturalPreservation:a. Are there any places or objects Iisted on, or proposed for, national, state, orlocal preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generallydescribe.The existence of historic and cultural resources will be determined at the time ofproject-specific environmental review.b. Generally describe any Iandmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological,scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.An inventory of historical sites has been or will be conducted as part of projectspecific environmental review.C.Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed on a project-specific basis.14.Transportation:a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site and describe proposedaccess to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.Impact on public streets and highways has been or will be assessed during projectspecific environmental review.b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximatedistance to the nearest transit stop?The relationship between specific projects and public transit has been or will beassessed during project-specific environmental review.Page 314 of 967 c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How manywould the project eliminate?An inventory of parking spaces and the impacts of specific projects on parkingspaces has been or will be conducted during project-specific environmental review.d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements toexisting roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicatewhether public or private).The development of new schools may require new access roads or streets. Thisissue will be fully addressed during project-specific environmental review.e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or airtransportation? If so, generally describe.Use of water, rail or air transportation has been or will be addressed during sitespecific, project-Ievel environmental review.f.How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completedproject? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.Each project proposal has been or will be separately evaluated as to traffic impacts.g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:Mitigation of impacts on transportation has been or will be addressed during projectspecific environmental review.15.Public Services:a.Would the project result in an increased need for public services (forexample: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so,generally describe.The District does not anticipate that the projects identified in the Capital FacilitiesPlan will substantially increase the need for other public services. Impacts have beenor will be evaluated on a project-specific basis.b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, ifany.Schools are built with automatic security systems, fire alarms, smoke alarms, heatsensors and sprinkler systems.16.UtilitiesPage 315 of 967 a.Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. Utilities available at project sites have been or will be identified during project specific environmental review. b.Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Utility revisions and construction needs will be identified during project-specific environmental review. C.Signature The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature , ;;� Michael Farmer Date Submitted: August 24, 2021 Page 316 of 967 D.SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS(do not use this sheet for project actions)Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction withthe Iist of the elements of the environment.When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal or the types ofactivities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at afaster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms.1.How would the proposal be Iikely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air;production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production ofnoise?To the extent this Plan makes it more likely that school facilities will be constructed,and/or renovated or remodeled, some of these environmental impacts will be moreIikely. Additional impermeable surfaces, such as roofs, parking Iots, sidewalks,access roads and playgrounds will increase storm water runoff, which could entersurface or ground water. Emissions to air could result from heating systems,emergency generators and other equipment, and from additional car and bus trips toand from the school for students and faculty. Any emissions resulting from this Planshould not require the production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardoussubstances, with the possible exception of storage of diesel fuel or gasoline foremergency generating equipment. Noise may result from additional traffic and fromconcentrating several hundred children at a new facility, especially before and afferschool and during recesses.To the extent this proposal allows additional residential development to occur, theseimpacts would also increase somewhat, but it is not possible to quantify thoseimpacts at this time. The impacts would depend on the type, Iocation and distributionof housing, for example, whether single or multiple family and the location of theschool.Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are:Facilities implementing the Plan have been or will be evaluated at the project specificlevel and impacts will be mitigated accordingly. Storm water detention and runoff willmeet applicable County and/or City requirements and, depending on the date ofactual construction, may be subject to a National Pollutant Discharge EliminationPage 317 of 967 System ("NPDES") permitting requirements. Discharges to air will be minimal, andwill meet any applicable requirements of the Puget Sound Air Pollution ControlAuthority. Fuel oil will be stored according to local and state requirements.2.How would the proposal be Iikely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life?The Plan itself will have no impact on these elements of the environment. Dependingon the particular site, construction of facilities may require clearing sites of plants andloss of animal habitat. To the extent residential development is allowed, additionalarea may be cleared and eliminated as habitat for animals. There are not likely to beany impacts on fish or marine life, although some water quality degradation instreams and rivers could occur due to increased residential development. Theseimpacts have been or will be addressed in more detail during project-specificenvironmental review when appropriate.Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are:Individual projects will be evaluated and mitigated appropriately on a project-specificbasis, but specific mitigation proposals cannot be identified at this time.3.How would the proposal be Iikely to deplete energy or natural resources?Any actual projects resulting from this Plan would consume heating fuel andelectrical energy. Increased traffic resulting from the construction of additionalfacilities would consume petroleum based fuels. Reduced traffic resulting fromconstruction of another neighborhood school may also reduce amounts of fuelconsumed, but it is not possible to quantify such reduction in consumption at thistime. These impacts have been or will be addressed in more detail during project-specific environmental review when appropriate.Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are:Facilities would be constructed in accordance with applicable energy efficiencystandards.4.How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas orareas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such asparks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat,historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands?The Plan and facilities constructed pursuant to the Plan should have no impact onthese resources. It is not possible to predict whether other development madepossible by this Plan would affect sensitive areas.Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are:No specific measures are being proposed at this time. Appropriate measures havebeen or will be proposed during project-specific review. Annual updates of this PlanPage 318 of 967 will be coordinated with Pierce County, City of Auburn and City of Sumner as part ofthe Growth Management Act process, one of the purposes of which is to protectenvironmentally sensitive areas. To the extent the School District's facilities planningprocess is part of the overall growth management planning process, these resourcesare more Iikely to be protected.s. How would the proposal be Iikely to affect land and shoreline use, including whetherit would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans?The Plan will not have any impact on Iand or shoreline use that is incompatibleexisting comprehensive plans, Iand use codes, or shoreline management plans.Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are:None are proposed at this time. Actual facilities constructed to implement the Planwill be sited and constructed to avoid or reduce land use impacts.6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or publicservices and utilities?This proposal should not create substantial new demands for transportation. Theprojects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create an increase in traffic nearnew District facilities but also reduce traffic by creating the opportunity for morestudents to walk to a closer school. The construction of the facilities included in theCapital Facilities Plan may result in minor increases in the demand for publicservices and utilities, such as fire and police protection, and water, sewer, andelectric utilities. None of these impacts are Iikely to be significant. The impacts ontransportation and public services and utilities of the projects included in the CapitalFacilities Plan will be addressed during project-Ievel review when appropriate.Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are:No measures to reduce or respond to such demands are proposed at this time.7.Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federallaws or requirements for the protection of the environment.The Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan will not conflict with any laws orrequirements for the protection of the environment.Page 319 of 967 Ordinance No. 2021-111 Page 1 of 2 Pierce County Council 930 Tacoma Ave S, Rm 1046 Tacoma, WA 98402 Sponsored by: Councilmember Derek Young 1 Requested by: County Council 2 3 4 5 ORDINANCE NO. 2021-111 6 7 8 9 An Ordinance of the Pierce County Council Amending Section 4A.30.030 of 10 the Pierce County Code, "School Impact Fee Schedule," to 11 Adjust School Impact Fees for 2022 Based Upon Changes in 12 the Construction Cost Index; and Setting an Effective Date. 13 14 Whereas, school impact fees in Pierce County are calculated according to the 15 formulas in Section 4A.30.020 of the Pierce County Code (PCC), then the fee is 16 "capped" by a "Maximum Fee Obligation" (MFO) which changes annually based upon 17 changes in the Construction Cost Index (20-City Average) published by the Engineering 18 News Record; and 19 20 Whereas, the annual adjustment must be adopted by Ordinance following the 21 adoption of the Capital Facilities Plan and any review of impact fees; and 22 23 Whereas, it has been the practice of the Pierce County Council (Council) to only 24 adjust impact fees in increments of five dollars, rounding up to the nearest five-dollar 25 increment; and 26 27 Whereas, school impact fees are collected for residential development in the 28 unincorporated County for school districts that meet the requirements in Title 4A PCC; 29 and 30 31 Whereas, pursuant to PCC 4A.30.020, the Construction Cost Index for February 32 2017 is the base value from which changes are calculated; and 33 34 Whereas, the Construction Cost Index for February 2017 was calculated to be 35 10,559; for September 2021 it is 12,464 which is an increase of 18.04 percent from the 36 base year; and 37 38 Whereas, the MFO for school districts effective February 1, 2021, and adopted in 39 Ordinance No. 2020-124 is $3,890 for single-family dwelling units, and $2,065 for each 40 multi-family dwelling unit; and 41 42 Whereas, after adjusting for changes to the Construction Cost Index through 43 October 2021 and rounding up to the nearest five-dollar increment, the adjusted school 44 MFOs are $4,200 for single-family dwelling units and $2,230 for multi-family dwelling 45 units, an increase of $310 and $165, respectively from the 2021 rates; and 46 47 48 Page 320 of 967 Ordinance No. 2021-111 Page 2 of 2 Pierce County Council 930 Tacoma Ave S, Rm 1046 Tacoma, WA 98402 Whereas, pursuant to PCC 4A.10.130 and 4A.30.010 C., the County has 1 reviewed the relevant School Districts' Capital Facilities Plans, County Comprehensive 2 Plan Amendments, and Title 4A PCC; Now Therefore, 3 4 BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of Pierce County: 5 6 Section 1. Section 4A.30.030 of the Pierce County Code, "School Impact Fee 7 Schedule," is hereby amended as shown in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and 8 incorporated herein by reference. 9 10 Section 2. The effective date of this Ordinance shall be February 1, 2022. 11 12 13 PASSED this day of ______ , 2021. 14 15 ATTEST: PIERCE COUNTY COUNCIL 16 Pierce County, Washington 17 18 19 20 Denise D. Johnson Derek Young 21 Clerk of the Council Council Chair 22 23 24 25 Bruce F. Dammeier 26 Pierce County Executive 27 Approved Vetoed , this 28 day of , 29 2021. 30 31 Date of Publication of 32 Notice of Public Hearing: 33 34 Effective Date of Ordinance: 35 36 Page 321 of 967 Exhibit A to Ordinance No. 2021-111 Page 1 of 1 Pierce County Council 930 Tacoma Ave S, Rm 1046 Tacoma, WA 98402 Exhibit A to Ordinance No. 2021-111 1 2 Only those portions of Section 4A.30.030 that are proposed to be amended are shown. 3 Remainder of text, tables, maps and/or figures is unchanged. 4 5 4A.30.030 School Impact Fee Schedule. 6 7 8 PER SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT PER MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT SCHOOL DISTRICT School District Fee Calculation Impact Fee (Maximum Fee Obligation is $4,200 $3,890) School District Fee Calculation Impact Fee (Maximum Fee Obligation is $2,230 $2,065) Bethel $17,082 $17,181 $3,890 $4,200 $0 ($1,042) $0 Carbonado $4,446 $5,771 $3,890 $4,200 $1,138 $1,520 $1,138 $1,520 Dieringer $4,176 $3,890 $4,176 $789 $789 Eatonville $13,185 $17,652 $3,890 $4,200 $3,414 $3,596 $2,065 $2,230 Fife $4,715 $4,541 $3,890 $4,200 $1,426 $822 $1,426 $822 Franklin Pierce $16,212 $13,420 $3,890 $4,200 $4,893 $2,012 $2,065 $2,012 Orting $16,552 $17,571 $3,890 $4,200 $6,982 $7,899 $2,065 $2,230 Peninsula $4,529 $4,340 $3,890 $4,200 $2,351 $2,143 $2,065 $2,143 Puyallup $12,978 $3,890 $4,200 $5,651 $2,065 $2,230 Steilacoom $8,104 $3,890 $4,200 $0 $0 Sumner-Bonney Lake $22,613 $32,126 $3,890 $4,200 $2,535 $3,862 $2,065 $2,230 White River $11,391 $3,890 $4,200 $4,001 $2,065 $2,230 Yelm $6,417 $4,500 $3,890 $4,200 $14,490 $1,900 $2,065 $1,900 Page 322 of 967 POLICY/TEXT AMENDMENT (P/T) #3 INCORPORATE FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS #210, 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Page 323 of 967 Page 324 of 967 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2022 Mirror Lake Elementary School Lake Grove Elementary School Wildwood Elementary School Totem Middle School Star Lake Elementary School Thomas Jefferson High School Page 325 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN June 29, 2021 BOARD OF EDUCATION Trudy Davis Hiroshi Eto Dr. Jennifer Jones Geoffery McAnalloy Luckisha Phillips SUPERINTENDENT Dr. Tammy Campbell Prepared by: Sally D. McLean, Chief Finance & Operations Officer Jennifer Thomas, Student & Demographic Forecaster Page 326 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 2-3 SECTION 1 THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Introduction 4 Inventory of Educational Facilities 5 Inventory of Non-Instructional Facilities 6 Needs Forecast - Existing Facilities 7 Needs Forecast - New Facilities 8 Six Year Finance Plan 9 SECTION 2 MAPS Introduction 10 Map – City and County Jurisdictions 11 SECTION 3 SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION Introduction 12 Building Capacities 13-15 Portable Locations 16-17 Student Forecast 18-20 SECTION 4 KING COUNTY, CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, AND CITY OF KENT IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS Introduction 21 Capacity Summaries 22-26 Impact Fee Calculations 27-28 Reference to Impact Fee Calculations 29-30 Student Generation Rates 31 Impact Fee Changes from 2021 to 2022 32 Page 327 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2 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.4278 effective June 2018, revised January 2020, and the City of Auburn Ordinance No. 5078 effective 1998, Federal Way Public Schools has updated its Capital Facilities Plan as of May 2021. This plan is scheduled to be submitted for consideration to each of the jurisdictions located with the Federal Way Public Schools’ service area: 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 requested to be 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 City of Des Moines collects school impact fees as part of the SEPA process. The District has plans for beginning discussions with the City of Milton to adopt an ordinance for school impact fees for parcels located within the Federal Way School District’s service area is in process. 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 for 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 or management need. During the 2016-17 school year the District formed a 100 member Facilities Planning Committee consisting of parents, community members and staff. The Committee was tasked with developing a recommendation to the Superintendent regarding Phase 2 of the District’s plan for school construction, remodeling, and/or modernization for voter consideration in November 2017. The voters passed this $450M bond authorization with a 62% YES vote reflecting a commitment to invest in the modernization of our infrastructure. Through the committee’s work a determination was made to rebuild Thomas Jefferson High School, Illahee Middle School, Totem Middle School, Lake Grove Elementary, Mirror Lake Elementary, Olympic View Elementary, Star Lake Elementary, and Wildwood Elementary. In addition to the school projects, the committee included a plan to modernize Memorial Stadium, which currently supports athletic activities for all schools. The rebuilding of the schools will create additional capacity for students at the elementary and high school levels. Page 328 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 3 INTRODUCTION, continued The District continues to monitor factors that may have an impact on enrollment and capacity at our schools, including new single-family and multi-family residential developments and any impacts due to the COVID-19 stay home order. In accordance with the McCleary decision, the State has provided funding to reduce K-3 class size to 17 and 4-12 class size to 25.Beginning in 2019-20 the legislature expects compliance with this funding adding pressure to the need for elementary capacity. In response to this need the district has acquired the former Devry building renovating it into 42 elementary classrooms to provide permanent additional capacity. Page 329 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 4 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 that shows expected funding for any new construction, portables and modernization listed follows this. Page 330 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 5 INVENTORY OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS (K-5) Adelaide 1635 SW 304th St Federal Way 98023 Brigadoon 3601 SW 336th St Federal Way 98023 Camelot 4041 S 298th St Auburn 98001 Enterprise 35101 5th Ave SW Federal Way 98023 Green Gables 32607 47th Ave SW Federal Way 98023 Lake Dolloff 4200 S 308th St Auburn 98001 Lake Grove 303 SW 308th St Federal Way 98023 Lakeland 35827 32nd Ave S Auburn 98001 Mark Twain 2450 S Star Lake Rd Federal Way 98003 Meredith Hill 5830 S 300th St Auburn 98001 Mirror Lake 625 S 314th St Federal Way 98003 Nautilus (K-8) 1000 S 289th St Federal Way 98003 Olympic View 2626 SW 327th St Federal Way 98023 Panther Lake 34424 1st Ave S Federal Way 98003 Rainier View 3015 S 368th St Federal Way 98003 Sherwood Forest 34600 12th Ave SW Federal Way 98023 Silver Lake 1310 SW 325th Pl Federal Way 98023 Star Lake 4014 S 270th St Kent 98032 Sunnycrest 24629 42nd Ave S Kent 98032 Twin Lakes 4400 SW 320th St Federal Way 98023 Valhalla 27847 42nd Ave S Auburn 98001 Wildwood 2405 S 300th St Federal Way 98003 Woodmont (K-8) 26454 16th Ave S Des Moines 98198 MIDDLE SCHOOLS (6-8) Federal Way Public Academy (6-10) 34620 9th Ave S Federal Way 98003 Illahee 36001 1st Ave S Federal Way 98003 Kilo 4400 S 308th St Auburn 98001 Lakota 1415 SW 314th St Federal Way 98023 Sacajawea 1101 S Dash Point Rd Federal Way 98003 Sequoyah 3450 S 360th ST Auburn 98001 Totem 26630 40th Ave S Kent 98032 TAF @ Saghalie (6-12) 33914 19th Ave SW Federal Way 98023 HIGH SCHOOLS (9-12) Decatur 2800 SW 320th St Federal Way 98023 Federal Way 30611 16th Ave S Federal Way 98003 Thomas Jefferson 4248 S 288th St Auburn 98001 Todd Beamer 35999 16th Ave S Federal Way 98003 Career Academy at Truman 31455 28th Ave S Federal Way 98003 ADDITIONAL SCHOOLS Internet Academy (K-12) 31455 28th Ave S Federal Way 98003 Employment Transition Program (12+) 33250 21st Ave SW Federal Way 98023 Federal Way Open Doors 31455 28th Ave S Federal Way 98003 Former DeVry Property (K-5) 3600 S 344th Way, Federal Way 98001 Page 331 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 6 CURRENT INVENTORY NON-INSTRUCTIONAL FACILITIES Developed Property Central Kitchen 1214 S 332nd Federal Way 98003 Federal Way Memorial Field 1300 S 308th St Federal Way 98003 Educational Services Center 33330 8th Ave S Federal Way 98003 Support Services Center 1211 S 332nd St Federal Way 98003 Leased Property Early Learning Center at Uptown Square 1066 S 320th St Federal Way 98003 Undeveloped Property Site # Location 75 SW 360th Street & 3rd Avenue SW – 9.2 Acres 65 S 351st 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 1st Way S and S 342nd St – Minimal acreage 96 S 308th St and 14th Ave S – .36 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. Page 332 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 7 NEEDS FORECAST - EXISTING FACILITIES PHASE EXISTING FACILITY FUTURE NEEDS ANTICIPATED SOURCE OF FUNDS As needed Purchase and Relocate Portables Interim Capacity Anticipated source of funds is Impact Fees. II Thomas Jefferson High School Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity Voter Approved Capital bond II Illahee Middle School Replace Existing Building Voter Approved Capital bond II Totem Middle School Replace Existing Building Voter Approved Capital bond II Lake Grove Elementary Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity Voter Approved Capital bond II Mark Twain Elementary Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity TBD, pending SCAP funding II Mirror Lake Elementary Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity Voter Approved Capital bond II Olympic View K-8 School Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity Voter Approved Capital bond II Star Lake Elementary Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity Voter Approved Capital bond II Wildwood Elementary Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity Voter Approved Capital bond II Memorial Stadium Replace Existing Facility Voter Approved Capital bond II DeVry Property Temp Swing School Increase Capacity SCAP and K-3 Class size reduction funding III Decatur High School Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity TBD III Kilo Middle School Replace Existing Building TBD III Sacajawea Middle School Replace Existing Building TBD III Adelaide Elementary Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity TBD III Brigadoon Elementary Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity TBD III Camelot Elementary Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity TBD III Lake Dolloff Elementary Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity TBD III Nautilus K-8 School Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity TBD III Twin Lakes Elementary Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity TBD III Woodmont K-8 School Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity TBD As part of the multi-phase modernization and replacement plan, the District intends to increase capacity for elementary and high school students with expansion at the Thomas Jefferson, Lake Grove, Mirror Lake, Olympic View, Star Lake, and Wildwood sites. Only projects in Phase II with plans to increase capacity are included in the impact fee calculation for this plan. Page 333 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 8 NEEDS FORECAST - ADDITIONAL FACILITIES NEW FACILITY LOCATION ANTICIPATED SOURCE OF FUNDS No current plans for additional facilities. Page 334 of 967 Six Year Finance PlanSecured FundingSourcesImpact Fees (1) $1,066,016Land Sale Funds (2)($597,828)Bond or Levy Funds (3) $138,160,768K3-CSR & TAFA unclaimed expenditures (4) $9,924,730School Construction Assistance Program (SCAP) (5)($5,291,681)TOTAL$143,262,005Projected RevenueSourcesSchool Construction Assistance Program (SCAP) (6) $94,839,867K-3 Class Size Reduction (7) $2,879,870Bond Funds (8) $115,000,000Land Fund Sales (9)$0Impact Fees (10) $1,800,000TOTAL$214,519,737Actual and Planned ExpendituresTotal Secured Funding and Projected Revenue$357,781,742NEW SCHOOLSEstimated and Budget 2021 2022 2023 2024 2026 2027 Total Total CostPrior Years 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-2025 2025-2026 2026-2027 2027-2028 2021-2028MODERNIZATION AND EXPANSIONLake Grove Elementary (11)$42,858,000$0$42,858,000Mirror Lake Elementary (11)$44,490,000$0$44,490,000Star Lake Elementary (11)$28,920,000$11,180,000$11,180,000$40,100,000Wildwood Elementary (11)$42,778,000$0$42,778,000Olympic View K-8 School (11)$2,338,000$16,362,000 $27,500,000$43,862,000$46,200,000Thomas Jefferson High School (11)$119,983,000$17,617,000$17,617,000$137,600,000Totem Middle School (11)$49,060,000$17,840,000$17,840,000$66,900,000Illahee Middle School (11)$0$5,200,000 $30,900,000 $36,900,000$73,000,000$73,000,000Memorial Stadium (11)$302,000$1,500,000 $25,100,000$26,600,000$26,902,000$0$0$0$0SITE ACQUISITIONFormer DeVry/ES 24 (12)$19,351,750$1,424,750 $1,421,500 $1,421,000 $1,423,000 $1,422,250 $1,423,750 $1,422,250 $9,958,500$29,310,250TEMPORARY FACILITIESPortables (13)$200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $1,400,000$1,400,000TOTAL$350,080,750 $69,823,750 $60,021,500 $40,021,000 $26,723,000 $1,622,250 $1,623,750 $1,622,250 $201,457,500 $551,538,250NOTES:`1 These fees are currently being held in a King County, City of Federal Way, City of Auburn, and City of Kent impact fee account, and will be available for use by the District for system improvements. This is year end balance on 12/31/20. 2 This is year end balance on 12/31/20.3 This is the 12/31/20 balance of bond funds and capital levy funds. This figure includes interest earnings.4 This represents the K3-CSR & TAFA unclaimed expenditures5 This represents the balance of SCAP funding.6 This is the balance of authorized and anticipated SCAP for the projects authorized by the voters in 2017.7 This is a secured K-3 Class size reduction grant.8 In November 2017, the District passed a $450M bond measure. The amount included in the finance plan is for projects that will create additional capacity. Only the costs associated with increasing capacity are included in school impact fee calculations. 9 There are no projected sale of surplus properties.10 These are projected fees based upon anticipated residential developments in the District, $25,000 per month over the next 6 years.11 Project budgets are updated as of April 2021 and reflective of actual Guaranteed Price Maximums and total project budgets for Lake Grove, Mirror Lake, Wildwood, Thomas Jeffereson, Star Lake, Totem, and DeVry.12 A former private university campus located in Federal Way was purchased in 2019 to provide up to 43 additional permanent elementary classrooms. Prior to creating new permanent capcity this location will be used as a temporary housing. These costs are excluded from impact fee calculations.13 These fees represent the cost of purchasing and installing new portables. The portable expenditure in future years may replace existing portables that are not functional.These may not increase capacity and are not included in the capacity summary.9Page 335 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 10 SECTION 2 - MAPS Federal Way Public Schools has twenty-one elementary schools (grades K-5), two schools with a K-8 grade configuration, six middle school schools (grades 6-8), four high schools (grades 9-12) and four small secondary schools. The Federal Way Public Academy serves students in grades 6-10. The programs at Open Doors and Career Academy at Truman High School serves students in grades 9-12. In addition to these programs, TAF@Saghalie serves students in grades 6-12 who reside within the service area and the Employment and Transition Program (ETP) at the Norman Center serves 18-21 year old scholars. 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. 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. 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. The final map included represents the city and county boundaries which overlap with the district’s service areas. •City of Algona •City of Auburn •City of Des Moines •City of Federal Way •City of Kent •City of Milton •Unincorporated King County Page 336 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 11 MAP – CITY AND COUNTY JURISDICTIONS FWPS boundaries is 100% Urban Growth Area Page 337 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 12 SECTION 3 - SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION Building Capacities - The Education Program Portable Locations Student Forecast – 2022 through 2028 Page 338 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 13 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 3 should be 17 students to comply with current legislation. In grades 4-5 the target is 25 students. For grades 6 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. Historically, the District has used the OSPI square footage calculation as a baseline for capacity calculation and made adjustments for specific program needs. The District will continue to use this calculation for determining capacity at our middle and high schools. However, for elementary schools capacity will be calculated based on the number of classroom spaces and the number of students assigned to each classroom. Class Size Guidelines FWPS Historical “Standard of Service” HB2661/SHB2776 Enacted Law Square Footage Guideline Kindergarten 18.9 17 25-28 Grades 1-2 18.9 17 25-28 Grade 3 18.9 17 28 Grades 4-5 25 25 28 For the purposes of determining student capacity at individual schools, the following list clarifies adjustments to classroom spaces and the OSPI calculation. Special Education Resource Rooms: Each middle school requires the use of a standard classroom(s) for special education students requiring instruction to address specific disabilities. English as a Second Language Programs: Each middle school and high school requires the use of a standard classroom for students learning English as a second language. Middle School Computer Labs: Each middle school has computer labs, except Totem Middle School. Wireless access has been installed at all secondary schools. If additional classroom space is needed, these computer labs may be converted to mobile carts. Page 339 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 14 BUILDING CAPACITIES, continued 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. Preschool/ECEAP/Headstart Our district currently offers preschool programs at multiple locations across the district. These programs decrease K-12 capacity. Early Childhood Education is an expanding need. Alternative Learning Experience: Federal Way offers students the opportunity to participate in an Alternative Learning Experience through our Internet Academy. These students have never been included in the capacity calculation of unhoused students. Due to COVID 19 and school closures many families elected to enroll in IA. We believe this is a temporary increase. This plan was prepared using historical IA data. 1418 Youth Reengagement: Federal Way offers students the opportunity to participate in 1418 Youth Reengagement Open Doors program. These students are housed at the Truman campus and have not been previously included in the capacity calculation of unhoused students. However, we have prepared this plan including approximately 25% of Open Doors enrollment. Page 340 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 15 BUILDING CAPACITIES, continued ELEMENTARY BUILDING MIDDLE SCHOOL BUILDING PROGRAM CAPACITY PROGRAM CAPACITY School Name Headcount 1 Preschool School Name Headcount Adelaide 353 30 Illahee 855 Brigadoon 299 30 Kilo 779 Camelot 277 30 Lakota 786 Enterprise 345 15 Sacajawea 694 Green Gables 401 Sequoyah 585 Lake Dolloff 400 Totem 795 3 Lake Grove 600 TAF @ Saghalie 598 Lakeland 371 Federal Way Public Academy 183 Mark Twain 430 TOTAL 5,275 Meredith Hill 375 30 3 Mirror Lake 600 *Middle School Average 727 Nautilus (K-8)466 Olympic View 353 HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING Panther Lake 347 PROGRAM CAPACITY Rainier View 405 30 Sherwood Forest 390 6 School Name Headcount Silver Lake 400 Decatur 1243 Star Lake 337 Federal Way 1684 Sunnycrest 405 Thomas Jefferson 1224 Twin Lakes 341 30 Todd Beamer 1085 Valhalla 406 TAF @ Saghalie 155 3 Wildwood 600 30 Truman Campus (Career Academy and Open Doors)159 Woodmont (K-8)357 Federal Way Public Academy 116 TOTAL 9,258 231 Employment Transition Program 48 TOTAL 5,714 Elementary Average 403 2 High School Average 1,309 Notes: 1Preschool enrollment reduces capacity for K-5 students. 15 preschool students in one classroom. 2Federal Way Public Academy, Career Academy at Truman High School, and Employment Transition Program and TAF @ Saghalie for the high school school grade span (9-12) are non-boundary schools. These schools are not used in the calculated averages. 3Lake Grove and Wildwood opened January 2021; Mirror Lake and TJHS are scheduled to open September 2021 Page 341 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 16 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 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 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. With the launch of construction of new schools, a number of portables will be relocated, decommissioned, or sold. The following page provides a list of the location of the portable facilities, used for educational facilities by Federal Way Public Schools. Page 342 of 967 PORTABLES LOCATED PORTABLES LOCATED AT ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS AT HIGH SCHOOLS NON NON INSTRUCTIONAL INSTRUCTIONAL* INSTRUCTIONAL INSTRUCTIONAL Adelaide 21Decatur 81 Brigadoon 1 Federal Way Camelot 1 Thomas Jefferson Enterprise 3 Todd Beamer 8 Green Gables 1 TOTAL 16 1 Lake Dolloff 5 Lake Grove Lakeland Mark Twain 3 Meredith Hill 3 PORTABLES LOCATED Mirror Lake AT SUPPORT FACILITIES Nautilus 5 Olympic View 2 MOT Panther Lake 4 TDC 9 Rainier View 5 Former TAFA Sherwood Forest 4 TOTAL 9 Silver Lake 4 Star Lake Sunnycrest 6 DISTRICT PORTABLES IN USE FOR ECEAP Twin Lakes 3 AND/OR HEADSTART Valhalla 4 Sherwood Forest 2 Wildwood Totem Woodmont 3 Total 2 TOTAL 50 10 PORTABLES LOCATED AT MIDDLE SCHOOLS NON INSTRUCTIONAL INSTRUCTIONAL Illahee 21 Kilo 16 Lakota Sacajawea 5 Sequoyah 2 Totem TAF@ Saghalie 4 TOTAL 14 7 PORTABLE LOCATIONS 17 Page 343 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 18 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 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 MasterTM 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 February 2018, the District contracted a demographer to develop projections for the Federal Way School District. The report was complete in March 2018. 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), 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 King County. Page 344 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 19 STUDENT FORECAST, continued 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 2026. This model produces a projection that is between 21,500 and 25,000 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 five 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. Federal Way like many districts experienced a decline in enrollment particularly at the early elementary grades due to COVID-19. We anticipate our student forecast about a 50% recovery in the coming year. The balance of the forecast is based on previous growth indicators. Page 345 of 967 Percent Calendar Yr School Year Elementary Middle School High School Total K -12 Change 2016 2015-16 10,206 5,094 6,695 21,995 2017 2016-17 10,424 5,033 6,476 21,933 -0.3% 2018 2017-18 10,418 5,159 6,338 21,915 -0.1% 2019 2018-19 10,233 5,124 6,386 21,743 -0.8% 2020 2019-20 10,046 5,413 5,836 21,295 -2.1% 2021 2020-21 9,324 5,173 5,786 20,283 -5.0% 2022 B2021-22 9,450 5,191 6,197 20,838 2.7% 2023 P2022-23 9,507 5,222 6,234 20,963 0.6% 2024 P2023-24 9,602 5,274 6,297 21,173 1.0% 2025 P2024-25 9,679 5,317 6,347 21,342 0.8% 2026 P2025-26 9,756 5,359 6,398 21,513 0.8% 2027 P2026-27 9,873 5,423 6,474 21,771 1.2% 2028 P2027-28 9,952 5,467 6,526 21,945 0.8% Elementary K-5 Middle School 6-8 High School 9-12 October 1 Head Count Enrollment History and Projections 18,000 18,500 19,000 19,500 20,000 20,500 21,000 21,500 22,000 22,500 School Year Enrollment History and Six Year Forecast 20 Page 346 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 21 SECTION 4 – KING COUNTY, CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, AND CITY OF KENT IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS Capacity Summaries Site & Construction Costs Allocations Student Generation Rates Impact Fee Calculations Reference to Impact Fee Calculations Page 347 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 22 CAPACITY SUMMARIES All Grades, Elementary, Middle School, and High Schools The Capacity Summaries combine Building Capacity information, Portable 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 District has recently adjusted its capacity calculation method for Elementary schools to better show capacity needed to comply with the K-3 Class Size Reduction. This adjustment is also shown in the portable capacity calculation. In order to allow for flexibility in portable usage the District will use an average class size calculation of 21 for each Elementary portable and an average class size of 25 for each Middle and High School portable. The information is organized with a page summarizing the entire District, and then evaluating capacity vs. number of students at elementary, middle school, and high school levels individually. The notes at the bottom of each spreadsheet provide information about what facilities are in place each year. Page 348 of 967 CAPACITY SUMMARY - ALL GRADES Budget Calendar Year 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 CAPACITY School Year 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 BUILDING PROGRAM HEADCOUNT CAPACITY 20,005 20,242 20,380 20,992 20,992 20,992 20,992 Add Capacity 237 138 612 0000 Adjusted Program Headcount Capacity 20,242 20,380 20,992 20,992 20,992 20,992 20,992 ENROLLMENT Basic Headcount Enrollment 20,838 20,963 21,173 21,342 21,513 21,771 21,945 Internet Academy Headcount Enrollment1 (255) (255) (255) (255) (255) (255) (255) Basic FTE Enrollment without Internet Academy 20,583 20,708 20,918 21,087 21,258 21,516 21,690 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM FTE CAPACITY (341) (328)74 (95) (266) (524) (698) RELOCATABLE CAPACITY Current Portable Capacity 2,050 1,800 1,800 1,758 1,708 1,708 1,708 Add/Subtract Portable Capacity (250)0 (42) (50)000 Adjusted Portable Capacity 1,800 1,800 1,758 1,708 1,708 1,708 1,708 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 1,459 1,472 1,832 1,613 1,442 1,184 1,010 - - Projected - - 23 Page 349 of 967 CAPACITY SUMMARY - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS Budget Calendar Year 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 CAPACITY School Year 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 BUILDING PROGRAM HEAD COUNT CAPACITY 9,016 9,016 9,154 9,766 9,766 9,766 9,766 Add/Subtract capacity total 01386120000 Add capacity at1: Star Lake 138 De Vry 612 Olympic View K-8 0 Adjusted Program Headcount Capacity 9,016 9,154 9,766 9,766 9,766 9,766 9,766 ENROLLMENT Basic Headcount Enrollment 9,450 9,507 9,602 9,679 9,756 9,873 9,952 Internet Academy Headcount2 (20) (20) (20) (20) (20) (20) (20) Basic Headcount Enrollment without Internet Academy 9,430 9,487 9,582 9,659 9,736 9,853 9,932 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM CAPACITY (414) (333)184 107 30 (87) (166) RELOCATABLE CAPACITY3 Current Portable Capacity 1,050 1,050 1,050 1,008 1,008 1,008 1,008 Add/Subtract portable capacity 00(42)0000 Add portable capacity at: Subtract portable capacity at: Lake Grove Mirror Lake Star Lake Wildwood Olympic View K-8 (42) Adjusted Portable Capacity 1,050 1,050 1,008 1,008 1,008 1,008 1,008 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 636 717 1,192 1,115 1,038 921 842 NOTES: 1 2 3 - - Projected - - Capacity increases are projected based on a design to accommodate 525 students. Increased capacity is currently stated as the difference between current calculated capacity and the projected design. In order to reduce elementary class size, Devry capacity is calculated at 17 scholars per classroom. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities. This represents historic enrollment. 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 based on class size capacity of 21. The actual number of portables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs. 24 Page 350 of 967 CAPACITY SUMMARY - MIDDLE SCHOOLS Budget Calendar Year 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 CAPACITY School Year 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 BUILDING PROGRAM HEADCOUNT CAPACITY 5,275 5,275 5,275 5,275 5,275 5,275 5,275 Add/Subtract capacity 0000000 Add capacity at: Totem 1 Illahee Adjusted Program Headcount Capacity 5,275 5,275 5,275 5,275 5,275 5,275 5,275 ENROLLMENT Basic Headcount Enrollment 5,191 5,222 5,274 5,317 5,359 5,423 5,467 Internet Academy2 (55) (55) (55) (55) (55) (55) (55) Basic Enrollment without Internet Academy 5,136 5,167 5,219 5,262 5,304 5,368 5,412 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM CAPACITY 139 108 56 13 (29) (93) (137) RELOCATABLE CAPACITY3 Current Portable Capacity 350 350 350 350 300 300 300 Add/Subtract portable capacity 000(50)000 Totem Middle School Sacajawea Middle School Illahee Middle School (50) Adjusted Portable Capacity 350 350 350 300 300 300 300 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 489 458 406 313 271 207 163 NOTES: 1 2 3 - - Projected - - 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 based on class size capacity of 25. The actual number of portables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities. This represents historic enrollment. Totem and Illahee Middle Schools currently have capacity for 800 & 850 students respectively, so no new capacity is anticipated with the rebuild of these older buildings. 25 Page 351 of 967 CAPACITY SUMMARY - HIGH SCHOOLS Budget Calendar Year 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 CAPACITY School Year 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 BUILDING PROGRAM HEADCOUNT CAPACITY 5,714 5,951 5,951 5,951 5,951 5,951 5,951 Add/Subtract capacity 237000000 Thomas Jefferson High School 4 237 Adjusted Program Headcount Capacity 5,951 5,951 5,951 5,951 5,951 5,951 5,951 ENROLLMENT Basic Headcount Enrollment 6,197 6,234 6,297 6,347 6,398 6,474 6,526 Internet Academy1 (180) (180) (180) (180) (180) (180) (180) Basic Ed without Internet Academy 6,017 6,054 6,117 6,167 6,218 6,294 6,346 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM CAPACITY (66) (103) (166) (216) (267) (343) (395) RELOCATABLE CAPACITY2 Current Portable Capacity 650 400 400 400 400 400 400 Add/Subtract portable capacity (250)000000 Thomas Jefferson High School 4 (250) Adjusted Portable Capacity 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE CAPACITY3 334 297 234 184 133 57 5 NOTES: 1 2 3 - - Projected - - 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 based on class size capacity of 25. The actual number of portables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities. This represents historic enrollment. Capacity for unhoused students will be accommodated with traveling teachers and no planning time in some classrooms. 26 Page 352 of 967 STUDENT GENERATIONSingle Family Student GenerationNumber of Number of Number of Number of Elementary Middle School High School TotalSingle Family Elementary Middle School High School Student StudentStudent StudentDEVELOPMENTDwellingsStudentsStudents Students FactorFactorFactorFactor19-Pacific Heights633000.04760.00000.00000.047619-Havenwood Park714120.06350.01590.03170.098618-Retreat Meadows5689110.12700.14290.17460.500018-Wyncrest II416010.09520.00000.01590.170718-Soundview Manor210000.00000.00000.00000.000017-Eagle Manor124210.06350.03170.01590.583317-Lakehaven Estates130100.00000.01590.00000.076917-Hibbford Glen154640.06350.09520.06350.933317-Vista Pointe10526450.41270.06350.07940.3333Total397552324Student Generation*0.13850.05790.06050.2569Multi-Family Student Generation - City of Federal WayNumber of Number of Number of Number of Elementary Middle School High School TotalMulti Family Elementary Middle School High School Student StudentStudent StudentDEVELOPMENTDwellingsStudentsStudents Students FactorFactorFactorFactor21-Watermark13518750.13330.05190.03700.222217-Uptown Square30812275890.39610.24350.28900.928617-Kitt's Corner21615479600.71300.36570.27781.3565Total659294161154Student Generation*0.44610.24430.23370.9241* Student Generation rate is based on totals.27Page 353 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 28 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 Auburn, 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. Impact Fee Calculation On page 30, the 2021 variables for the calculation of the Impact Fee for single family and multi-family units based on King County Code 21A and the Growth Management Act, generate the results below: Plan Year 2021 Plan Year 2022 Single Family Units $3,243 Multi-Family Units $16,003 Mixed-Use Residential1 $8,001 Impact Fee Calculation - King County Code 21A The Impact Fees have changed as a result of changes in several factors. The updates made to the variables in the Impact Fee calculation, generate a change in the Impact Fee between the 2021 Capital Facilities Plan and the 2022 Capital Facilities Plan. A summary of these changes can be found on page 32 and a year over year comparison of formula variables can be found on page 33. 1 In accordance with the City of Federal Way Ordinance No. 95-249. $1,845 $15,073 $7,536 Page 354 of 967 2022 IMPACT FEE School Site Acquisition Cost:Student Student Facility Cost / Facility Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/ Acreage Acre Capacity SFR MFR SFR MFR Elementary 11.97 $384,077 697 0.1385 0.4461 $914 $2,942 Middle School 0.0579 0.2443 $0 $0 High School 0.0605 0.2337 $0 $0 TOTAL $914 $2,942 School Construction Cost:Student Student % Perm Fac./ Facility Facility Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/ Total Sq Ft Cost Capacity SFR MFR SFR MFR Elementary 95.40% $44,267,128 709 0.1385 0.4461 $8,250 $26,571 Middle School 97.25% 0.0579 0.2443 $0 $0 High School 98.79% $15,171,887 237 0.0605 0.2337 $3,823 $14,780 TOTAL $12,073 $41,351 Temporary Facility Cost:Student Student % Temp Fac. Facility Facility Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/ Total Sq Ft Cost Capacity SFR MFR SFR MFR Elementary 4.60% 0.1385 0.4461 $0 $0 Middle School 2.75% 0.0579 0.2443 $0 $0 High School 1.21% 0.0605 0.2337 $0 $0 TOTAL $0 $0 School Construction Assistance Program Credit Calculation:Student Student Construction Cost Sq. Ft. State Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/ Allocation/Sq Ft Student Match SFR MFR SFR MFR Elementary $238.22 90 65.59% 0.1385 0.4461 $1,948 $6,273 Middle School $238.22 0.0579 0.2443 $0 $0 High School $238.22 130 65.59% 0.0605 0.2337 $1,228 $4,747 Total $3,176 $11,020 Tax Payment Credit Calculation SFR MFR Average Assessed Value (April 2020) $378,910 $193,630 Capital Bond Interest Rate (February 2021) 2.44% 2.44% Net Present Value of Average Dwelling $3,326,551 $1,699,925 Years Amortized 10 10 Property Tax Levy Rate $1.84 $1.84 Present Value of Revenue Stream $6,121 $3,128 Single Family Multi-Family Mixed-Use Residences Residences Residential1 Mitigation Fee Summary Site Acquisition Cost 914$ 2,942$ 2,942$ Permanent Facility Cost 12,073$ 41,351$ 41,351$ Temporary Facility Cost -$ -$ -$ State Match Credit (3,176)$ (11,020)$ (11,020)$ Tax Payment Credit (6,121)$ (3,128)$ (3,128)$ Sub-Total 3,690$ 30,145$ 30,145$ 50% Local Share 1,845$ 15,073$ 15,073$ Calculated Impact Fee 1,845$ 15,073$ 7,536$ City of Kent Impact Fee2 1,845$ 9,450$ 1In accordance with the City of Federal Way Ordinance No. 95-249 2In accordance with the City of Kent Ordinance No. 4278, rev 11/20 CFP 2022 ‐ Working Excel Documents.xlsx 29 Page 355 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 30 Consistent with the capacity calculations described earlier, the District uses the OSPI square footage calculation for determining capacity at our secondary schools. Based on this methodology, the following construction costs for Thomas Jefferson High School are allocated as the proportionate share: REFERENCES TO IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS, continued Square Footage Capacity at approx. 131 sq. ft. Current: 179,119 1378 Planned: 210,000 1600 Increased Capacity 237 Increase as % 16.11% GMP $94,176,828 Proportionate Share $15,171,887 The District will use the above formulas created as a base for future Capital Facilities Plans during the life of the current bond authorization. The capacity of these schools may vary from year to year as programs are added or changed and construction cost may increase over time. FACILITIES CAPACITY Permanent Facility Capacity: Changes to the Building Program Capacities calculation are found on page 15. Capacity Summaries: 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 22-26. 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 2021 Capital Facilities Plan were derived using actual generation factors from single-family units and multi-family units that were constructed in the District in the last five (5) years and can be found on the next page Temporary Facility Cost: The list of portables reflects the movement of portables between facilities or new portables purchased. Portable Locations can be found on pages 16 and 17. Page 356 of 967 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 31 REFERENCES TO IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS SCHOOL ACQUISITION COST The district purchased the former Devry Technical School building to house displaced scholars during school construction then will provide permanent capacity for Early Childhood Education programs. SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION COST With voter approval of the $450,000,000 bond package, design work is underway for six of the approved projects. Anticipated construction budgets (based on the Guaranteed Maximum Price or GMP) have been updated to reflect the final construction contracts, plus amendments. In addition, a credit for the cost of new construction is incorporated to recognize the K-3 Class Size Reduction Grant obtained by Federal Way Public Schools. The following table outlines the facility cost included in the impact fee calculation: Elementary Schools Lake Grove Mirror Lake Star Lake Wildwood Elementary TOTAL Permanent Capacity 353 404 387 472 1616 New Capacity 600 600 525 600 2325 Increased Capacity as % 43.9% GMP $31.475,730 $33,007,391 $30,163,111 $32,609,529 $127,255,761 Proportionate Share $ 55,865,279 K-3 Class Size Credit ($ 11,598,151) Net Proportionate Share $ 44,267,128 Two additional projects are within this horizon, but not yet included – Olympic View K-8 and Mark Twain Elementary. These costs will be incorporated into future Capital Facilities Plans. Current Middle School capacity calculations do not reflect unhoused students, so no costs associated with Illahee Middle School or Totem Middle School are included. Page 357 of 967 Changes from 2021‐22 Item From/To Comment Percent of Permanent Facilities 96.11% to 95.86%Report #3 OSPI Percent Temporary Facilities 3.89% to 4.24%Updated portable inventory Average Cost of Portable $189,941 to $169,579 Updated 5-yr rolling average of Classrooms portables purchased and placed by 2016. Construction Cost Allocation $238.22 to $238.22 Change effective July 2020 State Match 64.71% to 65.59%Change effective July 2020 Average Assessed Value Per King County Assessor's Office SFR- $383,189 to $378,910 SFR: Single-family residences and Mobile Homes MFR- $156,304 to $193,630 MFR: Apartments and Condos Capital Bond Interest Rate 2.44% to 2.44%Market Rate Property Tax Levy Rate $1.86 to $1.84 King County Treasury Division Student Generation Factors Updated Housing Inventory Single-Family Elementary .1809 to .1385 Middle School .0691 to .0579 High School .0987 to .0605 Multi-Family Elementary .5064 to .3946 Middle School .2523 to .2161 High School .2523 to .2067 Impact Fee SFR- $3,243 to $1,845 SFR based on the updated calculation MFR -$16,003 to $15,073 MFR based on the updated calculation City of Kent SFR- $3,243 to $1,845 SFR based on the updated calculation MFR -$9,193 to $9,450 MFR maximum per City of Kent Ordinance No. 4278, rev 11/20 Note: Student generation factors for our single family units are based on new developments constructed within the District over the last five (5) years prior to the date of the fee calculation. Student generation factors for are multi-family units are based on new developments constructed within the District over the last five (5) years prior to the date of the fee calculation. 32 Page 358 of 967 33330 8th Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003 | p.253.945.2043 | f.253.941.0442| www.fwps.org Business Services Each Scholar: A Voice. A Dream. A BRIGHT Future. June 29, 2021 Jeff Dixon Principal Planner City Of Auburn 25 West Main Street Auburn WA 98001-4998 Dear Mr. Dixon, On behalf of Dr. Campbell, Superintendent of Federal Way Public Schools, attached is a copy of the Federal Way Public Schools’ 2022 Capital Facilities Plan. The Federal Way Public Schools’ Board of Education adopted this plan on June 29, 2021. The Federal Way Public Schools’ Board of Education Resolution No. 2021-14 directs the Superintendent to submit the adopted Federal Way Public Schools’ 2021 Capital Facilities Plan to the City of Auburn. A copy of the resolution is attached for your files. The Federal Way Public Schools’ Board of Education requests the City of Auburn to decrease the 2021 impact fee to $1,845 for each single-family development and decrease the impact fee to $15,073 for each multi-family development unit. The expenditure report for the 2020 calendar year is also attached. Please let me know if you have any questions about the changes in the CFP for Federal Way Public Schools. You may contact Jen Thomas at (253)945-2071 or by email at jthomas@fwps.org. Sincerely, Sally McLean Chief Financial and Operations Officer CC: Dr. Tammy Campbell Dr. Dani Pfeiffer Ashley Murphy Mike Benzien Jennifer Thomas Attachments: 3 Page 359 of 967 Page 360 of 967 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 1 of 19 SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Purpose of checklist: Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. Instructions for applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use “not applicable” or "does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision- making process. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Instructions for Lead Agencies: Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B plus the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non-projects) questions in Part B - Environmental Elements –that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. A. Background 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: The adoption of a Federal Way Public Schools’ 2022 Capital Facilities Plan by the Federal Way Public Schools No. 210 for the purposes of planning for the District's facilities needs. The King County, City of Federal Way, City of Kent and the City of Auburn’s Comprehensive Plan will be requested to include the District's 2022 Capital Facilities Plan in the Capital Facilities Plan Element. This project may also Page 361 of 967 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 2 of 19 request the City of Des Moines to incorporate the District’s 2022 Capital Facilities Plan into their Comprehensive Plans. 2. Name of applicant: Federal Way School District No. 210. 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Federal Way School District No. 210 33330 8th Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 (253) 945-2000 Contact Person: Ms. Jennifer Thomas Student and Demographic Forecaster, Business Services Telephone: (253) 945-2071 Email: jthomas@fwps.org 4. Date checklist prepared: June 4, 2021 5. Agency requesting checklist: Federal Way School District No. 210. 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The Federal Way Public Schools’ 2022 Capital Facilities Plan is scheduled to be adopted by the District in July 2021. The Capital Facilities Plan will be forwarded to King County, the City of Federal Way, City of Kent, and the City of Auburn for inclusion in the City's Comprehensive Plan. It will also be forwarded to the City of Des Moines and Muckleshoot Indian Tribe for consideration. The District will continue to update the Capital Facilities Plan annually. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to project-specific environmental review. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. The Capital Facilities Plan sets forth the capital improvement projects that the District is currently implementing. This includes finishing construction on Federal Way High School and planning for several new voter-approved, Bond-funded projects. Additionally the plan covers the purchase and siting of temporary facilities at various locations. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will undergo additional environmental review, when appropriate, as they are developed. Page 362 of 967 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 3 of 19 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. This is a nonproject action. See Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. The District will request that the following jurisdictions consider adopting the Federal Way Public Schools’ 2022 Captial Facilities Plan as part of their respective Comprehensive Plan: • King County, • City of Federal Way, • City of Kent, • City of Auburn, • City of Des Moines, • City of Milton. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) This is a non-project action. This proposal involves the adoption of the Federal Way Public Schools’ 2022 Capital Facilities Plan for the purpose of planning the District’s facilities needs. The projects included in the Captial Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to project- specific environmental reviews. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The Capital Facilities Plan will affect the Federal Way School District. The District includes an area of approximately 35 square miles. The City of Federal Way, parts of the cities of Kent, Des Moines and Auburn, parts of unincorporated King County, fall within the District's boundaries. A detailed map of the District's boundaries may be viewed at the District's main office. B. Environmental Elements 1. Earth a. General description of the site: (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other _____________ The Federal Way School District is comprised of a variety of topographic land forms and gradients. Specific topographic characteristics of the sites at which the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan are located have been or will be identified during project-level environmental review when Page 363 of 967 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 4 of 19 appropriate. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Specific slope characteristics at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-level environmental review. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. Specific soil types found at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-level environmental review when appropriate. Project-level environmental review for any projects identified in the Capital Facilities Plan will include identification of any agricultural soils and associated impacts. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Unstable soils may exist within the Federal Way School District. Specific soil limitations on individual project sites have been or will be identified at the time of project-level environmental review when appropriate. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject, when appropriate, to project-specific environmental review and local approval at the time of proposal. Proposed grading projects, as well as the purpose, type, quantity, and source of any fill materials to be used have been or will be identified at that time. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. It is possible that erosion could occur as a result of the construction projects currently proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan. The erosion impacts of the individual projects have been or will be evaluated on a site-specific basis at the time of project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Individual projects have been or will be subject to local approval processes. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? The proposed renovation projects will require the construction of impervious surfaces. The extent of any impervious cover constructed will vary with each capital facilities project included in the Capital Facilities Plan. This issue has been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: The erosion potential of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and appropriate control measures have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Page 364 of 967 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 5 of 19 Relevant erosion reduction and control requirements will be met. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Various emissions, many construction-related, may result from the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan. The air-quality impacts of each project have been or will be evaluated during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: The individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to project- specific environmental review when appropriate and relevant local approval processes. The District will be required to comply with all applicable air regulations and air permit requirements. Proposed measures specific to the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 3. Water a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. There is a network of surface water bodies within the Federal Way School District. The surface water bodies that are in the immediate vicinity of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. When necessary, the surface water regimes and flow patterns have been or will be researched and incorporated into the designs of the individual projects. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may require work near the surface waters located within the Federal Way School District. Applicable local approval requirements have been or will be satisfied. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Page 365 of 967 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 6 of 19 Information with respect to the placement or removal of fill and dredge material as a component of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be provided during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Applicable local regulations have been or will be satisfied. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Any surface water withdrawals or diversions required in connection with the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Each project included in the Capital Facilities Plan, if located in a floodplain area, will be required to meet applicable local regulations for flood areas. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. Specific information regarding the discharge of waste materials that may be required as a result of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be provided during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions b. Ground Water: 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may impact groundwater resources. The impact of the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on groundwater resources has been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local regulations. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals. . . ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. The discharges of waste material that may take place in connection with the projects included in the Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review. c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Page 366 of 967 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 7 of 19 Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may have storm water runoff consequences. Specific information regarding the storm water impacts of each project has been or will be provided during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local storm water regulations. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may result in the discharge of waste materials into ground or surface waters. The specific impacts of each project on ground and surface waters have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to all applicable regulations regarding the discharge of waste materials into ground and surface waters. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site. Specific information regarding the drainage pattern impacts of each project has been or will be provided during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local drainange pattern regulations. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: Specific measures to reduce or control runoff impacts associated with the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. 4. Plants a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: ____deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other ____evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other ____shrubs ____grass ____pasture ____crop or grain ____ Orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops. ____ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other ____water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other ____other types of vegetation A variety of vegetative zones are located within the Federal Way School District. Inventories of the vegetation located on the sites of the projects proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be developed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Page 367 of 967 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 8 of 19 Some of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may require the removal or alteration of vegetation. The specific impacts on vegetation of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. The specific impacts to these species from the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be determined during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Measures to preserve or enhance vegetation at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local landscaping requirements. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. A variety of vegetative zones are located within the Federal Way School District. Inventories of the noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the sites of the projects proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be developed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. 5. Animals a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Examples include: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other ________ An inventory of species that have been observed on or near the sites of the projects proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be developed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. Inventories of threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be developed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on migration routes have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Page 368 of 967 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 9 of 19 Appropriate measures to preserve or enhance wildlife have been or will be determined during project- specific environmental review when appropriate. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. Inventories of any invasive animal species known to be on or near the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be developed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. The State Board of Education requires the completion of a life cycle cost analysis of all heating, lighting, and insulation systems before it will permit specific school projects to proceed. The energy needs of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be determined at the time of specific engineering and site design planning when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on the solar potential of adjacent projects have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Energy conservation measures proposed in connection with the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be considered during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan that may have any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses have been or will be identified during project- specific environmental review when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. Page 369 of 967 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 10 of 19 The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan that may contain existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. Toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used or produced during the project’s development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will comply with all current codes, standards, rules, and regulations. Individual projects have been or will be subject to project-specific environmental review and local approval at the time they are developed when appropriate. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? A variety of noises from traffic, construction, residential, commercial and industrial areas exists within the Federal Way School District. The specific noise sources that may affect the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indi- cate what hours noise would come from the site. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create normal construction noises that will exist on a short-term basis only. The construction projects could increase traffic around the construction sites on a short-term basis. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: The projected noise impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be evaluated and mitigated during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local regulations. Page 370 of 967 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 11 of 19 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. There are a variety of land uses within the Federal Way School District, including residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, utility, open space, recreational, etc. Impacts on projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on land uses on nearby or adjacent properties have been or will be identified and described during project-level environmental review when appropriate. b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use? The project sites covered under the Capital Facilities Plan have not been used recently as working farmlands or working forest lands. 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: Any areas located on the sites of the projects included in the Plan that may affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations have been or will be identified and described during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. c. Describe any structures on the site. The structures located on the proposed sites for the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified and described during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? The remodeling and renovation projects in the Capital Facilities Plan will require the demolishment of school structures. The structures that will be demolished as a result of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The sites that are covered under the Capital Facilities Plan have a variety of zoning classifications under the applicable zoning codes. Site-specific zoning information has been or will be identified during project- specific environmental review when appropriate. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Page 371 of 967 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 12 of 19 Inventories of the comprehensive plan designations for the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be completed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Shoreline master program designations of the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. Any areas located on the sites of the projects included in the Plan that have been classified as a critical area by the city or county have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? The Federal Way School District currently serves approximately 22,400 students. The student population is expected to increase to 23,800 by the year 2023. This projection has been adjusted to reflect the current economic conditions. The District employs approximately 3,200 people. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Any displacement of people caused by the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be evaluated during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. However, it is not anticipated that the Capital Facilities Plan, or any of the projects contained therein, will displace any people. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to project-specific environmental review and local approval when appropriate. Proposed mitigating measures will be proposed at that time, if necessary. L. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The compatibility of the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan with existing uses and plans has been or will be assessed as part of the comprehensive planning process and during project- specific environmental review when appropriate. m. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: The compatibility of the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan with nearby agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance have been or will be assessed as part of the comprehensive planning process and during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Page 372 of 967 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 13 of 19 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, mid- dle, or low-income housing. No housing units would be provided in connection with the completion of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. It is not anticipated that the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will eliminate any housing units. The impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan on existing housing have been or will be evaluated during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Measures to reduce or control any housing impacts caused by the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? The aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Appropriate measures to reduce or control the aesthetic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be determined on a project-specific basis when appropriate 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The light or glare impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Page 373 of 967 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 14 of 19 The light or glare impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Off-site sources of light or glare that may affect the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be evaluated during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Proposed measures to mitigate light and glare impacts have been or will be addressed during project- specific environmental review when appropriate. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? There are a variety of formal and informal recreational facilities within the Federal Way School District. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. The recreational impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan, including proposed renovated school and support facilities, may enhance recreational opportunities and uses. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Adverse recreational effects of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to mitigation during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. A school site usually provides recreational facilities to the community in the form of play fields and gymnasiums. 13. Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers ? If so, specifically describe. There are no known places or objects listed on, or proposed for such registers on the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan. The existence of historic and cultural resources on or next to the sites has been or will be addressed in more detail during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. An inventory of historical sites at or near the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan Page 374 of 967 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 15 of 19 has been or will be developed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. Methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be developed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed on a project-specific basis when appropriate. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The impact on public streets and highways of the individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The relationship between the specific projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and public transit has been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? An inventory of parking spaces located at the sites of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan and the impacts of specific projects on parking availability has been or will be conducted during project- specific environmental review when appropriate. d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). The need for new streets or roads, or improvements to existing streets and roads has been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Use of water, rail, or air transportation has been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would Page 375 of 967 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 16 of 19 be trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? The traffic impacts of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. Projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan that may interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area has been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: The mitigation of traffic impacts associated with the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan has been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. The District does not anticipate that the projects identified in the Capital Facilities Plan will substantially increase the need for other public services. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Remodeled/renovated school or facilities will be built with automatic security systems, fire alarms, smoke alarms, heat sensors, and sprinkler systems. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other ___________ Electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, and sanitary sewer utilities are available at the sites of the projects proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan. The types of utilities available at specific project sites have been or will be addressed in more detail during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Utility revisions and construction needs have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Page 376 of 967 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 17 of 19 C. Signature The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: . Name of signee: Jennifer Thomas . Position and Agency/Organization: Student and Demographic Forecaster . Date Submitted: 4 June 2021 D. Supplemental sheet for nonproject actions (IT IS NOT NECESSARY to use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; pro- duction, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? To the extent the Capital Facilities Plan makes it more likely that school facilities will be constructed and/or renovated and remodeled, some of these environmental impacts will be more likely. Additional impermeable surfaces, such as roofs, parking lots, sidewalks, access roads, and playgrounds could increase storm water runoff, which could enter surface or ground waters. Heating systems, emergency generators, and other school equipment that is installed pursuant to the Capital Facilities Plan could result in air emissions. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan should not require the production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances, with the possible exception of the storage of diesel fuel or gasoline for emergency generating equipment. The District does not anticipate a significant increase in the production of noise from its facilities, although the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will increase the District's student capacities. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Proposed measures to mitigate any such increases described above have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Storm water detention and runoff will meet applicable County and/or City requirements and may be subject to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permitting requirements. Discharges to air will meet applicable air pollution control requirements. Fuel oil will be stored in accordance with local and state requirements. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? Page 377 of 967 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 18 of 19 The Capital Facilities Plan itself will have no impact on these elements of the environment. These impacts have been or will be addressed in more detail during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. The projects included in the Plan are not likely to generate severe impacts on fish or marine life. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Specific measures to protect and conserve plants, animals, and fish cannot be identified at this time. Specific mitigation proposals have been or will be identified, however, during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? The construction of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will require the consumption of energy. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be constructed in accordance with applicable energy efficiency standards. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? The Capital Facilities Plan and individual projects contained therein should have no impact on these resources. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Updates of this Plan will be coordinated with King County and the cities of Federal Way, Kent, Des Moines, and Auburn as part of the Growth Management Act process, one of the purposes of which is to protect environmentally sensitive areas. To the extent the District's facilities planning process is part of the overall growth management planning process, these resources are more likely to be protected. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? The Capital Facilities Plan will not have any impact on land or shoreline use that is incompatible with existing comprehensive plans, land use codes, or shoreline management plans. The District does not anticipate that the Capital Facilities Plan or the projects contained therein will directly affect land and shoreline uses in the area served by the District. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: Page 378 of 967 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 19 of 19 No measures to avoid or reduce land use impacts resulting from the Capital Facilities Plan or the projects contained therein are proposed at this time. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create temporary increases in the District's need for public services and utilities. Upon the completion of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan, however, the District does not anticipate that its need for public services and utilities will increase substantially beyond existing levels. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: No measures to reduce or respond to such demands are proposed at this time. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. The Capital Facilities Plan will not conflict with any laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. Page 379 of 967 POLICY/TEXT AMENDMENT (P/T) #4 INCORPORATE KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT #415 2020/2021 - 2026/2027 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Page 380 of 967 Page 381 of 967 August 9, 2021 Mr. Jeff Dixon Department of Community Development City of Auburn 25 West Main Street Auburn, WA 98001 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Denise Daniels President Michele Bettinger Vice President Maya Vengadasalam Legislative Representative Leslie Hamada Director Joseph Bento Director Dr. Calvin J. Watts Superintendent MISSION Successfully Preparing All Students For Their Futures Finance Organizational Effectiveness 12033 SE 256th Street • A600 Kent, WA 98030 Phone: (253) 373-7295 Fax: (253) 373-7018 www.kent.k12.wa.us RE: Proposed 2022 School Impact Fees for Kent School District #415 Dear Mr. Dixon The six year (2020-2021) Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) for Kent School District #415 as adopted by the Board of Directors calls for a modest increase in school impact fees for 2022. The impact fees will increase by the percentage increase of the consumer price index (2.20%) for the Seattle metropolitan area in 2021. The single-family residence fee will increase by $125.24 to $5,818.09 from $569.85. The multi-family residence fee will increase by $53.90 to $2,457.53 from $2,403.63. The fee calculations are shown on pages 14 and 15 of the CFP. It should be noted that the District is making an adjustment of $1,538.90 for single family and $5,154 for multi-family residences from what the fees compute. This is to keep the fees reasonable and meet the need of the District and Communities. Sincerely, Ben Rarick Executive Director of Budget & Finance Page 382 of 967 Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan 2020-2021 through 2026-2027 June 2021 Kent School District No. 415 12033 SE 256th Street Kent, Washington 98030-6643 (253) 373-7295 BOARD of DIRECTORS Ms. Denise Daniels, President Ms. Michele Bettinger, Vice President Ms. Maya Vengadasalam, Legislative Representative Ms. Leslie Hamada, Director Mr. Joe Bento, Director ADMINISTRATION Dr. Calvin J. Watts Superintendent of Schools Israel Vela, Chief School Operations and Academic Support Officer Dr. Jewelle Harmon, Chief Accountability Officer Mr. Benjamin Rarick, Executive Director of Fiscal Services Mr. Dave Bussard, Director of Capital Planning & Facilities Page 383 of 967 Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table of Contents I - Executive Summary ................................................................................................. 3 II - Six - Year Enrollment Projection ............................................................................. 4 III - Current Kent School District “Standard of Service" ................................................. 6 Current Standards of Service for Elementary Students ................................................... 7 Current District Standards of Service for Secondary Students ........................................ 7 IV - Inventory and Capacity of Existing Schools ............................................................ 8 V - Six-Year Planning and Construction Plan ................................................................ 9 VI - Portable Classrooms ........................................................................................... 10 VII - Projected Six-Year Classroom Capacity ............................................................... 11 VIII - Finance Plan ..................................................................................................... 12 IX - Summary of Changes to June 2020 Capital Facilities Plan ..................................... 14 X - Appendices .......................................................................................................... 15 12 2 22 Page 384 of 967 I - Executive Summary This Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan has been prepared by the Kent School District as the organization's capital 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, Renton, Auburn, Black Diamond, Maple Valley, and SeaTac. This annual Plan update was prepared using data available in the spring of 2021 for the 2021-2022 school year. This annual update of the Plan reflects no new major capital projects, and an inflation-based adjustment to prior year impact fee rates. 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. This Plan has also been submitted to cities of Black Diamond, Maple Valley, and SeaTac for their information and inclusion in their Comprehensive Plans. 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, Renton and Auburn must also adopt this Plan and their own school impact fee ordinances. 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 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. Portables in the capacity calculation use the same standard of service as the permanent facilities. The capacity of each school in the District is calculated based on the District’s standard of service and the existing inventory of permanent facilities. The District's program capacity 23 3 33 Page 385 of 967 of permanent facilities reflects program changes and the state’s mandated reduction of class size to meet the standard of service for Kent School District. Portables provide additional transitional capacity. Kent School District is the fifth largest (FTE basis) 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 as reported to OSPI. 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 portables. This Plan currently represents projects in process funded primarily by the Kent School District’s 2016 Bond, as well as the 2018 Capital Construction Levy. Additional information about these projects can be found on the district’s capital projects homepage (link). Additionally, project updates sent to our community of stakeholders can be accessed on the KSD website (link). Based on revised student generation rates, and district enrollment projects, the district has updated the proposed student impact fee rate for the coming year. For a short overview, see Section IX (Summary of Changes to the June 2020 Capital Facilities Plan). 34 4 44 Page 386 of 967 II - Six - Year Enrollment Projection For capital facilities planning, enrollment growth projections are based on cohort survival and student yield from documented residential construction projected over the next six years (See Table 2). For this Plan, the district relied substantially on the results from Dr. Les Kendrick’s study of long-range enrollment forecasts for the Kent School District in the Fall of 2020. King County live births and the District's relational percentage average were used to determine the number of kindergartners entering the system (See Table 1). 6.88% of 26,011 King County live births in 2016 is projected for 1,789 students expected in Kindergarten for October 1, 2021. This is an increase of 524 live births in King County over the previous year (See Table 2). Early Childhood Education students (also identified as “ECE”), “Early Childhood Special Education (“ECSE”) students are forecast and reported to OSPI separately on Form P-223H for Special Education Enrollment. Capacity is reserved to serve students in the ECE programs at elementary schools. In addition to live birth data, enrollment projections for October 1, 2021 going forward rely upon the results of the enrollment study by Dr. Kendrick, utilizing the “medium growth” methodology. Within practical limits, the District has kept abreast of proposed developments. The District will continue to track new development activity to determine impact to schools. Information on new residential developments and the completion of these proposed developments in all jurisdictions will be considered in the District's future analysis of growth projections. The Kent School District serves eight permitting jurisdictions: unincorporated King County, the cities of Kent, Covington, Renton, and Auburn and smaller portions of the cities of SeaTac, Black Diamond, and Maple Valley. 45 5 55 Page 387 of 967 STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR "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 ten years. Following these guidelines, the student generation rate for Kent School District is as follows: Single Family Elementary .277 Middle School .071 Senior High .086 Total .435 Multi-Family Elementary .258 Middle School .058 Senior High .100 Total .416 The student generation factor is based on a survey of 1,399 single-family dwelling units and 1,020 multi- family dwelling units with no adjustment for occupancy rates. In preparing the 2021-2022 to 2026-2027 Capital Facilities Plan the District contracted with Dr. Les Kendrick of Educational Data Solutions LLC, a noted expert in demographic studies for school districts, to analyze and prepare the student generation factor. EDC included both “garden” and “urban style” apartments in the calculation for multi-family residences. Within the district’s borders there are several low-income and multi-family housing projects coming on-line in 2021. Once developed with occupancy occurring the District does recognize that the student generation for multi-family housing may impact future Capital Facilities Plan updates. 56 6 66 Page 388 of 967 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 OCTOBER REPORT 1251H (HEADCOUNT) ENROLLMENT HISTORY LB = Live Births LB in 2007 LB in 2008 LB in 2009 LB in 2010 LB in 2011 LB in 2012 LB in 2013 LB in 2014 LB in 2015 October HC Enrollment 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 King County Live Births 1 24,899 25,222 25,057 24,514 24,630 25,032 24,910 25,348 25,487 Increase / Decrease 655 323 -165 -543 116 402 280 316 139 Kindergarten / Birth % 1 8.57%8.40%8.34%8.34%8.17%8.14%7.98%7.93%6.68% Kindergarten 2,134 2,119 2,090 2,045 2,013 2,037 1,989 2,010 1,703 Grade 1 2,017 2,186 2,127 2,131 2,067 2,056 2,061 2,036 1,882 Grade 2 1,905 2,055 2,190 2,163 2,163 2,077 2,008 2,091 1,980 Grade 3 2,082 1,922 2,070 2,176 2,195 2,143 2,043 1,995 2,001 Grade 4 2,000 2,087 1,956 2,089 2,195 2,218 2,118 2,038 1,912 Grade 5 2,044 2,008 2,116 1,958 2,103 2,189 2,169 2,120 1,937 Grade 6 2,026 2,079 2,023 2,058 1,952 2,120 2,184 2,164 2,024 Grade 7 Middle School 2,139 2,046 2,104 1,974 2,021 1,922 2,044 2,166 2,010 Grade 8 " "2,139 2,121 2,091 2,100 2,021 2,043 1,882 2,073 2,086 Grade 9 Senior High 2,455 2,483 2,428 2,093 2,105 2,006 2,004 1,888 2,006 Grade 10 " "2,092 2,046 2,151 2,165 2,099 2,080 1,946 2,035 1,813 Grade 11 " "1,933 1,873 1,802 1,818 1,865 1,823 1,732 1,663 1,744 Grade 12 " "1,646 1,539 1,576 1,742 1,730 1,810 1,654 1,634 1,484 Total Enrollment 2 26,612 26,564 26,724 26,512 26,529 26,524 25,834 25,913 24,582 Yearly Headcount Increase / Decrease -3 -48 160 -212 17 -5 -690 79 -1,331 Cumulative Increase -219 -267 -107 -319 -302 -307 -997 -918 -2,249 1 This number indicates actual births in King County 5 years prior to enrollment year as updated by Washington State Department of Health, Center for Health Statistics. Kent School District percentage based on actual Kindergarten enrollment 5 years later. 2 Enrollment reported to OSPI on Form P-223 generates basic education funding and excludes Early Childhood Special Education ("ECSE" & "B2" or Birth to 2 Preschool Inclusive Education) and excludes College-only Running Start students. Change to Full Day Kindergarten for all schools For 2021 CFP - Headcount Enrollment History Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 1 May 2021 67 7 77 Page 389 of 967 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 SIX - YEAR ENROLLMENT PROJECTION Full Day Kindergarten at all Elem LB in 2015 LB in 2016 LB in 2017 LB in 2018 LB in 2019 LB in 2020 Est LB in 2021 ACTUAL ENROLLMENT October 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 King County Live Births 25,487 26,011 25,274 24,337 24,090 23,849 23,611 Increase / Decrease 139 524 -737 -937 -1,184 -1,425 -726 Kindergarten / Birth % 6.68%6.88%6.88%6.94%6.80%6.65%6.51% FD Kindergarten 1,703 1,789 1,739 1,688 1,637 1,587 1,536 Grade 1 1,882 1,787 1,945 1,950 1,951 1,944 1,937 Grade 2 1,980 1,968 1,845 2,000 2,002 1,998 1,992 Grade 3 2,001 2,052 2,014 1,880 2,035 2,033 2,027 Grade 4 1,912 2,083 2,110 2,062 1,922 2,076 2,074 Grade 5 1,937 1,979 2,130 2,148 2,097 1,949 2,105 Grade 6 2,024 2,013 2,032 2,177 2,193 2,135 1,985 Grade 7 Middle School 2,010 2,060 2,024 2,033 2,176 2,188 2,130 Grade 8 " "2,086 2,105 2,130 2,085 2,091 2,233 2,245 Grade 9 Senior High 2,006 2,163 2,157 2,173 2,125 2,126 2,270 Grade 10 " "1,813 2,078 2,213 2,197 2,210 2,157 2,157 Grade 11 " "1,744 1,625 1,841 1,951 1,934 1,942 1,894 Grade 12 " "1,484 1,707 1,571 1,772 1,877 1,855 1,863 Total Enrollment Projection 24,582 25,410 25,751 26,117 26,250 26,224 26,215 Yearly Increase/Decrease -1,331 828 341 366 133 -26 -9 Yearly Increase/Decrease %-5.14%3.37%1.34%1.42%0.51%-0.10%-0.03% Total Enrollment Projection 24,582 25,410 25,751 26,117 26,250 26,224 26,215 Live births for King County are estimates for year 2021 Projection Source: Les Kendrick Demographic Study, 2021 ("Medium Growth Model") 2020 - 2026 Enrollment Projections PROJECTED ENROLLMENT Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 2 May 2021 78 8 88 Page 390 of 967 III- Current Kent School District “Standard of Service" In order to determine the capacity of facilities in a school district, King County Code 21A.06 references 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 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. Portables included in the capacity calculation use the same standard of service as the permanent facilities. The standard of service defined herein will continue to evolve 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. This process will affect various aspects of the District's standard of service and future changes will be reflected in future capital facilities plans. 89 9 99 Page 391 of 967 Current Standards of Service for Elementary Students • Class size ratio for grades K - 3 is planned for an average of 23 students per class, not to exceed 26. • Class size ratio for grades 4 - 6 is planned for an average of 27 students per class, not to exceed 29. Some special programs require specialized classroom space and the program 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 special programs and space must be allocated to serve these programs. Students may also be provided music instruction and physical education in a separate classroom or facility. Some identified students will also be provided educational opportunities in classrooms for special programs such as those designated as follows: English Learners (EL) Education for Disadvantaged Students (Title I) – Federal Program Learning Assisted Programs (LAP) – State Program Highly Capable Students – State Program Reading, math or science Labs Dual Language Programs in four elementary schools Inclusive Education Service for Elementary and Secondary students with disabilities may be provided in a separate or self-contained classroom sometimes with a capacity of 10- 15 depending on the program. Current District 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 per the negotiated collective bargaining agreement with KEA. • The average class size ratio for grades 7–8 is 30 students per class and 143 students per day, with a maximum daily class load/enrollment of 150 based on five class periods per day. 910 10 1010 Page 392 of 967 • The average class size ratio for grades 9-12 is 32 students per class and 153 students per day, with a maximum daily class load/enrollment of 160 based on five class periods per day. Like Inclusive Education Programs listed above, many other secondary programs require specialized classroom space which can reduce the program capacity of the permanent school buildings, such as technology labs, performing arts activities, a variety of career and technical education programs, and other specialized programs. 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 workspace 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 Kent School District has determined that the standard utilization rate is 95% for secondary schools. Program capacity at elementary schools reflects 100% utilization at the elementary level. 1011 11 1111 Page 393 of 967 IV - Inventory and Capacity of Existing Schools Currently, the District has permanent program capacity to house 28,564 students and transitional (portable) capacity to house 2,085. This capacity is based on the District's Standard of Service as set forth in Section III. Included in this Plan is an inventory of the District's schools by type, address and current capacity (See Table 3). The ratio between permanent capacity and portable capacity is 94.9%-5.1%. 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 implemented in the Fall of 2020. Calculation of Elementary, Middle School and Senior High School capacities are set forth in Appendices A, B, and C. Maps of existing schools are included. For clarification, the following is a brief description of some of the non-traditional programs for students in Kent School District: The 2021-2022 school year will have two academy programs within the district housed at our new Kent Laboratory Academy. The project was approved by the Kent Board of Directors in 2019 by utilizing funding from the 2016 Bond Project “20 Classrooms”. The new facility has 24 classrooms and will now be utilized for many types of Academy related programs. The previous facility of these two programs (Kent Phoenix Academy Campus) will have the voter approved 2018 Levy Projects completed and will be available for additional capacity for our District at the secondary level. iGrad - Kent School District has developed the Individualized Graduation and Degree Program or “iGrad”. iGrad offers a second chance to students aged 16-21 who have dropped out of high school and want to earn a high school diploma. iGrad is not included in this Capital Facilities Plan because it is served in leased space at the Kent Hill Plaza Shopping Center. Over the past three years, enrollment in the iGrad program has averaged over 300 students. 1112 12 1212 Page 394 of 967 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 INVENTORY and CAPACITY of EXISTING SCHOOLS 2021 - 2022 SCHOOL Year Opened ABR ADDRESS Program Capacity Carriage Crest Elementary 1990 CC 18235 - 140th Avenue SE, Renton 98058 428 Cedar Valley Elementary 1971 CV 26500 Timberlane Way SE, Covington 98042 360 Covington Elementary 2018 CO 25811 156th Avenue SE, Covington 98042 630 Crestwood Elementary 1980 CW 25225 - 180th Avenue SE, Covington 98042 408 East Hill Elementary 1953 EH 9825 S 240th Street, Kent 98031 464 Emerald Park 1999 EP 11800 SE 216th Street, Kent 98031 477 Fairwood Elementary 1969 FW 16600 - 148th Avenue SE, Renton 98058 386 George T. Daniel Elementary 1992 DE 11310 SE 248th Street, Kent 98030 432 Glenridge Elementary 1996 GR 19405 - 120th Avenue SE, Renton 98058 431 Grass Lake Elementary 1971 GL 28700 - 191st Place SE, Kent 98042 428 Horizon Elementary 1990 HE 27641 - 144th Avenue SE, Kent 98042 477 Jenkins Creek Elementary 1987 JC 26915 - 186th Avenue SE, Covington 98042 384 Kent Elementary 1999 KE 24700 - 64th Avenue South, Kent 98032 454 Kent Valley Early Learning Center 2014 KV 317 ---4th Ave S, Kent, WA 98032 318 Lake Youngs Elementary 1965 LY 19660 - 142nd Avenue SE, Kent 98042 497 Martin Sortun Elementary 1987 MS 12711 SE 248th Street, Kent 98030 455 Meadow Ridge Elementary 1994 MR 27710 - 108th Avenue SE, Kent 98030 454 Meridian Elementary 1939 ME 25621 - 140th Avenue SE, Kent 98042 497 Millennium Elementary 2000 ML 11919 SE 270th Street, Kent 98030 478 Neely-O'Brien Elementary 1990 NO 6300 South 236th Street, Kent 98032 454 Panther Lake Elementary 2009 PL 12022 SE 216th Street, Kent, 98031 552 Park Orchard Elementary 1963 PO 11010 SE 232nd Street, Kent 98031 463 Pine Tree Elementary 1967 PT 27825 - 118th Avenue SE, Kent 98030 487 Ridgewood Elementary 1987 RW 18030 - 162nd Place SE, Renton 98058 477 River Ridge Elementary 2021 RR 00000 - 22420 Military Rd S SeaTac, WA 758 Sawyer Woods Elementary 1994 SW 31135 - 228th Ave SE, Black Diamond 98010 477 Scenic Hill Elementary 1960 SH 26025 Woodland Way South, Kent 98030 454 Soos Creek Elementary 1971 SC 12651 SE 218th Place, Kent 98031 360 Springbrook Elementary 1969 SB 20035 - 100th Avenue SE, Kent 98031 396 Sunrise Elementary 1992 SR 22300 - 132nd Avenue SE, Kent 98042 477 Elementary TOTAL 13,813 Cedar Heights Middle School 1993 CH 19640 SE 272 Street, Covington 98042 895 Mattson Middle School 1981 MA 16400 SE 251st Street, Covington 98042 787 Meeker Middle School 1970 MK 12600 SE 192nd Street, Renton 98058 832 Meridian Middle School 1958 MM 23480 - 120th Avenue SE, Kent 98031 792 Mill Creek Middle School 2005 MC 620 North Central Avenue, Kent 98032 916 Northwood Middle School 1996 NW 17007 SE 184th Street, Renton 98058 926 Middle School TOTAL 5,148 Kent-Meridian High School 1951 KM 10020 SE 256th Street, Kent 98030 1,904 Kentlake Senior High School 1997 KL 21401 SE 300th Street, Kent 98042 1,957 Kentridge Senior High School 1968 KR 12430 SE 208th Street, Kent 98031 2,277 Kentwood Senior High School 1981 KW 25800 - 164th Avenue SE, Covington 98042 2,159 Senior High TOTAL 8,297 Kent Laboratory Academy 2021 KLA 00000 - 208th St Kent, WA 98030 456 Kent Phoenix Academy 2007 PH 11000 SE 264th Street, Kent 98030 850 DISTRICT TOTAL 28,564 Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 3 May 20211213 13 1313 Page 395 of 967 1314 14 1414 Page 396 of 967 Kent School District Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P,NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri(Thailand), MapmyIndia, NGCC, © OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS User Community May 22, 2017 0 3.5 71.75 mi 0 5.5 112.75 km 1:144,448 Davis Demographics & PlanningMap by: SchoolSite Locator1415 15 1515Page 397 of 967 Kent School District Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P,NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri(Thailand), MapmyIndia, NGCC, © OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS User Community May 22, 2017 0 3.5 71.75 mi 0 5.5 112.75 km 1:144,448 Davis Demographics & PlanningMap by: SchoolSite Locator1516 16 1616Page 398 of 967 V - Six-Year Planning and Construction Plan In November 2016, the voters of the Kent School District approved a bond measure for $252 million. This new bonding authority provided for the replacement for Covington Elementary school, which opened in August of 2018, a new elementary school in the Kent Valley (Currently being built at the former location of Kent Mountain View Academy – River Ridge Elementary), and the twenty additional classrooms project redirected by the Kent School Board to build a 20 classroom Kent Academy Facility housing multiple academy programs in our district, which is currently underway at the site of the Old Panther Lake Elementary School (The Laboratory Academy). At the time of preparation of this Plan in spring 2021, the following projects to increase capacity will be a part of our student capacity in the Kent School District. • `Construction is more than 80% completed for the New Valley Elementary School (River Ridge) on West Hill within the City Limits of SeaTac, WA. The 89,000 square foot K-6 school project is being funded with bond funds and impact fees from King County. It will open for the 2021-2022 school year. • Construction is more than 95% complete for our new Kent Laboratory Academy at the Old Panther Lake Elementary Site in Kent in order to free up space at the current Kent Phoenix Academy location (formerly Sequoia Junior High) for additional classroom space if needed and/or to open another middle school soon. The new 59,000 square foot facility will accommodate a variety of Academy Programs within the Kent School District. • Some funding for lease or purchase of additional portables may be provided by impact fees as needed. Sites are based on need for additional capacity. As a critical component of capital facilities planning, 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 to and from school and bus stops as well as bus pull-outs and turn- arounds. 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 Table 4 & Sitemap). 1617 17 1717 Page 399 of 967 Voter approved bond issues have included funding for the purchase of 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. The Board of Directors has started the process to sell surplus property over the last school year. The Board will continue an annual review of standards of service and those decisions will be reflected in each update of the Capital Facilities Plan. 1718 18 1818 Page 400 of 967 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 Site Acquisitions and Projects Planned to Provide Additional Capacity Projected Projected % for SCHOOL / FACILITY / SITE LOCATION Type Status Completion Program new Date Capacity Growth Approximate Approximate # on Map ELEMENTARY 6 New Valley Elementary School (River Ridge) Old Kent Mountain View Academy Site Elementary Addition Under Construction 2021-2022 758 100% MIDDLE SCHOOL & SENIOR HIGH 3 New Academy Site (Kent Laboratory Academy)Old Panther Lake Elementary Site Academy Under Construction 2021-2022 456 100% TEMPORARY FACILITIES Additional Capacity Portables 1 TBD - For placement as needed New Planning 2020+24 - 31 each 100% # on Map 2 OTHER SITES ACQUIRED Land Use Designation Type 1 164th SE (Across from Mattson)25230-25050 164th SE, Covington 98042 Rural TBD 2 Ham Lake area (Pollard)16820 SE 240, Kent 98042 Rural Elementary 4 Shady Lk area (Sowers, Blaine, Drahota, Paroline)17426 SE 192 Street, Renton 98058 Urban Elementary 5 SE of Lake Morton area (West property)SE 332 & 204 SE, Kent 98042 Rural Secondary 10 South Central Site (Yeh)SE 286th St & 124th Ave SE, Auburn 98092 Urban TBD 12 256th - Covington (Halleson)25435 SE 256th, Covington 98042 Rural To be sold 12a 156th - Covington (Wikstrom)25847 156th Ave. SE, Covington 98042 Rural To be sold Notes: 1 TBD - To be determined - Some sites are identified but placement, timing and/or configuration of portables has not been determined. 2 Numbers correspond to sites on Site Bank Map on Page 19. Other Map site locations are parcels identified in Table 7 on Page 29. King County King County Land Use Jurisdiction King County King County King County King County King County Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 4 May 2021 1819 19 1919 Page 401 of 967 copyright KROLL MAP COMPANY, INC. This map has been modified by KSD 08/01 Fairwood Elementary Ridgewood Elementary Northwood Middle School Lake Youngs Elementary Glenridge Elementary Kentridge High School Kent Laboratory Academy Springbrook Elementary Soos Creek Elementary Sunrise Elementary Meridian Middle School Park Orchard Elementary Martin Sortun Elementary Daniel Elementary East Hill Elementary Kent Elementary Kent-Meridian High School Scenic Hill Elementary Kent School District Administration Center Meadow Ridge Elementary Pine Tree Elementary Horizon Elementary Covington Elementary Cedar Heights Middle School Cedar Valley Elementary Jenkins Creek Elementary Kentwood High School Crestwood Elementary Mattson Middle School Sawyer Woods Elementary Kentlake High School River Ridge Elementary Neely O’Brien Elementary Carriage Crest Elementary Meridian Elementary Meeker Middle School Grass Lake Elementary Emerald Park Elementary Kent Phoenix Academy Millennium Elementary Mill Creek Middle School 1920 20 2020 Page 402 of 967 I - Portable Classrooms The Plan references use of portables as interim or transitional capacity and facilities. Currently, the District utilizes portables to house students in excess of permanent capacity and for program purposes at some school locations (Please see Appendices A, B, C). Based on enrollment projections, implementation of full day kindergarten programs, lower state mandated class sizes, program capacity, and the need for additional permanent capacity, the District anticipates the need to purchase or lease additional portables during the next six- year period to ensure capacity (Noted in section V. Six Yr. Planning Construction). During the time period covered by this Plan, the District does not anticipate that all of the District’s portables will be replaced by permanent facilities. During the useful life of some of the portables, the school-age population may decline in some communities and increase in others, and these portables provide the flexibility to accommodate the immediate needs of the community. Portables 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 times of demand for increased capacity and completion of permanent school facilities to meet that demand. 3. To meet unique program requirements. Portables currently in the District’s inventory are continually evaluated resulting in some being improved and some replaced. The Plan projects that the District will use portables to accommodate interim housing needs for the next six years and beyond. The use of portables, their impacts on permanent facilities, life cycle and operational costs, and the interrelationship between portables, emerging technologies, and educational restructuring will continue to be examined. 2021 21 2121 Page 403 of 967 VII - Projected Six-Year Classroom Capacity As stated in Section IV, the program capacity study is periodically updated for changes in special programs and reflects class size requirements, class size fluctuations etc. As shown in the Inventory and Capacity chart in Table 3, the program capacity is also reflected in the capacity and enrollment comparison charts (See Tables 5 & 5 a-b-c). 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 “snapshot in time” to report enrollment for the year. Kent School District continues to be the fifth largest district (both FTE and headcount basis) in the state of Washington. The P-223 Headcount for October 2020 was 24,587 with kindergarten students counted at 1.0 and excluding ECSE and college-only Running Start students. In October 2020, there were an additional 1,102 students in 11th and 12th grade participating in the Running Start program at different colleges and receiving credits toward both high school and college graduation. Of these students, 686 attended classes only at the college (“college- only”) and are excluded from FTE and headcount for capacity and enrollment comparisons. Kent School District has one of the highest Running Start program participation rates in the state. Based on the enrollment forecasts, permanent facility inventory and capacity, current standard of service, portable capacity, and future additional classroom space, the District plans to continue to satisfy concurrency requirements through the transitional use of portables (See Table 5 and Tables 5 a-b-c). This does not mean that some schools will not experience overcrowding. There may be a need for additional portables and/or new schools to accommodate growth and additional programs within the District. New schools may be designed to accommodate placement of future portables. School attendance area changes, limited and costly movement of portables, zoning changes, market conditions, and educational restructuring will all play a major role in addressing overcrowding and underutilization as well as possible overcrowding of facilities in different parts of the District. 2122 22 2222 Page 404 of 967 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY TOTAL DISTRICT SCHOOL YEAR 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 Actual Permanent Program Capacity 1 27,255 28,564 28,564 28,564 28,564 28,564 28564 Changes to Permanent Capacity 1 Capacity Increase (F) Additional Permanent Classrooms 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Permanent Program Capacity Subtotal 27,255 28,564 28,564 28,564 28,564 28,564 28,564 Interim Portable Capacity Elementary Portable Capacity Required 1,248 0 0 0 0 0 0 Middle School Portable Capacity Required 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Senior High School Portable Capacity Required 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Interim Portable Capacity Total 1,248 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL CAPACITY 1 28,503 28,564 28,564 28,564 28,564 28,564 28,564 TOTAL ENROLLMENT/ PROJECTION 2 24,582 24,410 25,751 26,117 26,250 26,224 26,215 DISTRICT AVAILABLE CAPACITY 3,921 4,154 2,813 2,447 2,314 2,340 2,349 1 Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to reflect program changes. 2 Projection Source: Les Kendrick Demographic Study, 2021 ("Medium Growth Model") P R O J E C T E D Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 May 2021 2223 23 2323 Page 405 of 967 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY ELEMENTARY - Grades K - 6 SCHOOL YEAR 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 Actual Elementary Permanent Capacity 1 13,000 13,000 13,758 13,758 13,758 13,758 13,758 New Elementary School - Kent Valley 758 Additional Permanent Classrooms 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 13,000 13,758 13,758 13,758 13,758 13,758 13,758 Portable Capacity Required 1 1248 456 336 336 336 336 336 TOTAL CAPACITY 1 / 2 14,248 14,214 14,094 14,094 14,094 14,094 14,094 ENROLLMENT / PROJECTION 3 13,439 13,671 13,815 13,905 13,837 13,723 13,657 SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 809 543 279 189 257 371 437 Number of Portables Required 52 19 14 14 14 14 14 1 Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to reflect program changes. 2 Additional classrooms will be placed at schools with the greatest need for aleve overcrowding 3 Projection Source: Les Kendrick Demographic Study, 2021 ("Medium Growth Model") Enrollment & Projections reflect FULL Day Kindergarten at ALL Elementary schools @ 1.0 & exclude ECSE Preschoolers. P R O J E C T E D Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 A May 2021 2324 24 2424 Page 406 of 967 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY MIDDLE SCHOOL - Grades 7 - 8 SCHOOL YEAR 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-2027 Actual Middle School Permanent Capacity 1 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 Changes to Middle School Capacity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 Portable Capacity Required 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL CAPACITY 1 & 3 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 5,148 ENROLLMENT / PROJECTION 2 4,096 4,164 4,154 4,118 4,267 4,421 4,374 SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 1,052 984 994 1,030 881 727 774 Number of Portables Required 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Classroom Portables required at middle schools at this time. Some Portables used for classroom and program purposes. 1 Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to reflect program changes. 2 Projection Source: Les Kendrick Demographic Study, 2021 ("Medium Growth Model") 3 Surplus capacity due to grade level reconfiguration - All 9th grade students moved to the high schools in Fall 2004. P R O J E C T E D Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 B May 2021 2425 25 2525 Page 407 of 967 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY SENIOR HIGH - Grades 9 - 12 SCHOOL YEAR 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-2025 2025-26 2026-27 Actual Senior High Permanent Capacity 1 8,297 8,297 8,297 8,297 8,297 8,297 8,297 Changes to High School Capacity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 8,297 8,297 8,297 8,297 8,297 8,297 8,297 Portables Capacity Required 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL CAPACITY 1 8,297 8,297 8,297 8,297 8,297 8,297 8,297 ENROLLMENT / PROJECTION 3 7,047 7,574 7,782 8,094 8,146 8,080 8,184 SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 1,250 723 515 203 151 217 113 Number of Portables Required 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Classroom Portables required at this time. Some Portables used for classroom and program purposes. 1 Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to reflect program changes. 3 Projection Source: Les Kendrick Demographic Study, 2021 ("Medium Growth Model") P R O J E C T E D Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 C May 2021 2526 26 2626 Page 408 of 967 VIII - Finance Plan The finance plan shown on Table 6 demonstrates how the Kent School District plans to finance improvements for the years 2021-2022 through 2026-2027. The financing components include secured and unsecured funding and impact fees. The plan is based on future bond issues, state school construction assistance, collection of impact fees under the State Growth Management Act and voluntary mitigation fees paid pursuant to State Environmental Policy Act. With River Ridge Elementary School (New Valley School Project) and Kent Laboratory Academy (New Academy Project) coming on-line for school year 2021-2022, this will help support the capacity issue that has been an issue for our district. The building rate within the City of Kent and surrounding areas within our boundary continue to be robust. The district is likely to see growth in enrollment due to these conditions. In November 2016, the District held a special election to approve the authorization of $252,000,000 in bonding authority. The projects described above are part of this authorization. The first series of bonds ($80 million) were issued in February 2017, which funded the Covington Elementary Replacement School, as well as other infrastructure projects. Impact fees will be used at both the New Valley and Academy projects due to escalation in construction pricing across the Pacific Northwest. According to RCW 82.02.090, the definition of an impact fee is ". . . a payment of money imposed upon development as a condition of development approval to pay for public facilities needed to serve new growth and development, and that is reasonably related to the new development that creates additional demand and need for public facilities, that is a proportionate share of the cost of the public facilities, and that is used for facilities that reasonably benefit the new development. `Impact fee' does not include a reasonable permit or application fee." Mitigation or impact fees can be calculated on the basis of "unhoused student need" or "the maintenance of a district's level of service" as related to new residential development. A mitigation/impact fee may be imposed based upon a determination of insufficient existing permanent and/or portable school space or to pay for permanent and/or portable school space previously constructed as a result of growth in the district. A district's School Board must first approve the application of the mitigation or impact fees and, in turn, approval must then be granted by the other general government jurisdictions having responsibility within the district, counties, cities and towns. (Kent, Covington, Renton, Auburn, Black Diamond, Maple Valley, and SeaTac) Though the current enrollment projections increase for both elementary and secondary schools are relatively flat, the ongoing need to provide permanent instructional facilities to house students is a driving need as the shifts in our family populations continue, due to ongoing development. Impact fees will be used to support and address the challenges related to the number of temporary instructional facilities currently in use, the replacement of some of these aged facilities, the maintenance of the district's level of services, and the potential expansions to existing facilities in future years. 2627 27 2727 Page 409 of 967 The Kent School District 2021 CFP update includes continued execution of the 2016 Capital Bond Projects and anticipation of the data collection and review of our Facility Assessment Reports within the coming months. With the opening of our River Ridge Elementary School and the Kent Laboratory Academy, we are advancing opportunity to add capacity for our programs and student-based needs. The District Facilities and Capital Planning Teams have been preparing to complete an initial plan (Fall 2021) as we move the next steps of creating a Capital Bond Planning Task Force (CBPTF) – which will include District personnel, design professionals, teaching staff, student voice as well as community members to being well collaborated discussions to this platform. Our initial plan has revealed priorities including school replacement due to age, and the need for added permanent facilities to (1) reduce and eliminate our need for portables and (2) accommodate future growth as housing in the Kent region continues to expand. Once the CBPTF has it will be brought before the District’s Board of Directors for comments, discussion, and approval. A Capital Bond Measure would follow soon after approval. Portable purchases may be required before the Bond Measure passes as it takes approximately three years from design to open for most large-scale projects such as schools or added permanent capacity. Future updates to this Capital Facilities Plan will include detail of any adopted planning. For the Six-Year Finance Plan, costs of future schools are based on estimates from Kent School District Capital Planning Team. Please see pages 13-14 for a summary of the cost basis. 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 future elementary schools and additional classrooms. Project Projected Cost New Elementary School Kent Valley (To open Fall 2021) - Board Approved Name – River Ridge Elementary $55,000,000 New Academy Facility (To open Fall 2021) - Board Approved Name – Kent Laboratory Academy $36,000,000 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 for a list of site acquisition costs and averages. District Adjustment The impact fee calculations on Appendix B & C include a “District Adjustment” which is equal to the amount of increase that the impact fee formulas total for this year and adjusted for the decrease in the 2022 CY Consumer Price Index (2.2%) for the Seattle metropolitan area (Previously 2.5% for the 2021 CY). 2728 28 2828 Page 410 of 967 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 SIX-YEAR FINANCE PLAN Secured Unsecured Impact SCHOOL FACILITIES *2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 TOTAL Local & State State 2 or Local 3 Fees 5 Estimated Estimated PERMANENT FACILITIES No School Projects at this time.$0 TEMPORARY FACILITIES Additional portables 3 - 4 $0 OTHER N / A Totals $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * F = Funded U = Unfunded NOTES: 2 The District anticipates receiving some State Funding Construction Assistance for some projects. 3 Facility needs are pending review. Some of these projects may be funded with impact fees. 4 Cost of portables based on current cost and adjusted for inflation for future years. 5 Fees in this column are based on amount of fees collected to date and estimated fees on future units. Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 6 May 2021 2829 29 2929 Page 411 of 967 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 Site Acquisitions & Costs Average of Sites Purchased, Sold or Built on within last 10 Years Type & # on Map School / Site Year Open / Purchased Sold Location Acreage Cost/Price Avg cost-price/acre Total Average Cost / Acre Elementary 12 / Urban Property Sale-29.7 acres of Plemons-Yeh site 2016 SSE 124th Ave and 284th ST SE 29.70 $947,536 $31,904 7 / Rural Property Sale - Scarsella site 2015 2900 Kent Black Diamond RD SE 13.25 $330,000 $24,906 3 / Rural Property Sale - Old Covington Parcel A, #362206-9081 2019 17070 SE Wax Rd, Covington 8.00 $3,869,697 $483,712 3 / Rural Property Sale - Old Covington Parcel , #362206-9081 2021 17070 SE Wax Rd, Covington 8.00 0,000,000 $0 6 / Rural Property purchased for new elementary 2019 5 lots purchased Military Road South SeaTac WA 10.00 $1,770,355 $177,036 Elementary Site Subtotal 68.95 $6,917,588 $100,328 Elem site average Middle School No Acquisitions for Middle School 0.00 $0 Middle School Site Subtotal 0.00 $0 $0 Middle Schl Site Avg. Senior High No Acquisitions for Senior Highs 0.00 $0 $0 Senior High Site Subtotal 0.00 $0 $0 Sr Hi Site Average Note: All rural sites were purchased prior to adoption of Urban Growth Area. Numbers correspond to locations on Site Bank & Acquisitions Map on Page 17. Properties purchased prior to 2010 1 / Urban Site - Covington area North (So of Mattson MS)1984 2 / Rural Site - Ham Lake east (Pollard)1992 4 / Urban Site - Shady Lake (Sowers-Blaine-Drahota-Paroline)1995 68.95 $6,917,588 5 / Rural Site - SE of Lake Morton area (West property)1993 10 / Urban Site - Yeh-Williams (W of 132 Ave SE at SE 288)1999 12 / Urban Site - SE 256th Covington (Halleson)2000 12a / Urban Site - 156th Ave. SE Covington (Wikstrom)2004 Total Acreage & Cost Total Average Cost / Acre $100,328 Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 7 May 2021 2930 30 3030Page 412 of 967 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT FACTORS FOR ESTIMATED IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS Student Generation Factors - Single Family Student Generation Factors - Multi-Family Elementary (Grades K - 6)0.277 Elementary 0.258 Middle School (Grades 7 - 8)0.071 Middle School 0.058 Senior High (Grades 9 - 12)0.086 Senior High 0.100 Total 0.435 Total 0.416 Projected Increased Student Capacity OSPI - Square Footage per Student Elementary 758 Elementary 115 Middle School 0 Middle School 148 Senior High (Academy)456 Senior High 173 Special Education ?? Required Site Acreage per Facility Elementary (required)12 Average Site Cost / Acre Middle School (required)25 Elementary $100,328 Senior High (required)38 Middle School $0 Senior High $0 New Facility Construction Cost Elementary *$55,000,000 Temporary Facility Capacity & Cost Middle School $0 Elementary @ 24 $0 Senior High * (Academy)$36,000,000 Middle School @ 29 $0 Senior High @ 31 $0 Temporary Facility Square Footage State Funding Assistance Credit Elementary 125,204 District Funding Assistance Percentage 53.79% Middle School 10,256 Senior High 21,296 Total 4.3%156,756 Construction Cost Allocation CCA - Cost/Sq, Ft. $238.22 Permanent Facility Square Footage Elementary 1,621,688 Middle School 660,904 District Average Assessed Value Senior High/Other 1,223,349 Single Family Residence $268,271 Total 95.7%3,505,941 Total Facilities Square Footage District Average Assessed Value Elementary 1,746,892 Multi-Family Residence $226,726 Middle School 671,160 Senior High/Other 1,244,645 Total 3,662,697 Bond Levy Tax Rate/$1,000 1.41 Current Rate / 1,000 Tax Rate 0.0014 Developer Provided Sites / Facilities Value 0 General Obligation Bond Interest Rate Dwelling Units 0 Current Bond Interest Rate 2.44% CPI Inflation Factor 2.20% Per OSPI Website Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan (APPENDIX A)May 2021 3031 31 3131 Page 413 of 967 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT IMPACT FEE CALCULATION for SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE Site Acquisition Cost per Single Family Residence Formula: ((Acres x Cost per Acre) / Facility Capacity) x Student Generation Factor Required Site Acreage Average Site Cost/Acre Facility Capacity Student Factor A 1 (Elementary)12 $100,328 758 0.27734 $440.50 A 2 (Middle School)25 $0 0 0.07076 $0.00 A 3 (Senior High)38 $0 456 0.08649 $0.00 Total 75 $100,328 1,214 0.435A $440.50 Permanent Facility Construction Cost per Single Family Residence Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Permanent/Total Square Footage Ratio) Construction Cost Facility Capacity Student Factor Footage Ratio B 1 (Elementary)$55,000,000 758 0.27734 0.903 $18,171.62 B 2 (Middle School)$0 0 0.07076 0.984 B 3 (Senior High)$36,000,000 456 0.08649 0.998 $6,814.50 Total $91,000,000 1,214 0.435 B $24,986.13 Temporary Facility Cost per Single Family Residence (Portables) Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Temporary / Total Square Footage Ratio) Facility Cost Facility Capacity Student Factor Footage Ratio C 1 (Elementary)$0 24 0.27734 0.097 $0.00 C 2 (Middle School)$0 29 0.07076 0.016 $0.00 C 3 (Senior High)$0 31 0.08649 0.02 $0.00 Total $0 84 0.435 C $0.00 State Funding Assistance Credit per Single Family Residence (formerly "State Match") Formula: Area Cost Allowance x SPI Square Feet per student x Funding Assistance % x Student Factor Construction Cost Allocation SPI Sq. Ft. / Student Assistance %Student Factor D 1 (Elementary)$238.22 115 0.5379 0.27734 $4,086.86 D 2 (Middle School)$238.22 148 0.5379 0.07076 $1,342 D 3 (Senior High)$238.22 173 0.5379 0.08649 $1,917D $7,346.10 Tax Credit per Single Family Residence Average SF Residential Assessed Value (AAV)$268,271 Net Present Value (per EQ) (NPV)8.90 Current Debt Service Rate / 1,000 ( r )0.14%TC $3,366.53 (Below used to calculate NPV) Current Bond Interest Rate 2.44% Years Amortized (10 Years)- Used in NPV Calculation 10 Developer Provided Facility Credit Facility / Site Value Dwelling Units 0 0 FC 0 Fee Recap ** A = Site Acquisition per SF Residence $440.50 B = Permanent Facility Cost per Residence $24,986.13 C = Temporary Facility Cost per Residence $0.00 Subtotal $25,426.63 D = State Match Credit per Residence $7,346.10 TC = Tax Credit per Residence $3,366.53 Subtotal $10,712.63 Total Unfunded Need $14,713.99 50% Developer Fee Obligation $7,357 FC = Facility Credit (if applicable)$0 District Adjustment (1538.90) Net Fee Obligation per Residence - Single Family $5,818.09 Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan (APPENDIX B)June 2020 3132 32 3232 Page 414 of 967 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 Required Site Acreage Average Site Cost/Acre Facility Capacity Student Factor A 1 (Elementary)12 $100,328 758 0.25784 $409.53 A 2 (Middle School)25 $0 0 0.05784 A 3 (Senior High)38 $0 456 0.100 $0.00 Total $75 100,328 1,214 0.416A $409.53 Permanent Facility Construction Cost per Multi-Family Residence Unit Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Permanent / Total Square Footage Ratio) Construction Cost Facility Capacity Student Factor Footage Ratio B 1 (Elementary)$55,000,000 758 0.25784 0.903 $16,893.96 B 2 (Middle School)$0 0 0.05784 0.984 B 3 (Senior High)$36,000,000 456 0.100 0.998 $7,878.95 Total $91,000,000 1,214 0.416 B $24,772.91 Temporary Facility Cost per Multi-Family Residence Unit Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Temporary / Total Square Footage Ratio) Facility Cost Facility Capacity Student Factor Footage Ratio C 1 (Elementary)$0 24 0.25784 0.097 $0.00 C 2 (Middle School)$0 29 0.05784 0.016 $0 C 3 (Senior High)$0 31 0.100 0.02 $0 Total $0 84 C $0.00 State Funding Assistance Credit per Multi-Family Residence (formerly "State Match") Formula: Area Cost Allowance x SPI Square Feet per student x Funding Assistance % x Student Factor Area Cost Allowance SPI Sq. Ft. / Student Equalization %Student Factor D 1 (Elementary)$238.22 115 0.5379 0.25784 $3,799.51 D 2 (Middle School)$238.22 148 0.5379 0.05784 $1,097 D 3 (Senior High)$238.22 173 0.5379 0.1 $2,217D $7,113.22 Tax Credit per Multi Family Residence Average MF Residential Assessed Value (AAV)$226,726 Net Present Value (per EQ) (NPV)8.90 Current Debt Service Rate / 1,000 ( r )0.14%TC $2,845.18 (Below used to calculate NPV) Current Bond Interest Rate 2.44% Years Amortized (10 Years)- Used in NPV Calculation 10 Developer Provided Facility Credit Facility / Site Value Dwelling Units 0 0 FC 0 Fee Recap ** A = Site Acquisition per Multi-Family Unit $409.53 B = Permanent Facility Cost per MF Unit $24,772.91 C = Temporary Facility Cost per MF Unit $0.00 Subtotal $25,182.44 D = State Match Credit per MF Unit $7,113.22 TC = Tax Credit per MF Unit $2,845.18 Subtotal -$9,958.40 Total Unfunded Need $15,224.04 50% Developer Fee Obligation $7,612 FC = Facility Credit (if applicable)0 District Adjustment ($5,154) Net Fee Obligation per Residential Unit - Multi-family $2,457.53 Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan (APPENDIX C)June 2020 3233 33 3333 Page 415 of 967 IX - Summary of Changes to June 2020 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 June 2020 Plan are summarized here. Changes to capacity continue to reflect fluctuations in class size ratio as well as program changes. Changes in portables or transitional capacity reflect use, lease or purchase, sale, surplus and/or movement between facilities. The district worked with contractor Educational Data Solutions, LLC out of Seattle Washington to update student generation factors. The updated rates are included in the body of the Plan. The student headcount enrollment forecast is updated annually. All Elementary schools now have Full Day Kindergarten so six-year Kindergarten projections were previously modified to meet the requirements for Full Day Kindergarten programs at all elementary schools. The district expects to receive some State Funding Assistance (formerly called “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. The impact fees for 2022 calendar year will change based on the percentage increase of the consumer price index for the Seattle metropolitan area. The increase for 2022 calendar year is 2.2% (Based on the OSPI Applied to LEA & Levy per pupil inflators CPI as of March 2021). For single-family residences, the fee will increase by $125.24 to $5818.06. The impact fee for multi-family units will increase by $52.90 to $2,457.53. 3334 34 3434 Page 416 of 967 ITEM Grade/ Type FROM TO Increase/ Decrease Comments Student Generation Factor Elem 0.334 0.277 Single Family (SF)MS 0.078 0.071 SH 0.117 0.086 Total 0.529 0.435 -0.094 Decrease Student Generation Factor Elem 0.187 0.258 Multi-Family (MF)MS 0.043 0.058 SH 0.070 0.100 Total 0.300 0.416 0.116 Increase State Funding Assistance Ratios (“State Match”) 56.96%53.79%-3.17%Per OSPI Website Area Cost Allowance $225.97 $238.22 12.250 Per OSPI Website Average Assessed Valuation (AV)SF $423,247 $268,271 (154,976)Puget Sound ESD AV - Average of Condominiums & Apts.MF $164,546 $226,726 62,180 Puget Sound ESD Debt Service Capital Levy Rate / $1000 $1.41 $1.41 0.0 Per King Co. Assessor Report General Obligation Bond Interest Rate 2.16%2.44%0.28%Bond Buyers 20 year GO Index Impact Fee - Single Family SF $5,692.85 $5,818.09 $125.24 2.20% Impact Fee - Multi-Family MF $2,403.63 $2,457.53 $53.90 2.20% X - Appendices Changes to Impact Fee Calculation Factors Include: 3435 35 3535 Page 417 of 967 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST UPDATED 2021 WAC 197-11-960 Environmental Checklist. Purpose of Checklist: Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal Instructions for Applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use "not applicable" or "does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision-making process. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Instructions for Lead Agencies: Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents Use of checklist for non-project proposals: For non-project proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B plus the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non-projects) Page 418 of 967 2 questions in Part B - Environmental Elements -that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: The adoption of a six-year Capital Facilities Plan by the Kent School District. The Comprehensive Plans of King County, City of Kent, City of Covington, City of Renton, City of Auburn and possibly Cities of Maple Valley, Black Diamond and SeaTac have been and/or will be amended to include the Kent School District 2021 Capital Facilities Plan in the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plan for each jurisdiction. A copy of the Capital Facilities Plan is available for review in the Kent School District Business Services Department. 2. Name of applicant: Kent School District No. 415. 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Kent School District No. 415 12033 SE 256th Street # A-600 Kent, WA 98030-6643 Contact Person: Mr. Tom Metcalf, Director Telephone: (253) 373-7295 4. Date checklist prepared: May 7, 2021 5. Agency requesting checklist: Kent School District No. 415 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The 2021 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan is scheduled to be forwarded to King County, Cities of Kent, Covington, Renton, Auburn, Maple Valley, Black Diamond, and SeaTac for possible inclusion in each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. The Capital Facilities Plan will be updated annually. Site-specific projects have been or will be subject to project-specific environmental review. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. None at this time Page 419 of 967 4 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. King County and Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn and Renton will review and approve the Capital Facilities Plan for the purposes of impact fee ordinances and will need to adopt the Plan as an amendment to the Capital Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive Plans of King County and Cities of Kent, Covington, Renton and Auburn. Cities of Maple Valley, Black Diamond, and SeaTac may also review and approve the Plan for the purposes of any school impact fee ordinances and may adopt the Plan as an amendment to the Capital Facilities element of their Comprehensive Plans. 11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) This is a non-project action. This proposal involves the adoption of the Kent School District 2021 Capital Facilities Plan for the purpose of planning the facilities needs of the District and for inclusion in the Capital Facilities Plan element and possible amendment of the Comprehensive Plans for King County, City of Covington, City of Kent, City of Renton, City of Auburn, City of Black Diamond, City of SeaTac and City of Maple Valley. A copy of the Capital Facilities Plan may be viewed at the Kent School District Business Services Department office. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. Page 420 of 967 5 The 2021 Capital Facilities Plan will affect the Kent School District. The District includes an area of approximately 70 square miles. The City of Covington, and portions of the Cities of Kent, Auburn, Renton, Black Diamond, Maple Valley, SeaTac and parts of unincorporated King County fall within the boundaries of the Kent School District. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other ---- The Kent School District is comprised of a variety of topographic landforms and gradients, including all of those listed. Specific topographic characteristics will be identified during the planning and permit process for each capital project. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Specific slope characteristics will be identified during the planning and permit process for each capital project. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. · Specific soil types will be identified during the planning and permit process for each capital project. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Unstable soils may exist within the Kent School District. Specific soil limitations on individual project sites will be identified at the time of environmental review. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to project- specific environmental review and local approval at the time of proposal. Proposed grading projects, as well as the purpose, type, quantity, and source of fill materials will be identified as appropriate to each project. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. It is possible that erosion could occur as a result of construction projects currently proposed in the Capital Facilities Plan. Individual projects and their erosion impacts will be evaluated on a site-specific basis. Individual projects will be subject to environmental review and local approval on the time of proposal. Page 421 of 967 6 g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings?) Percentage of impervious cover will vary with each capital facilities project and will be addressed during project-specific environmental review. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Erosion potential on individual project sites will be addressed during project-specific environmental review. Relevant erosion reduction and control requirements will be met. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction operation and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Various emissions, many construction-related, may result from individual projects. Air-quality impacts will be evaluated during project-specific environmental review. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non-project Actions. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Off-site sources and necessary mitigation will be addressed during project-specific environmental review. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Plans for individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan have been or will be subject to environmental review and relevant local approval processes, including obtaining of any necessary air quality permits, at the time individual projects are formally proposed. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non-project Actions. 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. There is a network of surface water bodies within the Kent School District. The surface water regimes and flow patterns have been or will be researched and incorporated in the design of each individual project. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Page 422 of 967 7 Some projects may require work near these described waters. Individual projects in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to environmental review and local approval requirements at the time the project is formally proposed. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Information with respect to placement or removal of fill or dredge material will be addressed at the time of project-specific environmental review. Applicable local regulations have been or will be satisfied. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Any surface water withdrawals or diversions have been or will be addressed during project-specific environmental review. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Each capital facilities project, if located in a floodplain area, will be required to meet applicable local regulations for flood areas. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. Specific information regarding discharges of waste materials, if any, will be addressed during project-specific environmental review. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non-project Actions. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may impact ground water resources. Each project will be evaluated during project-specific environmental review. Applicable local regulations have been or will be satisfied. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non-project Actions. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals ... ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. Page 423 of 967 8 Impacts of discharged waste material, if any, have been or will be addressed during site-specific, project-level environmental review. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may have varying storm water runoff consequences. Each project will be subject to environmental review and applicable local regulations. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will have varying environmental impacts and will be subject to appropriate review and local regulations prior to construction. Information regarding waste materials will be presented at the time of such review. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non-project Actions. 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may have varying drainage pattern consequences. Each project will be subject to environmental review and applicable local regulations d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Specific measures to reduce or control runoff impacts have been or will be developed on a project-specific basis in cooperation with the appropriate jurisdiction. 4. Plants: a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other Page 424 of 967 9 water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other types of vegetation There are various vegetative zones within the Kent School District. An inventory of species has been or will be produced as part of project-specific environmental review. b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Impacts on vegetation will be determined at the time of project-specific environmental review at the time the project is formally proposed. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non-project Actions. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Specific impacts to these species from individual projects have been or will be determined at the time of project proposal and will be addressed during site-specific, project-level environmental review. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to environmental review and local approval at the time of project proposal. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to Environmental review and local approval at the time of project proposal. 5. Animals: a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: An inventory of species observed on or near sites has been or will be developed during project-specific environmental review. b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Page 425 of 967 10 Specific impacts to these species from individual projects will be determined at the time of project proposal and will be reviewed in cooperation with the affected jurisdictions. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Impacts on migration routes, if any, will be addressed during site-specific, project- level environmental review. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Appropriate measures to preserve or enhance wildlife have been or will be determined at the time of site-specific, project-level environmental review. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. An inventory of invasive animal species observed on or near sites has been or will be developed during project-specific environmental review 6. Energy and Natural Resources: a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. The State Board of Education requires a life-cycle cost analysis of all heating, lighting, and insulating systems prior to allowing specific projects to proceed. Energy needs will be decided at the time of specific engineering and site design planning. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non-project Actions. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe: Individual projects of this Capital Facilities Plan will be evaluated as to their impact on the solar potential of adjacent projects during environmental review. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Energy conservation measures will be considered at the project-specific design phase and environmental review. 7. Environmental Health: Page 426 of 967 11 a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non-project Actions. 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non-project Actions. 2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area in the vicinity Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non-project Actions. 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non-project Actions. 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non-project Actions. 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Proposed projects will comply with all current codes, standards, and rules and regulations. Individual projects have been or will be subject to environmental review and local approval at the time of formal submittal. b. Noise: 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? A variety of noises exist within the Kent School District. Specific noise sources have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Normal construction noises would exist on a short-term basis during school construction. There could be an increase in traffic or operations-related noise Page 427 of 967 12 which would be addressed during project specific environmental review. Please see the Supplemental Sheet for Non-project Actions. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Project noise impacts have been or will be evaluated and mitigated during the project-specific environmental review. Each project is or will be subject to applicable local regulations. 8. Land and Shoreline Use: a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? There are a variety of land uses within the Kent School District, including residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, utility, agricultural, forestry, open space, recreational, etc. b. Has the site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use? 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: This question will be addressed during site-specific, project-level environmental review. c. Describe any structures on the site. Structures located on proposed sites have been or will be identified and described during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Structures to be demolished, if any, will be identified as part of the project-specific environmental review process. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? There are a variety of zoning classifications within the Kent School District. Site specific zoning information has been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? An inventory of comprehensive plan designations has been or will be completed during project-specific environmental review. Page 428 of 967 13 g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Any shoreline master program designations have been or will be identified during project-specific environmental review. h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by city or county? If so, specify. Environmentally sensitive areas, if any, will be identified during project-specific environmental review. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? This information has been or will be provided at the time of project-specific environmental review. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? It is not anticipated that proposed projects will displace any people. Displacement of people, if any, will be evaluated during project-specific environmental review. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Individual projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be subject to project- specific environmental review and local approval at the time the project is formally proposed. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Compatibility of the proposal and specific projects with existing uses and plans have been or will be assessed as part of the comprehensive planning process and during project-specific environmental review. m. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with nearby agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: Compatibility of the proposal and specific projects with existing uses and plans have been or will be assessed as part of the comprehensive planning process and during project-specific environmental review. 9. · Housing: a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No housing units would be provided. Page 429 of 967 14 b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Any impact of project proposals on existing housing has been or would be evaluated during project-specific environmental review procedures. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Measures to reduce or control any housing impacts have been or will be addressed during site-specific, project-level environmental review. 10. Aesthetics: a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Aesthetic impacts have been or will be determined at the time of site-specific, project- level environmental review. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Aesthetic impacts have been or will be determined at the time of site-specific, project- level environmental review. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Appropriate measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts have been or will be determined at the time of project-specific environmental review. 11. Light and Glare: a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Light or glare impacts have been or will be determined at the time of project-specific environmental review. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Light or glare impacts have been or will be determined at the time of project-specific environmental review. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Off-site sources of light or glare have been or will be evaluated at the time of project specific environmental review. Page 430 of 967 15 d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Mitigation of light and glare impact has been or will be addressed during project- specific environmental review. 12. Recreation: a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? There are a variety of formal and informal recreational facilities within the Kent School District. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. Recreational impacts have been or will be addressed during project specific environmental review. Projects in the Capital Facilities Plan may enhance recreational opportunities and uses. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Any adverse effects on recreation stemming from individual project proposals have been or will be subject to mitigation during the environmental review procedure. A school site usually provides recreational facilities to the community in the form of additional play fields and gymnasiums. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation: a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers located on or near the site? If so, describe. The existence of historic and cultural resources will be determined at the time of project-specific environmental review. b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. An inventory of historical sites has been or will be conducted as part of project specific environmental review. c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with Page 431 of 967 16 tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed on a project-specific basis. d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed on a project-specific basis. 14. Transportation: a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Impact on public streets and highways has been or will be assessed during project- specific environmental review. b. Is site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The relationship between specific projects and public transit has been or will be assessed during project-specific environmental review. c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? An inventory of parking spaces and the impacts of specific projects on parking spaces have been or will be conducted during project-specific environmental review. d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). The development of new schools may require new access roads or streets. This issue will be fully addressed during project-specific environmental review. e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Use of water, rail or air transportation has been or will be addressed during site- specific, project-level environmental review. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of volume would be trucks (such as commercial and non-passenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? Each project proposal has been or will be separately evaluated as to traffic impacts. Page 432 of 967 17 g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. Each project proposal has been or will be separately evaluated as to traffic impacts. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Mitigation of impacts on transportation has been or will be addressed during project- specific environmental review. 15. Public Services: a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Impacts have been or will be evaluated on a project-specific basis. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Schools are built with automatic security systems, fire alarms, smoke alarms, heat sensors and sprinkler systems. 16. Utilities: a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. Utilities available at project sites have been or will be identified during project specific environmental review. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Utility revisions and construction needs will be identified during project-specific environmental review. Page 433 of 967 18 C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Mr. Tom Metcalf Director, Business Services Page 434 of 967 19 D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? To the extent this Plan makes it more likely that school facilities will be constructed, and/or renovated or remodeled, some of these environmental impacts will be more likely. Additional impermeable surfaces, such as roofs, parking lots, sidewalks, access roads and playgrounds will increase storm water runoff, which could enter surface or ground water. Emissions to air could result from heating systems, emergency generators and other equipment, and from additional car and bus trips to and from the school for students and faculty. Any emissions resulting from this Plan should not require the production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances, with the possible exception of storage of diesel fuel or gasoline for emergency generating equipment. Noise may result from additional traffic and from concentrating several hundred children at a new facility, especially before and after school and during recesses. To the extent this proposal allows additional residential development to occur, these impacts would also increase somewhat, but it is not possible to quantify those impacts at this time. The impacts would depend on the type, location and distribution of housing, for example, whether single or multiple family and the location of the school. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Facilities implementing the Plan have been or will be evaluated at the project specific level and impacts will be mitigated accordingly. Storm water detention and runoff will meet applicable County and/or City requirements and, depending on the date of actual construction, may be subject to a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permitting requirements. Discharges to air will be minimal, and will meet any applicable requirements of the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Authority. Fuel oil will be stored according to local and state requirements. Page 435 of 967 20 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? The Plan itself will have no impact on these elements of the environment. Depending on the particular site, construction of facilities may require clearing sites of plants and loss of animal habitat. To the extent residential development is allowed, additional area may be cleared and eliminated as habitat for animals. There are not likely to be any impacts on fish or marine life, although some water quality degradation in streams and rivers could occur due to increased residential development. These impacts have been or will be addressed in more detail during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Individual projects will be evaluated and mitigated appropriately on a project-specific basis, but specific mitigation proposals cannot be identified at this time. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Any actual projects resulting from this Plan would consume heating fuel and electrical energy. Increased traffic resulting from the construction of additional facilities would consume petroleum based fuels. Reduced traffic resulting from construction of another neighborhood school may also reduce amounts of fuel consumed, but it is not possible to quantify such reduction in consumption at this time. These impacts have been or will be addressed in more detail during project-specific environmental review when appropriate. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: Facilities would be constructed in accordance with applicable energy efficiency standards. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? The Plan and facilities constructed pursuant to the Plan should have no impact on these resources. It is not possible to predict whether other development made possible by this Plan would affect sensitive areas. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: No specific measures are being proposed at this time. Appropriate measures have been or will be proposed during project-specific review. Annual updates of this Plan will be coordinated with King County, Cities of Kent, Covington, Renton, Auburn, Black Diamond, SeaTac, and Maple Valley as part of the Growth Management Act process, one of the purposes of which is to protect environmentally sensitive areas. To the extent the School District's facilities planning process is part of the overall growth management planning process, these resources are more likely to be protected. Page 436 of 967 21 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? The Plan will not have any impact on land or shoreline use that is incompatible with existing comprehensive plans, land use codes, or shoreline management plans. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: None are proposed at this time. Actual facilities constructed to implement the Plan will be sited and constructed to avoid or reduce land use impacts. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? This proposal should not create substantial new demands for transportation. The projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan may create an increase in traffic near new District facilities but also reduce traffic by creating the opportunity for more students to walk to a closer school. The construction of the facilities included in the Capital Facilities Plan may result in minor increases in the demand for public services and utilities, such as fire and police protection, and water, sewer, and electric utilities. None of these impacts are likely to be significant. The impacts on transportation and public services and utilities of the projects included in the Capital Facilities Plan will be addressed during project-level review when appropriate. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: No measures to reduce or respond to such demands are proposed at this time. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. The Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan will not conflict with any laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. Page 437 of 967 0 DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE For Kent School District No. 415 2021 Capital Facilities Plan Issued with a 14-day comment and appeal period. Description of Proposal: This threshold determination analyzes the environmental impacts associated with the following actions, which are so closely related to each other that they are in effect a single action: 1. The adoption of the Kent School District 2021 Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan by the Kent School District for the purposes of planning for the facilities needs of the District. 2. The amendment of the King County Comprehensive Plan to include the Kent School District 2021 Capital Facilities Plan as a part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the King County Comprehensive Plan. 3. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Kent to include the Kent School District’s 2021 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Kent. 4. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Covington to include the Kent School District’s 2021 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Covington. 5. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Renton to include the Kent School District’s 2021 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Renton. 6. The amendment of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Auburn to include the Kent School District’s 2021 Capital Facilities Plan as part of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Auburn. 7. This proposal may also involve amendment of Comprehensive Plans of the Cities of Black Diamond, Maple Valley, and/or SeaTac to incorporate the Kent School District 2021 Capital Facilities Plan into the Capital Facilities element of that jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. Page 438 of 967 1 Proponent: Kent School District No. 415 Location of the Proposal: The Kent School District includes an area of approximately 70 square miles. The City of Covington and portions of the cities of Kent, Renton, Auburn, Black Diamond, Maple Valley, and SeaTac fall within the District's boundaries, as do parts of unincorporated King County. Lead Agency: Kent School District No. 415 is the lead agency pursuant to WAC 197-11-926. The lead agency for this proposal has determined that the proposal does not pose a probable significant adverse impact to the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030 (2) (c). This decision was made after a review of the completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public upon request. This Determination of Non-significance (DNS) is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2). The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date of issue. Comments must be submitted by 4:00 p.m., May 18, 2021. The responsible official will reconsider the DNS based on timely comments and may retain, modify, or, if significant adverse impacts are likely, withdraw the DNS. If the DNS is retained, it will be final after the expiration of the comment deadline. Responsible Official: ______________________________________ Mr. Dave Bussard Director of Capital Planning Kent School District No. 415 Telephone: (253) 373-7277 Address: 12033 SE 256th Street, Bld. B Kent, Washington 98030-6643 Appeals of this determination are governed by Board Policy No. 6890, which can be obtained from Mr. David Bussard, Director, Kent School District No. 415, 12033 SE 256th Street Bld. B, Kent, Washington 98030-6643 and pursuant to WAC 197-11-680 and RCW 43.21C.075. Date of Issue: 5/7/2021 Date Published: 5/21/2021 Page 439 of 967 POLICY/TEXT AMENDMENT (P/T #5) INCORPORATE CITY OF AUBURN CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2022-2027 Page 440 of 967 Page 1 of 3 Memorandum To: Planning and Community Development From: Finance Department, Capital Projects Date: September 14, 2021 Re: DRAFT 6-Year Capital Facilities Plan (2022-2027) Attached is the copy of our 2022-2027 Draft Capital Facilities Plan (CFP), the capital facilities element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. For questions or additional information on the preparation of this document, please contact Consuelo Rogel at (253) 804-5023 or crogel@auburnwa.gov. Questions regarding specific projects contained in the document should be directed to the department managing the project(s). A capital facilities plan is one of the comprehensive plan elements required by Washington’s Growth Management Act (GMA). The GMA requires that a capital facilities plan 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 a minimum of a six-year plan to finance capital facilities with identified sources of funding. The attached CFP satisfies the GMA requirement for a Capital Facilities Element as part of the Comprehensive Plan. The following projects have been added, removed or revised from the previous year’s CFP (2021-2026) due to the creation of new projects, completion of projects or changes in project titles and/or priorities: Transportation Projects (see TIP for further details) Additions • Lea Hill ITS Expansion page 29 • Non-Motorized Safety Program page 54 • 4th Street SE Preservation (AWS to L Street SE) page 69 Transportation Projects Deletions • F Street SE Non-Motorized Improvements. Project to be completed in 2021 • A Street SE Corridor Study Project to be completed in 2021 • Citywide Pedestrian Accessibility & Safety Program Title changed to Non-Motorized Safety Program (page 54) Page 441 of 967 Page 2 of 3 Transportation Projects Deletions (continued) • Citywide Arterial Bicycle & Safety Imp. Project combined with Non-Motorized Safety program (page 54) • AWS -Poplar Curve Safety Imp. Project to be completed in 2021 • 2022 Local Street Preservation Project cancelled- budget included in TIP # P-2 Local Street Program • AWN Preservation Phase 2 (8th St NE to 22nd St NE). Project to be completed in 2021 AWN Preservation Phase 3 (4th St SE & 8th St NE) Project to be completed in 2021 • Lakeland Hills Way Preservation Project to be completed in 2021 Water, Sewer, Storm Utilities Projects Additions • 4th Street SE Preservation Water page 95, Sewer page 133, Storm page 153 • R Street SE Improvements Water page 97, Storm page 171 • Auburn Way Pavement Patching Water page 99 • D Street SE Storm Improvements Water page 114 • 23rd Street SE Storm Improvements Water page 116, Sewer page 138 • C Street Preservation Water page 117 • Garden Avenue Re-alignment Sewer page 124 • Regional Growth Center Access Imp. Sewer page 139, Storm page 156 • Lead Service Line Replacement Storm page 168 • North Airport Storm Improvements, Phase 2 Storm page 169 • Arterial and Pedestrian Bike Safety Storm page 170 Water, Sewer, Storm Utilities Projects Deletions • F Street SE Non-Motorized Improvements Project completed in 2021 • Pipeline Asset Management Study Project completed in 2021 • 2022 Local Street Reconstruction Project cancelled • Meter Vault Replacement Project completed in 2021 • AWN Preservation Project Phase 3 Project completed in 2021 • Auburn Municipal Airport Runway Enhancements Project completed in 2021 Page 442 of 967 Page 3 of 3 Parks, Arts & Recreation Projects Deletions • Lea Hill Mini Soccer Field Turf Replacement Project to be completed in 2021 General Municipal Buildings / Community Improvements Additions • M&O Facility Improvement, Phase 1 page 199 • Sidewalk and ADA Inventory page 213 Community Improvements / General Municipal Buildings Deletions • M&O Vehicle Storage Bay Improvements Included in M&O Facility Imp. Project • Equipment Rental Vehicle Maintenance Bay Included in M&O Facility Imp. Project • M&O Lunchroom Expansion To be included as part of another phase of M&O facility improvements Airport Additions • Airport South T Hangar Taxilane rehab page 236 • Hangar Facility Construction (page 232) • Open T-Hangar Upgrades (page 233) • Runway/Taxiway Rehab, RSA Grading & PAPI project (page 234) • Property Access to Airport (page 235) • Precision Instrument Approach (page 236) • Airport Office / Middle Ramp Reconfigure (page 237) Airport Deletions • Hangar Facility Construction Developer is completing project without City funding Page 443 of 967 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN (2022 – 2027) Adopted by Ordinance No. xxxx, December x, 2021 as part of the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan City of Auburn 25 West Main Auburn, WA 98001 (253)931-3000 www.auburnwa.gov City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan Page 444 of 967 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan Page 445 of 967 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2022 – 2027 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary .................................................................................................................... 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 ............................................................................................................................. 15 Transportation ......................................................................................................................... 17 Arterial Street (102) Capital Projects ................................................................................. 22 Local Street (103) Capital Projects .................................................................................... 57 Street Preservation Fund (105) Capital Projects ............................................................... 60 Water ...................................................................................................................................... 71 Sanitary Sewer........................................................................................................................ 119 Storm Drainage ....................................................................................................................... 141 Parks, Arts and Recreation ..................................................................................................... 173 General Municipal Buildings .................................................................................................... 195 Community Improvements ...................................................................................................... 205 Airport ..................................................................................................................................... 225 Cemetery ................................................................................................................................ 239 Valley Regional Fire Authority ................................................................................................. 243 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan Page 446 of 967 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan Page 447 of 967 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: to provide 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. 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. The comprehensive plan contains timeframes that are the intended framework for future funding decisions and within which future actions and decisions are intended to occur. However, these timeframes are estimates; depending on factors involved in the processing of applications and project work, and the availability of funding, the timing may change from the included timeframes. The framework does not represent actual commitments by the City of Auburn that may depend on funding resources available. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 1 Page 448 of 967 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 2021 83,950 2022 85,041 2027 89,379 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 2022-2027 is summarized as follows: Type of Facility 2022 - 2027 Transportation - Arterial (102)45,822,630$ Transportation - Local (103)11,660,000 Transportation - Street (105)15,169,650 Water 50,318,838 Sanitary Sewer 16,129,879 Storm Drainage 22,733,259 Parks, Arts & Recreation 15,903,850 General Municipal Buildings 5,509,510 Community Improvements 9,483,400 Airport 16,876,460 Cemetery 355,000 Total 209,962,476$ City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 2 Page 449 of 967 FINANCING FOR CAPITAL FACILITIES The financing plan for the citywide capital improvements includes: Funding Source 2022 - 2027 Capital Facility Grants 20,302,756 Transportation 2,195,500 Parks, Arts & Recreation 528,000 General Municipal Buildings 1,901,370 Community Improvements 400,000 Storm Drainage 7,248,330 Airport User Fees / Fund Balance 46,692,498 Water 16,708,539 Sewer 22,823,169 Storm Drainage 355,000 Cemetery 274,000 Equipment Rental 37,510 Facilities 3,368,130 Airport Arterial Street Fund 2,493,435 Transportation Local Street Preservation Fund 1,760,000 Transportation Arterial Street Preservation Fund 12,157,676 Transportation Local Revitalization Fund 245,000 Community Improvements General Fund 20,020 General Municipal Buildings Bond Proceeds 505,000 Water WSDOT Aviation Loan 750,000 Airport DWSRF Loan 3,700,000 Water Municipal Parks Fund 450,000 Parks, Arts & Recreation Property Tax 1,113,500 Parks, Arts & Recreation Mitigation/Impact Fees 20,860,913 Transportation 6,589,850 Parks, Arts & Recreation 500,000 General Municipal Buildings 1,494,060 Community Improvements REET 1 3,314,000 General Municipal Buildings 750,000 Transportation - Local Streets 300,000 Parks, Arts & Recreation REET 2 4,605,500 Community Improvements 180,000 Parks, Arts & Recreation 930,000 Transportation - Arterial Streets 750,000 Transportation - Local Streets Other Sources 4,247,500 Transportation - Arterial Streets 7,500,000 Transportation - Local Streets 1,237,470 Community Improvements 5,510,000 Airport 88,750 Storm Drainage 5,075,000 Parks, Arts & Recreation Total 209,962,476$ (Includes grant funding that has not been secured) City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 3 Page 450 of 967 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS The forecasted impacts of new capital facilities on the City’s future operating budgets (2023- 2028) are as follows: Budget Year:2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Total 1 Transportation 4,000$ 9,000$ 10,000$ 16,000$ 16,000$ 19,000$ 74,000$ 2 Water - - - - - - - 3 Sanitary Sewer - - - - - - - 4 Storm Drainage - - - - - - - 5 Parks, Arts and Recreation 15,000 15,000 17,000 17,000 22,000 22,000 108,000 6 General Municipal Buildings - 95,000 95,000 95,000 95,000 95,000 475,000 7 Community Improvements (137,500) (137,500) (127,500) (127,500) (127,500) (127,500) (785,000) 8 Airport - 2,000 2,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 16,000 9 Cemetery - - - - - - - Total (118,500)$ (16,500)$ (3,500)$ 4,500$ 9,500$ 12,500$ (112,000)$ Project summary details are located on the following pages: Transportation page 70 Parks & Recreation page 193 General Municipal Buildings page 203 Community Improvements page 223 Airport page 237 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 4 Page 451 of 967 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) CONSEQUENCES OF THE CFP Based on the proposed six-year capital projects and the projected population increase of 4,338 (5%) between 2022 and 2027, 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, comparing the 2022 LOS to the projected 2027 LOS. CAPITAL FACILITY LOS UNITS 2022 LOS 2027 LOS (Projected) Community Parks Acres per 1,000 Pop.2.80 3.12 Linear Parks Acres per 1,000 Pop.0.20 0.23 Neighborhood Parks Acres per 1,000 Pop.0.77 0.83 The LOS for the following facilities will be maintained as a result of the CFP. CAPITAL FACILITY LOS UNITS 2022 LOS 2027 LOS (Projected) Roads Volume/Capacity Ratio "D" "D" Airport % Air Operations Support 100% 100% Cemetery Burial Plots per 1,000 Pop.32.00 30.00 Sanitary Sewer Residential GPCPD (Note 1)171.00 171.00 Storm Drainage N/A Water Residential GPCPD (Note 1)230.00 230.00 Note 1: GPCPD = Gallons per Customer per Day The LOS for the following facilities will be decreased as a result of the CFP, comparing the 2022 LOS to the projected 2027 LOS. CAPITAL FACILITY LOS UNITS 2022 LOS 2027 LOS (Projected) General Municipal Buildings Sq. Ft. per 1,000 Pop.3,725.36 3,543.83 Open Space Acres per 1,000 Pop.4.56 4.34 Senior Center Sq. Ft. per 1,000 Pop.145.32 136.50 Special Use Areas Acres per 1,000 Pop.3.03 2.85 Level of Service (LOS) is a common measure used to determine the efficiency or effectiveness of services. For the City of Auburn, LOS targets serves as a means to assess the adequacy of public facilities in meeting the needs of the population for which it serves. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 5 Page 452 of 967 For example, in the case of park space, when there is an increase in population without a corresponding increase in park acreage, the LOS unit of measure (acres per 1,000 population) will decline, indicating a potential need to increase the total amount of park acreage to keep pace with population growth. On the other hand, a slight increase in population, coupled with a large increase in facilities, will result in an increased LOS. For example, facilities such as buildings or burial plots may be constructed or expanded to keep pace with anticipated population growth. While this will have the effect of increasing LOS in the short-term, in the longer-term, the LOS will gradually decline to the targeted level based on forecasted population. The impact of population growth to the LOS for facilities will vary depending on the type of facility and long range planning by the City. CFP ELEMENT SOURCE DOCUMENTS Documents used in preparing this Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) are principally the comprehensive plans for the various public facilities included in this CFP. These individual comprehensive plans provide detailed identification of projects and identify their (projects) proposed funding sources. City documents include: • City-wide Comprehensive Land Use Plan (2015) • City Municipal Airport Master Plan Update (2012-2032) • City Comprehensive Water Plan (2015) • City Comprehensive Transportation Plan (2015) and Six Year Transportation Improvement Program (2022-2027) • City Comprehensive Drainage Plan (2015) • City Comprehensive Sewer Plan (2015) • City 2021-22 Biennial Budget and 2020 Annual Financial Report; and, • City Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan Update (2015), as well as numerous other planning and financial documents. All documents are available for public inspection at the City of Auburn. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 6 Page 453 of 967 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION PURPOSE The Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) is a 6-year plan (2022-2027) 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. With this in mind, the City will follow these guidelines and update the CFP at least every two years, incorporating the capital facilities improvements in the City’s biennial budget process. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 7 Page 454 of 967 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. The level of service is unique for each type of facility and is presented in the subsequent sections. 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 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 in 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. 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 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 8 Page 455 of 967 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 at least 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. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 9 Page 456 of 967 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 10 Page 457 of 967 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 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 19.27.095, 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 based on 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. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 11 Page 458 of 967 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: 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 that 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. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 12 Page 459 of 967 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 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. Goal 5 Provide public facilities that provide a sense of community that is inclusive of diverse populations. Policy 5.1 Contribute to community pride and foster a sense of community through provision of public facilities that create a community-gathering place for neighbors, family and friends. Policy 5.2 Through provision of public facilities, offer a broad range of activities promoting social interactions especially with new residents. Policy 5.3 Provide maximum flexibility and multiple uses through design of public facilities that are adaptable to changing interests. Policy 5.4 Provide a community center facility that is financially feasible, affordable for participants, and can generate revenue to offset a portion of the operating costs. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 13 Page 460 of 967 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 14 Page 461 of 967 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 through December 31, 2027. 3. Capital Projects and Financing Plan (Table X-2, X-2A and X-2B) This list of capital improvements identifies existing deficiencies, identifies facilities needed for future growth, and identifies the need to repair or replace obsolete or worn out facilities through December 31, 2027. 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 capital projects and the forecasted impacts on the City’s future operating budgets (2023 – 2028). City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 15 Page 462 of 967 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 16 Page 463 of 967 TRANSPORTATION Current Facilities Roadways: The City’s street system consists of a network of approximately 254 miles of arterials, collectors, local streets and alleys. Existing non-motorized facilities include a mix of trails, sidewalks, and both dedicated and shared bicycle facilities. Signals and ITS: The City’s transportation system also includes 96 traffic signals, a Traffic Control Center employing Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), which centrally directs the signals, 83 CCTV cameras, and various traffic beacons all communicating on a network of copper wire and fiber optic cable. The City also has two roundabouts. Transit: King County Metro Transit, Sound Transit and Pierce Transit serve the Auburn area. Auburn is currently served by six Metro, two Sound Transit, and one Pierce Transit bus route. In addition, Sound Transit “Sounder” commuter trains provide peak hour and midday service at the Auburn Station. The Sounder also provides special event service to selected sporting events. Park and ride facilities and the Auburn Station support bus and rail service. Level of Service (LOS) Washington's Growth Management Act (GMA) requires Level of Service (LOS) standards for both arterials and transit routes. The GMA requires that each jurisdiction's LOS standards be coordinated within the region and be supported by local ordinance, but the actual standards and the methods used are determined by each local jurisdiction. Under GMA, the focus is on the performance of the whole road system, not on individual intersections or roadways. LOS standards are a tool to help keep the transportation system in balance with the needs of forecast population growth and development. Table T-1a summarizes the LOS definitions. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 17 Page 464 of 967 Table T-1a Definition of Urban Street Level of Service (LOS) LOS A - describes primarily free flow operations at average travel speeds, usually about 90 percent of the free flow speed for the given street class. Vehicles are completely unimpeded in their ability to maneuver within the traffic stream. Control delay at signalized intersections is minimal. LOS B - describes reasonably unimpeded operations at average travel speeds, usually about 70 percent of the free flow speed for the street class. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is only slightly res tricted, and stopped delays are not bothersome. LOS C - describes stable conditions; however, ability to maneuver and change lanes in midblock locations may be more restricted than in LOS B, and longer queues, adverse signal coordination, or both may c ont ribute to lower average travel speeds of about 50 percent of the free flow speed for the street class. LOS D - borders on a range in which small increases in flow may cause substantial increases in delay and decreases in travel speed. LOS D may be due to adverse signal progression, inappropriate signal timing, high volumes, or some combination of these factors. Average travel speeds are about 40 percent of free flow speed. LOS E - is characterized by significant delays and average travel speeds of 33 percent or less of the free flow speed. Such operations are caused by a combination of adverse progression, high signal density, high volumes, extensive delays at critical intersections, and inappropriate signal timing. LOS F - is characterized by urban street flow at extremely low speeds, typically one-third to one-fourth of t he free flow speed. Intersection congestion is likely at critical signalized locations, with high delays, high volumes and extensive queuing. Source: 2010 Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C. 2010, page 10-5 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 the transportation and land use elements of the City’s Comprehensive Plan, as required by the GMA. The City has four choices if it is determined that standards cannot be met. • Modify the land use plan, placing tighter controls on the amount and type of development to reduce traffic. • Construct additional transportation facilities to support increased travel demand from new development. • Implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures to increase use of non- single occupant vehicle travel modes. • Relax the LOS standards; the City can lower its level of service standards to encourage further growth and minimize the need for additional transportation facilities. 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. The City can then identify locations where standards are not anticipated to be met in the future and identify appropriate improvements. At the project level, the SEPA process will continue to guide the more specific planning and analysis efforts. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 18 Page 465 of 967 Level of Service Standards LOS standards can help identify where and when transportation improvements are needed, and when development or growth will affect system operations. LOS provides a standard below which a transportation facility or system is not considered adequate. LOS standards can also be used to evaluate the impact of proposed developments on the surrounding street system. They can assure that all developments are served by a safe, efficient and cost-effective street system. They can also be used to disclose impacts, identify remedial actions, and apportion costs between public and private sources. The LOS standards shown in Table T-1b apply to the facility’s location and its functional classification. A more detailed description of the level of service methodology is provided in the City of Auburn Comprehensive Transportation Plan (2021), Chapter 5, Policy LOS-02. Table T- 1b Draft Roadway Capacity/Congestion LOS Standards Roadway/Intersection Maximum V/C Ratio/LOS Art erial Corridor D* Signalized Intersection D Unsignalized Intersection D *Unless otherwise specified in Chapter 2 of the City of Auburn Comprehensive Transportation Plan, 2020 LOS standards are also the basis of an equitable traffic impact fee system, which require developments to pay a portion of the costs for capacity improvements to the transportation infrastructure. In 2001, the City implemented a traffic impact fee program. The purpose of the fee is to mitigate traffic impacts more equitably while making the costs of development more predictable to developers. In 2007, the City implemented an additional transportation impact fee to address the impacts of heavy truck usage on the City’s transportation system. Both fees are updated annually so that the fees are consistent with current project costs. Measuring Transportation System Performance The level of service for street 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. Second, arterial corridor LOS analysis can be used to assess concurrency or if facilities are meeting the LOS standards. The City of Auburn currently uses Highway Capacity Manual methodologies to calculate levels of service. For arterials LOS are based on average travel speeds along a defined corridor. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 19 Page 466 of 967 Table T-1c shows the 25 defined street corridors, LOS standards and most recent calculated LOS. TABLE T- 1c Auburn Corridor Level of Service – Existing 2014 Weekday PM Peak Hour LOS ID Corridor From To Standard*NB/EB SB/WB 1 Auburn Way N 15th St NE S 277th St E C C 2 Auburn Way N E Main St 15th St NE E D D 3 Auburn Way S E Main St M St SE F C D 4 Auburn Way S M St SE Academy Dr SE D B C 5 M St / Harvey Auburn Way N E Main St E D D 6 M St / Harvey E Main St Auburn Way S E D C 7 37th St NE / NW W Valley Hwy Auburn Way N E C C 8 15th St NE / NW W Valley Hwy Auburn Way N F**D D 9 Auburn Ave / A St 6th St SE E Valley Access Rd D B C 10 Main St West Valley Hwy R St D D D 11 15th St SW West Valley Hwy C St SW E D D 12 C St SW Ellingson Rd SR - 18 D B C 13 West Valley Hwy 37th St NE 15th St NE E B C 14 S 277th St Frontage Rd L St NE E C C 15 R St SE / Kersey Way Howard Rd Lake Tapps Pkwy D B B 16 Lake Tapps Pkwy East Valley Hwy Kersey Way SE D C C 17 A St NW / B St NW 3rd St NW S 277th St D C B 18 8th St NE / Lea Hill Rd Harvey Rd 124th Ave SE E C B 19 SE 312th St / 132nd Ave SE 124th Ave SE SR - 18 D B B 20 105th Pl SE / SE 320th St Lea Hill Rd 124th Ave SE D A C 21 Lakeland Hills Way SE Lake Tapps Pkwy A St SE E D C 22 29th St SE / Riverwalk Dr A St SE Auburn Way S D D C 23 3rd St SW / Cross St C St Auburn Way S F F E 24 41st St SE / Ellingson Rd A St SE C St SE F F F 25 West Valley Hwy 15th St NW 15th St SW E D E * **Total travel time in the eastbound direction cannot exceed 1,000 seconds for this corridor to meet the LOS Standards Corridor segments within Downtown Auburn may operate at LOS E in accordance with the Auburn Downtown Plan. All other arterial and collector corridors must operate at LOS D or better, unless otherwise indicated. 2014 LOS City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 20 Page 467 of 967 Concurrency (Adequate Public Facilities) 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. In compliance with the GMA, adequate transportation system facilities must be available within six years of the time of occupancy and use of new development. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing The City’s transportation facilities include projects totaling $72,652,280. Tables T-2, T-2A and T-2B show 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 $74,000 are forecasted for transportation facilities during the six years 2023 – 2028. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 21 Page 468 of 967 TABLE T-2 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Page Capacity Projects: 26 Harvey Road & 8th Street NE Intersection Improvements Long-Term Debt 83,196 82,794 82,382 81,990 81,589 81,187 493,138 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Grants - - - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees 83,196 82,794 82,382 81,990 81,589 81,187 493,138 27 Lea Hill Road/112th Ave SE Roundabout Capital Costs - - 350,000 420,000 2,200,000 2,200,000 5,170,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Grants (Unsecured)- - - - 1,600,000 1,100,000 2,700,000 Traffic Impact Fees - - 350,000 420,000 600,000 1,100,000 2,470,000 28 29th Street SE & R Street SE Intersection Improvements Capital Costs 525,000 250,000 4,000,000 - - - 4,775,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Street Preservation Fund 105 25,000 - 375,000 - - - 400,000 Other - - 125,000 - - - 125,000 Traffic Impact Fees 500,000 250,000 3,500,000 - - - 4,250,000 29 Lea Hill ITS Expansion Capital Costs - - 100,000 500,000 - - 600,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - REET2 - - 50,000 250,000 - - 300,000 Traffic Impact Fees - - 50,000 250,000 - - 300,000 30 R Street SE & 21st Street SE Intersection Safety Improvements Capital Costs - 250,000 100,000 750,000 - - 1,100,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Grants (Unsecured)- - - 600,000 - - 600,000 Traffic Impact Fees - 250,000 100,000 150,000 - - 500,000 31 Auburn Way S and 6th Street SE Capital Costs - 130,000 25,000 845,000 - - 1,000,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Grants (Unsecured)- - - 695,000 - - 695,000 Traffic Impact Fees - 130,000 25,000 150,000 - - 305,000 32 SE 304th Street/132nd Avenue SE Roundabout Capital Costs - 250,000 50,000 1,200,000 - - 1,500,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Grants (Unsecured)- - - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - 250,000 50,000 1,200,000 - - 1,500,000 33 10th Street NW/A Street NW Intersection Improvements Capital Costs 250,000 750,000 - - - - 1,000,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees 250,000 750,000 - - - - 1,000,000 34 Evergreen Heights Elementary Sidewalks Capital Costs - - - - 150,000 1,800,000 1,950,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - 160,000 160,000 Grants (Unsecured)- - - - 120,000 1,440,000 1,560,000 REET2 - - - - 30,000 200,000 230,000 35 Riverwalk Drive SE Non-Motorized Improvements Capital Costs 175,000 1,050,000 - - - - 1,225,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 50,000 262,500 - - - - 312,500 Grants 125,000 455,000 - - - - 580,000 Other -MIT - 332,500 - - - - 332,500 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING TRANSPORTATION City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 22 Page 469 of 967 TABLE T-2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING TRANSPORTATION 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Page Capacity Projects: 36 Stewart Road - Sumner (Lake Tapps Parkway Corridor) Capital Costs - - 150,000 - - - 150,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Grants - - - - - - - Traffic Mitigation Fees - - 150,000 - - - 150,000 37 M Street Underpass (3rd St SE to 8th St SE) Long-Term Debt 122,843 122,550 122,258 121,965 121,673 121,380 732,669 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Grants (Unsecured)- - - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees 122,843 122,550 122,258 121,965 121,673 121,380 732,669 38 A Street Loop Capital Costs 340,000 1,192,000 - - - - 1,532,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Grants (Unsecured)- 1,125,000 - - - - 1,125,000 Traffic Impact Fees - 67,000 - - - - 67,000 Other 340,000 - - - - - 340,000 39 A Street NW, Phase 2 (W Main St to 3rd St NW) Capital Costs - - 350,000 2,650,000 - - 3,000,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - 150,000 - - - 150,000 Grants (Unsecured)- - 200,000 1,325,000 - - 1,525,000 Other (Other Agencies)- - - 1,325,000 - - 1,325,000 40 Auburn Way S Improvements (Hemlock St SE to Poplar St SE) Capital Costs 1,143,888 400,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 - - 8,543,888 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - 200,000 - - - 200,000 Traffic Impact Fees 846,338 400,000 1,738,153 1,453,615 - - 4,438,106 Grants 297,550 - 2,061,847 1,546,385 - - 3,905,782 Other (Other Agencies)- - - - - - - 41 M Street NE (E Main St to 4th St NE) Capital Costs 375,000 50,000 2,485,000 - - - 2,910,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 120,000 50,000 400,000 - - - 570,000 Arterial Street Fund 105 185,000 - 1,220,000 - - - 1,405,000 REET 2 - - 400,000 - - - 400,000 Traffic Impact Fees 70,000 - 465,000 - - - 535,000 Other - - - - - - - 42 49th Street NE (Auburn Way N to D St NE) Capital Costs 500,000 1,500,000 - - - - 2,000,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Grants - - - - - - - Other 500,000 1,500,000 - - - - 2,000,000 43 46th Place S Realignment Capital Costs - - - 250,000 250,000 750,000 1,250,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Grants - - - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - 250,000 250,000 750,000 1,250,000 44 124th Ave SE Corridor Improvements Phase 2 Capital Costs - - - - 400,000 1,100,000 1,500,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Grants - - - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - 400,000 1,100,000 1,500,000 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 23 Page 470 of 967 TABLE T-2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING TRANSPORTATION 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Page Capacity Projects: 45 Regional Growth Center Access Improvements Capital Costs 100,000 1,500,000 - - - - 1,600,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Grants - 1,300,000 - - - - 1,300,000 Traffic Impact Fees 100,000 200,000 - - - - 300,000 46 Stewart Road - City of Pacific (Lake Tapps Parkway Corridor) Capital Costs 100,000 - - - - - 100,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Grants - - - - - - - Traffic Mitigation Fees 100,000 - - - - - 100,000 47 East Valley Highway Widening Capital Costs - - - - 300,000 250,000 550,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Grants - - - - 200,000 175,000 375,000 Traffic Impact Fees - - - - 100,000 75,000 175,000 48 Garden Avenue Realignment Capital Costs 500,000 - - - - - 500,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Grants - - - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees 500,000 - - - - - 500,000 49 A Street NW - Phase 1 (3rd St NW to 14th St NW) Capital Costs 25,000 - - - - - 25,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Grants - - - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees 25,000 - - - - - 25,000 50 S 272nd/277th St Corridor Capacity & Non-Motorized Trail Improvements Capital Costs 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 120,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 120,000 Other - - - - - - - Subtotal, Capacity Projects: Capital Costs 4,239,927 7,527,344 11,814,640 9,818,955 3,503,262 6,302,567 43,206,695 Non-Capacity Projects: 51 Auburn Way N/1st Street NE Signal Replacement Capital Costs 105,935 - - - - - 105,935 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 85,935 - - - - - 85,935 Arterial Street Preservation 20,000 - - - - - 20,000 52 ITS Dynamic Message Signs Capital Costs - - - - 35,000 225,000 260,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - 35,000 225,000 260,000 Grants - - - - - - - City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 24 Page 471 of 967 TABLE T-2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING TRANSPORTATION 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Page Non-Capacity Projects: 53 Auburn Avenue/E Main Street Signal Replacement Capital Costs - - - - 200,000 900,000 1,100,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - REET 2 - - - - 200,000 900,000 1,100,000 54 Citywide Pedestrian Accessibility & Safety Program Capital Costs 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 900,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 900,000 Other - - - - - - - 55 Auburn Station Access Improvements Capital Costs 125,000 - - - - - 125,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - - - Other (Sound Transit)125,000 - - - - - 125,000 56 M Street SE Sidewalk Improvements Capital Costs 5,000 - - - - - 5,000 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 5,000 - - - - - 5,000 Grants (Unsecured)- - - - - - - Other - - - - - - - Subtotal, Non-Capacity Projects: Capital Costs 405,935 170,000 170,000 170,000 405,000 1,295,000 2,615,935 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects 4,033,888 7,322,000 11,610,000 9,615,000 3,300,000 6,100,000 41,980,888 Non-Capacity Projects 405,935 170,000 170,000 170,000 405,000 1,295,000 2,615,935 Long-Term Debt 206,039 205,344 204,640 203,955 203,262 202,567 1,225,807 Total Costs 4,645,862 7,697,344 11,984,640 9,988,955 3,908,262 7,597,567 45,822,630 FUNDING SOURCES: Unrestricted Street Revenue 410,935 462,500 750,000 150,000 185,000 535,000 2,493,435 Grants 447,550 2,880,000 2,636,847 4,166,385 2,120,000 3,615,000 15,865,782 Traffic Impact Fees 2,517,377 2,522,344 6,652,793 4,097,570 1,573,262 3,247,567 20,610,913 Traffic Mitigation Fees 100,000 - 150,000 - - - 250,000 Street Preservation Fund 105 205,000 - 1,220,000 - - - 1,425,000 REET - - 450,000 250,000 30,000 200,000 930,000 Other (Other Agencies, Funds)965,000 1,832,500 125,000 1,325,000 - - 4,247,500 Total Funding 4,645,862 7,697,344 11,984,640 9,988,955 3,908,262 7,597,567 45,822,630 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 25 Page 472 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: Harvey Rd NE/8th St NE Intersection Improvements TIP# I-5 Project No:cp0611 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:None LOS Corridor ID# 5, 19 Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Traffic Impact Fees (Debt Service)945,178 83,598 83,196 82,794 1,111,972 Traffic Impact Fees 204,500 204,500 PWTF 1,527,300 1,527,300 2,676,978 83,598 83,196 82,794 2,843,772 Capital Expenditures: Design 327,500 - - - 327,500 Right of Way 200,400 - - - 200,400 Construction 1,203,900 - - - 1,203,900 Long Term Debt - PWTF 945,178 83,598 83,196 82,794 1,111,972 2,676,978 83,598 83,196 82,794 2,843,772 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Traffic Impact Fees (Debt Service)82,382 81,990 81,589 81,187 493,138 Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - PWTF - - - - - 82,382 81,990 81,589 81,187 493,138 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - Long Term Debt - PWTF 82,382 81,990 81,589 81,187 493,138 82,382 81,990 81,589 81,187 493,138 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Description: The project constructed one eastbound through/right turn-lane on 8th St NE to the west of Harvey Rd and modified traffic signals and traffic channelization to accommodate the new lane. The additional lane reduced traffic delays and queuing at the intersection of Harvey Rd and 8th St NE in all directions. This project also reconstructed M St NE from 4th St NE to 8th St NE, a segment of roadway approximately 0.3 miles long with a four-lane cross-section. The reconstruction addressed the existing poor pavement condition and completed sidewalk gaps. . Progress Summary: Project was completed in 2010. Ongoing budget is for Public Works Trust Fund Loan debt payments scheduled through 2028. Future Impact on Operating Budget: N/A Total Funding Sources: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 26 Page 473 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: Lea Hill Road/112th Ave SE Roundabout TIP# I-6 Project No:cpxxxx Project Type:Capacity, Safety Project Manager:TBD LOS Corridor ID# 19 Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured - - 1,600,000 1,100,000 2,700,000 Traffic Impact Fees 350,000 420,000 600,000 1,100,000 2,470,000 Other - - - - - 350,000 420,000 2,200,000 2,200,000 5,170,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 350,000 - - - 350,000 Right of Way - 420,000 - - 420,000 Construction - - 2,200,000 2,200,000 4,400,000 350,000 420,000 2,200,000 2,200,000 5,170,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: The project will construct a single-lane roundabout at the 112th Avenue SE intersection with Lea Hill Road. The intersection is currently stop-controlled on the 112th Avenue SE approach. The project will also implement turn restrictions at the Lea Hill Road intersection with 105th Place SE, and remove the existing span wire traffic signal. The project will improve traffic operations, safety and non-motorized access. Progress Summary: The Lea Hill Road Corridor study was completed during 2020. This project is based on the study recommendations. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $1,000. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 27 Page 474 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: 29th St SE/R St SE Intersection Improvements TIP# I-8 Project No:cp2116 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:TBD LOS Corridor ID# 16, 27 Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - 750,000 500,000 250,000 1,250,000 Street Preservation Fund 105 - 75,000 25,000 - 100,000 Other (Icon)- - - - - - 825,000 525,000 250,000 1,350,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 825,000 275,000 - - Right of Way - - 250,000 250,000 250,000 Construction - - - - - - 825,000 525,000 250,000 1,350,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees 3,500,000 - - - 4,250,000 Street Preservation Fund 105 375,000 - - - 400,000 Other (Icon)125,000 - - - 125,000 4,000,000 - - - 4,775,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 275,000 Right of Way - - - - 500,000 Construction 4,000,000 - - - 4,000,000 4,000,000 - - - 4,775,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Description: The project will construct a second southbound through lane between 22nd Street SE and 33rd Street SE and a new signal at the 29th Street SE intersection. The improvements are needed to address the existing LOS deficiency at this intersection during the weekday PM peak hour. Progress Summary: The R Street Corridor study was completed during 2020. This project is based on the study recommendations. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The additional annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $500. Replacing the traffic signal will reduce on- going maintenance costs to replace parts and equipment that have reached the end of their service life. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 28 Page 475 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: Lea Hill ITS Expansion TIP# I-9 Project No:cpxxxx Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:TBD LOS Corridor ID# 16 Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - REET2 - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees 50,000 250,000 - - 300,000 REET2 50,000 250,000 - - 300,000 Other - - - - - 100,000 500,000 - - 600,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 100,000 - - - 100,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 500,000 - - 500,000 100,000 500,000 - - 600,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: This project will extend new City of Auburn fiber east along SE 304th St from 124th Ave SE to 132nd Ave SE and connect to the signal with SE 304th St. This will support communication to School zone beacons on both SE 304th SE and 132nd Ave SE, one traffic signal, one battery backup, and ITS cameras. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $ 500. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 29 Page 476 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: R Street SE & 21st Street SE Intersection Safety Improvements TIP# I-10 Project No:CP1918 Project Type:Capacity, Safety Project Manager:James Webb LOS Corridor ID# 16 Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - 250,000 - REET2 - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - 250,000 - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - 250,000 - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - 250,000 - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured - 600,000 - - 600,000 Traffic Impact Fees 100,000 150,000 - - 500,000 REET2 - - - - - Other - - - - - 100,000 750,000 - - 1,100,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 250,000 Right of Way 100,000 - - - 100,000 Construction - 750,000 - - 750,000 100,000 750,000 - - 1,100,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: The project will construct a single lane roundabout in place of the existing east/west stop-control on 21st Street SE. The project is needed to address an existing LOS deficiency, and will improve safety at the intersection. Progress Summary: This improvement was recommended in the R Street Corridor study which was completed during 2020. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $1,000. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 30 Page 477 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: Auburn Way S and 6th Street SE TIP# I-11 Project No:cpxxx Project Type:Capacity, Safety Project Manager:TBD LOS Corridor ID# 3 Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - 130,000 - Other - - - - - - - - 130,000 - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - 130,000 - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - 130,000 - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured - 695,000 - - 695,000 Traffic Impact Fees 25,000 150,000 - - 305,000 Other - - - - - 25,000 845,000 - - 1,000,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 130,000 Right of Way 25,000 - - - 25,000 Construction - 845,000 - - 845,000 25,000 845,000 - - 1,000,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: The project will construct a dedicated southbound right-turn pocket on Auburn Way S at 6th Street SE and other improvements to support the new right-turn pocket. The project will address an existing level of service deficiency at the intersection, improving access from SR-18 to A Street SE. Progress Summary: Federal grant funding for construction is proposed to be applied for in 2022. If awarded construction would occur in 2025. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $500. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 31 Page 478 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: SE 304th Street/132nd Avenue SE Roundabout TIP# I-13 Project No:cpxxxx Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:TBD LOS Corridor ID# 23, 25 Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - 250,000 - Other - - - - - - - - 250,000 - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - 250,000 - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - 250,000 - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees 50,000 1,200,000 - - 1,500,000 Other - - - - - 50,000 1,200,000 - - 1,500,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 250,000 Right of Way 50,000 - - - 50,000 Construction - 1,200,000 - - 1,200,000 50,000 1,200,000 - - 1,500,000 Grants / Other Sources: Description: The project will construct a single-lane roundabout at the SE 304th Street intersection with 132nd Avenue SE on Lea Hill. The roundabout will replace the existing stop-controlled on the SE 304th Street approach. The project is needed to address a level of service deficiency at the intersection. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $1,000. Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 32 Page 479 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: 10th Street NW/A Street NW Intersection Improvements TIP# I-15 Project No:asbd36 Project Type:Capacity, Safety Project Manager:TBD LOS Corridor ID# N/A Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - 250,000 750,000 250,000 REET2 - - - - - Other - - - - - - - 250,000 750,000 250,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 250,000 - 250,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 750,000 - - - 250,000 750,000 250,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - 1,000,000 REET2 - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 1,000,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 250,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 750,000 - - - - 1,000,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: The project will construct a new traffic signal in place of the existing stop-control on the 10th Street NW approach. The project is needed to address a level of service deficiency at the intersection. The project will also evaluate intersection control, channelization, and pedestrian crossing improvements along 10th Street NW to the east of the intersection. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $1,000. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 33 Page 480 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: Evergreen Heights Elementary Sidewalks TIP# N-8 Project No:asbd14, cp1810 Project Type:Capacity, Non-Motorized Project Manager:Jacob Sweeting LOS Corridor ID# 37 Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue 24,500 - - - 24,500 Grants- Unsecured - - - - - Traffic Mitigation Fees 100,000 - - - 100,000 Other (Auburn Sch. Dist.)122,500 - - - 122,500 REET 2 - - - - - 247,000 - - - 247,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction 247,000 - - - 247,000 247,000 - - - 247,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - 160,000 160,000 Grants- Unsecured - - 120,000 1,440,000 1,560,000 Traffic Mitigation Fees - - - - - Other (Auburn Sch. Dist.)- - - - - REET 2 - - 30,000 200,000 230,000 - - 150,000 1,800,000 1,950,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 150,000 - 150,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 1,800,000 1,800,000 - - 150,000 1,800,000 1,950,000 Grants / Other Sources: Auburn School District partnership includes direct financial contribution and ROW dedication. Description: The project will construct a new sidewalk along the north side of S 316th Street between the end of the existing sidewalk at 56th Avenue S and 51st Avenue S to the west (approximately 1,250 feet). The project will also construct curb and gutter, storm improvements, and street lighting. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 34 Page 481 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: Riverwalk Drive SE Non-Motorized Improvements TIP# N-9 Project No:cp2121 Project Type:Capacity, Non-Motorized Project Manager:Jeff Bender LOS Corridor ID# 27 Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - 20,000 50,000 262,500 70,000 Secured Grant - 55,000 125,000 455,000 180,000 Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - REET2 - - - - - Other (MIT)- - - 332,500 - - 75,000 175,000 1,050,000 250,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 75,000 175,000 - 250,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 1,050,000 - - 75,000 175,000 1,050,000 250,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - 312,500 Secured Grant - - - - 580,000 Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - REET2 - - - - - Other (MIT)- - - - 332,500 - - - - 1,225,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 175,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 1,050,000 - - - - 1,225,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: The project will construct sidewalks, street lighting, and related storm improvements along the east side of Riverwalk Drive SE between Auburn Way S and Howard Road SE. This project will close a major gap in the sidewalk system and ties into the proposed improvements on Auburn Way South. The project will also install a RRFB at the intersection with Howard Road. The project is proposed to be in partnership with the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. Progress Summary: Grant funding from WSDOT was awarded in 2021. The design phase will start in 2021 with construction of the improvements completed during 2023. The City and Muckleshoot Indian Tribe have entered into a memorandum of understanding for improvements along the Auburn Way S corridor, and are currently negotiating the funding agreement for this project. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $2,000. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 35 Page 482 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: Stewart Road - Sumner (Lake Tapps Parkway Corridor)TIP# R-2 Project No:N/A Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:City of Sumner LOS Corridor ID# N/A Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - REET2 - - - - - Traffic Mitigation Fees - - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - REET2 - - - - - Traffic Mitigation Fees 150,000 - - - 150,000 150,000 - - - 150,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction 150,000 - - - 150,000 150,000 - - - 150,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: This is a City of Sumner project to widen the Stewart Road (Lake Tapps Parkway) Corridor. The project will replace the existing bridge over the White River with a new wider one. Completion of this corridor widening is expected to significantly relieve traffic congestion in Auburn along the A St SE and C St SW corridors. Progress Summary: City of Sumner has initiated preliminary road design and is seeking grant funding to complete the project. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 36 Page 483 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: M Street Underpass (3rd St SE to 8th St SE) TIP# R-3 Project No:c201a0 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Ryan Vondrak LOS Corridor ID# 6 Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)9,731,904 - - - 9,731,904 REET2 1,140,000 - - - 1,140,000 Traffic Impact Fees (Construction)4,309,782 - - - 4,309,782 Traffic Impact Fees (Debt Service)890,856 123,135 122,843 122,550 1,136,834 Traffic Mitigation Fees 660,000 - - - 660,000 PWTFL (30 years)3,284,857 - - - 3,284,857 Other Sources (Other Agencies)*3,090,514 - - - 3,090,514 23,107,913 123,135 122,843 122,550 23,353,891 Capital Expenditures: Design 2,688,924 - - - 2,688,924 Right of Way 3,358,443 - - - 3,358,443 Construction 16,021,908 - - - 16,021,908 PWTFL Debt Service 890,856 123,135 122,843 122,550 1,136,834 22,960,131 123,135 122,843 122,550 23,206,109 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - REET2 - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees (Construction)- - - - - Traffic Impact Fees (Debt Service)122,258 121,965 121,673 121,380 732,669 Traffic Mitigation Fees - - - - - PWTFL (30 years)- - - - - Other Sources (Other Agencies)*- - - - - 122,258 121,965 121,673 121,380 732,669 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - PWTFL Debt Service 122,258 121,965 121,673 121,380 732,669 122,258 121,965 121,673 121,380 732,669 Description: Construction of a grade separated railroad crossing of M Street SE at the BNSF Stampede Pass tracks. Progress Summary: Construction was completed in 2014. The project is now in Public Works Trust Fund Loan (PWTFL) debt repayment through 2041. Future Impact on Operating Budget: N/A Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: Grants / Other Sources: Other Agencies are King County Metro Sewer, Port of Seattle, Port of Tacoma, and BNSF Railway City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 37 Page 484 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: A Street Loop TIP# R-4 Project No:CP2117 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Luis Barba LOS Corridor ID# N/A Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Secured Grant - - - 1,125,000 - Traffic Impact Fees - 470,000 - 67,000 470,000 Other (Sound Transit)- - 340,000 - 340,000 - 470,000 340,000 1,192,000 810,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 300,000 - - 300,000 Right of Way - 170,000 67,000 - 237,000 Construction - - 273,000 1,192,000 273,000 - 470,000 340,000 1,192,000 810,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Secured Grant - - - - 1,125,000 Traffic Impact Fees - - - - 67,000 Other (Sound Transit)- - - 340,000 - - - - 1,532,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - 67,000 Construction - - - - 1,465,000 - - - - 1,532,000 Grants / Other Sources:Interlocal funding from Sound Transit Description: The project will construct a new one-way (eastbound) roadway connection between A Street SW/S Division Street and A Street SE. The new intersection with A Street SE will allow an unsignalized right-turn movement onto southbound A Street SE, providing an alternative to the intersection of 3rd Street SE and A Street SE, which does not meet adopted LOS standards. The roadway will be constructed as a complete street to accommodate non-motorized road users. Progress Summary: Sound Transit has agreed to provide $340,000 towards the construction phase as mitigation for the second parking garage. Federal funding for the construction phase was awarded in 2021. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $1,000. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 38 Page 485 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: A Street NW, Phase 2 (W Main St to 3rd St NW) TIP# R-5 Project No:cpxxx Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:TBD LOS Corridor ID# 18 Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - Unsecured Grant - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - REET2 - - - - - Other 150,000 - - - 150,000 150,000 - - - 150,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction 150,000 - - 150,000 150,000 - - - 150,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Unsecured Grant 200,000 1,325,000 - - 1,525,000 Traffic Impact Fees 150,000 - - - 150,000 REET2 - - - - - Other - 1,325,000 - 1,325,000 350,000 2,650,000 - - 3,000,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 250,000 - - - 250,000 Right of Way 100,000 - - - 100,000 Construction - 2,650,000 - - 2,650,000 350,000 2,650,000 - - 3,000,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: The project will widen A Street NW to create a three-lane roadway section between W Main St and 3rd St NW. This project will improve the connection between the A St NW Extension, (Phase 1) and Auburn Station and Central Business District. This project could be partially or fully funded by development and/or Sound Transit's parking garage/access improvements. The project is approximately 0.2 miles long. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $500. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 39 Page 486 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: Auburn Way S Improvements (Hemlock St SE to Poplar St SE)TIP# R-6 Project No:cp1622 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Jeff Bender LOS Corridor ID# 4 Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - Grants- Secured (Federal)131,305 865,000 297,550 - 1,293,855 Traffic Impact Fees 24,707 135,000 846,338 400,000 1,006,045 REET2 - - - - - Other - - - - - 156,012 1,000,000 1,143,888 400,000 2,299,900 Capital Expenditures: Design 156,012 1,000,000 343,988 - 1,500,000 Right of Way - - 800,000 400,000 800,000 Construction - - - - 156,012 1,000,000 1,143,988 400,000 2,300,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 200,000 - - - 200,000 Grants- Secured (Federal)2,061,847 1,546,385 - - 3,905,782 Traffic Impact Fees 1,738,153 1,453,615 - - 4,438,106 REET2 - - - - - Other - - - - 4,000,000 3,000,000 - - 8,543,888 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 343,988 Right of Way - - - - 1,200,000 Construction 4,000,000 3,000,000 - - 7,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 - - 8,543,988 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: The project will widen Auburn Way S between Hemlock St SE and Poplar St SE to accommodate two general purpose lanes in each direction, turn lanes, access management where feasible, U-turns, curb, gutter, sidewalk, illumination, transit stop improvements, a new traffic signal in the vicinity of Chinook Elementary School, Intelligent Transportation Systems, streetscape and storm improvements. The project length is approximately 0.4 miles. The project is needed to address traffic operations issues along the corridor. Progress Summary: Project scope was revised to omit portions of the original project scope that are being built by the Auburn School District's (ASD) Chinook Elementary replacement project. ASD's project will construct a roundabout at the school driveway on Auburn Way S instead of the traffic signal on Auburn Way S that was originally proposed as part of the City's project. $1,297,000 of federal grant funding for the design phase was awarded in 2019. 2021 Funding includes 2020 carry forward. If the cost of design phase is less than anticipated, a portion of the design phase grant will be utilized for construction. $3,605,807 of federal grant funding was awarded in 2022 for the construction phase. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $2,500. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 40 Page 487 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: M Street NE (E Main St to 4th St NE) TIP# R-7 Project No:asbd12 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:TBD LOS Corridor ID# 5 Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - 120,000 50,000 120,000 Arterial Street Fund (105)- - 185,000 - 185,000 REET 2 - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - 70,000 - 70,000 Other - - - - - - - 375,000 50,000 375,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 375,000 50,000 375,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - 375,000 50,000 375,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 400,000 - - - 570,000 Arterial Street Fund (105)1,220,000 - - - 1,405,000 REET 2 400,000 - - - 400,000 Traffic Impact Fees 465,000 - - - 535,000 Other - - - - - 2,485,000 - - - 2,910,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 425,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 2,485,000 - - - 2,485,000 2,485,000 - - - 2,910,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Description: This project will construct a complete four/five-lane street section on M St NE from south of E Main St to 4th St NE, and reconstruct the signal at E Main St. The project is needed to improve traffic operations along the M Street NE corridor, and replace the existing pavement which is in poor condition. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $500. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 41 Page 488 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: 49th Street NE (Auburn Way N to D St NE)TIP # R-8 Project No:asbd38 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:TBD LOS Corridor ID# N/A Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - Other Sources - Developer - - 500,000 1,500,000 500,000 - - 500,000 1,500,000 500,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 350,000 - 350,000 Right of Way - - 150,000 - 150,000 Construction - - - 1,500,000 - - - 500,000 1,500,000 500,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - Other Sources - Developer - - - - 2,000,000 - - - - 2,000,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 350,000 Right of Way - - - - 150,000 Construction - - - - 1,500,000 - - - - 2,000,000 Grants / Other Sources: Description: This project will construct the build-out of 49th Street NE between Auburn Way N and D Street NE. The improvements are funded by private development. Progress Summary: Preliminary design to identify the scope of the project and cost estimate is currently prepared by the developer. Once this has been approved by the City, the developer will provide the City with funding to complete the detailed design, ROW acquisition, and construction of the improvements. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $500. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 42 Page 489 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: 46th Place S Realignment TIP# R-9 Project No:cpxxx Project Type:Capacity, Safety Project Manager:TBD LOS Corridor ID# N/A Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured - - - - - REET 2 - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - Other Sources - - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured - - REET 2 - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - 250,000 250,000 750,000 1,250,000 Other Sources - - - - - - 250,000 250,000 750,000 1,250,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 250,000 - 250,000 Right of Way - - 250,000 - 250,000 Construction - - - 750,000 750,000 - 250,000 250,000 750,000 1,250,000 Grants / Other Sources: Description: The project will realign 46th Place S to the south of S 321st Street. The realignment will move the 46th Place S intersection with S 321st Street approximately 350 feet to the east of the current location. This will create two T-intersections (44th Avenue S and 46th Place S) in place of the existing four-leg intersection. The existing 46th Place S will be dead-ended to the south of S 321st Street. The project will improve safety and traffic operations at the intersections. Progress Summary: A portion of the right-of-way for the realigned roadway was dedicated as part of an adjacent development project. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $1,000. Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 43 Page 490 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: 124th Ave SE Widening (SE 312th St to SE 318th St)TIP# R-11 Project No:asbd01 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:TBD LOS Corridor ID# 23 Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured Federal - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured Federal - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - 400,000 1,100,000 1,500,000 Other - - - - - - - 400,000 1,100,000 1,500,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 400,000 - 400,000 Right of Way - - - 1,100,000 1,100,000 Construction - - - - - - - 400,000 1,100,000 1,500,000 Grants / Other Sources: Description: This project will widen 124th Avenue SE to create a four-lane section with bicycle and pedestrian facilities SE 318th St and SE 312th St. The project will also construct improvements at the SE 312th St/124th Ave SE intersection (including adding bike lanes, dual westbound left-turn lanes, dual southbound through-lanes, a northbound right-turn pocket, ITS improvements, and pedestrian safety improvements). The project is needed to improve traffic operations along the corridor and to accommodate all travel modes. Progress Summary: Phase 1 improvements between SE 318th and SE 316th were completed by GRC in 2012. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $1,000. Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 44 Page 491 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: Regional Growth Center Access Improvements TIP# R-16 Project No:CP2110 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Seth Wickstrom LOS Corridor ID# N/A Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Secured - 325,000 - 1,300,000 325,000 Traffic Impact Fees - 85,000 100,000 200,000 185,000 REET2 - - - - - Other - - - - - - 410,000 100,000 1,500,000 510,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 410,000 - - 410,000 Right of Way - - 100,000 100,000 Construction - - - 1,500,000 - - 410,000 100,000 1,500,000 510,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Secured - - - 1,300,000 Traffic Impact Fees - - - 300,000 REET2 - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 1,600,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - 100,000 Construction - - - 1,500,000 - - - - 1,600,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: The project will construct a northbound left-turn lane and a northbound/southbound crosswalk at the 3rd Street NE/Auburn Avenue intersection, and realign the 4th Street NE/Auburn Way N intersection to eliminate the split phase signal operation improving circulation and access. The project will improve traffic operations, safety, and circulation for both vehicles and non- motorized users. Progress Summary: Grant funding for the design and construction phases was awarded from Sound Transit in 2019. The design phase of the project has been initiated, and is currently underway. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $500. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 45 Page 492 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: Stewart Road - City of Pacific (Lake Tapps Parkway Corridor)TIP# R-24 Project No:asbd25 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:City of Pacific LOS Corridor ID# N/A Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - REET2 - - - - - Traffic Mitigation Fees - - 100,000 - 100,000 - - 100,000 - 100,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 100,000 - 100,000 - - 100,000 - 100,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - REET2 - - - - - Traffic Mitigation Fees - - - - 100,000 - - - - 100,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 100,000 - - - - 100,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: This is a City of Pacific project to widen the Stewart Road (Lake Tapps Parkway) Corridor. This is the final segment of widening in the City of Pacific which will tie in with the City of Sumner's planned final widening segment and new bridge over the White River. Completion of this corridor widening is expected to significantly relieve traffic congestion in Auburn along the A St SE and C St SW corridors. Progress Summary: City of Pacific is in the process of completing the design phase and environmental permitting for the project. Construction is currently planned for 2021/22. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 46 Page 493 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: East Valley Highway Widening TIP # R-26 Project No:cpxxxx Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:TBD LOS Corridor ID# Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Unsecured Grant - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Unsecured Grant - - 200,000 175,000 375,000 Traffic Impact Fees - - 100,000 75,000 175,000 - - - 300,000 250,000 550,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 300,000 - 300,000 Right of Way - - - 250,000 250,000 Construction - - - - - - - 300,000 250,000 550,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: This project will widen E Valley Highway between Lakeland Hills Way and Terrace View Drive SE, approximately 0.6 miles. The roadway will have a four/five lane cross section with a trail connection along the east side. Other project elements include storm improvement, illumination and ITS. The project will provide congestion relief along the corridor and provide access for non-motorized users. Progress Summary: The City is conducting a corridor study during 2021. The scope and cost estimate for this project will be revised based on the study recommendations. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $2,500. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 47 Page 494 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: Garden Avenue Realignment TIP # R-27 Project No:cp2022 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Kim Truong LOS Corridor ID# 19 Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Traffic Impact Fees 8,200 291,800 500,000 - 800,000 8,200 291,800 500,000 - 800,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 8,200 141,800 - - 150,000 Right of Way - 150,000 - - 150,000 Construction - - 500,000 - 500,000 8,200 291,800 500,000 - 800,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - 500,000 - - - - 500,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 500,000 - - - - 500,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: The project will construct a new east/west connection between Garden Avenue and 104th Avenue SE, and will cul-de-sac Garden Avenue to the north of 8th Street NE. This will improve traffic operations and safety along 8th Street NE. Progress Summary: The previous project title (Lea Hill Rd Segment 1A) was updated based on recommendations from the Lea Hill Corridor Study in 2020. In 2016, a parcel at the intersection of Garden Avenue and 320th/8th Street was purchased for the project. In 2016, right-of-way was dedicated for a portion of the new east/west roadway as part of an adjacent development project. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $1,000. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 48 Page 495 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: A Street NW - Phase 1 (3rd St NW to 14th St NW) TIP# S-1 Project No:c207a0 Project Type:Capacity, Environmental Monitoring Project Manager:Tim Carlaw LOS Corridor ID# 18 Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue 123,276 - - - 123,276 Grants- Secured (Fed,State)6,562,702 - - - 6,562,702 Traffic Impact Fees 1,292,607 25,000 25,000 - 1,342,607 Other Sources -Multicare Contribution 383,381 - - - 383,381 8,361,966 25,000 25,000 - 8,411,966 Capital Expenditures: Design 2,247,331 - - - 2,247,331 Right of Way 821,341 - - - 821,341 Construction 5,000,640 - - - 5,000,640 Environmental 292,654 25,000 25,000 - 342,654 8,361,966 25,000 25,000 - 8,411,966 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State)- - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - 25,000 Other Sources -Multicare Contribution - - - - - - - - - 25,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - Environmental - - - - 25,000 - - - - 25,000 Grants / Other Sources: Description: The project constructed a new multi-lane arterial from 3rd Street NW to 14th Street NW completing a missing link along the corridor. This project improves mobility and was tied to corridor development. The project length was approximately three- quarters of a mile. The City purchased ROW from the northern property owner. If the property develops any access to A St NW, some or a portion of those funds may be reimbursed to the City (total cost was $251,000). Progress Summary: Pre-design was completed prior to 2007. Final design and environmental permitting were completed in 2011 and construction was completed in 2013. Major plantings are scheduled in 2015 as part of the wetland monitoring that is required to continue until 2023. Future Impact on Operating Budget: N/A Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 49 Page 496 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: S 272nd/277th St Corridor Capacity & Non-Motorized Trail Improvements TIP# S-2 Project No:cp1821 Project Type:Capacity, Environmental Monitoring Project Manager:Tim Carlaw LOS Corridor ID# 15 Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Secured Federal - - - - - Grants- Secured State - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees 20,567 20,000 20,000 20,000 60,567 Other (Development Funds)*- - - - - Other - - - - - 20,567 20,000 20,000 20,000 60,567 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Environmental 20,567 20,000 20,000 20,000 60,567 Construction - - - - - 20,567 20,000 20,000 20,000 60,567 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Secured State - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 120,000 Other (Development Funds)*- - - - - Other - - - - - 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 120,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Environmental 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 120,000 Construction - - - - - 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 120,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Description: This project will complete the environmental monitoring requirements related to the S 277th St corridor widening project between Auburn Way North and l St NE. Progress Summary: The 10 year monitoring period began in 2018 after final completion and continue through 2028. Future Impact on Operating Budget: N/A City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 50 Page 497 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: Auburn Way N/1st Street NE Signal Replacement TIP# I-1 Project No:CP1927 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Matt Larson LOS Corridor ID# N/A Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue 88,690 773,410 85,935 - 948,035 Arterial Preservation Fund (105)- 205,000 20,000 - 225,000 Grants- Unsecured (Fed & State)- - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - Other Sources - - - - - 88,690 978,410 105,935 - 1,173,035 Capital Expenditures: Design 88,690 191,189 - - 279,879 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 787,221 105,935 - 893,156 88,690 978,410 105,935 - 1,173,035 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - 85,935 Arterial Preservation Fund (105)- - - - Grants- Unsecured (Fed & State)- - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - Other Sources - - - - - - - - - 85,935 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 105,935 - - - - 105,935 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: The project will replace the existing traffic signal at the Auburn Way N/1st Street NE signal. The signal was constructed in 1968 and is approaching the end of its service life. The project scope also includes the construction of ADA improvements, curb-bulbs, and storm improvements. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Replacing the traffic signal will reduce on-going maintenance costs to replace parts and equipment that have reached the end of their service life. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 51 Page 498 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: ITS Dynamic Message Signs TIP# I-3 Project No:asbd16, cp1701, cp1912 Project Type:Non-Capacity (ITS) Project Manager:Seth Wickstrom LOS Corridor ID# N/A Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue 162,797 237,201 - 399,998 Grants- Unsecured Federal - - - - - REET 100,000 - - - 100,000 PWTFL - - - - - Other (MIT)- - - - - 262,797 237,201 - - 499,998 Capital Expenditures: Design 136,025 - - - 136,025 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 126,772 237,201 - - 363,973 262,797 237,201 - - 499,998 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - 35,000 225,000 260,000 Grants- Unsecured Federal - - - - - REET - - - - - PWTFL - - - - - Other (MIT)- - - - - - - 35,000 225,000 260,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 35,000 - 35,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 225,000 225,000 - - 35,000 225,000 260,000 Grants / Other Sources: Description: The program constructs Dynamic Message Signs at various locations throughout the City. Dynamic message signs are an important tool for communicating with roadway users in real time. Priority locations for sign placement are based on the Comprehensive Transportation Plans ITS map and include S. 277th, Auburn Way N, Auburn Way S, W Valley Highway, E Valley Highway, Lake Tapps Parkway, 15th St NW, and Lea Hill Rd. Progress Summary: The Auburn Way S and S 277th Street have been completed. The Lake Tapps Parkway and 15th Street NW signs are being constructed during 2021. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual maintenance and operational costs for this project is estimated to be $750 per sign. Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 52 Page 499 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: Auburn Avenue/E Main Street Signal Replacement TIP# I-7 Project No:cpxxxx Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD LOS Corridor ID# N/A Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured (Fed & State)- - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - REET 2 - - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured (Fed & State)- - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - REET 2 - - 200,000 900,000 1,100,000 - - 200,000 900,000 1,100,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 200,000 200,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 900,000 900,000 - - 200,000 900,000 1,100,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: This program will replace the existing traffic signal at the Auburn Avenue/E Main Street signal, which was constructed in 1968. The project scope also includes the construction of ADA improvements. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Replacing the traffic signal will reduce on-going maintenance costs to replace parts and equipment that have reached the end of their service life. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 53 Page 500 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: Non-Motorized Safety Program TIP# N-1 Project No:asbd08, cp1804, cp1902 Project Type:Non-Capacity (Annual) Project Manager:James Webb LOS Corridor ID# N/A Activity: Previous 2 Years 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue 124,054 165,000 150,000 150,000 439,054 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - REET - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - Other 179,596 - - - 179,596 303,650 165,000 150,000 150,000 618,650 Capital Expenditures: Design 94,867 33,000 30,000 30,000 157,867 Right of Way - - Construction 208,783 132,000 120,000 120,000 460,783 303,650 165,000 150,000 150,000 618,650 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 900,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - REET - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - Other - - - - - 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 900,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 Right of Way - Construction 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 720,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 900,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Description: The program will construct non-motorized safety improvement projects at locations throughout the City. Projects are prioritized based on pedestrian and bicycle demands, existing deficiencies, field studies and community requests. Common improvements installed by this program include, but are not limited to, RRFBs, signage, striping, raised crosswalk, bicycle lanes, etc. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 54 Page 501 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: Auburn Station Access Improvements TIP# N-6 Project No:TBD Project Type:Non-Capacity, Transit Project Manager:TBD LOS Corridor ID# N/A Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - REET2 - - - - - Other (King County Metro)- - 125,000 - 125,000 - - 125,000 - 125,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 25,000 - 25,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 100,000 - 100,000 - - 125,000 - 125,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - - Grants- Unsecured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - REET2 - - - - - Other (King County Metro)- - - - 125,000 - - - - 125,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 25,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 100,000 - - - - 125,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: The project will reconstruct the channelization and curb radii to improve the turning radius for transit vehicles at the northeast corner of A St SW/2nd St SW. Progress Summary: The ROW needed to accommodate this improvement was dedicated by the adjacent development project. King County Metro will complete the design and construction of the improvements as part of the RapidRide I Line project. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 55 Page 502 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: M Street SE Sidewalk Improvements TIP# N-10 Project No:CP2012 Project Type: Non-Capacity, Non-Motorized Project Manager:Luis Barba LOS Corridor ID# N/A Activity: 2021 YE 2022Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Street Revenue 33,664 366,336 5,000 - 405,000 Secured Grant 30,020 419,980 - - 450,000 Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - Other - - - - - 63,684 786,316 5,000 - 855,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 63,684 56,336 - - 120,020 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 729,980 5,000 - 734,980 63,684 786,316 5,000 - 855,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Street Revenue - - - - 5,000 Secured Grant - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 5,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 5,000 - - - - 5,000 Grants / Other Sources: Description: The project will construct sidewalks along the M Street SE corridor between Auburn Way S and 8th Street SE. The project will complete the missing sections of sidewalk along the west side of M Street SE between Auburn Way S and 8th Street SE, and will complete the missing segments of sidewalk along the east side between Auburn Way S and 12th Street SE. The project will construct approximately 2,000 linear feet of new sidewalk to match adjacent widths. The project will also construct ADA compliant curb ramps and relocate existing utility poles and overhead signage to provide ADA access. Progress Summary: Grant funding for the project was awarded by TIB in 2019. The design phase was initiated in 2020 and construction anticipated to be completed during 2021. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 56 Page 503 of 967 TABLE T - 2A 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Capacity Projects: None - Page Non-Capacity Projects: 58 Local Street Improvement Program Capital Costs 1,650,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 11,650,000 Funding Sources: Fund Balance - 350,000 350,000 350,000 350,000 350,000 1,750,000 Transfer In (W/S/SWM Utility)150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 900,000 To Be Determined - 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 7,500,000 Other REET 1 750,000 - - - - - 750,000 Other REET 2 750,000 - - - - - 750,000 59 2021 Local Street Preservation Project Capital Costs 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Funding Sources: Fund Balance 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Transfer In (W/S/SWM Utility)- - - - - - - Other REET 1 - - - - - - - Other REET 2 - - - - - - - SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects - - - - - - - Non-Capacity Projects 1,660,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 11,660,000 Total Costs 1,660,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 11,660,000 FUNDING SOURCES: Fund Balance 10,000 350,000 350,000 350,000 350,000 350,000 1,760,000 Transfer In (W/S/SWM Utility)150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 900,000 To Be Determined - 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 7,500,000 Other REET 1 750,000 - - - - - 750,000 Other REET 2 750,000 - - - - - 750,000 Total Funding 1,660,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 11,660,000 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING LOCAL STREET FUND City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 57 Page 504 of 967 LOCAL STREET FUND (103)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: Local Street Improvement Program TIP# P-2 Project No:sobd02, cp1614, cp1717, cp1725, cp1726, cp1925 Project Type:Non-Capacity, Preservation Project Manager:James Webb LOS Corridor ID# N/A Activity: (Previous 2Yrs.)2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Local Street Fund - - - 350,000 - Transfer In (Utilities)300,000 - 150,000 150,000 450,000 Sales Tax on Construction - - - - - To Be Determined - - - 1,500,000 - REET 1 - - 750,000 - 750,000 REET 2 2,900,206 - 750,000 - 3,650,206 3,200,206 - 1,650,000 2,000,000 4,850,206 Capital Expenditures: Design 326,214 - 250,000 400,000 576,214 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 2,873,991 - 1,400,000 1,600,000 4,273,991 3,200,206 - 1,650,000 2,000,000 4,850,206 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Local Street Fund 350,000 350,000 350,000 350,000 1,750,000 Transfer In (Utilities)150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 900,000 Sales Tax on Construction - - - - - To Be Determined 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 7,500,000 REET 1 - - - - 750,000 REET 2 - - - - 750,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 11,650,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 2,250,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 1,600,000 1,600,000 1,600,000 1,600,000 9,400,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 11,650,000 Grants / Other Sources: Description: This program has successfully completed overlays, chip seals and complete reconstructions since 2005. The program will focus on completing reconstruction needs in addition to regular maintenance treatments. The 2022 funds have been transferred into the Lead Service Line replacement project to cover the cost of additional reconstruction/rehabilitation included with the scope of that project. Progress Summary: This program has successfully completed overlays, chip seals and complete reconstructions since 2005. The program will focus on completing reconstruction needs in addition to regular maintenance treatments. The 2022 funds will be transferred into the Lead Service Line replacement project to cover the cost of additional reconstruction/rehabilitation included with the scope of that project. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project is anticipated to reduce the operating budget for street maintenance. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 58 Page 505 of 967 LOCAL STREET FUND (103)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: 2021 Local Street Preservation Project TIP# P-7 Project No:cp2019 Project Type:Non-Capacity, Preservation Project Manager:Kim Truong LOS Corridor ID# N/A Activity: (Previous 2Yrs.)2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Local Street Fund 105,082 834,919 10,000 - 950,001 Transfer In (Utilities)- - - - - Sales Tax on Construction - - - - - REET 1 - 1,500,000 - - 1,500,000 REET 2 - 700,000 - - 700,000 105,082 3,034,919 10,000 - 3,150,001 Capital Expenditures: Design 105,082 237,000 - - 342,082 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 2,797,919 10,000 - 2,807,919 105,082 3,034,919 10,000 - 3,150,001 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Local Street Fund - - - - 10,000 Transfer In (Utilities)- - - - - Sales Tax on Construction - - - - - REET 1 - - - - - REET 2 - - - - - - - - - 10,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 10,000 - - - - 10,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: This project will reconstruct G Street SE (from East Main Street to 4th Street SE) and grind and overlay the Riverwalk/Forest Ridge Neighborhood. The scope of work includes the following: full-depth roadway replacement and/or grind and overlay and any needed utility improvements within the project limits. Progress Summary: Project design underway in 2020. REET funds shown include $700k carry forward of 2020 funds from project CP1925 - 2020 Local Street Preservation Project and $1.5M of new REET funding in 2021. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project is anticipated to reduce the operating budget for street maintenance. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 59 Page 506 of 967 TABLE T-2B 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Capacity Projects: None - Page Non-Capacity Projects: 62 Arterial Street Preservation Program Capital Costs 600,000 600,000 150,000 1,133,870 2,050,000 2,200,000 6,733,870 Funding Sources: Fund Balance 600,000 600,000 150,000 1,133,870 2,050,000 2,200,000 6,733,870 REET 2 -Streets - - - - - - - Utility Tax - - - - - - - 63 2nd Street SE Preservation Capital Costs 175,000 - - - - - 175,000 Funding Sources: Fund Balance 70,000 - - - - - 70,000 Grants 105,000 - - - - - 105,000 Utility Tax - - - - - - - 64 Lake Tapps Pkwy/Sumner-Tapps Hwy E Preservation Capital Costs 25,000 75,000 1,284,356 - - - 1,384,356 Funding Sources: Fund Balance 25,000 75,000 534,356 - - - 634,356 Grants - - 750,000 - - - 750,000 65 Lea Hill Bridge Deck Preservation Capital Costs 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Funding Sources: Fund Balance 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Grants - - - - - - - 66 A St SE Preservation (37th Street SE to Lakeland Hills Way) Capital Costs - 25,000 100,000 1,732,260 - - 1,857,260 Funding Sources: Fund Balance - 25,000 100,000 866,130 - - 991,130 Grants - - - 866,130 - - 866,130 67 C Street SW Preservation (W Main St to GSA Signal) Capital Costs 100,000 2,236,544 - - - - 2,336,544 Funding Sources: Fund Balance 100,000 1,118,272 - - - - 1,218,272 Grants - 1,118,272 - - - - 1,118,272 68 3rd Street SW Bridges Deck Preservation Capital Costs 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Funding Sources: Fund Balance 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Grants - - - - - - - 69 4th Street SE Preservation (Auburn Way S to L Street SE) Capital Costs 2,662,620 - - - - - 2,662,620 Funding Sources: Fund Balance 1,065,048 - - - - - 1,065,048 Grants 1,597,572 - - - - - 1,597,572 Note: Financial plan utilizes the following order for use of funds to finance projects: grant revenues (if available), utility tax revenues and fund balance. CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING ARTERIAL STREET PRESERVATION FUND City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 60 Page 507 of 967 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects - - - - - - - Non-Capacity Projects 3,582,620 2,936,544 1,534,356 2,866,130 2,050,000 2,200,000 15,169,650 Total Costs 3,582,620 2,936,544 1,534,356 2,866,130 2,050,000 2,200,000 15,169,650 FUNDING SOURCES: Fund Balance 1,880,048 1,818,272 784,356 2,000,000 2,050,000 2,200,000 10,732,676 Grants 1,702,572 1,118,272 750,000 866,130 - - 4,436,974 REET 2 -Streets - - - - - - - Total Funding 3,582,620 2,936,544 1,534,356 2,866,130 2,050,000 2,200,000 15,169,650 - - - - - - - City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 61 Page 508 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET PRESERVATION FUND (105)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: Arterial Street Preservation Program TIP# P-1 Project No:Varies annually, spbd01, cp1718, cp1725, cp1803, cp1829, cp1926 Project Type:Non-Capacity, Preservation Project Manager:Kenneth Clark LOS Corridor ID# N/A Activity: (Previous 2 Years)2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Arterial Preservation Fund 1,486,913 544,211 600,000 600,000 2,631,124 Utility Tax - - - - REET2 -Streets 446,279 - - - 446,279 Other -Development Fees 79,343 Grants -Federal 9,514 - - - 9,514 2,022,049 544,211 600,000 600,000 3,086,917 Capital Expenditures: Design 165,654 500 90,000 90,000 256,154 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 2,231,470 543,711 510,000 510,000 3,285,181 2,397,123 544,211 600,000 600,000 3,541,334 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Arterial Preservation Fund 150,000 1,133,870 2,050,000 2,200,000 6,733,870 Utility Tax - - - - - REET2 -Streets - - - - - Grants -Federal - - - - - 150,000 1,133,870 2,050,000 2,200,000 6,733,870 Capital Expenditures: Design 22,500 170,080 307,500 330,000 1,010,080 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 127,500 963,790 1,742,500 1,870,000 5,723,790 150,000 1,133,870 2,050,000 2,200,000 6,733,870 Grants / Other Sources: Description: The program preserves classified streets throughout the City. Individual projects may include a combination of crack seal, overlays, rebuilds, and spot repairs. The program also funds the biennial collection of pavement condition ratings. This program is funded through a 1% utility tax that was adopted by City Council in 2008. Program funds reflect remaining budget after allocations to specific arterial street preservation projects which are included as separate projects in this TIP. Progress Summary: During 2021, the Auburn Way N preservation projects and 15th Street NW reconstruction will be completed; the Lea Hill Road and 3rd Street SW bridge decks will be preserved; the reconstruction of 2nd Street SE will begin; 4th Street SE reconstruction is being designed; and arterial patching and crack seal projects are proposed. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This program is anticipated to reduce the operating budget for street maintenance. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 62 Page 509 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET PRESERVATION FUND (105)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: 2nd Street SE Preservation TIP# P-3 Project No:CP2003 Project Type:Non-Capacity, Preservation Project Manager:Jai Carter Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Arterial Preservation Fund 45,219 278,281 70,000 - 393,500 Secured State Grant 35,223 450,027 105,000 - 590,250 Utility Tax - - - - - Bond proceeds - - - - - 80,442 728,308 175,000 - 983,750 Capital Expenditures: Design 80,442 34,558 - - 115,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 693,750 175,000 - 868,750 80,442 728,308 175,000 - 983,750 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Arterial Preservation Fund - - - - 70,000 Secured State Grant - - - - 105,000 Utility Tax - - - - - Bond proceeds - - - - - - - - - 175,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 175,000 - - - - 175,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: This project will reconstruct 2nd Street SE between A Street SE and Auburn Way S. The reconstruction will utilize full depth reclamation techniques. The project will also address fixed objects located within the clear zone, remove barriers to ADA access, and install new LED street lighting. Progress Summary: Grant funding for this project was awarded by TIB in 2019. The design phase started in 2020. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project is anticipated to reduce the operating budget for street maintenance. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 63 Page 510 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET PRESERVATION FUND (105)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: Lake Tapps Pkwy/Sumner-Tapps Hwy E Preservation TIP# P-6 Project No:spbd08 Project Type:Non-Capacity, Preservation Project Manager:TBD Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Arterial Preservation Fund - - 25,000 75,000 25,000 Unsecured Grant - - - - - Utility Tax - - - - - Bond proceeds - - - - - - - 25,000 75,000 25,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 25,000 50,000 25,000 Right of Way - - - 25,000 - Construction - - - - - - - 25,000 75,000 25,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Arterial Preservation Fund 534,356 - - 634,356 Unsecured Grant 750,000 - - 750,000 Utility Tax - - - - - Bond proceeds - - - - - 1,284,356 - - - 1,384,356 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - 75,000 Right of Way - - - 25,000 Construction 1,284,356 - - 1,284,356 1,284,356 - - - 1,384,356 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: The project will grind and overlay the Lake Tapps Parkway/Sumner-Tapps Highway E corridor from the intersection of Lake Tapps Parkway with Lakeland Hills Way to the intersection of Sumner-Tapps Highway E with 16th Street E (the Auburn City limit). Portions of the corridor include a center two-way left-turn lane which does not require preservation and would be omitted from the grind and overlay. The project scope also includes upgrades to ADA curb ramps and pedestrian push buttons, and replacement of vehicle detection at signalized intersections. Progress Summary: Grant funding for the project was awarded in 2020. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project is anticipated to reduce the operating budget for street maintenance. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 64 Page 511 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET PRESERVATION FUND (105)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: Lea Hill Bridge Deck Preservation TIP# P-9 Project No:CP2007 Project Type:Non-Capacity, Preservation Project Manager:Kim Truong Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Arterial Preservation Fund 2,882 37,118 10,000 - 50,000 Secured Federal Grant 4,858 922,992 - - 927,850 Utility Tax - - - - - Bond proceeds - - - - - 7,740 960,110 10,000 - 977,850 Capital Expenditures: Design 7,740 90,110 - - 97,850 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 870,000 10,000 880,000 7,740 960,110 10,000 - 977,850 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Arterial Preservation Fund - - - - 10,000 Secured Federal Grant - - - - - Utility Tax - - - - - Bond proceeds - - - - - - - - - 10,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 10,000 - - - - 10,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: This project will grind and overlay the bridge deck in an effort to extend the overall service life of the bridge. Progress Summary: Grant funding was awarded in 2020. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project is anticipated to reduce the operating budget for street maintenance. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 65 Page 512 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET PRESERVATION FUND (105)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: A St SE Preservation (37th Street SE to Lakeland Hills Way)TIP# P-10 Project No:spbd09 Project Type:Non-Capacity, Preservation Project Manager:TBD LOS Corridor ID# 10 Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Arterial Preservation Fund - - - 25,000 - Unsecured Grants - - - - - Utility Tax - - - - - Bond proceeds - - - - - - - - 25,000 - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - 25,000 - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - 25,000 - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Arterial Preservation Fund 100,000 866,130 - - 991,130 Unsecured Grants - 866,130 - - 866,130 Utility Tax - - - - - Bond proceeds - - - - - 100,000 1,732,260 - - 1,857,260 Capital Expenditures: Design 75,000 - - - 100,000 Right of Way 25,000 - - - 25,000 Construction - 1,732,260 - - 1,732,260 100,000 1,732,260 - - 1,857,260 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Description: The project will grind and overlay A Street SE from 37th Street SE to the Auburn/Pacific City Limit and from the Pacific/Auburn City Limit to the intersection with Lakeland Hills Way). The project also includes ADA upgrades to curb ramps, pedestrian push buttons, and replacement of vehicle detection loops. Progress Summary: Grant funding for the construction phase of this project is anticipated to be submitted in 2022. If awarded, the design phase would begin in 2023. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project is anticipated to reduce the operating budget for street maintenance. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 66 Page 513 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET PRESERVATION FUND (105)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Fund Project Title: C Street SW Preservation (W Main St to GSA Signal)TIP# P-11 Project No:cp2123 Project Type:Non-Capacity, Preservation Project Manager:TBD LOS Corridor ID# 13 Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Arterial Preservation Fund - 25,000 100,000 1,118,272 125,000 Secured Federal Grant - - - 1,118,272 - Utility Tax - - - - - Bond proceeds - - - - - - 25,000 100,000 2,236,544 125,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 25,000 75,000 - 100,000 Right of Way - - 25,000 25,000 Construction - - - 2,236,544 - - 25,000 100,000 2,236,544 125,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Arterial Preservation Fund - - - 1,218,272 Secured Federal Grant - - - 1,118,272 Utility Tax - - - - Bond proceeds - - - - - - - - - 2,336,544 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 75,000 Right of Way - - - - 25,000 Construction - - - 2,236,544 - - - - 2,336,544 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Description: The project will grind and overlay C Street SW from W Main Street to the GSA signal (approximately 2,000 feet to the south of 15th Street SW). The project also includes ADA upgrades to curb ramps and pedestrian push buttons, and replacement of vehicle detection loops. Progress Summary: Grant funding for the construction phase of this project was awarded in 2020. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project is anticipated to reduce the operating budget for street maintenance. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 67 Page 514 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET PRESERVATION FUND (105)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: 3rd Street SW Bridges Deck Preservation TIP# P-13 Project No:CP2006 Project Type:Non-Capacity, Preservation Project Manager:Kim Truong Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Arterial Preservation Fund 2,713 87,286 10,000 - 99,999 Secured Federal Grant 6,463 637,077 - - 643,540 Utility Tax - - - - - Bond proceeds - - - - - 9,176 724,363 10,000 - 743,539 Capital Expenditures: Design 9,176 97,286 - - 106,462 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 627,077 10,000 - 637,077 9,176 724,363 10,000 - 743,539 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Arterial Preservation Fund - - - - 10,000 Secured Federal Grant - - - - - Utility Tax - - - - - Bond proceeds - - - - - - - - - 10,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 10,000 - - - - 10,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: This project will seal and overlay the 3rd Street SW bridge decks in an effort to extend the overall service life of the bridges. The following bridges are included in the project: 3rd Street off-ramp, 3rd Street SW over the BNSF tracks, and 3rd Street SW over A Street SW. Progress Summary: Grant funding was awarded in 2020. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project is anticipated to reduce the operating budget for street maintenance. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 68 Page 515 of 967 ARTERIAL STREET PRESERVATION FUND (105)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Special Revenue Funds Project Title: 4th Street SE Preservation (Auburn Way S to L Street SE)TIP# P-14 Project No:CP2102 Project Type:Preservation Project Manager:Jeff Bender Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Arterial Preservation Fund 6,049 143,951 1,065,048 - 1,215,048 Secured State Grant - 150,000 1,597,572 - 1,747,572 Utility Tax - - - - - Other - - - - - 6,049 293,951 2,662,620 - 2,962,620 Capital Expenditures: Design 6,049 293,951 - - 300,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 2,662,620 - 2,662,620 6,049 293,951 2,662,620 - 2,962,620 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Arterial Preservation Fund - - - - 1,065,048 Secured State Grant - - - - 1,597,572 Utility Tax - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 2,662,620 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 2,662,620 - - - - 2,662,620 Grants / Other Sources: This project will replace pavement and utilities on 4th Street SE from Auburn Way South to L Street SE. A pavement grind and overlay is planned between Auburn Way South and D Street SE. Full depth pavement reclamation is planned from D Street SE to L Street SE. The project will also include replacement of City utilities, removal of sidewalk obstructions, replacement of sidewalk and curb ramps as needed to address ADA requirements, and other improvements. Progress Summary: Grant funding for the project was awarded by TIB in 2020. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project is anticipated to reduce the operating budget for street maintenance. Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 69 Page 516 of 967 TABLE T-3 Impact on Future Operating Budgets Transportation . Project:2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Total 1 Lea Hill Road/112th Ave SE Roundabout -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 2 29th St SE & R St SE Intersection Imp.- - 500 500 500 500 2,000 3 Lea Hill ITS Expansion - - - 500 500 500 1,500 4 R St SE & 21st St SE Int. Safety Imp.- - - 1,000 1,000 1,000 3,000 5 Auburn Way S & 6th Street SE - - - 500 500 500 1,500 6 SE 304th Street/132nd Avenue SE Roundabout - - - 1,000 1,000 1,000 3,000 7 10th St NW & A St NW Intersection Imp.- 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 5,000 8 Riverwalk Dr SE Non-Motorized Imp.- 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 10,000 9 A Street Loop - 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 5,000 10 A Street NW, Phase 2 (W Main St to 3rd St NW)- - - 500 500 500 1,500 11 AWS Imp. -Hemlock St SE to Poplar St SE - - - 2,500 2,500 2,500 7,500 12 M Street NE, E. Main to 4th - - 500 500 500 500 2,000 13 49th Street NE (AWN to D St NE)- 500 500 500 500 500 2,500 14 46th Place S Realignment - - - - - 1,000 1,000 15 124th Ave SE Widening (SE 312th St to SE 318th St)- - - - - 1,000 1,000 16 Regional Growth Center Access Imp.- 500 500 500 500 500 2,500 17 Garden Garden Avenue Re-Alignment 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 6,000 18 ITS Dynamic Message Signs 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 18,000 Total 4,000$ 9,000$ 10,000$ 16,000$ 16,000$ 19,000$ 74,000$ City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 70 Page 517 of 967 WATER Current Facilities The City of Auburn water utility provides water supply, treatment, transmission, storage, distribution, and service connections to in-City residences and businesses. The City also provides water to the City of Algona under a wholesale agreement. The water system consists of wells, springs and interties for source; chlorination stations and corrosion control for treatment; pump stations, pressure reducing 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 and service polices for the City’s water distribution system. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing The City of Auburn’s water system anticipates eight capacity projects in the amount of $17,274,823 and thirty non-capacity projects totaling $33,044,015 for a 6-year planning expectation total of $50,318,838. 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, water quality enhancements, comprehensive and resource management planning, pump station upgrades, telemetry system improvements, and meter upgrades. Impact on Future Operating Budgets There are no operating budget impacts forecasted for the water facilities during the six years 2023-2028. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 71 Page 518 of 967 TABLE W-1 Facilities Inventory Water Facilities CAPACITY FACILITY WATER RIGHT (MGD - max rate)LOCATION Water Supply: Coal Creek Springs Certificate 857 9.70<2.52>*3401 Stuck River Rd Well 1 Certificate 3560-A 3.17 1136 M St SE Well 2 G1-00277 C 3.46 1109 5th St NE Well 3A G1-23629 C 4.03 401 37th St SE Well 3B (Included Above)(Included Above) 401 37th St SE Well 4 G1-20391 C 4.03 950 25th St SE Well 5 G1-23633 C 1.44 5530 James Ave SE Well 5B G1-25518C 0.24 5401 Olive Way SE Well 5A (Included Above)(Included Above) West end of 62nd Ct SE Well 6 (Supplemental to Wells 1, 2, 3A, 3B, 4)5.04 (supplemental)1109 5th St NE Well 7 (Supplemental to Wells 1, 2, 3A, 3B, 4)5.04 (supplemental)405 E St NE West Hill Springs Claim (1973 File Date)0.9 1900 15th St NW Ext Supply Total (MGD)26.97 Available for Use 24.45 * Denotes deduction of 1,750 gpm (Qi/2,824 ac-ft/yr) to comply with the provisions of the Muckleshoot-Auburn Stipulated Agreement. CAPACITY FACILITY (MGD)LOCATION SERVICE AREA Intertie Tacoma B Street NW 3.2 3240 B St NW Valley Service Area Tacoma 132nd Ave SE 3.2 29598 132nd Ave SE Lea Hill Service Area Intertie Total (MGD)6.4 CAPACITY FACILITY (MG)LOCATION SERVICE AREA Storage Facilities: Academy Reservoir 8A 1.2 5031 Auburn Way S Academy Service Area Academy Reservoir 8B 1.5 5031 Auburn Way S Academy Service Area Lakeland Hills Reservoir 5 1.0 1326 57th Dr SE Lakeland Hills Svc Area Lakeland Hills Reservoir 6 1.0 5718 Francis Ct SE Lakeland Hills Svc Area Lea Hill Reservoir 4A 1.0 30502 132nd Ave SE Lea Hill Service Area Lea Hill Reservoir 4B 1.5 30502 132nd Ave SE Lea Hill Service Area Valley Reservoir 1 5.0 2003 Auburn Way S Valley Service Area Valley Reservoir 2 3.6 32115 105th Place S Valley Service Area Storage Total (MG)15.8 CITY OF AUBURN WATER SYSTEM City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 72 Page 519 of 967 TABLE W-1 (continued) Facilities Inventory Water Facilities CAPACITY FACILITY (GPM)LOCATION Booster Pump Stations: Academy 1: 2 pumps 800 2004 Auburn Way S Academy 2: 2 pumps 1,500 2004 Auburn Way S Academy East: 6 pumps 2,820 5031 Auburn Way S Green River: 4 pumps 4,680 29621 Green River Rd SE Intertie: 7 pumps 4,830 30502 132nd Ave SE Lakeland Hills: 5 pumps 3,200 1118 57th Place SE Lea Hill: 3 pumps 2,100 10406 Lea Hill Rd SE Terrace View: 3 pumps 1,500 6134 Alexander Place SE Wilderness Game Farm Pk: 2 pumps 1,050 2401 Stuck River Rd FACILITY LOCATION Pressure Reducing Stations: Serves Valley Pressure Zone: 25th Street SE #1110-10 25th St SE & K St SE B Street Intertie 3300 B St NW Green River Pump Station 29621 Green River Rd SE Howard Road CCF #1011-10 Howard Rd Howard Road CCF By-Pass #1011-20 Howard Rd (Bypass) Lea Hill Pump Station 10406 Lea Hill Rd SE Riverwalk # 1111-10 Riverwalk Dr SE & Howard Rd Riverwalk # 1111-20 2204 27th St. SE Serves Lea Hill: 132nd Avenue Intertie 132nd Ave SE & 295th St Amber View North #711-10 105th Pl SE & 320th Pl Amber View South #711-20 106th Pl SE Near Reservoir 2 Carriage Square Upper #611-30 Lea Hill Rd & 107 Pl Cobble Creek Lower #411-20 SE 304th Pl & SE 101st Place Cobble Creek Upper #411-10 104th Ave SE (South of 303rd Road) Lea Hill #412-10 SE 298th Place & 109 Ave SE Lea Hill #412-30 300 Block & 108th Ave SE Lea Hill #511-10 304th St. SE and 108th Ave SE Lea Hill #512-10 304th St. SE and 110th Pl SE Serves Academy: Academy Pump Station 2004 Auburn Way S Auburn Way South #1011-30 2003 Auburn Way S Auburn Way South #1114-10 4500 Auburn Way S Lemon Tree 5031 Auburn Way S City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 73 Page 520 of 967 TABLE W-1 (continued) Facilities Inventory Water Facilities FACILITY LOCATION Serves Lakeland Hills: Lakeland Hills #1309-10 Mill Pond Dr @ Oravetz Rd Lakeland Hills #1310-10 Mill Pond Dr & Mill Pond Loop Lakeland Hills #1310-20 Kennedy Ave SE River Rock Lakeland Hills #1409-10 Oravetz & Lakeland Hills Way Lakeland Hills #1409-20 47th SE & Lakeland Hills Way Lakeland Hills #1409-30 Lakeland Hills Way & 51st St SE Lakeland Hills #1409-40 Mill Pond Dr & Lakeland Hills Way Lakeland Hills #1410-10 5018 Mill Pond Dr Lakeland Hills #1410-20 51st St. SE east of Mill Pond Loop Lakeland Hills #1410-30 Nathan Ave & Highland Dr Lakeland Hills #1410-40 5203 Quincy Ave SE Lakeland Hills #1411-10 Bennett Ave & 56th Ave SE Lakeland Hills #1411-20 5310 Bennett Ave SE Lakeland Hills #1411-30 5100 Kersey Way Lakeland Hills #1411-40 2305 54th St SE Lakeland Hills #1411-50 5253 Wesley Ave SE Lakeland Hills #1411-60 5233 Victoria Avenue Lakeland Hills #1412-10 5539 Franklin Ave SE Lakeland Hills #1412-20 Kersey Way SE School Lakeland Hills #1509-10 Terrace View Lower (6170) Lakeland Hills #1509-20 Terrace View Middle (5960) Lakeland Hills #1509-30 Terrace View Upper (5810) Lakeland Hills #1509-40 Terrace View & Alexander Place SE Lakeland Hills #1510-10 Lakeland Hills Way & Evergreen Way CAPACITY FACILITY (GPM)LOCATION Corrosion Control: Howard Road 5,550 2101 Howard Rd SE Fulmer Field 9,375 1113 5th St NE Chlorination Stations: Coal Creek Springs Station 5,000 (gravity feed) 3401 Stuck River Rd West Hill Springs Station 625 (gravity feed) 1900 15th St NW Well 1 2,200 1136 M St SE Well 4 2,600 950 25th St SE Well 5A 180 5401 Olive Ave SE Well 5B 600 1100 63rd St SE FACILITY CAPACITY LOCATION Water Supply: Braunwood Satellite 1 20 GPM 4501 47th St SE Storage Facilities: Braunwood Satellite 1 33,000 Gallons 4501 47th St SE Booster Pump Stations: Braunwood: 3 Pumps 2.0 GPM 4501 47th St SE BRAUNWOOD SATELLITE WATER SYSTEM City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 74 Page 521 of 967 TABLE W-2 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Page Capacity Projects: 80 Cascade Water Alliance Water Purchase Capital Costs 934,810 934,810 934,810 934,810 934,810 934,810 5,608,860 Funding Sources: Water Fund 934,810 934,810 934,810 934,810 934,810 934,810 5,608,860 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 81 Academy Pump Station #1 Pump Replacement Capital Costs 609,500 - - - - - 609,500 Funding Sources: Water Fund 609,500 - - - - - 609,500 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 82 Coal Creek Springs Rehabilitation Capital Costs - - - - 1,125,509 2,873,424 3,998,933 Funding Sources: Water Fund - - - - 1,125,509 2,873,424 3,998,933 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 83 Algona Well 1 Decommissioning Capital Costs - 50,000 - - - - 50,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund - 50,000 - - - - 50,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 84 Annual Distribution System Improvements Program Capital Costs - - - 300,000 1,000,000 300,000 1,600,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund - - - 300,000 1,000,000 300,000 1,600,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 85 Howard Road CCTF Expansion Capital Costs - - - - 348,908 1,099,622 1,448,530 Funding Sources: Water Fund - - - - 348,908 1,099,622 1,448,530 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 86 Valley Service Area Reservoir No. 3 Capital Costs 50,000 - - - 700,000 510,000 1,260,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 50,000 - - - 700,000 510,000 1,260,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 87 Well 5/5A Upgrades Capital Costs - - - 947,000 112,000 1,640,000 2,699,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund - - - 947,000 112,000 1,640,000 2,699,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - Subtotal, Capacity Projects: Capital Costs 1,594,310 984,810 934,810 2,181,810 4,221,227 7,357,856 17,274,823 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING WATER DIVISION City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 75 Page 522 of 967 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Page Non-Capacity Projects: 88 Well Inspection and Redevelopment Program Capital Costs - - - 200,000 - - 200,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund - - - 200,000 - - 200,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 89 Water Repair & Replacements Capital Costs 100,000 - 300,000 1,000,000 300,000 - 1,700,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund - - 300,000 1,000,000 300,000 - 1,600,000 Bond Proceeds 100,000 - - - - - 100,000 90 Street Utility Improvements Capital Costs 200,000 - 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 - 3,200,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 200,000 - 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 - 3,200,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 91 Reservoir Seismic Rehabilitation Capital Costs - - 262,000 - 298,000 - 560,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund - - 262,000 - 298,000 - 560,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 92 Intertie Booster Pump Station Improvements Capital Costs - - - - 250,000 2,000,000 2,250,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund - - - - 250,000 2,000,000 2,250,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 93 Reservoir Painting Capital Costs - - - - 1,747,026 - 1,747,026 Funding Sources: Water Fund - - - - 1,747,026 - 1,747,026 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 94 Coal Creek Springs Transmission Main Replacement Capital Costs 3,700,000 - - - - - 3,700,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund - - - - - - - Grant - - - - - - - DWSRF Loan 3,700,000 - - - - - 3,700,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 95 4th Street SE Preservation Capital Costs 800,000 - - - - - 800,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 700,000 - - - - - 700,000 Grant - - - - - - - Bond Proceeds 100,000 - - - - - 100,000 96 Reservoir Repair and Replacements Capital Costs 62,000 64,000 66,000 68,000 70,000 72,000 402,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 62,000 64,000 66,000 68,000 70,000 72,000 402,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 97 R Street SE Improvements Capital Costs - 60,000 1,000,000 - - - 1,060,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund - 60,000 1,000,000 - - - 1,060,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 76 Page 523 of 967 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Page Non-Capacity Projects: 98 2021 Local Street Reconstruction Capital Costs 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund - - - - - - - Bond Proceeds 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 99 Auburn Way Pavement Patching Capital Costs 100,000 - - - - - 100,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 100,000 - - - - - 100,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 100 M Street NE Widening Capital Costs 37,000 - 320,000 - - - 357,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 37,000 - 320,000 - - - 357,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 101 Auburn Way South - Hemlock Street SE to Poplar Street SE Capital Costs - 2,176,000 256,000 - - - 2,432,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund - 2,176,000 256,000 - - - 2,432,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 102 Water Trench Patches Program Capital Costs 155,000 160,000 165,000 170,000 175,000 180,000 1,005,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 155,000 160,000 165,000 170,000 175,000 180,000 1,005,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 103 Lea Hill Pump Station Replacement Capital Costs - - - 491,000 746,333 5,300,000 6,537,333 Funding Sources: Water Fund - - - 491,000 746,333 5,300,000 6,537,333 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 104 Deduct Meter Replacement Program, Phases 1 through 3 Capital Costs 485,000 - - - - - 485,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 100,000 - - - - - 100,000 Bond Proceeds 385,000 - - - - - 385,000 105 Comprehensive Water Plan Capital Costs 263,000 251,000 20,000 - - - 534,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 263,000 251,000 20,000 - - - 534,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 106 Lea Hill AC Main Replacement Capital Costs 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund - - - - - - - Bond Proceeds 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 107 Reservoir 2 Valves Capital Costs 240,000 760,000 - - - - 1,000,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 240,000 760,000 - - - - 1,000,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 77 Page 524 of 967 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Page Non-Capacity Projects: 108 104th Park Development (104th to 102nd Water Main Loop) Capital Costs 50,000 - - - - - 50,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 50,000 - - - - - 50,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 109 Garden Avenue Realignment Capital Costs 440,000 - - - - - 440,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 440,000 - - - - - 440,000 Grants - - - - - - - 110 Lead Service Line Replacement Capital Costs 50,000 - - - - - 50,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 50,000 - - - - - 50,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - DWSRF Loan - - - - - - - 111 Well 4 Facility Improvements Capital Costs 1,015,000 - - - - - 1,015,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund 1,015,000 - - - - - 1,015,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 112 Water Resources Protection Program (Wellhead Protection) Capital Costs 27,700 28,500 29,400 30,200 31,200 33,100 180,100 Funding Sources: Water Fund 27,700 28,500 29,400 30,200 31,200 33,100 180,100 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 113 Game Farm Park Pump Station/Distribution System Improvements Capital Costs - - - - 69,782 329,774 399,556 Funding Sources: Water Fund - - - - 69,782 329,774 399,556 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 114 D Street SE Storm Improvements Capital Costs - 1,000,000 - - - - 1,000,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund - 1,000,000 - - - - 1,000,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 115 West Hill Springs Water Quality Improvements Capital Costs - - 100,000 480,000 - - 580,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund - - 100,000 480,000 - - 580,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 116 23rd Street SE Storm Improvements Capital Costs - 540,000 - - - - 540,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund - 540,000 - - - - 540,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 117 C St SW Preservation Capital Costs - 700,000 - - - - 700,000 Funding Sources: Water Fund - 700,000 - - - - 700,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - Subtotal, Non-Capacity Projects: Capital Costs 7,744,700 5,739,500 3,518,400 3,439,200 4,687,341 7,914,874 33,044,015 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 78 Page 525 of 967 SUMMARY: 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects 1,594,310 984,810 934,810 2,181,810 4,221,227 7,357,856 17,274,823 Non-Capacity Projects 7,744,700 5,739,500 3,518,400 3,439,200 4,687,341 7,914,874 33,044,015 Total Costs 9,339,010 6,724,310 4,453,210 5,621,010 8,908,568 15,272,730 50,318,838 FUNDING SOURCES: Water Fund 5,034,010 6,724,310 4,453,210 5,621,010 8,908,568 15,272,730 46,013,838 DWSRF Loan 3,700,000 - - - - - 3,700,000 Grants - - - - - - - Bond Proceeds 605,000 - - - - - 605,000 Total Funding 9,339,010 6,724,310 4,453,210 5,621,010 8,908,568 15,272,730 50,318,838 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 79 Page 526 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Cascade Water Alliance Water Purchase Project No:cp1914 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Susan Fenhaus Description: Activity: (Previous 2 Years)2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue 1,187,391 934,805 934,810 934,810 3,057,006 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 1,187,391 934,805 934,810 934,810 3,057,006 Capital Expenditures: Water Supply Purchase 1,187,391 834,805 934,810 934,810 2,957,006 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - 1,187,391 834,805 934,810 934,810 2,957,006 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 934,810 934,810 934,810 934,810 5,608,860 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 934,810 934,810 934,810 934,810 5,608,860 Capital Expenditures: Water Supply Purchase 934,810 934,810 934,810 934,810 5,608,860 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - 934,810 934,810 934,810 934,810 5,608,860 Grants / Other Sources: Financing of System Development Charges for the right to purchase water from Tacoma Public Utilities through the Second Supply Pipeline to meet future projected demand, based on agreements with Cascade Water Alliance. Council approved the agreements for permanent and reserve wholesale supply in September 2013. A new agreement with Tacoma was executed in 2014. Budget reflects purchase of permanent supply - payments of $934,810 will continue from 2020 through 2029. Reserve supply will not be purchased and is not included. Comprehensive Plan project S-04. Progress Summary: Ongoing payments through 2029 Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 80 Page 527 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Academy Pump Station #1 Pump Replacement Project No:cp1916 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Jeff Bender Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - - 609,500 - 609,500 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds 633,600 3,109,379 - - 3,742,979 Other - - - - - 633,600 3,109,379 609,500 - 4,352,479 Capital Expenditures: Design 633,600 32,248 - - 665,848 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 3,077,131 609,500 - 3,686,631 633,600 3,109,379 609,500 - 4,352,479 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - 609,500 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 609,500 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 609,500 - - - - 609,500 Grants / Other Sources: The pump station is reaching the end of its useful life. The project will construct a new pump station with 4 pumps to meet peak demands and fire flow requirements. Pump station #1 will be removed and pump station #2 will be used for storage after the pumps are removed. Preliminary design found it to be more cost effective to build a new pump station and decommission both existing pump stations. The backup power generator will be replaced. Comprehensive Plan project PS-07. Progress Summary: Construction underway in 2021. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 81 Page 528 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Coal Creek Springs Rehabilitation Project No:wabd07 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 50,000 - - 50,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - PWTFL - - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - - 50,000 - - 50,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 50,000 - - 50,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - 50,000 - - 50,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - 1,125,509 2,873,424 3,998,933 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - PWTFL - - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 1,125,509 2,873,424 3,998,933 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 500,000 - 500,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 625,509 2,873,424 3,498,933 - - 1,125,509 2,873,424 3,998,933 Grants / Other Sources: Rehabilitation of the Coal Creek Springs middle collector will improve capacity of the springs resulting in greater utilization of the water right. Comprehensive Plan project S-09. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 82 Page 529 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Algona Well 1 Decommissioning Project No:wabd08 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - 50,000 - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - 50,000 - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - 50,000 50,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - 50,000 - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - 50,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 50,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 50,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - 50,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: The Algona well has been temporarily abandoned and all related facilities removed. This project will have the well properly decommissioned by a State of Washington-licensed well driller, once the water rights have been transferred to an alternate source. Comprehensive Plan project S-14. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 83 Page 530 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Annual Distribution System Improvements Program Project No:wabd09 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - 300,000 1,000,000 300,000 1,600,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 300,000 1,000,000 300,000 1,600,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 300,000 - 300,000 600,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 1,000,000 - 1,000,000 - 300,000 1,000,000 300,000 1,600,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Program to fund capacity-related improvements to the water distribution system to address low pressures during peak hour demand and fire flows. Comprehensive Plan project D-02. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 84 Page 531 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Howard Road CCTF Expansion Project No:cpxxxx Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - 348,908 1,099,622 1,448,530 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - 348,908 1,099,622 1,448,530 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 348,908 - 348,908 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 1,099,622 1,099,622 - - 348,908 1,099,622 1,448,530 Grants / Other Sources: With the completion of the Coal Creek Springs Rehabilitation, the Howard Road Corrosion Control Treatment Facility will exceed its current capacity. This project will add one aeration tower and one blower pump to match the existing towers and blowers. Comprehensive Plan project S-18. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 85 Page 532 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Valley Service Area Reservoir No. 3 Project No:wabd26 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - - 50,000 - 50,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - 50,000 - 50,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 50,000 - 50,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - 50,000 - 50,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - 700,000 510,000 1,260,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - 700,000 510,000 1,260,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - 510,000 560,000 Property Acquisition - - 700,000 - 700,000 Construction - - - - - - 700,000 510,000 1,260,000 Grants / Other Sources: A new 1 million gallon storage facility is needed to meet future storage requirements in the Valley Service Area. Comprehensive Plan project R-04. Progress Summary: Reservoir siting study will be conducted in 2022, with property acquisition in 2026. Design of the project will be completed in 2028, with construction in 2028-2029. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant Impact Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 86 Page 533 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Well 5/5A Upgrades Project No:cpxxx Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - 947,000 112,000 1,640,000 2,699,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 947,000 112,000 1,640,000 2,699,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 112,000 - 112,000 Right of Way - 947,000 - - 947,000 Construction - - - 1,640,000 1,640,000 - 947,000 112,000 1,640,000 2,699,000 Grants / Other Sources: This project was identified in the 2016 Facilities Evaluation Study. Well 5 is in need of a new building, backup generator, chlorination, pump, and hydrologic investigation to evaluate the well's production. Due to the small size of the existing site, the acquisition of an adjacent parcel may be required. The Facilities Evaluation Study also identified the need for a new pump and motor in Well 5A. Comprehensive Plan project S-06. Progress Summary: The hydrologic study and property acquisition are anticipated to begin in 2025. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant Impact Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 87 Page 534 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Well Inspection and Redevelopment Program Project No:wabd11 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - 200,000 - - 200,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 200,000 - - 200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 200,000 - - 200,000 - 200,000 - - 200,000 Grants / Other Sources: No significant impact. Program for inspection and redevelopment of supply wells and springs necessary to ensure production at maximum capacity for efficient utilization. Comprehensive Plan project S-07. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 88 Page 535 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Water Repair & Replacements Project No:wabd02 Project Type:Non-Capacity (R&R) Project Manager:Various Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 130,000 - - 130,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - 100,000 - 100,000 Other - - - - - - 130,000 100,000 - 230,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 130,000 100,000 - 230,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - 130,000 100,000 - 230,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 300,000 1,000,000 300,000 - 1,600,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - 100,000 Other - - - - - 300,000 1,000,000 300,000 - 1,700,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 300,000 - 300,000 - 700,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 1,000,000 - - 1,000,000 300,000 1,000,000 300,000 - 1,700,000 Program to fund distribution system repair and replacement projects required for meeting peak demands and reducing system losses. Projects will be coordinated with the streets and other utility projects. Comprehensive Plan project D-09. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 89 Page 536 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Street Utility Improvements Project No:wabd01 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Various Description: Progress Summary: CP2102 (4th Street SE) was funded under this program and will be completed in 2022. No significant impact Activity: (Previous 2 Years)2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - - 200,000 - 200,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - 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 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 - 3,200,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - Total Funding Sources:1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 - 3,200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 - 3,200,000 Total Expenditures:1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 - 3,200,000 Grants / Other Sources: Water main improvements in coordination with the Local Street Preservation Program and general arterial street improvements. Comprehensive Plan project D-06. Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 90 Page 537 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Reservoir Seismic Rehabilitation Project No:wabd16 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 86,000 - - 86,000 Grants -Unsecured Federal - - - - - PWTFL - - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - - 86,000 - - 86,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 86,000 - - 86,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - 86,000 - - 86,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 262,000 - 298,000 - 560,000 Grants -Unsecured Federal - - - - - PWTFL - - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - 262,000 - 298,000 - 560,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 65,000 - 88,000 - 153,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 197,000 - 210,000 - 407,000 262,000 - 298,000 - 560,000 Grants / Other Sources: Install seismic control valves on outlet piping of Reservoirs 4A, 4B, 8A, and 8B. This project will include a study to identify work to be completed at each site, and to further define project costs at each site. Costs for the remaining reservoirs will be updated based on the study. Seismic control valve for Reservoir 2 is a separate project. Comprehensive Plan project R-06. Progress Summary: The study to identify the work to be completed at each site was completed in 2020. Individual sites will be planned based on the study results. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 91 Page 538 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Intertie Booster Pump Station Improvements Project No:wabd05 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - PWTFL - - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - 250,000 2,000,000 2,250,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - PWTFL - - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 250,000 2,000,000 2,250,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 250,000 250,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 2,000,000 2,000,000 - - 250,000 2,000,000 2,250,000 Grants / Other Sources: Project will provide additional piping and modify the existing Intertie/ Lea Hill Booster pump station building to utilize the existing Intertie pumps for the Boosted zone. The project will also add pressure reducing valves and control valves at Lea Hill reservoirs, and system valves to provide efficient operation of the 132nd Ave Tacoma Intertie. Comprehensive Plan projects D-06, and PS-04. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 92 Page 539 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Reservoir Painting Project No:cpxxxx Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - PWTFL - - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - 1,747,026 - 1,747,026 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - PWTFL - - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 1,747,026 - 1,747,026 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 227,026 227,026 Right of Way - - - - Construction - - 1,520,000 1,520,000 - - 1,747,026 - 1,747,026 Grants / Other Sources: Maintenance of reservoirs requires periodic painting to protect the steel and increase the useful life of the reservoir. Comprehensive Plan project R-05. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 93 Page 540 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Coal Creek Springs Transmission Main Replacement Project No:cp1603 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Seth Wickstrom Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue 396,402 262,452 - - 658,854 Parks Grants (State)- - - - - DWSRF Loan 234,666 - 3,700,000 - 3,934,666 Bond Proceeds - - - - - 631,068 262,452 3,700,000 - 4,593,520 Capital Expenditures: Design 631,068 262,452 - - 893,520 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 3,700,000 - 3,700,000 631,068 262,452 3,700,000 - 4,593,520 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - - Parks Grants (State)- - - - - DWSRF Loan - - - - 3,700,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - - - 3,700,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 3,700,000 - - - - 3,700,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: The facilities evaluation study conducted in 2013-2014 found a suspected leak on the 24" steel transmission main crossing the White River. This project plans to provide for full replacement of the transmission main suspended from a pedestrian bridge to be constructed across the White River. Parks Department will participate in the project by providing funding from grants for the trail connections to the bridge. This option eliminates the deep blow-off and allows more flexibility for expansion. A future project would rehabilitate the existing transmission main for redundancy. Comprehensive Plan project D-11. Progress Summary: Design underway in 2019 and 2020. Permitting in 2021. A DWSRF loan was applied for in 2020 for construction in 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 94 Page 541 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: 4th Street SE Preservation Project No:CP2102 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Jeff Bender Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 450,000 700,000 - 1,150,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - Bond Proceeds - 135,575 100,000 - 235,575 Other - - - - - - 585,575 800,000 - 1,385,575 Capital Expenditures: Design - 50,000 - - 50,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 535,575 800,000 - 1,335,575 - 585,575 800,000 - 1,385,575 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - 700,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - 100,000 Other - - - - - - - - - 800,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 800,000 - - - - 800,000 Grants / Other Sources: Along with the street reconstruction and other utility improvements, replace approximately 1,700 LF of 6" cast iron pipe between F St SE and L St Se with 8" ductile iron pipe. Replace approximately 630LF of 8" cast iron pipe between D St SE and F St SE with 8" ductile iron pipe. Progress Summary: Design is underway in 2021 with construction expected in 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant Impact Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 95 Page 542 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Reservoir Repair and Replacements Project No:wabd12 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 150,000 62,000 64,000 212,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 150,000 62,000 64,000 212,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 150,000 62,000 64,000 212,000 - 150,000 62,000 64,000 212,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 66,000 68,000 70,000 72,000 402,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 66,000 68,000 70,000 72,000 402,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction 66,000 68,000 70,000 72,000 402,000 66,000 68,000 70,000 72,000 402,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: General reservoir maintenance and minor improvements. Comprehensive Plan project R-03. Progress Summary: In 2018, project costs were escalated at 3% per year from 2015 to year of construction. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 96 Page 543 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: R Street SE Improvements Project No:CP2116 Project Type: Project Manager:Luis Barba Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 70,000 - 60,000 70,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 70,000 - 60,000 70,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 70,000 - 60,000 70,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - 70,000 - 60,000 70,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 1,000,000 - - - 1,060,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 1,000,000 - - - 1,060,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 60,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 1,000,000 - - - 1,000,000 1,000,000 - - - 1,060,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Non-capacity Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Along with the street reconstruction and other utility improvements, replace approximately 2,830 LF of 8" cast iron pipe with 12" ductile iron pipe, along with valves, fire hydrants, and services. Progress Summary: Design is underway in 2021 with construction expected in 2024. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant Impact City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 97 Page 544 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: 2021 Local Street Reconstruction Project No:cp2019 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Kim Truong Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 130,000 - - 130,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds 46,726 2,563,274 10,000 - 2,620,000 Other - - - - - 46,726 2,693,274 10,000 - 2,750,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 46,726 35,280 - - 82,006 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 2,657,994 10,000 - 2,667,994 46,726 2,693,274 10,000 - 2,750,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - 10,000 Other - - - - - - - - - 10,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 10,000 - - - - 10,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: This project will construct water main improvements on G Street SE between E. Main Street and 4th Street SE and in various streets in the Riverwalk neighborhood. The improvements are coordination with the 2021 Local Street Preservation project and include replacing 1,250 feet of 4" cast iron pipe with 8" ductile iron water main and 43 services on G ST SE. and replacement of 4,360 feet of 6" cast iron pipe and 730 feet of 4" cast iron with 8" ductile iron main and 110 services in the Riverwalk area. Comprehensive Plan project D-06. Progress Summary: Project design began in 2020. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 98 Page 545 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Auburn Way Pavement Patching Project No:CP2120 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Aleksey Koshman Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 50,000 100,000 - 150,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 50,000 100,000 - 150,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 10,000 - - 10,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 40,000 100,000 - 140,000 - 50,000 100,000 - 150,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - 100,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 100,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 100,000 - - - - 100,000 Grants / Other Sources: Roadway restoration of trench patches from water leak repair and water service installation on Auburn Way that are beyond the scope of work done by maintenance staff. Progress Summary: Project design in 2021 with construction in 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 99 Page 546 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: M Street NE Widening Project No:wabd13 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - - 37,000 - 37,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - 37,000 - 37,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 37,000 - 37,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - 37,000 - 37,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 320,000 - - - 357,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 320,000 - - - 357,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 37,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 320,000 - - - 320,000 320,000 - - - 357,000 Grants / Other Sources: Water main improvements constructed in conjunction with streets project: M ST NE widening (E Main to 4th St NE). Work includes replacing 26 services, connecting to existing 12" ductile main, and abandoning 6" cast main in place. Comprehensive Plan project D-06. Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant Impact City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 100 Page 547 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Auburn Way South - Hemlock Street SE to Poplar Street SE Project No:cp1622 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Jeff Bender Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 66,000 - 2,176,000 66,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 66,000 - 2,176,000 66,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 66,000 - 66,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 2,176,000 - - 66,000 - 2,176,000 66,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 256,000 - - - 2,432,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 256,000 - - - 2,432,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - Construction 256,000 - - - 2,432,000 256,000 - - - 2,432,000 Grants / Other Sources: Water main improvements constructed in conjunction with Auburn Way South street improvements. Project will replace approximately 2,300 feet of 10" cast iron line with 12" ductile Iron water main. Comprehensive Plan project D-06. Progress Summary: Design began in 2020 in conjunction with Auburn School District's Chinook Elementary School Replacement project. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant Impact Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 101 Page 548 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Water Trench Patches Program Project No:wabd28 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - - 155,000 160,000 155,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - 155,000 160,000 155,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 155,000 160,000 155,000 - - 155,000 160,000 155,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 165,000 170,000 175,000 180,000 1,005,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 165,000 170,000 175,000 180,000 1,005,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction 165,000 170,000 175,000 180,000 1,005,000 165,000 170,000 175,000 180,000 1,005,000 Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: This program provides annual funding for roadway restoration of trench patches from water leak repair and water service installation that are beyond the scope of work done by maintenance staff. Progress Summary: Program was developed in 2020 to adhere to pavement restoration requirements in the City Engineering Design standards. 2021 funding was used for CP2120 Auburn Way Pavement Patching. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 102 Page 549 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Lea Hill Pump Station Replacement Project No:wabd18 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - 491,000 746,333 5,300,000 6,537,333 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 491,000 746,333 5,300,000 6,537,333 Capital Expenditures: Design - 491,000 - - 491,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 746,333 5,300,000 6,046,333 - 491,000 746,333 5,300,000 6,537,333 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Lea Hill pump station will be reconstructed to provide redundant pumped supply to the Lea Hill area. If the Green River Pump Station is out of service for maintenance, a redundant pump station would avoid the need to purchase more expensive regional surface water through the 132nd Intertie. The pump station needs to be relocated from its current location on the shoulder of Lea Hill Road at the base of a steep hill for safety and reliability considerations. The project will also construct approximately 900 feet of 12" transmission main along Lea Hill Rd from Garden Avenue to the existing pump station site. Comprehensive Plan project PS-10. Progress Summary: Property acquisition completed in 2020 under Garden Ave Realignment project. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant Impact City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 103 Page 550 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Deduct Meter Replacement Program, Phases 1 through 3 Project No:cp1917, cp2001, cp2115 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Jeff Bender Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue 23,975 38,525 100,000 - 162,500 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds 365,049 579,969 385,000 - 1,330,018 Other - - - - - 389,024 618,494 485,000 - 1,492,518 Capital Expenditures: Design 23,986 28,476 - - 52,462 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 365,038 590,018 485,000 - 1,440,056 389,024 618,494 485,000 - 1,492,518 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - 100,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - 385,000 Other - - - - - - - - - 485,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 485,000 - - - - 485,000 Grants / Other Sources: Approximately 200 non-single family irrigation meters within the water system are connected to the customer's supply line on the customer side of the domestic meter, instead of being directly connected to the water main. Since sewer charges for non-single family customers are based on the domestic water meter reading and irrigation water does not use the sewer system, customers ask to have the irrigation use deducted from their overall domestic use for sewer billing purposes. Thus, irrigation meters installed after the domestic meter are referred to as "deduct meters". To improve the billing process, increase staff efficiencies and eliminate manual calculations in the billing process this project will re-install the irrigation meters to directly connect to the main. Deduct meters will be converted to irrigation meters to more equitably bill water usage. Progress Summary: Construction was planned and budgeted to be completed in 4 years. Recent bids indicate the original cost estimate was low. The budget was increased in 2021 and 2022, and the project will be completed in 3 years (2020-2022). Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 104 Page 551 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Comprehensive Water Plan Project No:wabd25 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Susan Fenhaus Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 122,000 263,000 251,000 385,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 122,000 263,000 251,000 385,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 122,000 263,000 251,000 385,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - 122,000 263,000 251,000 385,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 20,000 - - - 534,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 20,000 - - - 534,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 20,000 - - - 534,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - 20,000 - - - 534,000 Grants / Other Sources: Update the Comprehensive Water Plan as required by Washington Department of Health (DOH) by May 2022. DOH changed WAC to require a 10-year planning period which is an increase from the 6-year period. Current plan (2015) was approved before the code change, but was written to include the 10-year period in anticipation of the revised code. In August 2021, submitted update letter to DOH requesting extension of approved plan. The letter included a report of the demand forecast compared to actual demand, and report of the capital improvement plan. If the extension is approved, next complete plan will be due in 2025. However, the water plan will need to be updated in conjunction with the City's Comprehensive Plan due in 2024. Progress Summary: Request for current plan extension was submitted in 2021. Complete update will begin in 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact. Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 105 Page 552 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Lea Hill AC Main Replacement Project No:cp1929 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Jai Carter Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds 1,479,008 918,992 10,000 - 2,408,000 Other - - - - - 1,479,008 918,992 10,000 - 2,408,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 243,786 18,992 - - 262,778 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 1,235,222 900,000 10,000 - 2,145,222 1,479,008 918,992 10,000 - 2,408,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - 10,000 Other - - - - - - - - - 10,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 10,000 - - - - 10,000 Grants / Other Sources: Distribution system repair and replacement project required for meeting peak demands and reducing system losses. Project will replace asbestos cement (AC) water main in the Lea Hill service area. Progress Summary: Project substantially complete in 2021. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant Impact Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 106 Page 553 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Reservoir 2 Valves Project No:wabd29 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - - 240,000 760,000 240,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - 240,000 760,000 240,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 240,000 - 240,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 760,000 - - - 240,000 760,000 240,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - 1,000,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 1,000,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 240,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 760,000 - - - - 1,000,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: This project will replace the existing 20" supply valve with a seismic control valve, and replace the 12" drain valve at Reservoir 2. Both valves will be installed in a vault. This project was identified as a maintenance issue due to limited access to the valves. The addition of a seismic control will improve the resiliency of the distribution system. Progress Summary: Grant application for hazard mitigation submitted. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 107 Page 554 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: 104th Park Development (104th to 102nd Water Main Loop) Project No:cp1619 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Jamie Kelly Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 250,000 50,000 - 300,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 250,000 50,000 - 300,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 50,000 - - 50,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 200,000 50,000 - 250,000 - 250,000 50,000 - 300,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - 50,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 50,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 50,000 - - - - 50,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: This project will construct a water main between 102nd Avenue SE and 104 Avenue SE is part of a Parks Department project that is developing a new City park. The new water main will eliminate convert the existing dead-end system to a looped system, as recommended by the Comprehensive Plan. Progress Summary: Project design underway in 2021. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 108 Page 555 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Garden Avenue Realignment Project No:cp2022 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Kim Truong Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue 324 167,075 440,000 - 607,399 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 324 167,075 440,000 - 607,399 Capital Expenditures: Design 324 55,000 - - 55,324 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 112,075 440,000 - 552,075 324 167,075 440,000 - 607,399 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - 440,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 440,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 440,000 - - - - 440,000 Grants / Other Sources: This project will construct water improvements as part of the Garden Avenue Realignment transportation project. The improvements include installation of 1,000 feet of 12" transmission main from the 20" existing main in 8th St NE along Garden Avenue to the location of a future new booster pump station site on property to be purchased on 102nd Ave SE, and then back to 8th St NE. Progress Summary: Acquired property for future pump station in 2020. Design of water main under way in 2021. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 109 Page 556 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Lead Service Line Replacement Project No:cp1922 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Jai Carter Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue 1,169 516,362 50,000 - 567,531 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds 389,410 1,860,590 - - 2,250,000 DWSRF 86,095 2,913,905 - 3,000,000 476,674 5,290,857 50,000 - 5,817,531 Capital Expenditures: Design 476,674 840,857 - - 1,317,531 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 4,450,000 50,000 - 4,500,000 476,674 5,290,857 50,000 - 5,817,531 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - 50,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - DWSRF - - - - - - - - - 50,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 50,000 - - - - 50,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: The City has approximately 1,000 service lines with a lead goose-neck connection at the main. State and Federal agencies are planning a 15 year period for utilities to remove all lead service lines. This project will remove lead service lines and construct associated roadway restoration throughout the City. Any additional lead service lines that are not removed and replaced with this project will be replaced as part of future rehabilitation and replacement projects. Progress Summary: City received a Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) loan for replacement of the lead service lines. Design completed. Construction began in 2021. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant Impact City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 110 Page 557 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Well 4 Facility Improvements Project No:cp2021 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Seth Wickstrom Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 191,000 1,015,000 - 1,206,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 191,000 1,015,000 - 1,206,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 191,000 - - 191,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 1,015,000 - 1,015,000 - 191,000 1,015,000 - 1,206,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - 1,015,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 1,015,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 1,015,000 - - - - 1,015,000 This project was identified in the Facilities Evaluation Study. The project will include a comprehensive investigation and evaluation of the well operation. Findings from the evaluation will likely result in replacing the generator with a larger unit, possibly replacing the motor soft starter with a variable frequency drive (VFD), and replacing aging control valves, gate valves, and air relief system. Comprehensive Plan project S-22. Progress Summary: Design underway in 2021, with construction anticipated to be complete in 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant Impact Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 111 Page 558 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Water Resources Protection Program (Wellhead Protection) Project No:wabd23 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - - 27,700 28,500 27,700 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - 27,700 28,500 27,700 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 27,700 28,500 27,700 - - 27,700 28,500 27,700 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 29,400 30,200 31,200 33,100 180,100 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 29,400 30,200 31,200 33,100 180,100 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction 29,400 30,200 31,200 33,100 180,100 29,400 30,200 31,200 33,100 180,100 Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Annual funding for implementing strategies identified in the Wellhead Protection Plan. Although some tasks will be performed as part of the water operations budget, other tasks will require consultants with expertise in review and investigation of contaminant sites and other environmental databases, development of spill response plans, and leaking underground storage tanks. Comprehensive Plan project S-08. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant Impact City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 112 Page 559 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Game Farm Park Pump Station/Distribution System Improvements Project No:cpxxxx Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - 69,782 329,774 399,556 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - 69,782 329,774 399,556 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 69,782 - 69,782 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 329,774 329,774 - - 69,782 329,774 399,556 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: The pumps at Game Farm Wilderness Park are in need of replacement, and the building need repairs. This project was identified in the 2015 Comprehensive Plan as occurring in the short to mid term, or by 2025. Installation of new water main crossing the White River to eliminate the pump station was identified as being completed by 2035. The Coal Creek Springs Transmission Main project will add a pipe crossing the White River to be used for installation of a water main for Game Farm Wilderness Park. Completion of the river crossing will enable the water main project to be completed sooner and eliminate the need for pump station improvements. This project will install new main within the Game Farm Park from the existing 8" near the amphitheater to the river crossing, and from the river crossing to the existing pump station in the Wilderness area. The project will also decommission the existing pump station. Comprehensive Plan project D16. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant Impact City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 113 Page 560 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: D Street SE Storm Improvements Project No:cp2126 Project Type: Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources: Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 90,000 - 1,000,000 90,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 90,000 - 1,000,000 90,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 90,000 - - 90,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 1,000,000 - - 90,000 - 1,000,000 90,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - 1,000,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 1,000,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 1,000,000 - - - - 1,000,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Non-capacity Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Along with the storm drainage and other facility improvements, replace approximately 1,540 LF of 6" cast iron pipe with 8" ductile iron pipe, replace 380 LF of 12" cast iron pipe with ductile iron pipe, and install 335 LF of 8" ductile iron pipe, along with valves, fire hydrants, and service. Progress Summary: Design will begin in early 2022, with construction expected in 2023. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant Impact City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 114 Page 561 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: West Hill Springs Water Quality Improvements Project No:cpxxx Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue 100,000 480,000 - - 580,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 100,000 480,000 - - 580,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 100,000 - - - 100,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 480,000 - - 480,000 100,000 480,000 - - 580,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: The aging chlorination building at West Hill Springs will be replaced and a new liquid chlorination system will be installed. Additionally, aeration to adjust pH will be required. Comprehensive Plan project S-12. Progress Summary: Additional cost refinement will be needed due to the need for additional improvements not originally identified in the Comprehensive Plan. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant Impact City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 115 Page 562 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: 23rd Street SE Storm Improvements Project No:cp2125 Project Type: Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 50,000 - 540,000 50,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 50,000 - 540,000 50,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 50,000 - - 50,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 540,000 - - 50,000 - 540,000 50,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - 540,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 540,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 540,000 - - - - 540,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Non-capacity Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Along with the storm drainage and other facility improvements, replace approximately 1,225 LF of 6" and 8" cast iron pipe with 8" ductile iron pipe, along with valves, fire hydrants, and service. Progress Summary: Design will begin in early 2022, with construction expected in 2023. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant Impact City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 116 Page 563 of 967 WATER FUND (460)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: C St SW Preservation Project No:CP2123 Project Type: Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Water Revenue - 30,000 - 700,000 30,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 30,000 - 700,000 30,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 30,000 - - 30,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 700,000 - - 30,000 - 700,000 30,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Water Revenue - - - - 700,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 700,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 700,000 - - - - 700,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Non-capacity Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Along with the street reconstruction and other utility improvements, replace approximately 300 LF of 8" cast ion pipe with 12" ductile iron pipe and replace 560 LF of 16" cast iron pipe with 16" ductile iron pipe, along with valves fire hydrants and services. Progress Summary: Design will begin in early 2022, with construction expected in 2023. Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant Impact City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 117 Page 564 of 967 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 118 Page 565 of 967 SANITARY SEWER Current Facilities The City’s sanitary sewer service area encompasses approximately 28-square miles that are primarily within the City limits but includes a total of approximately ½ square mile within Auburn’s 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 approximately 218 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 is designated to accommodate for residential, industrial, and commercial development. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing Investments in the City’s sewage collection facilities include primarily non-capacity improvements and replacement projects. Anticipated projects include replacement of aging sewer pipes and manholes in conjunction with arterial and local street improvements, replacement of pipe identified through the sewer program’s condition assessment process, replacement of the Rainier Ridge Pump station, and updating the Comprehensive Sewer Plan. Additionally, the City will continue to monitor flow rates, primarily within the Valley Basin area to help identify specific areas of the City that show high levels of inflow and infiltration. The City of Auburn’s sewer system includes one capacity project in the amount of $75,000 and fifteen non- capacity projects totaling $16,054,879 for an overall six-year plan of $16,129,879. Table S-2 shows the proposed financing plan followed by individual worksheets showing the project detail. Impact on Future Operating Budgets There are no operating budget impacts forecasted for sanitary sewer facilities during the six years 2023 – 2028. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 119 Page 566 of 967 TABLE S-1 Facilities Inventory Sewage Facilities CAPACITY FACILITY (MGD)LOCATION Pump Stations: 8th Street 0.26 900 8th Street NE 22nd Street 0.79 1950 22nd Street NE Area 19 0.47 800 71st Street SE Auburn 40 0.63 4159 O Place NE Dogwood 0.43 1423 Dogwood Street SE Ellingson 2.20 100 41st Street SE F Street 0.86 1700 F Street SE Hudson 0.76 6408 S 287th Street North Tapps 0.73 2610 Lake Tapps Pkwy SE Peasley Ridge 0.36 5225 South 320th Street Promenade 0.25 12900 SE 312th Street R Street 0.14 600 R Street NE Rainier Ridge 0.29 31809 125th Place SE Riverside 0.58 13900 104th Avenue SE Terrace View 0.94 104 60th Street SE Valley Meadows 0.18 2022 4th Street SE Verdana 2.88 11807 SE 296th Place (Kent, WA) FACILITY Pipe Size LOCATION River Crossings: Inverted Syphon 8 & 12 Inch Green River & 26th Street NE 8th Street Bridge 14 Inch Green River & 8th Street NE City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 120 Page 567 of 967 TABLE S-2 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Page Capacity Projects: 124 Garden Avenue Re-alignment Capital Costs 75,000 - - - - - 75,000 Funding Sources: Sewer Fund 75,000 - - - - - 75,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - Subtotal, Capacity Projects: Capital Costs 75,000 - - - - - 75,000 Non-Capacity Projects: 125 Sanitary Sewer Repair & Replacement Program Capital Costs 300,000 1,500,000 300,000 1,500,000 300,000 1,500,000 5,400,000 Funding Sources: Sewer Fund 300,000 1,500,000 300,000 1,500,000 300,000 1,500,000 5,400,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 126 Street Utility Improvements Capital Costs 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 1,200,000 Funding Sources: Sewer Fund 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 1,200,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 127 Vactor Decant Facility Capital Costs 180,000 - - - - - 180,000 Funding Sources: Sewer Fund 180,000 - - - - - 180,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 128 Manhole Ring and Cover Replacement Capital Costs 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 480,000 Funding Sources: Sewer Fund 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 480,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 129 Sewer Pump Station Replacement/Improvement Program Capital Costs - 255,000 525,000 2,900,000 - - 3,680,000 Funding Sources: Sewer Fund - 255,000 525,000 2,900,000 - - 3,680,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 130 Pump Station Electrical Improvements Capital Costs 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Funding Sources: Sewer Fund 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING SEWER FUND City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 121 Page 568 of 967 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Page Non-Capacity Projects: 131 Inflow and Infiltration Study Capital Costs 167,000 172,000 - - - - 339,000 Funding Sources: Sewer Fund 167,000 172,000 - - - - 339,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 132 Comprehensive Sewer Plan Update Capital Costs 80,000 180,000 20,000 - - - 280,000 Funding Sources: Sewer Fund 80,000 180,000 20,000 - - - 280,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 133 4th Street SE Preservation Capital Costs 550,000 - - - - - 550,000 Funding Sources: Sewer Fund 550,000 - - - - - 550,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 134 M Street NE Widening Capital Costs 12,000 - 112,000 - - - 124,000 Funding Sources: Sewer Fund 12,000 - 112,000 - - - 124,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 135 Rainier Ridge Pump Station Rehabilitation/Replacement Capital Costs 2,900,000 - - - - - 2,900,000 Funding Sources: Sewer Fund 2,900,000 - - - - - 2,900,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 136 2nd Street SE Preservation Capital Costs 146,879 - - - - - 146,879 Funding Sources: Sewer Fund 146,879 - - - - - 146,879 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 137 2021 Sewer Repair and Replacement Capital Costs 500,000 - - - - - 500,000 Funding Sources: Sewer Fund 500,000 - - - - - 500,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 138 23rd SE Storm Improvements Capital Costs 15,000 150,000 - - - - 165,000 Funding Sources: Sewer Fund 15,000 150,000 - - - - 165,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 139 Regional Growth Center Access Improvements Capital Costs - 100,000 - - - - 100,000 Funding Sources: Sewer Fund - 100,000 - - - - 100,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - Subtotal, Non-Capacity Projects: Capital Costs 5,140,879 2,637,000 1,237,000 4,680,000 580,000 1,780,000 16,054,879 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 122 Page 569 of 967 SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects 75,000 - - - - - 75,000 Non-Capacity Projects 5,140,879 2,637,000 1,237,000 4,680,000 580,000 1,780,000 16,054,879 Total Costs 5,215,879 2,637,000 1,237,000 4,680,000 580,000 1,780,000 16,129,879 FUNDING SOURCES: Utility Funds (Sewer)5,215,879 2,637,000 1,237,000 4,680,000 580,000 1,780,000 16,129,879 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - Total Funding 5,215,879 2,637,000 1,237,000 4,680,000 580,000 1,780,000 16,129,879 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 123 Page 570 of 967 SEWER FUND (461)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Garden Avenue Re-alignment Project No:CP2022 Project Type: Project Manager:Kim Truong Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - 17,500 75,000 - 92,500 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 17,500 75,000 - 92,500 Capital Expenditures: Design - 17,500 5,000 - 22,500 Right of Way - - - - Construction - - 70,000 - 70,000 - 17,500 75,000 - 92,500 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - - - - 75,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 75,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 5,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 70,000 - - - - 75,000 Grants / Other Sources: No significant impact Capacity Along with the extension of the road between Garden Avenue and 104th Ave SE, extend the existing sewer line in the new east/west roadway from the existing manhole to Garden Avenue (approx.. 220 feet of 8” PVC pipe). Install two side sewer stubs to the properties north and south of the new road extension. Progress Summary: Design for the project is underway. Project construction is anticipated to be completed in 2022 The majority of property owners along Garden Avenue either did not support or did not respond to questionnaire regarding additional sewer extensions along Garden Avenue, so they will not be included in the project. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 124 Page 571 of 967 SEWER FUND (461)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Sanitary Sewer Repair & Replacement/System Improvements Program Project No:sebd01 Project Type: Project Manager:Bob Elwell Description: Activity: (Previous 2 Yrs.)2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue 300,000 1,500,000 300,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - 300,000 1,500,000 300,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 250,000 150,000 250,000 Right of Way - - 20,000 20,000 Construction - - 30,000 1,350,000 30,000 - - 300,000 1,500,000 300,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue 300,000 1,500,000 300,000 1,500,000 5,400,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 300,000 1,500,000 300,000 1,500,000 5,400,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 250,000 150,000 250,000 150,000 1,200,000 Right of Way 20,000 - 20,000 - 60,000 Construction 30,000 1,350,000 30,000 1,350,000 4,140,000 300,000 1,500,000 300,000 1,500,000 5,400,000 Grants / Other Sources: Non-Capacity (Repair and Replacement) Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: This program should slightly decrease the operating budget by correcting the problems that require operation staff's attention. Repair and replace (R&R) broken sewer mains and other facilities. These lines will be identified through television inspection and routine cleaning. This program includes funding for R&R projects which have not yet been identified as a separate R&R project or are not associated with transportation projects. Anticipated projects include bi-annual, stand-alone, repair and replacement projects for sewer lines which are broken, misaligned, "bellied" or otherwise require an inordinate amount of maintenance effort or present a risk of backup or trench failure, and facilities which generate consistent odor complaints. For efficiency and cost savings, sewer R&R may be combined with other public facility improvements. Additionally, system improvements which enhance the ability to maintain service are included here. Comprehensive Plan Project #1. Progress Summary: In 2021, funds from this program were transferred to CP2010 - 2021 Sewer Repair and Replacement project and CP2102 - 4th Street SE Preservation, which will use those funds to repair or replace sewer lines at 18 sites around the City. Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 125 Page 572 of 967 SEWER FUND (461)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Street Utility Improvements Project No:sebd02 Project Type: Project Manager:Bob Elwell Description: Activity: (Previous 2 Yrs.)2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - 4,500 200,000 200,000 204,500 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 4,500 200,000 200,000 204,500 Capital Expenditures: Design 1,000 30,000 30,000 31,000 Right of Way - - - Construction 3,500 170,000 170,000 173,500 - 4,500 200,000 200,000 204,500 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 1,200,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 1,200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 1,020,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 1,200,000 Grants / Other Sources: Non Capacity (Repair and Replacement) Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: No significant Impact Sewer system repair and replacements in coordination with transportation projects. Comprehensive Plan Project #2. Progress Summary: 2021 transfers from this fund were made to CP2003 - 2nd Street SE Preservation, CP2022 - Garden Street Realignment, CP2110 - Regional Growth Center Access Improvements, and CP2102 - 4th Street SE Preservation. Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 126 Page 573 of 967 SEWER FUND (461)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Sewer Vactor Decant Facility Project No:sebd03 Project Type: Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - - 180,000 - 180,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - 180,000 - 180,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 180,000 - 180,000 Right of Way/Property Acquisition - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - 180,000 - 180,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - - - - 180,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 180,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 180,000 Right of Way/Property Acquisition - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - 180,000 Grants / Other Sources: Non-Capacity (Improvements) Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: This project could decrease the future operating budget by reducing the expenses associated with hauling saturated waste to the County landfill. Currently the City hauls vactored sewage waste to the County landfill on a biweekly basis. The sewage sludge is considerably wet, thus Utility funds are paying for the disposal of water. This project consists of a study/analysis to assess the City’s vactor disposal method and identify a cost-effective alternative to the status quo. Possible recommendations may include maintaining current operations, constructing a gravity decant facility, incorporating special equipment into the vactor truck to increase decanting ability, purchasing specialized dewatering machinery, or collaborating with neighboring utilities for the shared use of facilities and equipment. Comprehensive Plan Project #3. Progress Summary: This analysis will be completed in 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 127 Page 574 of 967 SEWER FUND (461)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Manhole Ring and Cover Replacement Project No:sebd04 Project Type: Project Manager:Bob Elwell Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - 59,000 80,000 80,000 139,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 59,000 80,000 80,000 139,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 5,000 8,000 8,000 13,000 Right of Way/Property Acquisition - - - - - Construction - 54,000 72,000 72,000 126,000 - 59,000 80,000 80,000 139,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 480,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 480,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 48,000 Right of Way/Property Acquisition - - - - - Construction 72,000 72,000 72,000 72,000 432,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 480,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: This project could decrease the future operating budget by reducing the need for staff to respond to loose manholes or lids. Non-Capacity (Repair and Replacement) As manholes and roads age and their condition deteriorates, access covers and the rings in which they sit can become loose and/or misaligned, and can become a road hazard requiring maintenance staff attention and increasing the City's liability. This annual project will replace approximately 50 sewer manhole rings and covers to maintain access to the sewer system and to decrease the likelihood of the manholes becoming road hazards. In some years, this replacement will be as a stand- alone project, and in some years many of these replacements will be in conjunction with other City capital projects. Comprehensive Plan Project #7. Progress Summary: Ongoing Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 128 Page 575 of 967 SEWER FUND (461)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Sewer Pump Station Replacement/Improvement Program Project No:sebd05 Project Type: Project Manager:Bob Elwell Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - - - 255,000 - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - 255,000 - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - 255,000 255,000 Right of Way/Property Acquisition - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - 255,000 - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue 525,000 2,900,000 - - 3,680,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 525,000 2,900,000 - - 3,680,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 525,000 230,000 - - 1,010,000 Right of Way/Property Acquisition - - - - - Construction - 2,670,000 - - 2,670,000 525,000 2,900,000 - - 3,680,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Non-Capacity (Repair and Replacement/Improvements) Total Funding Sources: The Sewer Utility's infrastructure currently consists of 17 public sewer pump stations that range in age from 2 to over 50 years old. As those stations age, and utility operations change, considerations such as station condition, component condition, capacity, reliability, and safety suggest that stations be upgraded, rehabilitated, and replaced. This program fund will provide funding to meet those needs through 2025. Comprehensive Plan Project #4. Progress Summary: Following the results of the systematic pump station evaluation study, the 2017-2022 funds for this program were divided into the Pump Station Electrical Improvements project (for common improvements at many stations) and the Pump Station Replacement project (for Rainier Ridge) As future considerations of reliability, capacity, and condition are evaluated, and specific projects are developed, these funds will be designated for those projects. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will not have a significant effect on operating budget. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 129 Page 576 of 967 SEWER FUND (461)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Pump Station Electrical Improvements Project No:cp1812 Project Type: Project Manager:Jeff Bender Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue 237,717 1,042,283 10,000 - 1,290,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 237,717 1,042,283 10,000 - 1,290,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 209,675 - - - 209,675 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 28,042 1,042,283 10,000 - 1,080,325 237,717 1,042,283 10,000 - 1,290,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - - - - 10,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 10,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 10,000 - - - - 10,000 Non-capacity This project will design and construction improvements to the City's sewer pump stations' electrical systems that were identifed by the 2016 Pump Station Condition Assessment Project. The additions and modifications are intended to increase employee safety as well as operational efficiency. They include adding dry well control panel disconnects, bringing intrinsically safe wiring up to code, organizing, labelling, and dressing out control panel boxes, adding dry well HMI computer screens, creating uniform as-built wiring diagrams for each station, as well as several other modifications identified for specific stations. Funding for this project was derived from the Sewer Pump Station Replacement/Improvement program (sebd05). Progress Summary: The project is anticipated to be substantially complete by the end of 2021, with project closeout in early 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: This project will not have a significant effect on operating budget. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 130 Page 577 of 967 SEWER FUND (461)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Inflow and Infiltration Study Project No:CP2124 Project Type: Project Manager:Elwell Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - 163,000 167,000 172,000 330,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 163,000 167,000 172,000 330,000 Capital Expenditures: Design/Analysis - 163,000 167,000 172,000 330,000 Right of Way/Property Acquisition - - - - - Construction - - - - - - 163,000 167,000 172,000 330,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - - - - 339,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 339,000 Capital Expenditures: Design/Analysis - - - - 339,000 Right of Way/Property Acquisition - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - 339,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: This project will not have a significant effect on operating budget. Non-Capacity (Improvement) This project will assess portions of the City Sewer Service Area for infiltration/inflow (I/I) values. Excessive localized I/I can be an indicator of poor sewer main and side sewer conditions and could contribute to capacity issues in the future. This project will monitor flow in the collection system over several years. This data will then be used to help identify repair and replacement needs, modeling purposes, and for I/I assessment in future updates to the Comprehensive Sewer Plan. Comprehensive Plan Project #9. Progress Summary: Initial flow monitors were installed in May, 2020 with additional monitors were added in September/October, 2020. Monitoring locations for September/October, 2021 were determined based on the results of the initial phase of monitoring. The two years of data collection coincide with King County's flow monitoring program which will allow the data to be shared and correlated. Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 131 Page 578 of 967 SEWER FUND (461)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Comprehensive Sewer Plan Update Project No:sebd12 Project Type: Project Manager:Bob Elwell Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - - 80,000 180,000 80,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - 80,000 180,000 80,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 80,000 180,000 80,000 Right of Way/Property Acquisition - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - 80,000 180,000 80,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue 20,000 - - - 280,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 20,000 - - - 280,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 20,000 - - - 280,000 Right of Way/Property Acquisition - - - - - Construction - - - - - 20,000 - - - 280,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Non-Capacity (Repair and Replacement/Improvement) This project will not have a significant effect on operating budget. This project will prepare an update to the City's Sewer Comprehensive Plan to be adopted by City Council as part of the City's overall Comprehensive Plan to be completed by June 2024. City staff will prepare portions of the plan and will engage consultants to complete some of the tasks including hydraulic modeling, financial analysis, cost estimation and overal plan preparation/assembly. Comprehensive Plan Project #10. Progress Summary: Preliminary work on policy review, project schedule, and hiring a consultant for hydraulic modeling and plan preparation is anticipated to be completed 2021. The plan is anticipated to be completed by late 2023 for adoption with City Comprehensive Plan in 2024. Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 132 Page 579 of 967 SEWER FUND (461)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: 4th Street SE Preservation Project No:cp2102 Project Type: Project Manager:Jeff Bender Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - 125,000 550,000 - 675,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 125,000 550,000 - 675,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 125,000 20,000 - 145,000 Right of Way - - - - Construction - - 530,000 - 530,000 - 125,000 550,000 - 675,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - - - - 550,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 550,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 20,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 530,000 - - - - 550,000 Grants / Other Sources: This project should slightly decrease the operating budget by correcting problems that require operation staff's attention. Non-capacity Along with the street reconstruction and other utility improvements, replace approximately 950 feet of 8" and 150 feet of 21" diameter sanitary sewer mains as well as provide new side sewers to each parcel served by those mains. Progress Summary: Design is underway in 2021 with construction expected in 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 133 Page 580 of 967 SEWER FUND (461)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: M Street NE Widening Project No:sebd08 Project Type: Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - - 12,000 - 12,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - 12,000 - 12,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 12,000 - 12,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - 12,000 - 12,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue 112,000 - - - 124,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 112,000 - - - 124,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 12,000 - - - 24,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 100,000 - - - 100,000 112,000 - - - 124,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: No significant Impact Non-Capacity Replace approximately 170 LF of 12" and 20 LF of 8" vitrified clay sewer line in M St NE between Main Street and 1st St NE and replace approximately 100 LF of 8" PVC between 2nd and 3rd Street NE to repair a belly at the downstream end of the pipe in conjunction with street improvements. Progress Summary: Design is anticipated in 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 134 Page 581 of 967 SEWER FUND (461)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Rainier Ridge Pump Station Rehabilitation/Replacement Project No:cp2009 Project Type: Project Manager:Jai Carter Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue 15,228 499,772 2,900,000 - 3,415,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 15,228 499,772 2,900,000 - 3,415,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 15,228 499,772 220,000 - 735,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 2,680,000 - 2,680,000 15,228 499,772 2,900,000 - 3,415,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - - - - 2,900,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 2,900,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 220,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 2,680,000 - - - - 2,900,000 Grants / Other Sources: This project will not have a significant effect on operating budget. Non-capacity The Rainer Ridge Pump Station was constructed in 1980. Most of the property within its tributary basin has been fully developed, and the station has very little excess capacity. As such, there is a very short response time in the event of a pump failure, especially during peak use. Additionally, the PVC force main has had several breaks, and should be replaced. The initial phase of this project will examine the alternatives of rehabilitating the station, replacing major components, or replacing the entire station. The proposed funding assumes a complete replacement, and will be adjusted pending the alternatives analysis. Funding for this project was derived from the Sewer Pump Station Replacement/Improvement program (sebd05). Progress Summary: A consultant for the project has been selected, and design has begun on several replacement options. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 135 Page 582 of 967 SEWER FUND (461)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: 2nd Street SE Preservation Project No:CP2003 Project Type: Project Manager:Jai Carter Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue 3,121 150,000 146,879 - 300,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 3,121 150,000 146,879 - 300,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 3,121 25,000 10,000 - 38,121 Right of Way - - - - Construction - 125,000 136,879 - 261,879 3,121 150,000 146,879 - 300,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - - - - 146,879 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 146,879 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 10,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 136,879 - - - - 146,879 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: No significant impact Non-capacity This project replaces approximately 450 LF of 8” concrete sewer line with 8” PVC and replaces 2 manholes as part of a street reconstruction project for 2nd Street SE between A Street SE and Auburn Way South. Progress Summary: City was awarded transportation grant funding in 2019 and the project design began in 2020. Construction is anticipated to begin in late 2021 and be completed in early 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 136 Page 583 of 967 SEWER FUND (461)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: 2021 Sewer Repair and Replacement Project No:CP2010 Project Type: Project Manager:Jai Carter Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue 51,542 950,000 500,000 - 1,501,542 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 51,542 950,000 500,000 - 1,501,542 Capital Expenditures: Design 51,542 32,040 10,000 - 93,582 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 917,960 490,000 - 1,407,960 51,542 950,000 500,000 - 1,501,542 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - - - - 500,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 500,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 10,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 490,000 - - - - 500,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: This project should slightly decrease the operating budget by correcting the problems that require operation staff's attention. Non-capacity This project plans to replace a total of approximately 2585 LF of 8”-10” diameter sewer line at 9 separate sites, and to complete 10 spot repairs. Progress Summary: Project design began in 2020. The project began construction in August 2021 and is anticipated be completed in early 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 137 Page 584 of 967 SEWER FUND (461)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: 23rd SE Storm Improvements Project No:cp2126 Project Type: Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - - 15,000 150,000 15,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - 15,000 150,000 15,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 15,000 15,000 15,000 Right of Way - - - - Construction - - - 135,000 - - - 15,000 150,000 15,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - - - - 165,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 165,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 30,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 135,000 - - - - 165,000 Grants / Other Sources: This project should slightly decrease the operating budget by correcting problems that require operation staff's attention. Non-capacity Along with the storm drainage and other facility improvements, replace approximately 320 LF of 8” clay pipe along K Street SE in its existing alignment with new 8” PVC. as well as replacing seven side sewers within the right of way that are connected to that line. Progress Summary: Design will begin in early 2022, with construction expected in 2023. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 138 Page 585 of 967 SEWER FUND (461)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Regional Growth Center Access Improvements Project No:CP2110 Project Type: Project Manager:Seth Wickstrom Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - 10,000 - 100,000 10,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 10,000 - 100,000 10,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 10,000 - 5,000 10,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 95,000 - - 10,000 - 100,000 10,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Sewer Revenue - - - - 100,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 100,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 5,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 95,000 - - - - 100,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: This project should slightly decrease the operating budget by correcting problems that require operation staff's attention. Non-capacity Along with the Intersection and other facility improvements, replace 200 LF of 8” concrete sewer with 8” PVC pipe in 3rd St NE between B St NE and Auburn Ave N. Progress Summary: Design will begin in 2021, with construction expected in 2023. Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 139 Page 586 of 967 POLICY/TEXT AMENDMENT (P/T #5) INCORPORATE CITY OF AUBURN CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2021-2026 Page 587 of 967 Page 588 of 967 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 140 Page 589 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE Current Facilities The City’s storm drainage service area encompasses the municipal boundaries of the City. The City’s drainage system consists of a combination of closed conveyance pipes and open ditch conveyance facilities, with seven 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. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing The City’s storm drainage facilities anticipate one capacity project in the amount of $88,750 and 24 non-capacity projects totaling $22,644,509 for a six-year planning expectation total of $22,733,259. Table SD-2 shows the proposed financing plan followed by individual worksheets showing the project detail. Impact on Future Operating Budgets There are no operating budget impacts forecasted for storm drainage facilities during the six years 2023 – 2028. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 141 Page 590 of 967 TABLE SD-1 Facilities Inventory Storm Drainage Facilities CONYEYANCE ASSETS Pipes 243 miles Ditches 40 miles Catch Basins 10,275 Manholes 3,024 Outfalls to Green River, White River and Mill Creek 66 Stormwater Ponds 167 CAPACITY PUMP STATIONS (GPM)LOCATION Brannan Park Pump Station #4 20,200 Brannan Park White River Pump Station 17,700 5000 block A Street SE Emerald Corp. Park Pump Station 6,500 C Street NE near 42nd Street M St SE Grade Separation 1,500 328 M St SE A Street SE Pump Station 1,380 A Street SE near SR-18 and BNRR overpass West Main Street Pump Station 1,200 1420 West Main Street Auburn Way S Pump Station #3 1,000 Auburn Way S near SR-18 and BNRR overpass City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 142 Page 591 of 967 TABLE SD-2 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Page Capacity Projects: 147 37th St. NW Storm Improvement Capital Costs 88,750 - - - - - 88,750 Funding Sources: Storm Fund - - - - - - - Other -PSE 88,750 - - - - - 88,750 Subtotal, Capacity Projects: Capital Costs 88,750 - - - - - 88,750 Non-Capacity Projects: 148 Pipeline Repair & Replacement Program Capital Costs 125,000 1,250,000 125,000 1,250,000 125,000 1,250,000 4,125,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 125,000 1,250,000 125,000 1,250,000 125,000 1,250,000 4,125,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 149 2021 Storm Renewal & Replacement Project Capital Costs 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Pierce Co. Opportunity Fund - - - - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 150 30th Street NE Area Flooding, Phase 3 Capital Costs - - - 673,000 2,244,000 - 2,917,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund - - - 673,000 2,244,000 - 2,917,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 151 Street Utility Improvements Capital Costs 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,500,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,500,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 152 2021 Local Street Preservation - G Street SE and Riverwalk/Forest Ridge Capital Costs 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 153 4th Street SE Preservation Capital Costs 946,000 - - - - - 946,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 946,000 - - - - - 946,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING STORM DRAINAGE DIVISION City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 143 Page 592 of 967 TABLE SD-2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING STORM DRAINAGE DIVISION 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Page Non-Capacity Projects: 154 Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan Update Capital Costs 140,000 50,000 20,000 - - - 210,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 140,000 50,000 20,000 - - - 210,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 155 Vegetation Sorting Facility Capital Costs 966,000 - - - - - 966,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 966,000 - - - - - 966,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 156 Regional Growth Center Access Capital Costs 20,000 140,000 - - - - 160,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 20,000 140,000 - - - - 160,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 157 North Airport Area Storm Improvements Capital Costs 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 158 D St. SE Storm Improvement Capital Costs 458,000 1,794,260 - - - - 2,252,260 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 458,000 1,794,260 - - - - 2,252,260 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 159 S. 330th St. & 46th Pl. S. Storm Improvement Capital Costs 302,369 - - - - - 302,369 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 302,369 - - - - - 302,369 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 160 23rd Street SE Storm Improvement Capital Costs 124,000 613,880 - - - - 737,880 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 124,000 613,880 - - - - 737,880 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 161 Riverwalk Drive SE Non-Motorized Improvements Capital Costs 505,000 - - - - - 505,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 505,000 - - - - - 505,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 162 S. 314th St. & 54th Ave S. Storm Improvement Ph. 1 Capital Costs 102,000 416,000 - - - - 518,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 102,000 416,000 - - - - 518,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 144 Page 593 of 967 TABLE SD-2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING STORM DRAINAGE DIVISION 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Page Non-Capacity Projects: 163 S. 314th St. & 54th Ave S. Storm Improvement Ph. 2 Capital Costs - 115,000 281,000 - - - 396,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund - 115,000 281,000 - - - 396,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 164 M Street NE Widening Capital Costs 50,000 - 350,000 - - - 400,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 50,000 - 350,000 - - - 400,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 165 West Main Street Pump Station Upgrade Capital Costs - 850,000 2,914,000 - - - 3,764,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund - 850,000 2,514,000 - - - 3,364,000 King Co. Opportunity Fund - - 400,000 - - - 400,000 166 Manhole & Catchbasin Frame and Grate Replacement Capital Costs 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 480,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 480,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 167 Auburn Way North and 1st St NE Signal Replacement Capital Costs 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 168 Lead Service Line Replacement Capital Costs 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 169 North Airport Stormwater Improvement, Phase 2 Capital Costs 1,235,000 - - - - - 1,235,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 1,235,000 - - - - - 1,235,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 170 Arterial and Pedestrian Bike Safety Capital Costs 30,000 - - - - - 30,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 30,000 - - - - - 30,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - 171 R St SE Improvements Capital Costs 40,000 30,000 1,080,000 - - - 1,150,000 Funding Sources: Storm Fund 40,000 30,000 1,080,000 - - - 1,150,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - Subtotal, Non-Capacity Projects: Capital Costs 5,423,369 5,589,140 5,100,000 2,253,000 2,699,000 1,580,000 22,644,509 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 145 Page 594 of 967 TABLE SD-2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING STORM DRAINAGE DIVISION 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects 88,750 - - - - - 88,750 Non-Capacity Projects 5,423,369 5,589,140 5,100,000 2,253,000 2,699,000 1,580,000 22,644,509 Total Costs 5,512,119 5,589,140 5,100,000 2,253,000 2,699,000 1,580,000 22,733,259 FUNDING SOURCES: Storm Fund 5,423,369 5,589,140 4,700,000 2,253,000 2,699,000 1,580,000 22,244,509 King Co. Opportunity Fund - - 400,000 - - - 400,000 Other -PSE 88,750 - - - - - 88,750 Total Funding 5,512,119 5,589,140 5,100,000 2,253,000 2,699,000 1,580,000 22,733,259 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 146 Page 595 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title:37th St. NW Storm Improvement Project No:cp1724 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Luis Barba Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue 915 90,100 - - 91,015 PSE - - 88,750 - 88,750 Bond Proceeds - - - - - King County Flood Control District Grant 47,977 162,023 - - 210,000 48,892 252,123 88,750 - 389,765 Capital Expenditures: Design 48,892 10,000 - - 58,892 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 242,123 88,750 - 330,873 48,892 252,123 88,750 - 389,765 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - - - - PSE - - - - 88,750 Bond Proceeds - - - - - King County Flood Control District Grant - - - - - - - - - 88,750 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 88,750 - - - - 88,750 Grants / Other Sources: King County Opportunity Grant Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Phase 1: Phase 1 will address storm improvements in the ROW. Project will eliminate a direct connection to the adjacent side channel to Mill Creek and tie into the main storm system. Phase 2: Project will replace the damaged and eroded existing pipes spanning the PSE substation access driveway in vicinity of 37th St NE near I St NW. During periods of prolonged heavy flows, this side channel to Mill Creek exceeds the capacity of the combined culverts and backs up onto 37th St. NW and also impacts the Interurban Trail. Comprehensive Plan Project #2 Progress Summary: The City has been awarded a $210,000 King County Opportunity Grant for the overall project. Phase 1 will be bid and constructed in 2021 using storm funds only. Ongoing discussions with PSE continue for phase 2 with possible construction in 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: None City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 147 Page 596 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Pipeline Repair & Replacement Program Project No:sdbd03 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: (Previous 2 Years)2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue 906,192 169,000 125,000 1,250,000 1,200,192 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 906,192 169,000 125,000 1,250,000 1,200,192 Capital Expenditures: Design 61,521 169,000 125,000 - 355,521 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 844,671 - - 1,250,000 844,671 906,192 169,000 125,000 1,250,000 1,200,192 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 125,000 1,250,000 125,000 1,250,000 4,125,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 125,000 1,250,000 125,000 1,250,000 4,125,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 125,000 - 125,000 - 375,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 1,250,000 - 1,250,000 3,750,000 125,000 1,250,000 125,000 1,250,000 4,125,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: This program provides funding for projects involving replacement of existing infrastructure. These projects support street repairs and other utility replacement programs, requiring coordination. Comprehensive Plan Project #1. Progress Summary: In 2021, this program transferred funding to the 4th Street (cp2102 - $75K), the Arterial Pedestrian and Bike Safety Project (cp2119 - $35K) and R St SE Improvements (cp2116 - 70K). Future Impact on Operating Budget: Repair and replacement of aging infrastructure should reduce operating costs. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 148 Page 597 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title:2021 Storm Renewal & Replacement Project Project No:cp2017 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Luis Barba Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue 46,850 819,149 10,000 - 875,999 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Pierce County FCZD Opportunity Fund - 74,000 - - 74,000 46,850 893,149 10,000 - 949,999 Capital Expenditures: Design 45,944 70,000 - - 115,944 Right of Way 906 - - - 906 Construction - 823,149 10,000 - 833,149 46,850 893,149 10,000 - 949,999 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - - - 10,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Pierce County FCZD Opportunity Fund - - - - - - - - - 10,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 10,000 - - - - 10,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Lower maintenance costs due to reducing stormwater runoff onto roadways and sidewalks. This project will provide improvements to the existing storm drainage system to eliminate known drainage issues and reduce maintenance at eight sites: Eastpoint Storm Pond, Mountain View Cemetery, SE 304th Street at 108th Ave SE, S 316th Street near 55th Ave S, Lakeland Hills Way at Oravetz Drive, Riverwalk Drive at Howard Rd, 2nd St NW at H St. NW and the south side of Mill Pond Drive near Oravetz Rd. Progress Summary: Design in 2020/2021, construction beginning fall 2021 with completion in early 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 149 Page 598 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: 30th Street NE Area Flooding, Phase 3 Project No:cpxxxx Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 673,000 2,244,000 - 2,917,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 673,000 2,244,000 - 2,917,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 673,000 - - 673,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 2,244,000 - 2,244,000 - 673,000 2,244,000 - 2,917,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: This project will reduce potential flooding in C St. NE by redirecting wet weather high flows southward to the 42-inch diameter (Phase 1) storm drain in 30th St. NE. By redirecting the C St. NE drainage into the Brannan Park system, these flows would no longer be affected by high water levels in Mill Creek. To avoid deepening the Phase 1 gravity line (and extensive retrofits to the Brannan Park pump station), this project would include a wet weather pump station and force main connection to 30th St. NE. The upgraded 42-inch diameter pipe in 30th St. NE would have sufficient capacity for these additional flows. Key components of Phase 3 include: Wet weather pump station (estimated capacity of 4.5 to 7 cfs), 1,730 feet of 15-inch diameter force main; Diversion structure in C St. NE for pump station. Comprehensive Plan Project #4B. Progress Summary: This project was moved from 2023-2024 to 2025-2026 to balance storm funding requirements throughout the capital facilities plan. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Impacts are expected to increase due to high level of maintenance required for pump stations. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 150 Page 599 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Street Utility Improvements Project No:sdbd04 Project Type:Non Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: Previous 2 years 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 90,000 250,000 250,000 340,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 90,000 250,000 250,000 340,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 90,000 250,000 250,000 340,000 - 90,000 250,000 250,000 340,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,500,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 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 1,500,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,500,000 Storm system repair and replacements in coordination with transportation projects. Comprehensive Plan Project #12. Progress Summary: In 2021, this program transferred funding to the North Airport Stormwater Improvement, Phase 2 (cp2118 - $120K). Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant Impact. Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 151 Page 600 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: 2021 Local Street Preservation - G Street SE and Riverwalk/Forest Ridge Project No:cp2019 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Kim Truong Description: Activity: (Previous 2 Years)2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue 24,631 465,369 10,000 - 500,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 24,631 465,369 10,000 - 500,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 24,631 13,709 - - 38,340 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 451,660 10,000 - 461,660 24,631 465,369 10,000 - 500,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - - - 10,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 10,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 10,000 - - - - 10,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: This improvement will replace undersized and deteriorated storm line with the street project. Approximately 1150 feet of 12" storm line with catchbasins and manholes will be constructed along G St. SE between East Main and 4th St. SE. and in the Forest Ridge neighborhood near 24th St. SE and Forest Ridge Rd. Progress Summary: Project is in construction. Anticipated to be completed in early 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Repair and replacement of aging infrastructure should reduce operating costs. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 152 Page 601 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: 4th Street SE Preservation Project No:cp2102 Project Type: Project Manager:Jeff Bender Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 75,000 946,000 - 1,021,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 75,000 946,000 - 1,021,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 75,000 20,000 - 95,000 Right of Way - - - - Construction - - 926,000 - 926,000 - 75,000 946,000 - 1,021,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - - - 946,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 946,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 20,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 926,000 - - - - 946,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Non-capacity Along with the street reconstruction and other utility improvements, install 1680 LF existing 8” storm with 12” storm, 165 LF of new and replaced 15", 205 LF of new 14" DI, 130 LF of new 16" and 23 LF of replaced 30" along 4th St SE from Auburn Way South to L St SE. Progress Summary: Design started in 2021. Design currently at 90% with construction bid expected in December 2021. Future Impact on Operating Budget: None. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 153 Page 602 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan Update Project No:sdbd16 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Tim Carlaw Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 40,000 140,000 50,000 180,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 40,000 140,000 50,000 180,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 40,000 140,000 50,000 180,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - 40,000 140,000 50,000 180,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 20,000 - - - 210,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 20,000 - - - 210,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 20,000 - - - 210,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - 20,000 - - - 210,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: None This project will prepare an update to the City's Storm Drainage Comprehensive Plan to be adopted by City Council as part of the City's overall Comprehensive Plan to be completed by June 2024. City staff will prepare portions of the plan and will engage consultants to complete some of the tasks including hydraulic modeling, financial analysis, and cost estimation. Comprehensive Plan Project #9. Progress Summary: The deadline for completion of the City's Comprehensive Plan has been extended from June 2023 to June 2024. Preliminary project planning began in 2020. Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 154 Page 603 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title:Vegetation Sorting Facility Project No:sdbd12 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - 966,000 - 966,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - 966,000 - 966,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 64,000 - 64,000 Acquisition - - 750,000 - 750,000 Construction/Equipment - - 152,000 - 152,000 - - 966,000 - 966,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - - - 966,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 966,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 64,000 Acquisition - - - - 750,000 Construction/Equipment - - - - 152,000 - - - - 966,000 Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: This project will prepare an evaluation of the benefits and costs of acquiring property to use as a vegetation sorting facility prior to disposal or reuse of materials from storm drainage maintenance activities (e.g., pond and ditch cleaning). The evaluation will identify potential use of a sorting facility by other City departments and by neighboring jurisdictions as a regional facility. If evaluation shows a reasonable benefit/cost ratio, the project implementation proceed with property acquisition and site improvements to construct the vegetation sorting facility. Cost includes bin barriers and sorting equipment to facilitate materials handling and separation. Comprehensive Plan Project #10. Progress Summary: Due to lack of staff resources due to Covid, the evaluation and property purchase has been deferred to 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Overall operating costs should decrease as a result of improved efficiency from the sorting facility. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 155 Page 604 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Regional Growth Center Access Project No:cp2110 Project Type: Project Manager:Seth Wickstrom Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 15,000 20,000 140,000 35,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 15,000 20,000 140,000 35,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 15,000 20,000 - 35,000 Right of Way - - - - Construction - - - 140,000 - - 15,000 20,000 140,000 35,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - - - 160,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 160,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 20,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 140,000 - - - - 160,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Non-capacity Along with the street reconstruction and other utility improvements, replace approximately 463 LF of existing 8” storm with 12” storm along Auburn Ave and 3rd St NE alignments. Also install approximately 80 LF new 12” storm in this area for local inflow. Install approximately 200 LF new 12” storm in 4th St NE between Auburn Way North and Auburn Ave for local inflow. Progress Summary: Design is underway in 2021 with construction expected in 2023. Future Impact on Operating Budget: None. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 156 Page 605 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title:North Airport Area Storm Improvements Project No:cp2026 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Seth Wickstrom Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue 10,903 150,000 10,000 - 170,903 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 10,903 150,000 10,000 - 170,903 Capital Expenditures: Design 10,903 - - - 10,903 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 150,000 10,000 - 160,000 10,903 150,000 10,000 - 170,903 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - - - 10,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 10,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 10,000 - - - - 10,000 Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: This project will reconfigure the storm lines that flow into “Pond I”, an existing storm pond on Airport property at the northeast end of the runway. The specific items of work include removing existing storm pipe, installing approximately 470 linear feet of new 12-inch and 30-inch storm pipe, and restoring existing pavement and landscaping. The purpose of this work is to better utilize the existing storage capacity available to the City’s storm system on 30th St NE which will help reduced localized flooding around northern airport hangars during heavy rain events. This project will also allow the City to eventually eliminate one or more of the existing storm ponds at the north end of the Airport property in future. Progress Summary: Project completed in 2021. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Reduce maintenance costs and airport building damage due to flooding. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 157 Page 606 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title:D St. SE Storm Improvement Project No:cp2125 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Jai Carter Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 50,000 458,000 1,794,260 508,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 50,000 458,000 1,794,260 508,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 50,000 458,000 - 508,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 1,794,260 - - 50,000 458,000 1,794,260 508,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - - - 2,252,260 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 2,252,260 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 458,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 1,794,260 - - - - 2,252,260 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: This project will Install approximately 990 L.F. 30-inch, 630 L.F. 24-inch and 1230 L.F. 12-inch of new gravity storm drain pipe to convey the 25-year flow along D Street SE from a flooding area that caused by failing dry wells located near the intersection of D Street SE and 25th Street SE. Additionally, the project will install approximately 380 LF 12-inch gravity storm drain pipe in F Street SE from 27th to 26th Street SE to complete a missing line connection. Both of these systems direct flows to the existing 21st Street storm pond. Comprehensive Plan Project #7. Progress Summary: Charter completed in 2021, design in 2022, construction in 2023. Construction costs escalated by 3% for delaying construction from 2022 to 2023. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Operating expenses are expected to decrease with the elimination of existing drywells. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 158 Page 607 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title:S. 330th St. & 46th Pl. S. Storm Improvement Project No:cp2018 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Barba Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 45,000 302,369 - 347,369 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 45,000 302,369 - 347,369 Capital Expenditures: Design - 45,000 5,000 50,000 Easement - - 5,000 - 5,000 Construction - - 292,369 - 292,369 - 45,000 302,369 - 347,369 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - - - 302,369 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 302,369 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 5,000 Easement - - - - 5,000 Construction - - - - 292,369 - - - - 302,369 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: As part of the City's efforts to improve the drainage system in the West Hill annexation area, this project construct improvements near S. 330th Street and 46th Place S. where public storm drainage currently discharges within a large open ditch. The improvement will re-route the drainage within the right-of-way to the existing outfall. Comprehensive Plan Project #5A. Progress Summary: Project design underway in 2020. The project is delayed due to environmental permitting. Anticipated construction in 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: None City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 159 Page 608 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title:23rd Street SE Storm Improvement Project No:cp2126 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Jai Carter Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 50,000 124,000 613,880 174,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 50,000 124,000 613,880 174,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 50,000 124,000 - 174,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 613,880 - - 50,000 124,000 613,880 174,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - - - 737,880 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 737,880 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 124,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 613,880 - - - - 737,880 Grants / Other Sources: This project will improve existing drainage conditions in vicinity of 23rd St. SE & K St. SE. In the 2015 Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan, the project was divided into two phases: Phase 1 includes installation of 600 LF of 15-inch line along K St. SE from 23rd St. SE to 21st St. SE to alleviate flooding associated with the pedestrian entrance to Pioneer Elementary School, and Phase 2 includes installation of 560 LF of 18-inch line along 23rd St SE from F St. SE to K St. SE to convey flows to the F St. SE trunkline for discharge into the 21st St SE regional infiltration facility. Phases 1 and 2 will be constructed as a single project. Comprehensive Plan Project #8 (Phase 1+2). Progress Summary: In 2020, the project implementation has been moved from 2020 to 2021 to coordinate with the redevelopment of Pioneer Elementary School. Design will begin in early 2022, with construction expected in 2023. Construction costs were escalated 3% from 2022 to 2023. Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 160 Page 609 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title:Riverwalk Drive SE Non-Motorized Improvements Project No:cp2121 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Jeff Bender Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 17,000 505,000 - 522,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 17,000 505,000 - 522,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 17,000 51,000 - 68,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 454,000 - 454,000 - 17,000 505,000 - 522,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - - - 505,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 505,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 51,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 454,000 - - - - 505,000 This project will construct large diameter storm piping to replace the existing roadside ditch, and expand the Riverwalk ponds to accommodate increased capacity due to the lost infiltration of the upstream ditch along Riverwalk Drive. The project will be implemented as part of the transportation project that will construct sidewalks along the east side of Riverwalk Drive SE from Howard Road and Auburn Way South. Progress Summary: Design beginning in 2021. Construction 2023. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Maintenance costs should decrease as a result of the project. Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 161 Page 610 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title:S. 314th St. & 54th Ave S. Storm Improvement Ph. 1 Project No:sdbd19 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - 102,000 416,000 102,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - 102,000 416,000 102,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 102,000 - 102,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 416,000 - - - 102,000 416,000 102,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - - - 518,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 518,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 102,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 416,000 - - - - 518,000 Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: As part of the City's efforts to improve the drainage system in the West Hill annexation area, this project will construct improvements near S 314th Street. and 54th Avenue S. to redirect flows and implement Low Impact Development (LIID) techniques. Comprehensive Project #5B Phase 1. Progress Summary: Charter will be completed in 2021. Design will be in 2022, construction in 2023. Future Impact on Operating Budget: None City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 162 Page 611 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title:S. 314th St. & 54th Ave S. Storm Improvement Ph. 2 Project No:sdbd22 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - - 115,000 - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - 115,000 - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - 89,000 - Right of Way - - - 26,000 - Construction - - - - - - - - 115,000 - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 281,000 - - - 396,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 281,000 - - - 396,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 89,000 Right of Way - - - - 26,000 Construction 281,000 - - - 281,000 281,000 - - - 396,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: As part of the City's efforts to improve the drainage system in the West Hill annexation area, this project will construct improvements near S 314th Street and 54th Avenue S to route the public storm drainage through a new easement and pipe to the downstream system. Comprehensive Drainage Plan Project #5B Phase 2. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 163 Page 612 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title:M Street NE Widening Project No:sdbd20 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 50,000 - 50,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - 50,000 - 50,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 50,000 - 50,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - 50,000 - 50,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 350,000 - - - 400,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 350,000 - - - 400,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 50,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 350,000 - - - 350,000 350,000 - - - 400,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: None This project will replace approximately 450 LF of undersized and deteriorated storm drain pipe and install approximately 300 feet of new storm drain pipe with catch basins and manholes. The project will be implemented as part of the transportation project: M Street NE Widening from E. Main Street to 4th Street NE. Progress Summary: Project scope developed in 2020. Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 164 Page 613 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title:West Main Street Pump Station Upgrade Project No:sdbd11 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - - 850,000 - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - 850,000 - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - 850,000 - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - 850,000 - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 2,514,000 - - - 3,364,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - King County Opportunity Fund 400,000 - - - 400,000 2,914,000 - - - 3,764,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 850,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 2,914,000 - - - 2,914,000 2,914,000 - - - 3,764,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: This project will upgrade the existing pump station by providing a redundant pump, force main, and outlet to meet level of service goals. Comprehensive Plan Project #1. Progress Summary: In 2020, project implementation was moved from 2022-2023 to 2023-2024 for balance funding in the capital facilities plan period. Future Impact on Operating Budget: None City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 165 Page 614 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title:Manhole & Catchbasin Frame and Grate Replacement Project No:sdbd21 Project Type:Non-Capacity (Repair and Replacement) Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 80,000 80,000 80,000 160,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 80,000 80,000 80,000 160,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 8,000 8,000 8,000 16,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 72,000 72,000 72,000 144,000 - 80,000 80,000 80,000 160,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 480,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 480,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 48,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 72,000 72,000 72,000 72,000 432,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 480,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Reduced risk of road hazard claims. As manholes & catchbasins age and their condition deteriorates, frame and grates can become loose and/or misoriented, or due to age are not meeting standards. This annual project will replace approximately 50 storm manhole and catchbasin frame and grates to maintain access to the storm system and to decrease the likelihood of the manholes becoming road hazards. In some years, this replacement will be as a stand-alone project, and in some years many of these replacements will be in conjunction with other City capital projects. Progress Summary: New program Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 166 Page 615 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title:Auburn Way North and 1st St NE Signal Replacement Project No:cp1927 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Matt Larson Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 190,000 10,000 - 200,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 190,000 10,000 - 200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - Right of Way - - - - Construction - 190,000 10,000 - 200,000 - 190,000 10,000 - 200,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - - - 10,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 10,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 10,000 - - - - 10,000 Grants / Other Sources: This project addresses an existing storm-to-sanitary sewer cross connection(s) at the intersection of Auburn Way North and 1st Street SE with installation of new 12" storm pipes and manholes. The project is being implemented with the transportation project that is replacing the traffic signal and curb ramps at the intersection. Progress Summary: Construction will be completed in early 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 167 Page 616 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Lead Service Line Replacement Project No:CP1922 Project Type: Project Manager:Carter Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 140,000 10,000 - 150,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 140,000 10,000 - 150,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - Construction - 140,000 10,000 - 150,000 - 140,000 10,000 - 150,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - - - 10,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 10,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 10,000 - - - - 10,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Non-capacity Along with the street reconstruction resulting from Water Utility improvements, replace approximately 673 LF of 12" DI storm at the following locations: 3rd at D St NE, 3rd at E St NE, 2nd St NE at Auburn Ave, 2nd at E St NE, 1st at D St NE, 1st at E St NE, D St SE between 2nd and 4th St SE, and B St SE at 14th St SE. Progress Summary: Design completed in 2021, construction to be completed in 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: None. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 168 Page 617 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title:North Airport Stormwater Improvement, Phase 2 Project No:cp2118 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Wickstrom Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 135,000 1,235,000 - 1,370,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 135,000 1,235,000 - 1,370,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 135,000 135,000 - 270,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 1,100,000 - 1,100,000 - 135,000 1,235,000 - 1,370,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - - - 1,235,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 1,235,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 135,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 1,100,000 - - - - 1,235,000 This project will eliminate Pond F and underground Pond G within subsurface chambers. Storm modeling for the north auburn airport area has determined that overall storage capacity is sufficient and will eliminate the existing bird netting and vegetation management for these two ponds. Progress Summary: Consultant scope and fee negotiation is in process. Design anticipated to begin September 2021. Construction in 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Eliminating Pond F and undergrounding Pond G will significantly reduce the costs to maintain the bird netting and vegetation management within the ponds. Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 169 Page 618 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title:Arterial and Pedestrian Bike Safety Project No:cp2119 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Aleksey Koshman Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 5,000 30,000 - 35,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 5,000 30,000 - 35,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 5,000 - - 5,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 30,000 - 30,000 - 5,000 30,000 - 35,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue - - - - 30,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - - 30,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 30,000 - - - - 30,000 Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Install 90 LF of 12" PVC storm drain between two catch basins on the east side A St SE near the Oldcastle plant. Progress Summary: Design 2021, construction 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: None. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 170 Page 619 of 967 STORM DRAINAGE FUND (462)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title:R St SE Improvements Project No:cp2116 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Barba Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Storm Revenue - 30,000 40,000 30,000 70,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - - 30,000 40,000 30,000 70,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 30,000 40,000 30,000 70,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - 30,000 40,000 30,000 70,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Storm Revenue 1,080,000 - - - 1,150,000 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other - - - - - 1,080,000 - - - 1,150,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 70,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 1,080,000 - - 1,080,000 1,080,000 - - - 1,150,000 None. Along with the street reconstruction and other utility improvements, replace approximately 2,800 LF of 8" and 10" concrete pipe with 12" pipe between 28th and 33rd St SE. Add 152 LF of 12" storm pipe and 8 new catch basins between 25th St SE and 28th St SE. Progress Summary: Design is underway in 2021 with construction expected in 2024. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 171 Page 620 of 967 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 172 Page 621 of 967 PARKS, ARTS AND RECREATION Current Facilities The City of Auburn’s Park system consists of a total of 953.39 acres of neighborhood and community parks, special use areas, open space and linear parks (trails). 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 existing inventory of City- owned park acres divided by the 2022 projected City population of 85,041. This equates to 0.77 acres per 1,000 population for neighborhood parks, 2.80 acres per 1,000 population for community parks, 0.20 acres for linear parks, 4.56 acres for open space, and 3.03 acres for special use areas. The proposed LOS provided by the City’s park system represents the planned 2027 inventory of City-owned park acres divided by the 2027 projected City population of 89,379. This equates to 0.83 acres per 1,000 population for neighborhood parks, 3.12 acres per 1,000 population for community parks, 0.23 acres per 1,000 population for linear parks, 4.34 acres per 1,000 population for open space, and 2.85 acres per 1,000 population for special use areas. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing Parks and Recreation facilities include eleven capacity projects at a cost of $15,163,850 and four non-capacity projects totaling $740,000 for a 6-year planning total of $15,903,850. Table PR – 2 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 $108,000 are forecasted for parks and recreation facilities during the six years 2023 – 2028. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 173 Page 622 of 967 TABLE PR-1 Facilities Inventory Parks, Arts and Recreation, Land CAPACITY FACILITY (Acres)LOCATION Neighborhood Parks: Existing Inventory: 21st Street Playground 0.17 405 21st St. SE Auburndale Park 9.74 31802 108th Ave. SE Ballard Park 0.68 1612 37th Way SE Cameron Park 3.85 3727 Lemon Tree Lane Cedar Lane Park 8.36 1002 25th St. SE Dorothy Bothell Park 4.35 1087 Evergreen Way SE Dykstra Park 1.67 1487 22nd St. NE Forest Villa mini-park 0.21 1647 Fir St. SE Gaines Park 1.33 1008 Pike St. NW Indian Tom Park 0.42 1316 6th St. NE Jornada Park 1.89 1433 U Ct. NW Kersey 3 Park A 2.73 5480 Charlotte Ave. SE Kersey 3 Park B 0.79 5530 Udall Ave. SE Lakeland Hills Park 5.06 1401 Evergreen Way SE Lea Hill Courts 1.18 32121 105th Pl. SE Lewis Lake Nature Park 9.25 32054 58th Ave. S Riversands Park 1.76 5014 Pike St NE Rotary Park 3.89 2635 Alpine St. NE Scootie Brown Park 1.68 1403 Henry Rd. NE Shaughnessy Park 3.46 3302 21st St. SE Terminal Park 1.22 1292 C St. SE Village Square 1.10 12111 SE 310th St. Total Neighborhood Parks 64.79 Proposed Capacity Projects: Auburndale II Park 9.35 29700 118th Street SE Total Proposed Capacity Projects 9.35 2026 Projected Inventory Total - Neighborhood Parks -74.14 Community Parks: Existing Inventory: Brannan Park 21.68 1019 28th St. NE Fulmer Field 5.04 1101 5th St. NE Game Farm Park 57.20 3030 R St. SE Game Farm Wilderness Park 48.50 2407 Stuck River Dr. SE GSA Park 5.31 413 15th St. SW Isaac Evans Park 19.87 29627 Green River Road NE Lea Hill Park 5.26 31693 124th Ave. SE Les Gove Park 26.07 910 9th St. SE Mill Pond 4.20 4582 Mill Pond Dr, SE Roegner Park 19.22 601 Oravetz Road Sunset Park 15.15 1420 69th St SE Veteran's Memorial Park 7.67 405 E St. NE Total Community Parks 235.17 Proposed Capacity Projects: 104th Avenue SE 14.73 31495 104th Ave. SE Jacobson Tree Farm 29.30 29387 132nd Ave SE Total Proposed Capacity Projects 44.03 2026 Projected Inventory Total - Community Parks -279.20 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 174 Page 623 of 967 TABLE PR-1 (continued) Linear Parks: Existing Inventory: Interurban Trail 9.14 804 West Main St. Lake Tapps Parkway Trail 2.36 1420 69th St SE Lakeland Hills Trail 1.66 1087 Evergreen Way SE Reddington Levee Trail 2.50 1019 28th St NE White River Trail 0.93 601 Oravetz St. NE Total Linear Parks 16.59 Proposed Capacity Projects: Green River Trail 0.83 277th to Reddington Levee Trail Jacobsen Tree Farm to Green River Trail 2.75 White River Trail Extension 0.05 Total Proposed Capacity Projects 3.63 2026 Projected Inventory Total - Linear Parks -20.22 Special Use Areas: Existing Inventory: Auburn Environmental Park 16.84 413 Western Ave NW B Street Plaza 0.10 148 East Main St. Bicentennial Park 1.07 502 Auburn Way S. Centennial Viewpoint Park 0.70 402 Mountain View Dr. City Hall Plaza 1.10 25 West Main St. Clark Plaza 0.25 1420 Auburn Way N. Community Garden A 1.04 1030 8th St. NE Fenster/Green River Access 12.58 10502 Auburn Black Diamond Road Golf Course 139.71 29630 Green River Road SE Mountain View Cemetery 60.00 2020 Mountain View Dr. Olson Canyon Farmstead 20.00 28728 Green River Road Pioneer Cemetery 0.76 802 Auburn Way N, Plaza Park 0.19 2 West Main St. Slaughter Memorial 0.02 2988 Auburn Way N. Total Special Use Areas 254.36 Proposed Capacity Projects: None - Total Proposed Capacity Projects - 2026 Projected Inventory Total - Special Use Areas -254.36 Open Space Areas: Existing Inventory: Auburn Environmental Park Open Space 190.91 413 Western Ave. NW Clark Property 26.68 TBD Game Farm Open Space 26.00 3030 R St. SE Golf Course Open Space 40.98 29630 Green River Road SE Lakeland Hills Nature Area 46.07 500 182nd Ave. S Olson Canyon Open Space 47.00 28728 Green River Road Qares Property 0.99 TBD Riverpoint Open Space 3.85 1450 32nd St. NE Total Open Space Areas 382.48 Proposed Capacity Projects: West Hill Park Open Space 5.00 TBD Total Proposed Capacity Projects 5.00 2026 Projected Inventory Total - Open Space Areas -387.48 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 175 Page 624 of 967 TABLE PR-2 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Page Capacity Projects: 178 Park Acquisitions/Development Capital Costs 30,000 50,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 580,000 Funding Sources: Fund Balance - - - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - - - KC Prop 2 30,000 50,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 580,000 179 Jacobsen Tree Farm Development Capital Costs 2,915,050 2,500,000 - 5,000,000 - - 10,415,050 Funding Sources: Fund Balance - - - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - 1,000,000 - - 1,000,000 KC Prop 2 333,500 - - - - - 333,500 Other (TBD)- 2,500,000 - 2,000,000 - - 4,500,000 Park Impact Fees 2,581,550 - - 2,000,000 - - 4,581,550 180 West Hill Park Acquisition and Development Capital Costs 750,000 1,000,000 - - - - 1,750,000 Funding Sources: Fund Balance - - - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)400,000 500,000 - - - - 900,000 Park Impact Fees 350,000 500,000 - - - - 850,000 181 Game Farm Park Improvements Capital Costs 150,000 - - - - - 150,000 Funding Sources: Park Mitigation Fees - - - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - - - REET 1 - - - - - - - Park Impact Fees 150,000 - - - - - 150,000 182 Auburndale Park Capital Costs 100,000 - - - - - 100,000 Funding Sources: Fund Balance - - - - - - - KC Prop 2 100,000 - - - - - 100,000 Park Impact Fees - - - - - - - 183 Auburndale Park II Capital Costs - - 575,000 - - - 575,000 Funding Sources: Fund Balance - - - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - - - Other - - 575,000 - - - 575,000 184 Sunset Park Improvements Capital Costs 177,800 - - - - - 177,800 Funding Sources: Fund Balance - - - - - - - Park Impact Fees 177,800 - - - - - 177,800 Other (Contributions)- - - - - - - 185 Cedar Lanes Bike Park Capital Costs 466,000 - - - - - 466,000 Funding Sources: Fund Balance - - - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)135,500 - - 135,500 Park Impact Fees 330,500 - - - - - 330,500 186 BPA Trail on Lea Hill Capital Costs - - 150,000 - - - 150,000 Funding Sources: Fund Balance - - 150,000 - - - 150,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - - - KC Prop 2 - - - - - - - CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 176 Page 625 of 967 TABLE PR-2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Page Capacity Projects: 187 Lakeland Hills Nature Area Capital Costs - 25,000 - 75,000 100,000 - 200,000 Funding Sources: Fund Balance - - - - - - - Park Mitigation Fees - - - - - - - Park Impact Fees - 25,000 - 75,000 100,000 - 200,000 188 Miscellaneous Parks Improvements Capital Costs 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 600,000 Funding Sources: Fund Balance 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 300,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - - - KC Prop 2 - - - - - - - Park Impact Fees 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 300,000 Subtotal, Capacity Projects: Capital Costs 4,688,850 3,675,000 950,000 5,300,000 325,000 225,000 15,163,850 Page Non-Capacity Projects: 189 Cameron Park Capital Costs - 55,000 - 55,000 - - 110,000 Funding Sources: Fund Balance - - - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- 55,000 - 55,000 - - 110,000 Other - - - - - - - 190 Fulmer Park Playground Replacement Capital Costs 150,000 - - - - - 150,000 Funding Sources: Fund Balance - - - - - - - Grants (Private)50,000 - - - - - 50,000 KC Prop 2 100,000 - - - - - 100,000 191 Fairway Drainage Improvement Capital Costs 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 Funding Sources: Fund Balance - - - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - - - REET 2 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 192 Community Center Parking Lot Improvements Capital Costs 300,000 - - - - - 300,000 Funding Sources: Fund Balance - - - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - - - REET 1 300,000 - - - - - 300,000 Subtotal, Non-Capacity Projects: Capital Costs 480,000 85,000 30,000 85,000 30,000 30,000 740,000 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects 4,688,850 3,675,000 950,000 5,300,000 325,000 225,000 15,163,850 Non-Capacity Projects 480,000 85,000 30,000 85,000 30,000 30,000 740,000 Total Costs 5,168,850 3,760,000 980,000 5,385,000 355,000 255,000 15,903,850 FUNDING SOURCES: Fund Balance 50,000 50,000 200,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 450,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)535,500 555,000 - 1,055,000 - - 2,145,500 Grants -Private 50,000 - - - - - 50,000 KC Prop 2 563,500 50,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 1,113,500 Parks Impact 3,639,850 575,000 50,000 2,125,000 150,000 50,000 6,589,850 Parks Mitigation - - - - - - - REET 1 300,000 - - - - - 300,000 REET 2 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 Other - 2,500,000 575,000 2,000,000 - - 5,075,000 Total Funding 5,168,850 3,760,000 980,000 5,385,000 355,000 255,000 15,903,850 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 177 Page 626 of 967 MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Park Acquisitions/Development Project No:gpbd04 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Daryl Faber Description: Activity: (Previous 2 Yrs.)2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Fund 321 -Unrestricted Fund Balance 39,183 - - - 39,183 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - REET1 647,050 26,516 - - 673,566 KC Prop 2 - 30,000 30,000 50,000 60,000 686,233 56,516 30,000 50,000 772,749 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - Acquisition 686,233 56,516 30,000 50,000 772,749 Construction - - - - - 686,233 56,516 30,000 50,000 772,749 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Fund 321 -Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - REET1 - - - - - KC Prop 2 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 580,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 580,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Acquisition 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 580,000 Construction - - - - - 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 580,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: None Land and other property acquisitions to occur based on demand and deficiencies including parks, open space, trails, corridors and recreational facilities. Progress Summary: The City purchased the Auburn Avenue Theater and the Qares property in 2020. Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 178 Page 627 of 967 MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Jacobsen Tree Farm Development Project No:cp0609, cp2020 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Daryl Faber Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Fund 321 -Unrestricted Fund Balance 25,321 - - - 25,321 Grants- Unsecured State - - - - - King County Prop 2 14,165 - 333,500 - 347,665 Park Impact Fees - - 2,581,550 - 2,581,550 Other (TBD)- - - 2,500,000 2,500,000 39,486 - 2,915,050 2,500,000 5,454,536 Capital Expenditures: Design 39,486 - 300,000 - 339,486 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 2,615,050 2,500,000 2,615,050 39,486 - 2,915,050 2,500,000 2,954,536 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Fund 321 -Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants- Unsecured State - 1,000,000 - - 1,000,000 King County Prop 2 - - - - 333,500 Park Impact Fees - 2,000,000 - 4,581,550 Other (TBD)- 2,000,000 - - 4,500,000 - 5,000,000 - - 10,415,050 Capital Expenditures: Design - 500,000 - - 800,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 4,500,000 - - 9,615,050 - 5,000,000 - - 10,415,050 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: Develop the 29.3 acre site into a Community Park. A Master Plan for the park was completed in 2009 and will serve as a roadmap for development of the site. The newly annexed Lea Hill area of the City is deficient in park acreage. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: No significant impact due to master plan. Future park development will result in maintenance and utility expenses undeterminable at this time. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 179 Page 628 of 967 MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: West Hill Park Acquisition and Development Project No:gpbd27 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Jamie Kelly Description: Progress Summary: Undetermined at this time. Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Municipal Parks Construction Fund - - - - - Local Grant (Unsecured)- - 400,000 500,000 400,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - REET - - - - - Park Impact Fees - 50,000 350,000 500,000 400,000 Total Funding Sources:- 50,000 750,000 1,000,000 800,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - 150,000 - Construction - - - 850,000 - Acquisition - 50,000 750,000 - 800,000 Total Expenditures:- 50,000 750,000 1,000,000 800,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Municipal Parks Construction Fund - - - - - Local Grant (Unsecured)- - - - 900,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - REET - - - - - Park Impact Fees - - - - 850,000 Total Funding Sources:- - - - 1,750,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 150,000 Construction - - - - 850,000 Acquisition - - - - 750,000 Total Expenditures:- - - - 1,750,000 Grants / Other Sources: The City has been exploring local and state funding for acquisition and development. Staff to send out form letters to existing property owners in an effort to gauge interest in selling suitable properties to the City. Acquire property adjacent to Watershed property on the West Hill, and develop park. Park to be used as access to the trails on the watershed property. Improvements to include parking, playground, restroom, and kiosks. Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 180 Page 629 of 967 MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Game Farm Park Improvements Project No: cp1720, cp1924 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Daryl Faber Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year EndFunding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Fund 321 -Unrestricted Fund Balance 13,431 - - 13,431 Grants- Unsecured State - - - - - Grants- Secured Local -KCYSF 150,000 - - 150,000 REET 1 - 1,000,000 - - 1,000,000 Other (Park Mitigation Fee)- - - - - Other (Park Impact Fee)334,012 - 150,000 - 484,012 497,443 1,000,000 150,000 - 1,647,443 Capital Expenditures: Design - 40,000 - - 40,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 497,443 960,000 150,000 - 1,607,443 497,443 1,000,000 150,000 - 1,647,443 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Fund 321 -Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants- Unsecured State - - - - - Grants- Secured Local -KCYSF - - - - - REET 1 - - - - - Other (Park Mitigation Fee)- - - - - Other (Park Impact Fee)- - - - 150,000 - - - - 150,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 150,000 - - - - 150,000 Grants / Other Sources: King County Youth Sports Facilities Grant Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: None Improve interior lighting and pathways and provide access from the newly acquired property on southwest corner of the park. The project will also replace synthetic turf on two full sized soccer fields. Progress Summary: City completed resurfacing project on the turf fields in early 2021. Future improvements to include lighting for the pickleball and basketball courts. Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 181 Page 630 of 967 MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Auburndale Park Project No:gpbd01 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Daryl Faber Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Fund 321 -Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other (Park Impact Fee)- - - - - Other (KC Prop 2)- - 100,000 - 100,000 - 100,000 - 100,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 5,000 - 5,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 95,000 - 95,000 - - 100,000 - 100,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Fund 321 -Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Other (Park Impact Fee)- - - - - Other (KC Prop 2)- - - - 100,000 - - - - 100,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 5,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 95,000 - - - - 100,000 Grants / Other Sources: Progress Summary: Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Utilities would increase by $5,000 Develop a Master Plan for the Park, install an irrigation system, new play structure and improve signage. Create an entrance to the park from the east via 110th Ave SE to allow access from the adjacent neighborhoods. Construct new section of trail in the western portion of the park. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 182 Page 631 of 967 MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Auburndale Park II Project No:gpbd05 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Daryl Faber Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Fund 321 -Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - REET - - - - - Other TBD - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Fund 321 -Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - REET - - - - - Other TBD 575,000 - - - 575,000 575,000 - - - 575,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 75,000 - - - 75,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 500,000 - - - 500,000 575,000 - - - 575,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Description: Develop a Master Plan, improve the existing trail system and install signage and play structure. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Increased utility costs of $2,000 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 183 Page 632 of 967 MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Sunset Park Improvements Project No:cp1921 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Daryl Faber Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Fund 321 -Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Park Impact Fees 22,235 - 177,800 - 200,035 Other -Contributions & Donations - - - - - 22,235 - 177,800 - 200,035 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 15,000 - 15,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 22,235 - 162,800 - 185,035 22,235 - 177,800 - 200,035 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Fund 321 -Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Park Impact Fees - - - - 177,800 Other -Contributions & Donations - - - - - - - - - 177,800 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 15,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 162,800 - - - - 177,800 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Description: Expand playground area to include spray park and additional play activities. Coordinate improvements with service club and Lakeland Hills Homeowners Association. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Increase in Utilities of $10,000 per year City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 184 Page 633 of 967 MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Cedar Lanes Bike Park Project No:cp2127 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Jamie Kelly Description: Progress Summary: None Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Municipal Parks Construction Fund - - - - - KC Youth Sports Grant (Secured)- 7,500 135,500 - 143,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - REET - - - - - Park Impact Fees - 7,500 330,500 - 338,000 Total Funding Sources:- 15,000 466,000 - 481,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 15,000 15,000 - 30,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 451,000 - 451,000 Total Expenditures:- 15,000 466,000 - 481,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Municipal Parks Construction Fund - - - - - KC Youth Sports Grant (Secured)- - - - 135,500 Bond Proceeds - - - - - REET - - - - - Park Impact Fees - - - - 330,500 Total Funding Sources:- - - - 466,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 15,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 451,000 Total Expenditures:- - - - 466,000 Grants / Other Sources: Construct a bike park and restroom at Cedar Lanes Park. Bike park to include an asphalt pump track and skills course. Pedestrian trails in the park will also be improved. Future Impact on Operating Budget: City has contracted with Evergreen Mountain Bike Alliance for design of the pump track and skills course. Construction anticipated in Spring 2022. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 185 Page 634 of 967 MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: BPA Trail on Lea Hill Project No:gpbd23 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Daryl Faber Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Fund 321 -Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants- Unsecured (State RCO)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - REET - - - - - Other (KC Prop. 2)*- - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Predesign - - - - - Design - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Fund 321 -Unrestricted Fund Balance 150,000 - - - 150,000 Grants- Unsecured (State RCO)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - REET - - - - - Other (KC Prop. 2)*- - - - - 150,000 - - - 150,000 Capital Expenditures: Predesign 25,000 - - - 25,000 Design 125,000 - - - 125,000 Construction - - - - - 150,000 - - - 150,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: None Develop a feasibility study related to constructability of a pedestrian trail linking the Jacobsen Tree Farm site to the west end of Lea Hill. This trail would follow the alignment of the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) transmission lines from 132nd to 108th Avenue SE. Construction would be in phases based on constructability. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 186 Page 635 of 967 MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Lakeland Hills Nature Area Project No:gpbd11 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Daryl Faber Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Fund 321 -Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Park Impact Fees - - 25,000 - Park Mitigation Fees - - - - - - - 25,000 - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - 25,000 - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - 25,000 - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Fund 321 -Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - Park Impact Fees - 75,000 100,000 - 200,000 Park Mitigation Fees - - - - - - 75,000 100,000 - 200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 25,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 75,000 100,000 - 175,000 - 75,000 100,000 - 200,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Increased maintenance costs of $5,000 Complete Master Plan to include the development and construction of an environmental community park. Trails, fencing, parking and visitor amenities are included in the project. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 187 Page 636 of 967 MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Miscellaneous Parks Improvements Project No:various, gpbd03 Project Type:Capacity/Non-Capacity Project Manager:Daryl Faber Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Fund 321 -Unrestricted Fund Balance 19,250 78,000 50,000 50,000 147,250 Grants- Unsecured State - - - - - Local Grant - - - - - KC Prop 2 - 177,500 - - 177,500 Other (Park Impact Fee)25,000 113,869 50,000 50,000 188,869 44,250 369,369 100,000 100,000 513,619 Capital Expenditures: Professional Services - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction 44,250 369,369 100,000 100,000 513,619 44,250 369,369 100,000 100,000 513,619 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Fund 321 -Unrestricted Fund Balance 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 300,000 Grants- Unsecured State - - - - - Local Grant - - - - - KC Prop 2 - - - - - Other (Park Impact Fee)*50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 300,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 600,000 Capital Expenditures: Professional Services - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 600,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 600,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Minor park improvements including shelters, roofs, playgrounds, irrigation and restrooms. Progress Summary: Project funding includes the Mill Pond Dock Improvement (cp1915) in 2019, funded $25,000 to help complete the West Auburn Lake Park (cp1801) in 2020 and $36,000 for the Lea Hill Mini Soccer Field Turf replacement (cp2122) in 2021 Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 188 Page 637 of 967 MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Cameron Park Project No:gpbd24 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Daryl Faber Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Fund 321 -Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants- Unsecured Local - - - 55,000 - Bond Proceeds - - - - - REET - - - - - Other - - - - - - - - 55,000 - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - 5,000 - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 50,000 - - - - 55,000 - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Fund 321 -Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants- Unsecured Local - 55,000 - - 110,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - REET - - - - - Other - - - - - - 55,000 - - 110,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 5,000 - - 10,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 50,000 - - 100,000 - 55,000 - - 110,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: None This project will improve the pedestrian trail and add landscape and fencing to serve as buffer to the neighborhood and play structure. This project is identified in the Parks Improvement Plan. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 189 Page 638 of 967 MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Fulmer Park Playground Replacement Project No:gpbd25 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Jamie Kelly Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Municipal Parks Construction Fund - - - - - Grants- Kaboom - - 50,000 - 50,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - REET - - - - - KC Prop 2 - - 100,000 - 100,000 - - 150,000 - 150,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 7,500 - 7,500 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 142,500 - 142,500 - - 150,000 - 150,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Municipal Parks Construction Fund - - - - - Grants- Kaboom - - - - 50,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - REET - - - - - KC Prop 2 - - - - 100,000 - - - - 150,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 7,500 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 142,500 - - - - 150,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Replace aging playground. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 190 Page 639 of 967 MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Fairway Drainage Improvement Project No:gpbd19, cp1911, cp2002, cp2104 Project Type:Non-capacity Project Manager:Daryl Faber Description: Activity: (Previous 2 Yrs.)2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Municipal Parks Construction Fund 527 - - - 527 Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - REET 2 57,454 30,000 30,000 30,000 117,454 Other - - - - - 57,981 30,000 30,000 30,000 117,981 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction 57,981 30,000 30,000 30,000 117,981 57,981 30,000 30,000 30,000 117,981 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Municipal Parks Construction Fund - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - REET 2 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 Other - - - - - 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 Grants / Other Sources: Apply top dressing sand to the first five fairways in order to firm up these landing areas so that the holes are playable year round. Sand will be applied with a three yard topdressing machine. Sand will be applied bi/weekly at a tenth of an inch of sand throughout the fairways. Fairways will start to show improvements once four inches of sand are applied. Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 191 Page 640 of 967 MUNICIPAL PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (321)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Community Center Parking Lot Improvements Project No:cp2111 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Jamie Kelly Description: Progress Summary: None Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Municipal Parks Construction Fund - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - REET 1 - 50,000 300,000 - 350,000 Other - - - - - Total Funding Sources:- 50,000 300,000 - 350,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 50,000 - - 50,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 300,000 - 300,000 Total Expenditures:- 50,000 300,000 - 350,000 Forecasted Project Cost: Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Municipal Parks Construction Fund - - - - - Grants- Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Bond Proceeds - - - - - REET 1 - - - - 300,000 Other - - - - - Total Funding Sources:- - - - 300,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 300,000 Total Expenditures:- - - - 300,000 Grants / Other Sources: Resurface the main drive that serves the Community and Event Center at Les Gove Park. The existing pervious concrete surface is deteriorated from weather and heavy use. Parks staff will work with Public Works and industry professionals to determine appropriate surfacing. Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 192 Page 641 of 967 TABLE PR-3 Impact on Future Operating Budgets Parks, Arts & Recreation – Municipal Parks Construction Project:2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Total 1 Auburndale Park 5,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$ 30,000$ 2 Auburndale Park II - - 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 8,000 3 Sunset Park 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 60,000 4 Lakeland Hills Nature Area - - - - 5,000 5,000 10,000 Total 15,000$ 15,000$ 17,000$ 17,000$ 22,000$ 22,000$ 108,000$ City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 193 Page 642 of 967 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 145.32 square feet per 1,000 population is based on the existing inventory divided by the 2022 citywide population of 83,950. The proposed LOS of 136.50 square feet per 1,000 population is based on the projected inventory divided by the 2027-projected citywide population of 89,379. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing The CFP does not include any senior center capital facilities projects during 2022-2027 Impact on Future Operating Budgets There are no operating budget impacts forecasted for the senior center facility during the six years 2023 – 2028. TABLE PR-5 Facilities Inventory Senior Center CAPACITY FACILITY (Square Feet)LOCATION Existing Inventory: Senior Center 12,200 808 9th Street SE Total Existing Inventory 12,200 Proposed Capacity Projects: None - Total Proposed Capacity Projects - 2027 Projected Inventory Total 12,200 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 194 Page 643 of 967 GENERAL MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS Current Facilities The current inventory of City government administration and operations facilities include 207,629 square feet for general government operations, 66,469 square feet for police services, and 38,646 square feet for fire protection, for a total of 312,744 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 3,725.36 square feet per 1,000 population is based on the existing inventory divided by the 2022 citywide population of 83,950. The proposed LOS of 3,543.83 square feet per 1,000 population is based on the projected inventory divided by the 2027-projected citywide population of 89,379. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing The City’s General Municipal Building facilities include four capital projects at a cost of $2,195,510 and debt service at a cost of $3.314.000 for a total of $5,509,510. The major projects include (1) $1,028,000 for the Auburn Arts & Culture Center Renovation, (2) $810,000 for M&O Facility Improvement (3) $320,000 for M&O Fuel Tank and $3,314,000 for City Hall Annex debt service costs. Table GM – 2 shows the proposed financing plan followed by individual worksheets showing the project detail. Impact on Future Operating Budgets As Table GM-3 shows, operating budget impacts of $570,000 are forecasted for General Municipal buildings facilities during the six years 2023- 2028. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 195 Page 644 of 967 TABLE GM-1 Facilities Inventory General Municipal Buildings CAPACITY FACILITY (Square Feet)LOCATION Existing Inventory: General Government: City Hall 61,721 25 W Main Street City Hall Annex 45,034 1 W Main Street City Maintenance & Operations Facility 17,940 1305 C Street SW Community Center 13,973 910 9th Street SE Municipal Court (Justice Center-Leased to King County)12,200 340 E Main Street Activity Center 10,074 910 9th Street SE Auburn Arts & Culture Center 8,744 100 Auburn Avenue Auburn Avenue Theater 7,560 10 Auburn Avenue Youth Center 7,132 910 9th Street SE Auburn Valley Humane Society -(Leased to AVHS)5,900 4910 A Street GSA Building 5,580 2905 C Street SW #815 R Street Building 4,977 2840 Riverwalk Drive Les Gove Storage Building 4,044 910 9th Street SE Street Waste Handling Facility 2,750 1305 C Street SW Total 207,629 Police: Gun range 32,880 1600 Block 15th St NW Headquarters (Justice Center)24,800 340 E Main Street R Street Building (Leased to Puget Sound Theft Task Force)4,789 2840 Riverwalk Drive Seized vehicle parking stalls 3,000 2905 C Street SW GSA Building 1,000 2905 C Street SW #815 Total 66,469 Fire: Stations: GSA Station #35 16,526 2905 C Street SW North Station #31 12,220 1101 D Street NE South Station #32 5,200 1951 R Street SE Other Facilities: North Station Maint. Facility 4,700 1101 D Street NE Total 38,646 Total Existing Inventory 312,744 Proposed Capacity Projects: Maintenance & Operations New Maintenance Bay 4,000 Total Proposed Capacity Projects 4,000 2027 Projected Inventory Total 316,744 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 196 Page 645 of 967 TABLE GM-2 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Page Capacity Projects: 198 Auburn Arts & Culture Center Renovation Capital Costs 28,000 1,000,000 - - - - 1,028,000 Funding Sources: Fund Balance - - - - - - - Grants 28,000 500,000 - - - - 528,000 Other (Cumulative Reserve F122)- - - - - - - Other Park Impact Fees - 500,000 - - - - 500,000 Subtotal, Capacity Projects: Capital Costs 28,000 1,000,000 - - - - 1,028,000 Non-Capacity Projects: 199 M&O Facility Improvement - Phase 1 Capital Costs 810,000 - - - - - 810,000 Funding Sources: Equipment Rental Fund 194,000 - - - - - 194,000 Operating Transfer - General Fund 20,020 - - - - - 20,020 Operating Transfer -Water 198,660 - - - - - 198,660 Operating Transfer -Sewer 198,660 - - - - - 198,660 Operating Transfer -Storm 198,660 - - - - - 198,660 200 M&O Fuel Tank Replacement Capital Costs 320,000 - - - - - 320,000 Funding Sources: Equipment Rental Fund 80,000 - - - - - 80,000 Operating Transfer -Water 80,000 - - - - - 80,000 Operating Transfer -Sewer 80,000 - - - - - 80,000 Operating Transfer -Storm 80,000 - - - - - 80,000 201 HVAC Equipment Replacement Capital Costs 37,510 - - - - - 37,510 Funding Sources: Operating Transfer -Facilities 37,510 - - - - - 37,510 REET 1 - - - - - - - Subtotal, Non-Capacity Projects: Capital Costs 1,167,510 - - - - - 1,167,510 202 City Hall Annex Long-Term Debt 553,500 553,400 552,700 553,800 551,700 548,900 3,314,000 Funding Sources: REET 1 553,500 553,400 552,700 553,800 551,700 548,900 3,314,000 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects 28,000 1,000,000 - - - - 1,028,000 Non-Capacity Projects 1,167,510 - - - - - 1,167,510 Long-Term Debt 553,500 553,400 552,700 553,800 551,700 548,900 3,314,000 Total Costs 1,749,010 1,553,400 552,700 553,800 551,700 548,900 5,509,510 FUNDING SOURCES: Equipment Rental Fund 274,000 - - - - - 274,000 Operating Transfer- Gen. Fund 20,020 - - - - - 20,020 Operating Transfer -Water 278,660 - - - - - 278,660 Operating Transfer -Sewer 278,660 - - - - - 278,660 Operating Transfer -Storm 278,660 - - - - - 278,660 Operating Transfer -Facilities 37,510 - - - - - 37,510 Grants 28,000 500,000 - - - - 528,000 Park Impact Fees - 500,000 - - - - 500,000 REET 1 553,500 553,400 552,700 553,800 551,700 548,900 3,314,000 Total Funding 1,749,010 1,553,400 552,700 553,800 551,700 548,900 5,509,510 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING GENERAL MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 197 Page 646 of 967 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Auburn Arts & Culture Center Renovation Project No:cp1612 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Daryl Faber Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Fund Balance - 10,150 - - 10,150 Grants- Secured (State)58,777 431,223 - - 490,000 Grants- Secured (Local)314,043 94,107 28,000 - 436,150 Grants -Unsecured (Local)- - - 500,000 500,000 Other -(Cumulative Reserve)- 42,200 - - 42,200 Other -(TBD)- 200,000 - - 200,000 Other -(Contributions & Donations)14,850 - - - 14,850 Other (Park Impact Fee)5,912 844,088 - 500,000 850,000 393,582 1,621,768 28,000 1,000,000 2,543,350 Capital Expenditures: Design 190,143 45,000 - 75,000 235,143 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 203,439 1,576,768 28,000 925,000 1,808,207 393,582 1,621,768 28,000 1,000,000 2,043,350 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants- Secured (State)- - - - - Grants- Secured (Local)- - - - 28,000 Grants -Unsecured (Local)- - - - 500,000 Other -(Cumulative Reserve)- - - - - Other -(Contributions & Donations)- - - - - Other (Park Impact Fee)- - - - 500,000 - - - - 1,028,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 75,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 953,000 - - - - 1,028,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Renovation to the property and building located at 20 Auburn Avenue (100 Auburn Avenue) Building for the creation of an Arts & Culture Center in downtown Auburn. The renovation of this building will allow increased access to the arts for all of Auburn residents and visitors. Having a dedicated Art Center alongside the Auburn Avenue Theater performing arts series has the potential to transform Auburn into an arts tourism destination within the South Puget Sound. This project is a high priority for the City of Auburn and the purchase of this important building was completed in 2016. Progress Summary: The City has secured $898,000 in grant funding. The historic window restoration was completed in 2018, interior demolition started in 2019, and final renovation designs completed in 2020. It is anticipated that Phase 1 renovation of the main floor will begin in 2020 and continue through 2021. As a landmark building, exterior renovations must maintain the historic character of the building. Phase 2 renovations for the basement are expected to begin in 2023 at which time the City intends to apply for additional grant funds. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual operating budget fiscal impact is estimated to be $95,000. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 198 Page 647 of 967 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND (560)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: M&O Facility Improvement - Phase 1 Project No:cp2107 Project Type: Project Manager:Matt Larson Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Equip. Rental Revenue - 24,000 194,000 - 218,000 General Fund - Transfer-in - 2,470 20,020 - 22,490 Water Fund - Transfer-in - 24,510 198,660 - 223,170 Sewer Fund - Transfer-in - 24,510 198,660 - 223,170 Storm Fund - Transfer-in - 24,510 198,660 - 223,170 - 100,000 810,000 - 910,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 100,000 20,000 - 120,000 Construction - 790,000 - 790,000 - 100,000 810,000 - 910,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Equip. Rental Revenue - - - - 194,000 General Fund - Transfer-in - - - - 20,020 Water Fund - Transfer-in - - - - 198,660 Sewer Fund - Transfer-in - - - - 198,660 Storm Fund - Transfer-in - - - - 20,020 - - - - 631,360 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 20,000 Construction - - - - 790,000 - - - - 810,000 Grants / Other Sources: None Non-Capacity This project will enclose the existing eight bay large fleet covered parking area north of the Public Works M&O's main building by installing full height mechanically operated door systems. This project will also expand the existing M&O building with a new Central Stores and reconfigure the existing building to increase the fleet maintenance area. Progress Summary: Project design phase began in May 2021. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 199 Page 648 of 967 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND (560)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: M&O Fuel Tank Replacement Project No:erbd01 Project Type: Project Manager:Tyler Thompson Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Equip. Rental Revenue - - 80,000 - 80,000 REET 1 - - - - - Water Fund - Transfer-in - - 80,000 - 80,000 Sewer Fund - Transfer-in - - 80,000 - 80,000 Storm Fund - Transfer-in - - 80,000 - 80,000 - - 320,000 - 320,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 25,000 - 25,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 295,000 - 295,000 - - 320,000 - 320,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Equip. Rental Revenue - - - - 80,000 REET 1 - - - - - Water Fund - Transfer-in - - - - 80,000 Sewer Fund - Transfer-in - - - - 80,000 Storm Fund - Transfer-in - - - - 80,000 - - - - 320,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 25,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 295,000 - - - - 320,000 Grants / Other Sources: This project should reduce the operating budget due to lower maintenance and inspection costs. Non-Capacity Replace three 10,000 gallon underground tanks with new above ground tanks. The existing tanks were installed in 1989 and are single wall fiberglass tanks. It will be a benefit to the City to have the tanks above ground in the future due to the reduced maintenance and inspection cost. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 200 Page 649 of 967 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: HVAC Equipment Replacement Project No:gcbd17, cp2108, 2113, 2114 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Lisa Moore Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - Grants - Unsecured State - - - - - Grants - Local Unsecured - - - - - REET 1 - 730,840 - 730,840 Facilities Fund-Transfer In - 371,470 37,510 - 408,980 - 1,102,310 37,510 - 1,139,820 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 1,102,310 37,510 - 1,139,820 - 1,102,310 37,510 - 1,139,820 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants - Unsecured State - - - - - Grants - Local Unsecured - - - - - REET 1 - - - - - Facilities Fund-Transfer In - - - - 37,510 - - - - 37,510 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 37,510 - - - - 37,510 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Replace HVAC Equipment at City Hall, Auburn Senior Center, Mountain View Cemetery, Arts & Culture Center building, Maintenance and Operations building and the Auburn Avenue Theater. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will reduce operating costs through energy conservation and reduced maintenance and repair. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 201 Page 650 of 967 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: City Hall Annex Project No:N/A Project Type:Long Term Debt Project Manager: Description: Activity: (Previous 2 Yrs.)2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants - Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - REET 1 1,316,650 553,000 553,500 553,400 2,423,150 1,316,650 553,000 553,500 553,400 2,423,150 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Construction - - - - - Long-Term Debt Service 1,316,650 553,000 553,500 553,400 2,423,150 1,316,650 553,000 553,500 553,400 2,423,150 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants - Secured (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - REET 1 552,700 553,800 551,700 548,900 3,314,000 552,700 553,800 551,700 548,900 3,314,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Construction - - - - - Long-Term Debt Service 552,700 553,800 551,700 548,900 3,314,000 552,700 553,800 551,700 548,900 3,314,000 Grants / Other Sources: To pay scheduled debt service costs on 2010 General Obligation bonds issued for the City Hall Annex. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: N/A Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 202 Page 651 of 967 Impact on Future Operating Budgets General Municipal Buildings . Project:2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Total 1 Auburn Arts & Culture Ctr. Renovation -$ 95,000$ 95,000$ 95,000$ 95,000$ 95,000$ 475,000$ Total -$ 95,000$ 95,000$ 95,000$ 95,000$ 95,000$ 475,000$ City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 203 Page 652 of 967 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 204 Page 653 of 967 COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENTS Current Facilities Community Improvements include the 104th Avenue Park development, sidewalk and traffic signal improvements, neighborhood traffic calming program, public art and phase two of the Auburn Environmental Park Boardwalk project. 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 fourteen capital projects at a cost of $8,582,900 and debt service at a cost of $900,500 for a total of $9,483,400. Table CI-2 shows the proposed financing plan followed by individual work sheets showing the project detail. Impact on Future Operating Budgets As Table CI-3 shows, because of the City Street light LED retrofit program the operating budget will save approximately $785,000 for community improvement facilities during the six years 2023-2028. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 205 Page 654 of 967 TABLE CI-2 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Page Capacity Projects: 208 Auburn Way South (SR-164) - Southside Sidewalk Improvements Capital Costs 95,000 750,000 - - - - 845,000 Funding Sources: Grants 80,000 615,000 - - - - 695,000 REET 2 15,000 60,000 - - - - 75,000 Other (MIT)- 75,000 - - - - 75,000 209 104th Ave. Park Development Capital Costs 1,770,200 - - - - - 1,770,200 Funding Sources: Grants 451,370 - - - - - 451,370 Other - Park Impact Fees 1,318,830 - - - - - 1,318,830 210 Downtown Plaza Park Capital Costs 377,700 - - - - - 377,700 Funding Sources: Other Park Impact Fees 145,230 - - - - - 145,230 Other -Developer Fees 232,470 - - - - - 232,470 Subtotal, Capacity Projects: Capital Costs 2,242,900 750,000 - - - - 2,992,900 Non-Capacity Projects: 211 Public Art Capital Costs 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 Funding Sources: REET 2 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 212 Citywide ADA & Sidewalk Improvements Capital Costs 185,000 145,000 20,000 220,000 190,000 20,000 780,000 Funding Sources: REET 2 185,000 125,000 20,000 200,000 170,000 - 700,000 Other (Fees)- 20,000 - 20,000 20,000 20,000 80,000 213 Sidewalk and ADA Inventory Capital Costs - 200,000 - - - - 200,000 Funding Sources: REET 2 - 200,000 - - - - 200,000 214 Lea Hill Safe Routes to Schools Capital Costs - 70,000 950,000 - - - 1,020,000 Funding Sources: Grants - 55,000 700,000 - - - 755,000 REET2 - 15,000 200,000 - - - 215,000 Other -Auburn School Dist.- - 50,000 - - - 50,000 215 Annual Traffic Signal Replacement & Improvements Capital Costs 100,000 180,000 185,000 190,000 195,000 200,000 1,050,000 Funding Sources: REET 2 100,000 180,000 185,000 190,000 195,000 200,000 1,050,000 216 Citywide Street Lighting Improvements Capital Costs 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 300,000 Funding Sources: REET 2 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 300,000 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENTS City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 206 Page 655 of 967 TABLE CI-2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENTS 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Page Non-Capacity Projects: 217 City Street Lighting LED Retrofit Capital Costs 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 Funding Sources: REET 2 10,000 - - - - - 10,000 218 Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program Capital Costs 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 900,000 Funding Sources: REET 2 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 900,000 219 City Wetland Mitigation Projects Capital Costs 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 Funding Sources: Other (Fund 124-Wetland Mit.)5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 220 Auburn Environmental Park Boardwalk -Phase 2 Capital Costs - 75,000 800,000 - - - 875,000 Funding Sources: REET 2 - 75,000 - - - - 75,000 Other - To Be Determined - - 800,000 - - - 800,000 221 City Downtown Public Parking Lot Reconfiguration Capital Costs 245,000 - - - - - 245,000 Funding Sources: Local Revitalization Fund 245,000 - - - - - 245,000 222 Local Revitalization Long Term Debt 152,300 150,800 148,800 151,300 148,000 149,300 900,500 Funding Sources: REET 2 152,300 150,800 148,800 151,300 148,000 149,300 900,500 Subtotal, Non-Capacity Projects: Capital Costs 775,000 905,000 2,190,000 645,000 620,000 455,000 5,590,000 SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects 2,242,900 750,000 - - - - 2,992,900 Non-Capacity Projects 775,000 905,000 2,190,000 645,000 620,000 455,000 5,590,000 Long-Term Debt 152,300 150,800 148,800 151,300 148,000 149,300 900,500 Total Costs 3,170,200 1,805,800 2,338,800 796,300 768,000 604,300 9,483,400 FUNDING SOURCES: Local Revitalization Fund 330 245,000 - - - - - 245,000 Grants 531,370 670,000 700,000 - - - 1,901,370 REET 2 692,300 1,035,800 783,800 771,300 743,000 579,300 4,605,500 Other -To Be Determined - - 800,000 - - - 800,000 Other (Fees)- 20,000 - 20,000 20,000 20,000 80,000 Other (MIT)- 75,000 - - - - 75,000 Other (Developer Fees)232,470 - - - - - 232,470 Other -Auburn School Dist.- - 50,000 - - - 50,000 Other (Fund 124-Parks Impact)1,464,060 - - - - - 1,464,060 Other (Fund 124-Wetland Mit.)5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 Total Funding 3,170,200 1,805,800 2,338,800 796,300 768,000 604,300 9,483,400 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 207 Page 656 of 967 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Auburn Way South (SR-164) - Southside Sidewalk Improvements TIP# N-7 Project No:gcbd10 Project Type:Capacity, Non-motorized, Safety Project Manager:TBD Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Grants - Secured - - 80,000 615,000 80,000 REET 2 - - 15,000 60,000 15,000 Other (MIT)- - - 75,000 - - - 95,000 750,000 95,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 95,000 - 95,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 750,000 - - 95,000 750,000 95,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Grants - Secured - - - - 695,000 REET 2 - - - - 75,000 Other (MIT)- - - - 75,000 - - - - 845,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 95,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 750,000 - - - - 845,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: The project will construct missing sidewalk along the south side of Auburn Way S. The existing sidewalk along the south side currently ends at the intersection with Howard Road and restarts to the west of the intersection with Muckleshoot Plaza. The sidewalk gap extends for approximately 1,700 feet. The project also includes a Rapid Flashing Rectangular Beacon (RRFB) across Howard Road to provide a connection from the existing non-motorized facilities to the proposed improvements. Progress Summary: Grant funding from WSDOT was awarded in 2021. The design phase will start in 2022, with construction of the improvements completed during 2023. The City and Muckleshoot Indian Tribe have entered into a memorandum of understanding for improvements along the Auburn Way S corridor, and are currently negotiating the funding agreement for this project. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 208 Page 657 of 967 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: 104th Ave. Park Development Project No: cp1619 Project Type: Capacity Project Manager: Jamie Kelly Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Cap Improve - - - - - Grants - Secured State - 113,630 451,370 - 565,000 REET2 2,424 - - - 2,424 Other -Park Impact Fees 62,401 171,005 1,318,830 - 1,552,236 64,825 284,635 1,770,200 - 2,119,660 Capital Expenditures: Design 64,825 284,635 - - 349,460 Construction - - 1,770,200 - 1,770,200 Long-Term Debt Service - - - - 64,825 284,635 1,770,200 - 2,119,660 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Cap Improve - - - - - Grants - Secured State - - - - 451,370 REET2 - - - - - Other -Park Impact Fees - - - - 1,318,830 - - - - 1,770,200 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Construction - - - - 1,770,200 Long-Term Debt Service - - - - - - - - - 1,770,200 Grants / Other Sources: Complete Master Plan and construct park improvements identified in the Master Plan. Anticipated improvements include parking, trails, restroom, and playground. Work associated with permit approvals is also included in the budget. Progress Summary: The City was awarded a State grant from RCO where funds became available in June 2019. Park staff is currently working with design consultant team and Public Works to design the project. Design is anticipated to be completed in 2021, and construction in Spring/Summer 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The annual impact on the operating budget is estimated to be $10,000 for temporary wages and $2,500 for supplies. Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 209 Page 658 of 967 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Downtown Plaza Park Project No:cp2016 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Jamie Kelly Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Developer Fees - 32,160 232,470 - 264,630 Other -Park Impact Fees - - 145,230 - 145,230 - 32,160 377,700 - 409,860 Capital Expenditures: Design - 32,160 17,025 - 49,185 Construction - - 360,675 - 360,675 - 32,160 377,700 - 409,860 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Developer Fees - - - - 232,470 Other -Park Impact Fees - - - - 145,230 - - - - 377,700 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 17,025 Construction - - - - 360,675 - - - - 377,700 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: This project will renovate and improve the plaza area across from City Hall. Improvements will complement the new commercial building store fronts on the adjacent property that is being constructed in 2020. Improvement will include, but not be limited to seating, plantings, surfacing, and public art. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 210 Page 659 of 967 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Public Art Project No: gcbd05, cp1818 Project Type: Non-Capacity Project Manager: Julie Krueger Description: Activity: (Previous 2 Years)2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total REET 2 163,000 127,500 30,000 30,000 320,500 163,000 127,500 30,000 30,000 320,500 Capital Expenditures: Design 62,500 - - - 62,500 Construction 100,500 127,500 30,000 30,000 258,000 163,000 127,500 30,000 30,000 320,500 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: REET 2 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 Capital Expenditures: Construction 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: None The City designates $30,000 annually toward the purchase of public art, for placement at designated locations throughout the City. Progress Summary: Arts Commission will meet to assess future needs and seek approval from City Council on placement. Future Impact on Operating Budget: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 211 Page 660 of 967 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Citywide ADA & Sidewalk Improvements TIP# N-2 Project No:cp1804, cp1815, cp1902, cp2106, gcbd01 Project Type:Non-Capacity (Annual) Project Manager:James Webb LOS Corridor ID# N/A Activity: (Previous 2 Yrs.)2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Grants -State 232,875 - - - 232,875 REET 2 485,070 185,000 185,000 125,000 855,070 Other (Fees)40,000 - - 20,000 40,000 757,945 185,000 185,000 145,000 1,127,945 Capital Expenditures: Design 13,807 20,000 37,000 29,000 70,807 Construction 744,138 165,000 148,000 116,000 1,057,138 757,945 185,000 185,000 145,000 1,127,945 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: REET 2 20,000 200,000 170,000 - 700,000 Other (Fees)- 20,000 20,000 20,000 80,000 20,000 220,000 190,000 20,000 780,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 4,000 44,000 38,000 4,000 156,000 Construction 16,000 176,000 152,000 16,000 624,000 20,000 220,000 190,000 20,000 780,000 Grants / Other Sources: Description: The program will construct citywide accessibility improvements to the public right-of-way sidewalk system including adding/upgrading curb ramps, removing barriers to access and completing gaps. Projects are prioritized annually based on pedestrian demands, existing deficiencies, and citizen requests. Program funds reflect remaining budget after allocations to specific ADA and sidewalk improvement projects. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 212 Page 661 of 967 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Sidewalk and ADA Inventory TIP# N-5 Project No:TBD Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD LOS Corridor ID# N/A Activity: (Previous 2 Yrs.)2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - REET 2 - - - 200,000 - - - - 200,000 - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - 200,000 - - - - 200,000 - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Fund Balance REET 2 - - - - 200,000 - - - - 200,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 200,000 - - - - 200,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Description: The project will create an inventory of existing sidewalk and ADA infrastructure located with the public ROW throughout the City. This information will be used to identify and prioritize deficiencies in existing non-motorized infrastructure, and to document progress on the implementation of the ADA transition plan. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 213 Page 662 of 967 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Lea Hill Safe Routes to Schools TIP# N-11 Project No:gcbd16 Project Type:Non-Motorized Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants - Unsecured - - - 55,000 - REET 2 - - - 15,000 - Other (ASD)- - - - - - - - 70,000 - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - 70,000 - Construction - - - - - - - - 70,000 - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants - Unsecured 700,000 - - - 755,000 REET 2 200,000 - - - 215,000 Other (ASD)50,000 - - - 50,000 950,000 - - - 1,020,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 70,000 Construction 950,000 - - - 950,000 950,000 - - - 1,020,000 Grants / Other Sources: The project will construct non-motorized improvements along SE 304th St from Hazelwood Elementary School extending east to 124th Ave SE, and along the west side of 124th Ave SE to the south of SE 304th St. The project will complete multiple gaps in the existing non- motorized network. The project will also construct curb and gutter, ADA compliant curb ramps, driveways aprons and retaining walls associated with the new sidewalks. Utility poles will need to be relocated to accommodate the proposed sidewalk alignment in some locations. Additional lighting is proposed for pedestrian safety and will be incorporated onto existing/relocated utility poles, and an RRFB will be installed at the SE 304th St intersection with 116th Ave SE. Ancillary work, including but not limited to, property restoration, grading, storm upgrades, school zone beacon relocation, channelization, fencing, landscaping and mailbox relocation will be addressed with the project. Progress Summary: Grant funding is anticipated to be applied for in 2022. If secured, the design phase will be started in 2023. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Expenditures: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 214 Page 663 of 967 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Annual Traffic Signal Replacement & Improvements TIP# I-2 Project No:cp1813, cp1906, cp2004, gcbd07 Project Type:Non-Capacity (Annual) Project Manager:Scott Nutter LOS Corridor ID# N/A Activity: (Previous 2 Yrs.)2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants - Unsecured - - - - - REET 2 - 304,313 100,000 180,000 404,313 - 304,313 100,000 180,000 404,313 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Construction - 304,313 100,000 180,000 404,313 - 304,313 100,000 180,000 404,313 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants - Unsecured - - - - - REET 2 185,000 190,000 195,000 200,000 1,050,000 185,000 190,000 195,000 200,000 1,050,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Construction 185,000 190,000 195,000 200,000 1,050,000 185,000 190,000 195,000 200,000 1,050,000 Grants / Other Sources: Description: The program will replace end of life capital facilities replacement for traffic signal and Intelligent Transportation System equipment including cabinets, video detection cameras, field network devices, traffic cameras, battery backup components, and other related equipment. The program also includes minor safety improvements, operations improvements, and Accessible Pedestrian Signal Improvements based on the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Progress Summary: Project continues to complete various intersection improvements. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will have a positive impact on the operating budget for street maintenance, reducing maintenance costs. Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 215 Page 664 of 967 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Citywide Street Lighting Improvements TIP# I-4 Project No: cp1928, cp2005, gcbd09 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Scott Nutter Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants - Unsecured - - - - - REET 2 55,640 91,922 50,000 50,000 197,562 55,640 91,922 50,000 50,000 197,562 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Construction 55,640 91,922 50,000 50,000 197,562 55,640 91,922 50,000 50,000 197,562 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - Grants - Unsecured - - - - - REET 2 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 300,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 300,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Construction 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 300,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 300,000 Grants / Other Sources: The project constructs lighting improvements throughout the City, including upgrading decorative street lights not converted to LED with the 2020 conversion project, and installing new street lights. Progress Summary: During 2021 a program is being developed to continue the conversion of decorative city street lights and non-city owned street lights which were not included in the 2020 LED conversion project. Future Impact on Operating Budget: New street lights installed with this program will increase the City's street light power costs but this increase will be offset by decreased power costs as existing standard street lights are converted to LED. Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 216 Page 665 of 967 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: City Street Light LED Retrofit TIP# I-17 Project No: cp1920 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Scott Nutter Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Grants - Secured Federal 373,798 126,202 - - 500,000 Contributions 350,000 - - 350,000 REET 2 1,493,940 346,974 10,000 - 1,850,914 1,867,738 823,176 10,000 - 2,700,914 Capital Expenditures: Design 90,308 94,166 - - 184,474 Construction 1,777,430 729,010 10,000 - 2,516,440 1,867,738 823,176 10,000 - 2,700,914 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Grants - Secured Federal - - - - - Contributions - - - - - REET 2 - - - - 10,000 - - - - 10,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Construction - - - - 10,000 - - - - 10,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: The project will convert all City owned cobra-head street lights to LED. This phase of the project will convert all City owned cobra-head street lights to LED and add smart lighting control technology. Federal grant funding for this phase of the project was awarded in 2019. Future phases to upgrade other types of City street lights (such as decorative residential and downtown decorative lights) to LED will be considered as additional funding is available. Progress Summary: A detailed audit of all existing City owned lights and the design phase of the project have been completed. The construction phase of the project is programmed to begin during Spring 2020. REET funds shown in 2021 reflect anticipated carry forward of 2020 funds to complete project in 2021. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Annual savings in power usage is anticipated to be $130,000 per year. Additional maintenance savings will be realized in the reduction of materials for light replacement and is estimated to be $20,000 per year. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 217 Page 666 of 967 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Neighborhood Traffic Safety Program TIP# R-1 Project No:cp1814, cp1907, cp2013, gcbd06 Project Type:Non-Capacity (Annual) Project Manager:Scott Nutter Activity: (Previous 2 Yrs.)2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - REET 2 33,610 51,937 150,000 150,000 235,547 33,610 51,937 150,000 150,000 235,547 Capital Expenditures: Design - 5,000 30,000 30,000 35,000 Construction 33,610 46,937 120,000 120,000 200,547 33,610 51,937 150,000 150,000 235,547 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Fund Balance - - - - - REET 2 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 900,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 900,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 Construction 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 720,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 900,000 Grants / Other Sources: Description: This program will implement low-cost traffic calming strategies, supported by engineering studies as necessary. Projects will be selected annually based on requests from residents, or police concerns, crash history, and available staff and financial resources. Progress Summary: During 2020 and 2021 the scope of the program was reduced due to funding and staffing constraints. A budget ammendment is proposed for 2022 to allow the program to be resumed. Future Impact on Operating Budget: The traffic calming program will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance. Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 218 Page 667 of 967 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: City Wetland Mitigation Projects Project No:cp1315 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Jeff Tate Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Fund 124 Wetland Mitigation Account 6,969 36,600 5,000 5,000 48,569 6,969 36,600 5,000 48,569 5,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 10,000 - - 10,000 Monitoring 1,868 5,000 5,000 5,000 11,868 Construction 5,101 21,600 - - 26,701 6,969 36,600 5,000 5,000 48,569 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Fund 124 Wetland Mitigation Account 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Monitoring 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 Construction - - - - - 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: This project designs and constructs off-site wetland mitigation in the Auburn Environmental Park for participating development projects as approved through the City's development review process. Design, construction, monitoring, and maintenance of the mitigation is funded through wetland mitigation fees collected by the City. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: After construction, each wetland mitigation site will be monitored and maintained for a period of three to five years, depending on the specific requirements for the project. Funding for future year monitoring and maintenance is included in the development fees collected by the City, and is budgeted as part of the Capital Facilities Plan. Replacement plantings for Auburn Airport tree removal conducted in 2013. Design and construction of mitigation for other development sites deferred to 2021. Years 2019-2024 scheduled for site monitoring only. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 219 Page 668 of 967 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Auburn Environmental Park Boardwalk - Phase 2 Project No:cp1611 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Jeff Tate Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total REET 2 - - - 75,000 - Other -TBD - - - - - - - - 75,000 - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - 75,000 - Construction - - - - - - - - 75,000 - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: REET 2 - - - - 75,000 Other -TBD 800,000 - - - 800,000 800,000 - - - 875,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 75,000 Construction 800,000 - - - 800,000 800,000 - - - 875,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: The Auburn Environmental Park (AEP) provides vegetated natural open space within an urbanized area. The AEP provides opportunities for local economic development, water quality improvement, storm water detention, flood control, fish and wildlife enhancement, visual resources, public education, and passive recreation, including walking trails and bird viewing amenities. In 2012, the City completed the construction of approximately 1,200 lineal feet of the first phase (Phase 1) of an elevated boardwalk trail in the Auburn Environmental Park (AEP). This trail extended from West Main Street through existing wetlands in the AEP terminating at the base of the Bird Viewing Tower constructed in 2009. As part of the construction of the elevated boardwalk, the City also installed interpretative signage, bench seating, limited new vehicle parking on Western Avenue and over two acres of wetland species of trees, plants and shrubs. Phase 2 of the elevated boardwalk trail would construct a combination of up to approximately 2,000 lineal feet of surface trail and elevated boardwalk trail from the current terminus at the Bird Viewing Tower to a connection with the Interurban Trail. The Phase 2 project will further previous and current Councils’ visions of the AEP providing passive recreation and environmental education opportunities for all Auburn citizens. Progress Summary: Design for this project is scheduled to start in fall of 2023. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Construction of the Phase 2 project is anticipated to incur approximately $10,000 in annual operating costs to the City’s operating budget. Operating costs are addressed in the Environmental Services portion of the Community Development and Public Works Department operating budget. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 220 Page 669 of 967 LOCAL REVITALIZATION FUND (330)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: City Downtown Public Parking Lot Reconfiguration Project No: cp1616 Project Type: Non-Capacity Project Manager: Ingrid Gaub Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Local Revitalization Fund 330 17,329 - 245,000 - 262,329 17,329 - 245,000 - 262,329 Capital Expenditures: Construction 17,329 - 245,000 - 262,329 17,329 - 245,000 - 262,329 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Local Revitalization Fund 330 - - - - 245,000 - - - - 245,000 Capital Expenditures: Construction - - - - 245,000 - - - - 245,000 Grants / Other Sources: Reconfigure the City owned public parking lot between Safeway and Main Street to address pedestrian and vehicular circulation; remove existing landscaping to allow more flexibility in the parking lot redesign; explore whether more parking stalls can be added to the lot to aid in providing additional customer parking within Downtown Auburn; and resurface the parking lot. Progress Summary: Monies to improve the parking lot adjacent to Safeway and the B Street Plaza were used to create safety and aesthetic improvements to the plaza. New catenary lighting and planters were added to the plaza as a short- to medium-term improvement. The lighting increases safety and the planters were added to delineate walking paths and create visual interest. Completion of design and construction is delayed until the Heritage Building is addressed. Future Impact on Operating Budget: None anticipated as the City already maintains the parking lot. Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 221 Page 670 of 967 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (328)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Capital Projects Fund Project Title: Local Revitalization Project No: Project Type: Project Manager: Description: Activity: (Previous 2 Yrs.)2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total REET 2 452,400 153,300 152,300 150,800 758,000 452,400 153,300 152,300 150,800 758,000 Capital Expenditures: Long-Term Debt Service 452,400 153,300 152,300 150,800 758,000 452,400 153,300 152,300 150,800 758,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: REET 2 148,800 151,300 148,000 149,300 900,500 148,800 151,300 148,000 149,300 900,500 Capital Expenditures: Long-Term Debt Service 148,800 151,300 148,000 149,300 900,500 148,800 151,300 148,000 149,300 900,500 Grants / Other Sources: To pay debt service costs on 2010 General Obligation bonds issued for the Downtown Promenade improvements. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: N/A Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 222 Page 671 of 967 TABLE CI-3 Impact on Future Operating Budgets Community Improvements . Project:2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Total 1 104th Ave. Park Development 12,500$ 12,500$ 12,500$ 12,500$ 12,500$ 12,500$ 75,000$ 2 AEP Boardwalk -Phase 2 - - 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 40,000 3 City Street Light LED Retrofit (150,000) (150,000) (150,000) (150,000) (150,000) (150,000) (900,000) Total (137,500)$ (137,500)$ (127,500)$ (127,500)$ (127,500)$ (127,500)$ (785,000)$ City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 223 Page 672 of 967 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 224 Page 673 of 967 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 2017, there were approximately 142,000 take-offs and landings (aircraft operations) at the airport annually. Table A-1 “Facilities Inventory” lists the facilities with current capacity and location. The Airport Master Plan was completed in May 2015 for the period 2012 through 2032. Level of Service (LOS) The Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan 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 2022, the Airport Master Plan forecasts the number of operations to be 198,623 – well below the capacity of the airport runway. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing The City’s Airport facilities include ten non-capacity projects totaling $16,876,460. These include the Runway/Taxiway Rehab, RSA grading & Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) project, open T-hangar upgrades, and Airport office/middle ramp reconfigure project. 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 $16,000 are forecasted for Airport facilities during the six years 2023 – 2028. TABLE A-1 Facilities Inventory Airport FACILITY # of Aircraft # of Feet LOCATION Existing Inventory: Hangars (Public)145 2143 E Street NE Hangars (Private)103 2143 E Street NE Tiedowns 153 2143 E Street NE Runway 3,841 2143 E Street NE Total Existing Inventory 401 3,841 Proposed Capacity Projects: Private Hangar Development 23 - 2143 E Street NE Total Proposed Capacity Projects 23 - 2027 Projected Inventory Total 424 3,841 CAPACITY City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 225 Page 674 of 967 TABLE A-2 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Capacity Projects: None - Page Non-Capacity Projects: 227 Annual Repair and Maintenance of Airport Facilities Capital Costs 75,000 500,000 100,000 200,000 238,800 246,000 1,359,800 Funding Sources: Airport Fund 75,000 500,000 100,000 200,000 238,800 246,000 1,359,800 Grants - - - - - - - 228 Jet A Fueling Facility Capital Costs - - 50,000 350,000 - - 400,000 Funding Sources: Airport Fund - - 25,000 175,000 - - 200,000 Other Agencies - - 25,000 175,000 - - 200,000 Grants - - - - - - - 229 AWOS, Beacon & Emergency Generator Capital Costs - - 111,110 1,000,000 - - 1,111,110 Funding Sources: Airport Fund - - 5,555 100,000 - - 105,555 Grants - - 105,555 900,000 - - 1,005,555 230 Annual Airport Pavement Maintenance Capital Costs 50,000 - 50,000 50,000 100,000 100,000 350,000 Funding Sources: Airport Fund 50,000 - 50,000 50,000 100,000 100,000 350,000 Grants - - - - - - - 231 Open T-Hangar Upgrades & Door Replacement Capital Costs 1,500,000 - - - - - 1,500,000 Funding Sources: Airport Fund 250,000 - - - - - 250,000 State Loan 750,000 - - - - - 750,000 Grants 500,000 - - - - - 500,000 232 Runway/Taxiway Rehab, RSA Grading & PAPI project Capital Costs 444,440 3,611,110 - - - - 4,055,550 Funding Sources: Airport Fund 22,220 180,555 - - - - 202,775 Grants 422,220 3,430,555 - - - - 3,852,775 233 Property Access to Airport Capital Costs - - - 50,000 - - 50,000 Funding Sources: Airport Fund - - - 50,000 - - 50,000 Grants - - - - - - - 234 Precision Instrument Approach Capital Costs 25,000 25,000 - - - - 50,000 Funding Sources: Airport Fund 25,000 25,000 - - - - 50,000 Grants - - - - - - - 235 Airport Office / Middle Ramp Reconfigure Capital Costs - 75,000 75,000 5,750,000 - - 5,900,000 Funding Sources: Airport Fund - 7,500 7,500 575,000 - - 590,000 Other Agencies - 67,500 67,500 5,175,000 - - 5,310,000 236 Airport Taxilane and Ramp Rehab Capital Costs - - - - - 2,100,000 2,100,000 Funding Sources: Airport Fund - - - - - 210,000 210,000 Grants - - - - - 1,890,000 1,890,000 SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects - - - - - - - Non-Capacity Projects 2,094,440 4,211,110 386,110 7,400,000 338,800 2,446,000 16,876,460 Total Costs 2,094,440 4,211,110 386,110 7,400,000 338,800 2,446,000 16,876,460 FUNDING SOURCES: Airport Fund 422,220 713,055 188,055 1,150,000 338,800 556,000 3,368,130 Other Agencies - 67,500 92,500 5,350,000 - - 5,510,000 State Loan 750,000 - - - - - 750,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)922,220 3,430,555 105,555 900,000 - 1,890,000 7,248,330 Total Funding 2,094,440 4,211,110 386,110 7,400,000 338,800 2,446,000 16,876,460 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING AIRPORT FUND City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 226 Page 675 of 967 AIRPORT FUND (465)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Annual Repair and Maintenance of Airport Facilities Project No:apbd05, cp1931 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: (Previous 2 Years)2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Airport Revenue 59,778 - 75,000 500,000 134,778 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Other - - - - - 59,778 - 75,000 500,000 134,778 Capital Expenditures: Design 17,504 - 12,000 100,000 29,504 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 42,274 - 63,000 400,000 105,274 59,778 - 75,000 500,000 134,778 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Airport Revenue 100,000 200,000 238,800 246,000 1,359,800 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Other - - - - - 100,000 200,000 238,800 246,000 1,359,800 Capital Expenditures: Design 20,000 40,000 45,000 45,000 262,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 80,000 160,000 193,800 201,000 1,097,800 100,000 200,000 238,800 246,000 1,359,800 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Due to the current conditions of the Facilities at the Airport, this program provides for necessary maintenance and repair work such as slab sealing, roof replacement, hangar beam replacement, painting, electrical repairs, etc. for buildings identified in the 2018 Facility Condition Assessment as being in "Fair" to "Good" condition. Repair and maintenance of these facilities will help prolong the service life of these buildings. Progress Summary: Program began in 2017. In 2018, a Facilities Condition Assessment was completed. Future Impact on Operating Budget: This project will decrease the need for more costly repairs and maintenance on older buildings. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 227 Page 676 of 967 AIRPORT FUND (465)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Jet A Fueling Facility Project No:apbd04 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Ingrid Gaub Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Airport Revenue - - Other Agencies - - - State Grant -Unsecured - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Airport Revenue 25,000 175,000 - - 200,000 Other Agencies 25,000 175,000 - - 200,000 State Grant -Unsecured - - - - - 50,000 350,000 - - 400,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction 50,000 350,000 - - 400,000 50,000 350,000 - - 400,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: Construct any necessary site improvements to accommodate a temporary 2,000 gallon fueling truck for Jet A fuel on site in 2018. Design and Construct a permanent 12,000 gallon Fuel Tank for Jet A service at Airport in 2022 and 2023 after the runway extension is complete and demand for Jet A fuel is established. 50% split of funding between the airport and a private party. Progress Summary: Due to the minimal demand for Jet A and interest in private partner to install this project was moved 2024. Future Impact on Operating Budget: None City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 228 Page 677 of 967 AIRPORT FUND (465)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: AWOS, Beacon & Emergency Generator Project No:cpxxxx Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:Ingrid Gaub Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Airport Revenue - - - - - Federal - Non-Primary Entitlements - - - - - Federal- Unsecured - - - - - State Grant -Unsecured - - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Airport Revenue 5,555 100,000 - - 105,555 Federal - Non-Primary Entitlements 100,000 200,000 - - 300,000 Federal- Unsecured - 700,000 - - 700,000 State Grant -Unsecured 5,555 - - 5,555 111,110 1,000,000 - - 1,111,110 Capital Expenditures: Design 111,110 160,000 - - 271,110 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 840,000 - - 840,000 111,110 1,000,000 - - 1,111,110 Grants / Other Sources:Federal Aviation Administration and Washington State Department of Transportation Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: This project will fund the environmental, design and construction of an Automated Weather Observation System (AWOS), Beacon and emergency generator. This will be funded at 90% by the FAA Progress Summary: After discussion with the FAA this project was expanded to include beacon and emergency generator expenses. Future Impact on Operating Budget: $2,000 annually for on-going maintenance and repair City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 229 Page 678 of 967 AIRPORT FUND (465)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Annual Airport Pavement Maintenance Project No:apbd12 Project Type: Non-Capacity Project Manager: Tim Mensonides Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Airport Revenue - 32,180 50,000 - 50,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Other - - - - - - 32,180 50,000 - 50,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 9,180 5,000 - 14,180 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 23,000 45,000 - 68,000 - 32,180 50,000 - 82,180 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Airport Revenue 50,000 50,000 100,000 100,000 350,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Other - - - - - 50,000 50,000 100,000 100,000 350,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 5,000 5,000 10,000 10,000 35,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction 45,000 45,000 90,000 90,000 315,000 50,000 50,000 100,000 100,000 350,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: This project will complete pavement maintenance and preservation activities for the Airport Runway, Taxiways and other paved surfaces at the Auburn Airport to maintain the facilities in adequate operational conditions Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 230 Page 679 of 967 AIRPORT FUND (465)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Open T-Hangar Upgrades & Door Replacement Project No:apbd14 Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Airport Revenue - - 250,000 - 250,000 State Loan - - 750,000 - 750,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - 500,000 - 500,000 Other (Public/Private Partnership)- - - - - - - 1,500,000 - 1,500,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 200,000 - 200,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 1,300,000 - 1,300,000 - - 1,500,000 - 1,500,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Airport Revenue - - - - 250,000 State Loan - - - - 750,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - 500,000 Other (Public/Private Partnership)- - - - - - - - - 1,500,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 200,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 1,300,000 - - - - 1,500,000 Grants / Other Sources: Due to the current conditions of the hangar facilities at the Airport, this program will replace or upgrade hangar facilities as they reach the end of their service life. A Facility Condition Assessment was completed in 2018. In 2019 an in depth analysis of the hangars' structure and roofing was conducted with a recommendation to not replace but upgrade the structures. The demand on the airport is greater for closed hangars vs open units. This project will convert 2 open hangar rows to closed hangars, and replace old doors on the airport's "H" hangar row. This will increase airport revenues at approximately $100,000 annually. This will allow for 2 open rows to remain on the airport and provide greater hangar options for airport tenants. Progress Summary: Project is scheduled to begin and be completed in 2022. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Utilization of 750K dollar low interest airport loan offered by WSDOT Aviation, Airport funds and an FAA grant. In 2023 hangar revenues increase $100,000 annually. Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 231 Page 680 of 967 AIRPORT FUND (465)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Runway/Taxiway Rehab, RSA Grading & PAPI project Project No:apbd13 Project Type: Non-Capacity Project Manager: Tim Mensonides Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Airport Revenue - - 22,220 180,555 22,220 Federal -Non Primary Entitlement - - 400,000 150,000 400,000 Grants unsecured -Federal - - - 3,100,000 - Grants unsecured - State - - 22,220 180,555 22,220 - - 444,440 3,611,110 444,440 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 444,440 350,000 444,440 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 3,261,110 - - - 444,440 3,611,110 444,440 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Airport Revenue - - - - 202,775 Federal -Non Primary Entitlement - - - - 550,000 Grants unsecured -Federal - - - - 3,100,000 Grants unsecured - State - - - - 202,775 - - - - 4,055,550 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 794,440 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 3,261,110 - - - - 4,055,550 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: This project will complete a Fog seal of on the Airport Taxiways to extend the life of the pavement and complete rehabilitation of the Runway to prolong the useful life of the Runway. This project will also complete necessary improvements to the property purchased from the Park and Ride to be in compliance with the FAA requirements for the Runway Safety Area. In addition the project will install Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) for Runway to replace aging Visual Approach Slope Indicator (VASI) system. Progress Summary: After discussion with the FAA this project combined the Runway/Taxiway Rehab, the RSA Grading and the PAPI project into one project as part of the 2021 -2026 Capital Facilities Plan. Future Impact on Operating Budget: $2,000 annually for PAPI on-going maintenance and repair City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 232 Page 681 of 967 AIRPORT FUND (465)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Property Access to Airport Project No:cpxxx Project Type:Non-Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Airport Revenue - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Other (Public/Private Partnership)- - - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Airport Revenue - 50,000 - - 50,000 Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Other (Public/Private Partnership)- - - - - - 50,000 - - 50,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - 50,000 - - 50,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - 50,000 - - 50,000 Grants / Other Sources: Enter into a through the fence agreement for access to the Airport. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 233 Page 682 of 967 AIRPORT FUND (465)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Precision Instrument Approach Project No:apbd15 Project Type:Non -Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Airport Revenue - - 25,000 25,000 25,000 Bond Revenue - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Other (Public/Private Partnership)- - - - - - - 25,000 25,000 25,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 25,000 25,000 25,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - 25,000 25,000 25,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Airport Revenue - - - - 50,000 Bond Revenue - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Other (Public/Private Partnership)- - - - - - - - 50,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - 50,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - 50,000 Grants / Other Sources: Approval process with the FAA to improve the airport's instrument approach. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 234 Page 683 of 967 AIRPORT FUND (465)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Airport Office / Middle Ramp Reconfigure Project No:cpxxx Project Type:Non -Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Airport Revenue - - - 7,500 - Bond Revenue - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Other (Public/Private Partnership)- - - 67,500 - - - - 75,000 - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - 75,000 - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - 75,000 - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Airport Revenue 7,500 575,000 - - 590,000 Bond Revenue - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Other (Public/Private Partnership)67,500 5,175,000 - - 5,310,000 75,000 5,750,000 - - 5,900,000 Capital Expenditures: Design 75,000 - - - 150,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - 5,750,000 - - 5,750,000 75,000 5,750,000 - - 5,900,000 Grants / Other Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: This project will reconfigure the Airport office and parking lot area to allow for additional development of an Airport based aviation business /restaurant. 10/90% split with the airport and private party. Progress Summary: Future Impact on Operating Budget: None City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 235 Page 684 of 967 AIRPORT FUND (465)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Airport Taxilane and Ramp Rehab Project No:cpxxx Project Type:Non -Capacity Project Manager:TBD Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Airport Revenue - - - - - Bond Revenue - - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - - - Other (Public/Private Partnership)- - - - - - - - - Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - - - - - - Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Airport Revenue - 210,000 210,000 Bond Revenue - - - - Grants (Fed,State,Local)- - - 1,890,000 1,890,000 Other (Public/Private Partnership)- - - - - - 2,100,000 2,100,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - 300,000 300,000 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - 1,800,000 1,800,000 - - 2,100,000 2,100,000 Grants / Other Sources: Pavement rehab of airport's south hangar taxilanes. Pavement Condition Index for this area is 55 and 61. Last major maintenance on the pavement was preformed in 1972 (original construction). Progress Summary: Planning and FAA grant to cover 90% of project costs is scheduled Future Impact on Operating Budget: None Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 236 Page 685 of 967 TABLE A-3 Impact on Future Operating Budgets Airport . Project:2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Total 1 Automated Weather Observation System, Beacon & Emergency Generator -$ -$ -$ 2,000$ 2,000$ 2,000$ 6,000$ 2 Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) for Runway - 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 10,000 Total -$ 2,000$ 2,000$ 4,000$ 4,000$ 4,000$ 16,000$ City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 237 Page 686 of 967 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 238 Page 687 of 967 CEMETERY Current Facilities The City owns two cemeteries. The Mountain View Cemetery is a fully developed facility (60 acres and five buildings) that provides burial services and related merchandise for the community. The Pioneer Cemetery is a historic cemetery that 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 32 burial plots/niches and cremation in ground plots per 1,000 population is based on the existing inventory divided by the estimated 2022 citywide population of 83,950. The proposed LOS of 30 burial and plots/niches and cremation in ground plots per 1,000 population is based on the projected inventory divided by the 2027-projected citywide population of 89,379. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing The City’s Mountain View Cemetery facilities includes one capital projects costing $355,000 to build a new mausoleum. Table C-2 shows the proposed financing plan followed by the worksheet showing the project detail. Impact on Future Operating Budgets There are no operating budget impacts forecast for the cemetery during the six years 2023 – 2028. TABLE C-1 Facilities Inventory Cemetery CAPACITY FACILITY # of Plots/Niches LOCATION Existing Inventory: Mountain View Cemetery 2,624 2020 Mountain View Dr. Pioneer Cemetery - 8th & Auburn Way No. Total Existing Inventory 2,624 Proposed Capacity Projects: New Development - Burial Plots 96 Total Proposed Capacity Projects 96 2027 Projected Inventory Total 2,720 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 239 Page 688 of 967 TABLE C-2 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Page Capacity Projects: 241 Mausoleum Building Capital Costs - 355,000 - - - - 355,000 Funding Sources: Cemetery Fund - 355,000 - - - - 355,000 Cemetery Endowed Care - - - - - - - SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects - 355,000 - - - - 355,000 Non-Capacity Projects - - - - - - - Total Costs - 355,000 - - - - 355,000 FUNDING SOURCES: Cemetery Fund - 355,000 - - - - 355,000 Cemetery Endowed Care - - - - - - - Total Funding - 355,000 - - - - 355,000 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING CEMETERY FUND City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 240 Page 689 of 967 CEMETERY FUND (466)Capital Facilities Plan Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Enterprise Funds Project Title: Mausoleum Building Project No:cp1831 Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Craig Hudson Description: Activity: 2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Unrestricted Cemetery Revenue 2,250 46,673 - 355,000 48,923 Bond Proceeds - - - - - Cemetery Endowed Care - - - - - 2,250 46,673 - 355,000 48,923 Capital Expenditures: Design 2,250 46,673 - - 48,923 Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - 355,000 - 2,250 46,673 - 355,000 48,923 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Unrestricted Cemetery Revenue - - - - 355,000 Bond Proceeds - - - - - Cemetery Endowed Care - - - - - - - - - 355,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Construction - - - - 355,000 - - - - 355,000 This project will design and construct a 72 crypt and 48 niche mausoleum for above ground internment option. The public has expressed desire to have this option available as the current mausoleum is at capacity. Progress Summary: Project design is planned to be completed in 2021 and construction to begin in 2023. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Forecasted Project Cost: Total Funding Sources: City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 241 Page 690 of 967 City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 242 Page 691 of 967 FIRE PROTECTION Current Facilities The Valley Regional Fire Authority provides fire protection and rescue services to a 40-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 Valley Regional Fire Authority operates out of five 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 (17 fire apparatus) divided by the 2022 citywide population estimate of 85,041. The proposed LOS of 0.20 fire apparatus per 1,000 is based on the 2027-planned inventory (18 fire apparatus) divided by the 2027-projected citywide population of 89,379. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing The Valley Regional Fire Authority includes one capital project at a cost of $1,200,000 for fire apparatus enhancements and 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 2023 – 2028. City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 243 Page 692 of 967 TABLE F-1 Facilities Inventory Valley Regional Fire Authority FACILITY Fire Apparatus Aid Vehicles LOCATION Existing Inventory: Stations: North Station #31 1101 'D' Street NE, Auburn First Line 2 1 Reserve - 1 South Station #32 1951 'R' Street SE, Auburn First Line 1 1 Reserve 1 1 Lakeland Station #33 500 182nd Ave E, Auburn First Line 1 - Reserve 1 - Lea Hill Station #34 31290 124th Ave SE, Auburn First Line 1 - Brush Truck 1 - Reserve 1 - GSA Station #35 2815 C St SW, Auburn Reserve 1 1 Pacific Station #38 133 3rd Ave SE, Pacific First Line 1 - Reserve 1 - Total Existing Inventory 12 5 Proposed Inventory Additions: First Line 1 - Total Proposed Capacity Projects 1 - 2027 Projected Inventory Total 13 5 CAPACITY City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 244 Page 693 of 967 TABLE F-2 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Capacity Projects: Fire Station Facility Relocation, Enhancements & Improvements Capital Costs 825,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 1,200,000 Funding Sources: Grants - - - - - - - Other Proceeds (VRFA)750,000 - - - - - 750,000 Impact/Mitigation Fees 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 450,000 SUMMARY: CAPITAL COSTS Capacity Projects - - - - - - - Non-Capacity Projects 825,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 1,200,000 Total Costs 825,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 1,200,000 FUNDING SOURCES: Grants (Fed,State,Local)750,000 - - - - - 750,000 Impact/Mitigation Fees 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 450,000 Total Funding 825,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 1,200,000 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PROJECTS AND FINANCING Valley Regional Fire Authority City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 245 Page 694 of 967 Capital Facilities PlanValley Regional Fire Authority Six Year Capital Facilities Plan, 2022-2027 Project Title: Fire Station Facility Relocation, Enhancements & Improvements Project No:N/A Project Type:Capacity Project Manager:Mark Horaski Description: Activity: (Previous 2 Yrs.)2021 YE 2022 Year End Funding Sources:Prior to 2021 Estimate 2022 Budget 2023 Budget Project Total Grants - - - - - Other Proceeds (VRFA)- - 750,000 - 750,000 Impact/Mitigation Fees - 550,000 75,000 75,000 625,000 - 550,000 825,000 75,000 1,375,000 Capital Expenditures: Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Aerial Apparatus Acquisition - 550,000 825,000 75,000 1,375,000 - 550,000 825,000 75,000 1,375,000 Total 2024 2025 2026 2027 2022-2027 Funding Sources: Grants - - - - - Other Proceeds (VRFA)- - - - 750,000 Impact/Mitigation Fees 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 450,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 1,200,000 Capital Expenditures:- Design - - - - - Right of Way - - - - - Aerial Apparatus Acquisition 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 1,200,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 1,200,000 Facility Improvement projects are identified and prioritized annually and are subject to delay to accommodate emergency repairs. The Valley Regional Fire Authority includes one project for apparatus enhancements and improvements. Progress Summary: Fire mitigation and impact fees will be transferred to the Valley Regional Fire Authority to pay for apparatus enhancements and improvements. Future Impact on Operating Budget: Total Funding Sources: Total Expenditures: Total Expenditures: Total Funding Sources: Forecasted Project Cost: None City of Auburn Draft Capital Facilities Plan 246 Page 695 of 967 POLICY/TEXT (P/T) AMENDMENTS (CPA-21- 0001) P/T #6 – Capital Facilities Element Volume 3, (incorporated by reference). The changes the Capital Facilities Element consist of the following: • No text changes to the Capital Facilities Element are needed, although the referenced Comprehensive Water Plan in Policy CF-13 is expected to be updated by 2024 with current data as part of the Periodic Update. Page 696 of 967 POLICY/TEXT (P/T) AMENDMENTS (CPA-21- 0001) P/T #7 – Transportation Element Volume 5, (incorporated by reference). The changes the Transportation Element consist of the following: • Update Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) information/project list; • Re-designate one project from Comprehensive Plan list to the (TIP) list to maintain continuity in the future transportation network conditions; • Additional minor changes will relate to grammar, punctuation, choice of words, references, etc. Page 697 of 967 MEMORANDUM TO: Judi Roland, Chair, Planning Commission Roger Lee, Vice-Chair, Planning Commission Planning Commission Members FROM: Cecile Malik, Senior Transportation Planner, Public Works DATE: 08/31/2021 RE: City File No. CPA21-0001- Update to the Comprehensive Transportation Plan This is an annual update to the Comprehensive Transportation Plan, which is adopted by reference in the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Transportation Plan (Plan) is the framework for transportation planning in Auburn. It functions as the overarching guide for changes to the transportation system. The Plan evaluates the existing system by identifying key assets and improvement needs. These findings are then incorporated into a needs assessment, which guides the future of the transportation system. This Plan is multi-modal, addressing multiple forms of transportation in Auburn including the street network, non-motorized travel, and transit. Evaluating all modes enables the City to address its future transportation needs in a comprehensive and balanced manner. The last major update of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan was adopted in 2015. During the creation of this plan, specific data was collected, analysis performed, and projects were identified. The intent of this update is to bring some information up to date, based on changes that took place in the City and its programs since the last update. Summary of the text changes: Addition to the table of contents to list the maps. Appendix A: Comprehensive Transportation Plan Project List: Removed project that was moved to TIP, and added Main Street TOD projects Summary of map changes: - Map 2.1 Functional Road Classification: updated to change the classification of 2 road segments, marked a future segment as partially complete, and removed 1 future road segment. - Map 2.2 Average Daily Traffic Volume: removed the “Park” layer - Map 2.3 Tuck Routes: added missing truck route segment, and remove the legend for “Parks” - Map 2.4: Freight Route Classification Map: no change - Map 2.5: Auburn LOS Corridors: no change Page 698 of 967 - Map 2.7 Intelligent Transportation Systems: updated to current existing and future conditions and added layer for future traffic signals - Map 2.8 Comprehensive Plan Projects: updated to reflect current planned projects, and removed “Parks” layer - Map 3.1 Sidewalks: changed visible layers to improve map visuals - Map 3.2 Bicycle and mixed-use trails: updated to current conditions - Map 3.3 2015 bike connectors: updated name for Outlet Collection (from Supermall) - Map 4.1 Transit: Removed and combined with map 4.2 - Map 4.2 Transit Routes and Transit Dependent Areas: updated to show new route numbers and the Sounder route and include transit dependent areas ATTACHMENTS --------------------------  A – Appendix A –Project List  B – Proposed Maps Amendment  C – Proposed Final Maps  D – Final Comprehensive Transportation Plan Page 699 of 967     DRAFT              20202021  Adopted  by Ordinance No.  6803  City of Auburn  12/7/20201/1/2021  Comprehensive Transportation  Plan Update  Page 700 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 1       Page 701 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 2    Table of Contents  CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 32  1.1 PURPOSE ..................................................................................................................................... 42  1.2 HOW THE CITY USES THE PLAN .................................................................................................. 54  1.3 REGIONAL COORDINATION ........................................................................................................ 97  1.4 ACCOMPLISHMENTS SINCE THE LAST PLAN (2015) ............................................................... 1311  1.5 PLAN ORGANIZATION ............................................................................................................ 1412  1.6 STAFF RESOURCES .................................................................................................................. 1412  CHAPTER 2 – THE STREET SYSTEM ......................................................................................................... 1614  2.1 EXISTING STREET SYSTEM ............................................................................................................ 1614  2.2 STREET STANDARDS AND LEVELS‐OF‐SERVICE ............................................................................ 2321  2.3 FUTURE STREET SYSTEM .............................................................................................................. 2927  CHAPTER 3 ‐ NON‐MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION .............................................................................. 4845  3.1 PEDESTRIAN TRAVEL .................................................................................................................... 4946  3.2 BICYCLE TRAVEL ............................................................................................................................ 5653  3.3 FUTURE NON‐MOTORIZED SYSTEM............................................................................................. 6258  CHAPTER 4 – TRANSIT ............................................................................................................................ 6662  4.1 NEEDS ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................................................... 6662  4.2 TRANSIT USER NEEDS ................................................................................................................... 7066  4.3 TRANSIT SYSTEM RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................... 7672  CHAPTER 5 – POLICIES ............................................................................................................................ 7874  5.1 COORDINATION, PLANNING, AND IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................... 7874  5.2 STREET SYSTEM ............................................................................................................................ 8782  5.3 NON‐MOTORIZED SYSTEM ........................................................................................................... 9286  5.4 TRANSIT SYSTEM .......................................................................................................................... 9589  5.5 AIR TRANSPORTATION ................................................................................................................. 9590  CHAPTER 6 – FUNDING ........................................................................................................................... 9791  6.1 FINANCIAL PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING ............................................................................. 9791  6.2 FUNDING SOURCES ...................................................................................................................... 9791  6.3 REVENUE SHORTFALL CONTINGENCY ........................................................................................ 10397  6.4 FUNDING STRATEGIES, PROJECT PRIORITIZATION.................................................................... 10397  CHAPTER 7 – MONITORING AND EVALUATION .................................................................................. 10498  7.1 ANNUAL UPDATES ...................................................................................................................... 10498  7.2 MULTI‐YEAR UPDATES ............................................................................................................... 10599  Page 702 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 3      Maps:  1.1 Adjacent Jurisdictions  2.1 Functional Roadway Classification  2.2 Average Daily Traffic Volumes  2.3 Truck Routes  2.4 Freight Routes Classification Map  2.5 LOS Corridors  2.7 Intelligent Transportation Systems  2.8 Comprehensive Plan Projects  3.1 Priority Sidewalk Corridors  3.2 Existing and Future Bicycle Facilities and Multi‐Use Trails  3.3 Bicycle Corridors and Connectors  4.1 Transit Routes and MIT Shuttle Route    Tables:  2.1 Corridor Level of Service – Existing 2014 Weekday PM Peak Hour  2.2 Future Capacity Projects and Cost Estimate – 2022  2‐3 Corridor Levels of Service – Future 2022 Weekday PM Peak Hour  2.4 Future Capacity Projects and Cost Estimates – 2035  2.5 Corridor Levels of Service ‐ Future 2035 Weekday PM Peak Hour  2.6 Regional Center Mode Split Goals  3.1 Proposed Trail Projects  Appendix A: Comprehensive Plan Project List           Formatted: Line spacing: single Formatted: Font: (Default) +Body (Calibri), Bold Formatted: Heading 1, Tab stops: 6.44", Left Formatted: Font: Bold Formatted: Line spacing: single Formatted: Font: Not Bold Formatted: Normal, Tab stops: Not at 6.44" Formatted: Font: Not Bold Formatted: Font: Not Bold Formatted: Line spacing: single Formatted: Font: Not Bold Formatted: Font: Not Bold Formatted: Font: Not Bold Formatted: Font: Not Bold Formatted: Font: 11 pt Formatted: Normal, Tab stops: Not at 6.44" Formatted: Font: Not Bold Formatted: Font: Not Bold Formatted: Normal, Tab stops: Not at 6.44" Page 703 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 4    CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION    Auburn Station  The transportation system is a vital component of Auburn's social, economic, and physical  structure. The primary purpose of the transportation system is to support the movement of  people and goods within the City and connect the City to the broader region. Secondarily, it  influences patterns of growth, development, and economic activity by providing access to  adjacent land uses. Planning for the development and maintenance of the transportation  system is a critical activity promoting the efficient movement of people and goods, ensuring  emergency access, and optimizing the role transportation plays in attaining other community  objectives.    1.1 PURPOSE  The Comprehensive Transportation Plan (Plan) is the framework for transportation planning in  Auburn. It functions as the overarching guide for changes to the transportation system. The  Plan evaluates the existing system by identifying key assets and improvement needs. These  findings are then incorporated into a needs assessment, which guides the future of the  transportation system.  This Plan is multi‐modal, addressing multiple forms of transportation in Auburn including the  street network, non‐motorized travel, and transit. Evaluating all modes enables the City to  address its future transportation needs in a comprehensive and balanced manner.    VISION  The Comprehensive Transportation Plan reflects the current and future needs of the Auburn  community and, in doing so, seeks to:   Enhance the quality of life for all Auburn residents;   Encourage healthy community principles through non‐motorized travel;   Promote a transportation system that supports local businesses and enhances economic  Commented [VB1]: The plan seems to be sometimes  referred to as the Comprehensive Transportation Plan and  sometimes as the Plan. Should we pick one and be  consistent?  Page 704 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 5    development opportunities;   Create a transportation system that is efficient, uncomplicated, and welcoming to visitors;  and   Provide a balanced, multi‐modal transportation system that addresses both local and  regional needs.    GMA REQUIREMENTS  Washington State’s 1990 Growth Management Act (GMA) requires that transportation planning  be directly tied to the City’s land use decisions and fiscal planning. This is traditionally  accomplished through the adoption of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan.  Auburn fulfills this mandate by adopting the Comprehensive Transportation Plan as the  Transportation Element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. In order to be GMA compliant, the  Comprehensive Transportation Plan must:   Inventory the existing transportation system in order to identify existing capital facilities  and travel levels as a basis for future planning;   Identify level‐of‐service (LOS) standards for all arterials, transit routes, and state‐owned  facilities as a gauge for evaluating system performance;   Specify actions and requirements for bringing into compliance locally owned transportation  facilities or services that are below an established level‐of‐service  LOS standard;   Determine existing deficiencies of the system;   Use land use assumptions to estimate future travel, including impacts to state‐owned  facilities;   Identify future improvement needs from at least ten years of traffic forecasts based on the  adopted land use plan;   Include a multiyear financing plan based on the identified needs;   Address intergovernmental coordination; and   Include transportation demand management strategies.    DISCLOSURES  In accordance with the requirements of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990  (“ADA”), the City of Auburn will not discriminate against qualified individuals with disability in  its services, programs, or activities.  Modifications to Policies and Procedures: City of Auburn will make all reasonable modifications  to policies and programs to ensure that people with disabilities have an equal opportunity to  enjoy all of its programs, services, and activities. For example, individuals with service animals  are welcomed in City of Auburn offices, even where pets are generally prohibited.    1.2 HOW THE CITY USES THE PLAN  The Comprehensive Transportation Plan provides policy and technical direction for  development of the City’s transportation system through the year 2035. It updates and expands  Page 705 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 6    the 2015 Comprehensive Transportation Plan by recognizing network changes since the last  plan, evaluating current needs, and identifying standards for future development, and various  infrastructure improvement scenarios. Major updates are required every 8 years. The next  major update is required to be adopted by June 2024.    NEEDS ASSESSMENT  A system‐wide, multi‐modal needs assessment was conducted throughout plan development to  ascertain which aspects of Auburn’s existing transportation system work well and which ones  need improvement. An evaluation of potential solutions and investment priorities was also  conducted as part of this process. The end result is that Auburn has a more thorough  understanding of system deficiencies, how best to address these deficiencies, and direction for  expanding the system in a sustainable manner.    PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT  Public outreach is an important component of the ongoing needs assessment process.  Throughout the year 2014, the City held a number of community meetings through the  Imagine Auburn visioning p.  Process, for the major update adopted in 2015. The meetings included discussions of capital  investments in transportation infrastructure and other transportation related issues which have  been incorporated into this document.  As part of the adoption process, the Plan is also reviewed by the City of Auburn Planning  Commission, including a hearing where members of the public are provided the opportunity to  provide input on the plan, which is then reviewed and adopted by the City Council.    POLICY DEVELOPMENT  The City creates policies to state preferences for preservation of the existing system and  development of the future transportation system. Policies can be qualitative in nature, but  often they are quantitative and prescribe a specific standard.  Policies are also important for communicating the City’s values and needs to neighboring  jurisdictions and regional and state agencies. Having established policies in place enables the  City to more effectively influence change in keeping with its needs and objectives.    LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) AND CONCURRENCY  The concurrency provisions of the 1990 Growth Management Act (GMA) require that local  governments permit development only if adequate public facilities exist, or can be guaranteed  to be available within six years, to support new development.  The GMA requires each local jurisdiction to identify facility and service needs based on level‐of‐  service (LOS) standards. Auburn ensures that future development will not cause the system’s  performance to fall below the adopted LOS standard by doing one or a combination of the  following: limiting development, requiring appropriate mitigation, or changing the adopted  Commented [VB2]: the placement of this comma is  confusing. Are the updates identifying standards for various  infrastructure improvement scenarios, or are various  infrastructure improvement scenarios the fourth item on  this list?  Commented [CM3R2]: Good catch – coma removed  Commented [VB4]: Is this supposed to be one sentence?  Commented [CM5R4]: yes  Commented [VB6]: Not a grammatical necessity, but  should LOS be spelled out just for the header? I know we  introduced the acronym previously, but I prefer to have  acronyms to be spelled out in headers  Page 706 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 7    standard.    CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN AND TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM  The City uses the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) to  develop a financial plan for capital improvements in Auburn, thus enabling the City to fulfill the  GMA requirement of having a multiyear financing plan based on the identified transportation  needs.  The TIP, is a financial planning tool used to implement the list of transportation improvement  projects identified in the Comprehensive Transportation Plan. It is a six‐year plan which is  reviewed and updated annually by the City Council to reflect changes to project priorities and  funding circumstances. Generally, the projects included in the TIP are financially constrained  such that the estimated projects costs do not exceed the anticipated funding available in the  6six‐yeaar period. An exceptionExceptions are capacity projects funded by Transportation  Impact Fees (also referred to as Traffic Impact Fees). The first three years of traffic impact fee  funded projects included in the plan are fiscally constrained based on conservative growth  projections. The last three years of traffic impact fee funded projects in the plan include  additional projects that provide for growth beyond those accounted for by conservative growth  projections. This results in a plan to implement projects to accommodate additional growth  should it occur. The traffic impact fee funded projects included in the TIP are utilized to prepare  annual updates to the traffic impact fee schedule.   The Capital Facilities PlanCFP is also an annually adopted six‐year financing plan. However, it is  not fiscally constrained for all six years. Unlike the TIP, the CFP is an adopted element of the  City’s Comprehensive Plan.    ADA COMPLIANCE  The City is committed to providing public infrastructure without barriers to those with  disabilities and achieving compliance with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA).   According to the ADA, local governments must develop a transition plan describing how it will  ensure its facilities, services, programs, and activities are accessible. The transition plan:   Identifies physical barriers that limit the accessibility of its programs or activities to  individuals with disabilities.   Describes the methods that will be used to remove the barriers.   Provides an estimated schedule for taking the steps necessary to achieve compliance.   Identifies the city official responsible for implementation and provides information on how  to file a grievance or complaint.  In 2020, The City completed an ADA Transition Plan for the pPublic rRight‐of‐way (ROW) that  summarizes the City’s policies and standards guiding right‐of‐wayROW maintenance and  improvements to pursue full compliance with the ADA. The ADA Transition Plan documents  internal design standards and specifications, development of a schedule and budget, and a step  Commented [VB7]: This isn't capitalized in the ordinance,  so I don't think it should be capitalized here  Commented [VB8]: Should this be like the previous lists,  where each bullet point ends in a semicolon, and there is an  "and" before the final item?  Commented [CM9R8]: It can be  Page 707 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 8    to monitor the process outlined in the plan. The ADA Transition Plan for the Public Right of Way  addresses the public right of way (ROW) of the City of Auburn, which typically includes  vehicular and bicycle roadway lanes, sidewalks, roadside trails, street landscape areas,  crosswalks, and traffic signals.    TITLE VI COMPLIANCE  Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Federal‐Aaid Highway Act of 1973 prohibits  discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in any program or activity that  receives Federal funds or other fFederal financial assistance. Programs that receive Federal  funds cannot distinguish among individuals on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex  either directly or indirectly, in the types, quantity, quality, or timeliness of program services,  aids, or benefits that they provide or the manner in which they provide them. This prohibition  applies to intentional discrimination as well as to procedures, criteria, or methods of  administration that appear neutral but have a discriminatory effect on individuals because of  their race, color, national origin, or sex. Policies and practices that have such an effect must be  eliminated unless a recipient can show that they were necessary to achieve a legitimate  nondiscriminatory objective. Even if there is such a reason, the practice cannot continue if  there are alternatives that would achieve the same objectives but that would exclude fewer  minorities. Persons with limited English proficiency must be afforded a meaningful opportunity  to participate in programs that receive Federal funds. Policies and practices may not deny or  have the effect of denying persons with limited English proficiency equal access to Federally‐ funded programs for which such persons qualify.    The City of Auburn, Washington, assures that no person shall on the grounds of race, color,  national origin, or sex, as provided by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, be excluded from  participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under  any program or activity. The City further assures every effort will be made to ensure non‐ discrimination in all of its programs and activities, whether those programs and activities are  federally funded or not.    The Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 broadened the scope of Title VI coverage by expanding  the definition of the term “program or activity” to include all of the operations of Federal Aid  recipients, sub‐recipients, and contractors/consultants, whether such programs and activities  are federally assisted or not (Public Law 100259 [S.557] March 22, 1988.).    The City will include Title VI language in all written agreements and will monitor for compliance.  The City’s Director of Human Resources is responsible for initiating and monitoring Title VI  activities, preparing reports and other responsibilities as required by 23 Code of Federal  Regulation (CFR) 200 and 49 Code of Federal Regulation 21.    The Title VI Non‐Discrimination Agreement between the City and the Washington State  Department of Transportation (WSDOT) requires the City to prepare a yearly report of Title VI  accomplishments for the last year and goals for the upcoming year. The agreement and annual  Commented [VB10]: Should we say the full title: the ADA  Transition Plan for Facilities in the Public Right‐of‐Way  Commented [CM11R10]: yes  Page 708 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 9    report are published on the City’s website.      1.3 REGIONAL COORDINATION  In addition to being influenced by factors within the City, Auburn’s transportation system is  influenced by what happens beyond its City limits: growth in neighboring communities,  infrastructure maintenance by regional agencies, the lack of funding for road maintenance, new  capacity projects, and competing demands for transit services. This Plan calls for effective inter‐ jurisdictional actions to address cross‐border issues and to mitigate the impact of new  development. The Plan also recognizes that other jurisdictions, particularly state agencies and  transit providers, are responsible for a major share of the transportation facilities serving  Auburn.    WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION  The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) has jurisdiction over three major  routes connecting Auburn to the region: SR‐167, SR‐18, and SR‐164 (Auburn Way South).  Auburn coordinates with WSDOT to study these corridors and implement roadway  improvements. WSDOT also serves an important role as administrator of federal and state  transportation funds.    SOUND TRANSIT  Sound Transit provides a variety of regional transit services for King, Snohomish, and Pierce  counties. In Auburn, Sound Transit provides commuter rail and express bus service. The Auburn  Station also serves as a hub and transfer station for local transit service provided by King  County Metro Transit and Pierce Transit.  The transit chapter provides more detail on current Sound Transit services, remaining needs for  regional transit service, and the role Auburn plays in coordinating with the agency.    KING COUNTY  King County Metro Transit, formerly a division of the King County Department of  Transportation, is now the King County Transit Department. The King County Transit  Department provides local bus service for the Auburn area. Planned service for the City of  Auburn is described in the Metro Strategic Plan for Public Transportation 2011‐2021, and in  Metro Connects Long Range Public Transportation Plan, which was adopted by the King County  Council in 2017. The City has developed an employee Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) program  in cooperation with King County Transit. Details of the CTR program are summarized in the  Non‐motorized and Transit chapters of this plan.  Auburn partners with King County Metro and Pierce Transit on the 497 bus route, which  provides peak hour service from Lakeland Hills to the Auburn Station. Auburn and King County  Transit Metro hope to continue this relationship and develop future partnerships to expand  Page 709 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 10    transit service in Auburn.  King County Road Services Division is responsible for maintaining and regulating the roadway  network in King County, including the Totem and Klump portions of King County located inside  the City limits. King County Road Services has a number of programs and plans in place that  regulate development and other activities affecting their roadway network.    PIERCE COUNTY  Auburn partners with Pierce Transit on the 497 bus route, which provides peak hour service  from Lakeland Hills to the Auburn Station. Auburn and Pierce Transit hope to continue this  relationship and develop future partnerships to expand transit service in Auburn.    COUNTYWIDE PLANNING POLICIES  Under the Growth Management ActGMA, King and Pierce Counties have adopted Countywide  Planning Policies to guide development in both incorporated and unincorporated areas of their  jurisdictions. The policies support county and regional goals to provide a variety of mobility  options and establish LOS standards that emphasize the efficient movement of people and not  just vehicles. The Countywide Planning Policies are also important because they provide  direction for planning and development of potential annexation areas.    PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL  The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) sets policy for King, Pierce, Kitsap, and Snohomish  Ccounties through its long‐range planning document, Vision 2040, and its regional  transportation plan, Transportation 2040. Both documents encourage future growth to be  concentrated in regional growth centers. They also seek to provide a multi‐modal  transportation system that serves all travel modes, actively encouraging the use of alternatives  to single occupant vehicles. Another important policy theme is a focus on maximizing the  efficiency of the transportation system through transportation demand management (TDM)  and transportation system management (TSM) strategies, as well as completing critical links in  the network.    Currently, PSRC is working on a Draft document for Vision 2050, which is an update of Vision  2040. Vision 2050 wasis expected to be  adopted by their Executive Board in October 2020.  Auburn’s Transportation Plan is required to be consistent with PSRC’s regional planning efforts.    ADJACENT CITIES  The City recognizes the importance of coordinated and strong inter‐jurisdictional action  because transportation impacts do not stop at local boundaries. The City works closely with  neighboring cities and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe to address transportation issues. These  Commented [VB12]: Do KCM and PT share 497? Or is this  inaccurate?  Commented [VB13]: Vision 2050 was adopted in October  2020.  Page 710 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 11    neighbors adopt goals and policies that directly impact Auburn. In developing this plan, analysis  was undertaken to ensure that all transportation system improvements are compatible with  neighboring jurisdictions.  CITY OF KENT  The City of Kent shares Auburn’s northern border and several regional transportation corridors  including S 277th Street, SR‐ 167, and the West Valley Highway. Most recently, Auburn has  completed coordination with Kent on the annexation of the S 277th Street from Auburn Way  North to the Green River into the City of Auburn to allow the widening of S 277th Street  between Auburn Way N and L Street NE.  CITY OF FEDERAL WAY  The City of Federal Way is located west of Auburn. Several roadways, most notably SR‐ 18,  connect Auburn and Federal Way. Auburn and Federal Way regularly coordinate on both  motorized and non‐motorized roadway improvements affecting both jurisdictions.  CITES OF SUMNER/ALGONA/ PACIFIC/BONNEY LAKE  The City partners with its southern neighbors in many respects, including street system  planning, transit planning, and regional trail planning. Auburn is also working with Sumner,  Pacific, and Algona on roadway improvement projects, including the recent preservation of  Boundary Boulevard in partnership with Algona, and financial support of Pacific’s project to  widen Stewart Road to the west of the White River. The City coordinates primarily with Bonney  Lake for provision of water service in the Pierce County portion of the City. However, efforts to  coordinate transportation systems and services will likely occur in the future. Partnerships with  neighboring cities will continue to be an important factor in successful transportation planning.  Page 711 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 12      Map 1‐1 Adjacent Jurisdictions    Page 712 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 13    MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE  The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT) is situated in the southeastern portion of the City and in  unincorporated King County, generally to the east of Auburn Way South (SR‐164) and south of  SR‐18. The Muckleshoot TribeMIT operates two major attractions in or near Auburn: the  Muckleshoot Casino and the White River Amphitheatre. Both of these activity centers generate  a large number of vehicle trips. Commercial development on tribal lands is expected to increase  in the future and must be evaluated during transportation planning efforts.  The City and tribe MIT coordinate on a variety of transportation planning issues, both to  accommodate the capacity needs derived from traffic generated by tribal land uses and to  ensure the tribe has a functioning transportation system for its members. The City and the  Tribe MIT are currently working on a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to partner on  pedestrian improvement projects along the Auburn Way South corridor.  The Muckleshoot TribeMIT has developed their own Comprehensive Land Use Plan. In addition,  a Transportation Plan and a Tribal Transportation Improvement Program have been created to  identify transportation needs and plan for the next seven generations. One theme that is  emerging from this effort is the need to build a well‐connected internal roadway system on the  reservation. Currently, Auburn Way South is the primary route for drivers and pedestrians  traveling within the reservation. This extensive internal network will increase transportation  efficiency and, most importantly, improve safety along the Auburn Way South corridor. The  Muckleshoot Indian TribeMIT and the City of Auburn have created a partnership to provide  safety improvements along Auburn Way South. These improvements are complete and the City  continues to pursue grant and partnership opportunities to complete additional improvements  along the corridor.  During July 2015, the State Legislature passed a transportation package which included $15  million for the SR‐ 164 East Auburn Access project, which will create and develop an affordable,  long‐term improvement to congestion and safety issues, while also planning to accommodate  future growth in the area. The City is involved in the development of the preferred alternative  for this project.  The Muckleshoot TribeMIT runs two publicly available tTransit routes along SR‐164.  The Reservation Route runs through the Tribe MIT community, and stops southeast of Les Gove  Park. It runs every 30 minutes starting at 7:00am. The Auburn Route Express runs from the  TribeMIT through the City of Auburn, making stops along the way. It runs every hour starting at  7:00am.    1.4 ACCOMPLISHMENTS SINCE THE LAST PLAN (2015)  Since 2015, the City has completed numerous transportation improvements, with an emphasis  on providing new road capacity, improving pedestrian and bicycle safety, preservation of  existing infrastructure, and providing better access to regional transit services including  commuter rail. Planned and completed capacity projects are shown on Tables 2‐2, 2‐4, and  Appendix A.  Commented [VB14]: And running until when?  Commented [VB15]: runs from the reservation? Might be  more clear (if that's accurate) than 'runs from MIT.'  Page 713 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 14      In addition to the completed planned capacity projects, additional projects were completed,  such as, for example, the I Sstreet roundabout at 22nd St NE, the Auburn Way South sidewalk  additions from Dogwood to Hemlock and from 17th St SE to Muckleshoot Plaza, the 277th  multimodal path from Auburn Way N to L St, and the F street SE non‐motorized improvements,  all of which increase road users safety and accessibility.    1.5 PLAN ORGANIZATION  The following three chapters are organized according to the three primary transportation  modes in Auburn: the Street System (Chapter 2), the Non‐motorized System (Chapter 3),  and the Transit System (Chapter 4). Each chapter contains a needs assessment and discussion  of the future system, including proposed projects or improvements.  The remaining chapters cover subjects pertaining to all three system types. Chapter 5 details  the City’s transportation objectives and policies. Chapter 6 discusses funding sources that can  be used to finance future network improvements. Chapter 7 identifies a monitoring and  evaluation strategy to ensure the document remains relevant and that progress is made  towards implementation of the Plan.    1.6 STAFF RESOURCES  Implementation of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan requires numerous resources,  including staff time. All departments play a role in executing the Plan, but the Public Works  Department is the implementation lead. The Public Works Department employs engineers,  planners, technical and support staff, and maintenance and operations personnel to maintain  and improve the City’s transportation system. Nonetheless, staff performs many functions, and  dedicating sufficient resources to carry out the goals of this plan continues to present  challenges. Figure 1‐1 identifies the basic organization of the Public Works Department,  Transportation Program.    Page 714 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 15    Figure 1‐1 Transportation Program Staff Resources (2020)       DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC  WORKS CITY  ENGINEER/ASSISTANT  DIRECTOR SENIOR  TRANSPORTATION  PLANNER TRANSPORTATION  PLANNER (VACANT) ROW SPECIALIST SENIOR TRAFFIC  ENGINEER ASSISTANT TRAFFIC  ENGINEER ASSISTANT TRAFFIC  ENGINEER (VACANT) TRAFFIC OPERATIONS  ENGINEER TRAFFIC OPERATIONS  SUPERVISOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL  TECHNICIAN (2 POSITIONS) MAINTENANCE &  OPERATIONS GENERAL  MANAGER STREET / VEGETATION  MANAGER STREET SUPERVISOR MAINTENANCE  WORKER II CDL (6 POSITIONS) MAINTENANCE  WORKER I CDL (4 POSITIONS) VEGETATION  SUPERVISOR MAINTENANCE  WORKER II CDL (6 POSITIONS) MAINTENANCE  WORKER i CDL (2 POSITIONS) Commented [VB16]: Does this need to be updated?  Commented [CM17R16]: Yes – will update with  Transportation Technician Position  Page 715 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 16    CHAPTER 2 – THE STREET SYSTEM  The City is served by an extensive street network, which includes highways, arterials, collectors,  and local streets. The Auburn transportation system is designed to accommodate all modes of  travel. This chapter describes the network and how well it serves the City both existing and  future.    2.1 EXISTING STREET SYSTEM    FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION  The street system functions as a network. Functional classification is the hierarchy by which  streets and highways are defined according to the character of service they provide. There are  three main classes of streets in Auburn: arterials, collectors, and local streets. Existing street  classifications are shown in Map 2‐1. All streets have been classified using the Federal  Functional Classification system guidelines. No significant changes have been made to the  classification of City streets from the previous Comprehensive Transportation Plan.  The Auburn Engineering Design Standards identifies design standards for each type of City  street, in conformance with WSDOT and the American Association of State Highway  Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards.  From a planning perspective, acknowledgment and proper designation of functional  classifications allows for the preservation of right‐of‐waythe ROW for future transportation  corridors, whether the corridor provides access to car, high‐occupancy vehicle (HOV), transit,  bike, or pedestrian use. Functional classification helps establish corridors that will provide for  the future movement of people and goods, as well as emergency vehicle access. Proper  designation is crucial to the planning effort; as development occurs, accommodation for the  appropriate transportation corridors should be incorporated into development plans.  STATE HIGHWAYS  SR‐ 18 – connects I‐ 5 to I‐ 90 through Auburn. Within the City limits, SR‐ 18 has interchanges  with SR‐ 167, West Valley Highway, C Street, SR‐ 164/Auburn Way S, Auburn Black Diamond  Road, and SE 304th Street providing access to downtown Auburn and Lea Hill. It is classified as  both a Highway of Statewide Significance (HSS) and a National Highway System (NHS) route for  the entire corridor segment. SR‐ 18 is a full control limited access highway, allowing access only  at interchanges within the City limits.  SR‐ 167 ‐ also known as the Valley Freeway, serves as an alternative to I ‐5, connecting sSouth  King and north Pierce Ccounties to the I‐ 405 corridor to the north. SR‐ 167 is designated as  both HSS and NHS. Within the City limits, SR‐ 167 has interchanges with SR‐ 18, S 277th Street,  15th Street NW, and 15th Street SW. SR‐ 167 is a full control limited access highway, allowing  access only at interchanges within the City limits.  SR‐ 164 ‐ is a 15‐mile roadway corridor beginning at the SR‐ 18 interchange with Auburn Way S.  Page 716 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 17    The corridor is aligned southeast through the City, connecting with the Muckleshoot Tribal  Reservation and White River Amphitheater, and unincorporated King County before  terminating in the City of Enumclaw at its junction with SR‐ 410. SR‐ 164 is a City street which is  part of a sState Hhighway. It is classified as an urban minor arterial by WSDOT, and also an HSS.  The City of Auburn classifies it as a principal arterial. SR ‐164 does not have the same access  restrictions as found on SR‐ 18 and SR‐ 167.  ARTERIALS  Arterials are the highest level of City street classification. There are two types of arterials in  Auburn.  Principal Arterials are designed to move traffic between locations within the region and  connect with the freeway system. Design emphasis is placed on providing movement for both  inter‐ and intra‐city traffic. As such, these facilities typically carry the highest traffic volumes,  experience the longest vehicle trips, and have the highest speed limits of all City streets.  Direct access to adjacent land uses is permitted, although these streets are most likely to have  limited access, in an effort to enhance safety along these corridors, and increase capacity for  through vehicles.  These arterials are the framework street system for the City and usually extend beyond the City  limits, connecting with neighboring jurisdictions. They are typically constructed to  accommodate five ‐lanes of traffic with speed limits of 30 to 45 miles per hour (mph). The  design year average daily traffic (ADT) is greater than 15,000 vehicles per day. Principal arterials  are heavily utilized as bus routes, carrying both local and regional service. Typically, on‐street  bicycle facilities are not appropriate for Principal Arterials and bicyclists are accommodated on  adjacent separated trails or on parallel bicycle routes. Pedestrians are accommodated on  sidewalks.  Minor Arterials interconnect and augment the principal arterial system by providing access to  and from the principal arterials and freeways. They serve moderate length trips with slightly  less mobility than principal arterials and distribute traffic to smaller geographic areas. Minor  arterials may serve secondary traffic generators such as business centers, neighborhood  shopping centers, major parks, multifamily residential areas, medical centers, larger religious  institutions, and community activity centers. While minor arterials should not enter  neighborhoods, they do provide access between neighborhoods. They are typically constructed  to accommodate four to five lanes of traffic with speed limits of 30 to 35 mph and a design year  ADT of 10,000 to 20,000 vehicles per day. Minor arterials are frequently utilized as bus routes,  have sidewalks to comfortably accommodate pedestrians, and may include bicycle lanes, as  appropriate.  COLLECTORS  Collectors are a step below arterials in the City classification system. There are three types of  collectors in Auburn.  Urban Residential Collectors are used to connect local streets and residential neighborhoods to  community activity centers and minor and principal arterials. Urban Residential Collectors are  Commented [VB18]: I was trying to find the official name  of the reservation, which, from looking at the MIT website,  seems to be just Muckleshoot Reservation. Otherwise, I  would suggest saying MIT Reservation, to be consistent with  abbreviating Muckleshoot Indian Tribe to MIT throughout  the plan  Commented [VB19]: There are inconsistencies with the  capitalization in both the Principal Arterials and Minor  Arterials sections. Are these classifications of streets always  capitalized? Or should they just be capitalized at the start of  each section, sort of like a header?  Page 717 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 18    typically constructed to accommodate two travel lanes with medians and turn pockets at  intersections or two travel lanes with bicycle lanes. The posted speed limit is generally 30 mph  and the design year ADT is 2,500 to 10,000 vehicles per day. Urban Residential Collectors have  sidewalks and may be utilized for some transit service, including dial‐a‐ride transit and  paratransit services.  Rustic Residential Collectors are routes located in areas with less intensive land uses associated  with the Residential Conservancy land‐use designation. They carry traffic between local and  arterial streets. Rustic Residential Collectors provide access to all levels of arterials, are typically  constructed to accommodate two lanes with gravel shoulders on both sides, and have a speed  limit of 30 to 40 mph. The gravel shoulder may be reduced on one side to provide a wider  shoulder on the other for bicycle travel. Rustic Residential Collectors do not have sidewalks and  generally do not carry transit services except for paratransit and possibly dial‐a‐ride‐transit. The  design year ADT is 1,000 to 5,000 vehicles per day.  Non‐Residential Collectors provide intra‐community access by connecting non‐residential  areas, such as industrial and commercial areas, to minor and principal arterials. They may serve  neighborhood traffic generators, such as stores, elementary schools, religious institutions,  clubhouses, small hospitals or clinics, and areas of small multifamily developments, as well as  other commercial and industrial uses. Non‐Residential Collectors are typically constructed to  accommodate two lanes and a center two‐way left‐turn lane, with a speed limit of 30 mph and  may include bicycle lanes. The design year ADT is 2,500 to 5,000 vehicles per day. Non‐ Residential Collectors have sidewalks and may be utilized for some transit service, including  dial‐a‐ride transit and paratransit services.  LOCAL STREETS  Local Streets are the most common street type in the City. Local streets comprise all facilities  not part of one of the higher classification systems. Local streets primarily provide direct access  to abutting land and to the higher order streets. Service to through traffic is discouraged. There  are four categories of local streets.  Local Residential Streets provide access to abutting residential parcels. They offer the lowest  level of mobility among all street classifications. The street is designed to conduct traffic  between dwelling units and higher order streets. As the lowest order street in the hierarchy,  the street usually carries minimal through traffic and includes short streets, cul‐de‐sacs, and  courts. The speed limit is generally 25 mph and the design year ADT is 200 to 1,200 vehicles per  day. Urban Local Residential Streets have sidewalks to accommodate pedestrians. Bicyclists  may travel either on the sidewalk or within the travel lane depending on their level of comfort.  Transit service is generally limited to dial‐a‐ ride transit and paratransit.  Rustic Local Residential Streets serve areas associated with the Residential Conservancy zoning  designation. They provide access to adjacent land and distributing traffic to and from the  arterials, residential collectors, rustic, and local streets. Rustic Local Residential Streets are two‐ lane roadways with gravel shoulders and a speed limit of 25 mph. The design year ADT is 100 to  1,000 vehicles per day. Because these streets have low traffic volumes, bicyclists can  comfortably share the travel lane with motorized vehicles. Since Rustic Local Residential Streets  Commented [VB20]: Why is this possibly when the word  'possibly' is not included when allowing for dial‐a‐ride in  lower classifications, such as local residential streets?  Commented [VB21]: Same comment as above ‐  capitalization inconsistencies with the names of street  classifications.  Page 718 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 19    do not have sidewalks, pedestrians walk along the shoulder of the road. Transit service is very  infrequent and most likely limited to paratransit and possibly dial‐a‐ride‐transit.  Local Non‐Residential Streets provide direct access to higher order classification streets and  serve primarily industrial and manufacturing land uses. They offer a lower level of mobility and  accommodate heavy vehicle traffic. Typically they have two travel lanes with a speed limit of 25  mph and the design year ADT is 400 to 1,200 vehicles per day. Local Non‐Residential Streets  have sidewalks to accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists may travel on the shoulder of the  road (Class IV bicycle facility), although bicycle travel may not be as comfortable as on Local  Non‐Residential Streets due to a greater frequency of trucks and other heavy vehicles. Transit  service is generally limited to dial‐a‐ ride transit and paratransit.  Private Streets can be appropriate for local access in very limited usage. They provide direct  access to City streets and should be limited to those streets accessing properties within a  planned area and immediately adjacent properties. Private streets at a minimum are built to  the same design and construction standards as a local residential street.  ALLEYS  Alleys provide vehicular access to abutting properties, generally through the rear or side of the  property. Alleys can be public or private and serve several purposes including access  management and the alleviation of traffic problems on city streets. Alleys should provide  through access to city streets or adequate turnaround space if through access is not feasible.  Alleys shall be constructed to allow for general‐purpose and emergency access at all times.  ACCESS TRACTS  Access Tracts, sometimes referred to as shared driveways, provide vehicular access for lots that  do not front a street or alley. They are most common in panhandle lots or rear lots that do not  have street or alley access. Access tracts are privately owned and maintained. They must  provide for sufficient vehicular movement and turnaround space, be free of temporary and  permanent obstructions, and provide for emergency access.    TRAFFIC VOLUMES  Average daily traffic counts were obtained from data collected during 2019. Map 2‐2 shows the  existing average weekday daily traffic volumes on City arterials.  A major contributor to the high traffic volumes on City arterials is traffic passing through the  City. This pass‐through traffic originates in surrounding jurisdictions and uses City streets to  access the major regional highways, such as SR‐18 and SR‐167. Based on the City’s travel  demand model from 2014, between 25 and 30 percent of all vehicle trips on the Auburn street  system begin and end outside the City. The City is committed to working with WSDOT to  improve the state highway system, thereby reducing the demand on the City street system.    SPEED LIMITS  The City designates speed limits as a means of alerting drivers to safe and appropriate travel  Commented [VB22]: Other land use designations were  capitalized previously.  Page 719 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 20    speeds for a particular corridor segment. Typically, the higher the classification of roadway, the  higher the posted speed limit. Except for school zones, which are posted at 20 mph when  children are present, speed limits in the City range from 25 mph (typically for local roads) to 45  mph on some principal arterials. The City routinely monitors corridors to ensure appropriate  speed limits are in place. Unless otherwise posted the statutory legal speed limit in the City is  25 mph.    TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND SIGNS  Traffic signals, signs, and pavement markings are used to inform road users, thereby increasing  the effective use of the roadway by moving traffic more efficiently and safely. The City uses the  Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) as guidance for design, construction, and  placement of these design elements in the right of wayROW.    FREIGHT  Auburn is an important freight hub in the Puget Sound region, and the efficient movement of  freight, through and within the City, is critical to Auburn’s economic stability. Both rail and truck  freight, originating largely in the Ports of Tacoma and Seattle, pass through Auburn regularly.    RAIL  The Union Pacific Railroad (UP) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF) have rail lines  running through Auburn. The UP line runs north‐south, to the east of the Interurban Trail. BNSF  has a double‐track, federally designated, high‐speed railroad line running north‐south. BNSF  and Sound Transit added a third track to this north‐south line in 2016. This third track was  installed to handle increased commuter rail traffic and freight traffic. The BNSF Stampede Pass  line runs east‐west through downtown Auburn, entering Auburn at the east end of town near  Auburn‐Black Diamond Road, and merges with the north‐south line just south of the Auburn  Station.  In addition, BNSF operates a rail yard between A Street SE and C Street SW, south of SR‐18. In  the future, this area may develop as a multi‐modal rail yard, prompting the need to mitigate  increased truck traffic through capacity improvements. BNSF also has plans to increase traffic  on the Stampede Pass line, the east‐west rail line running through Auburn. To accommodate  this increase, the City completed the grade separation of M Street SE. Both the BNSF north‐ south line and the Stampede Pass line are handling an increase in rail freight traffic. BNSF  handles a number of unit (solid) coal trains traveling to terminals in northwest Washington  state, as well as unit oil trains carrying crude oil to northwest Washington state refineries.  While loaded coal and oil trains are usually handled on the north‐south line, some of these  empty trains return east to Wyoming or North Dakota via the Stampede Pass line.    TRUCK  Page 720 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 21    The City has designated truck routes for through freight movement in an effort to maximize the  efficiency of, and protect the roadway infrastructure. Current City of Auburn truck routes are  shown in Map 2‐3. Truck routes, established by City ordinance, are designated for roadways  that incorporate special design considerations such as street grades, continuity, turning radii,  street and lane widths, pavement strength, and overhead obstruction heights.  In addition, the Washington State Freight and Goods Transportation System (FGTS) is used to  classify roadways, freight railroads, and waterways according to the annual freight tonnage  they carry as directed by RCW 47.05.021. Map 2‐4 shows the 2019 classifications of City streets.  The FGTS is primarily used to establish funding eligibility for Freight Mobility Strategic  Investment Board (FMSIB) grants, fulfill federal reporting requirements, support transportation  planning process, and plan for pavement needs and upgrades. The FGTS classifies roadways  using the following categories:   T1: more than 10 million tons per year   T2: 4 million to 10 million tons per year   T3: 300,000 to 4 million tons per year   T4: 100,000 to 300,000 tons per year   T5: at least 20,000 tons in 60 days and less than 100,000 tons per year  Truck freight tonnage values are derived from actual or estimated truck traffic counts and  converted into average weights by truck type.  The City expects that the majority of regional truck trips will take place on state highways.  However, recognizing that trips through the City are sometimes necessary, Auburn has  designated a network of north‐south and east‐west corridors as truck routes, which are built to  truck standards. In addition, the City has designated future truck routes, which will be designed  and constructed to accommodate truck traffic, as opportunities arise. FMSIB has expressed an  interest in these first and last mile connectors which provide access between these classified  freight facilities and port, rail yard, distribution centers, and truck terminals.  Auburn has significant industrial and commercial development throughout the City. The City  encourages local delivery trucks to use the designated truck network as much as possible, but  recognizes that trips on non‐truck routes are necessary. The City is committed to supporting  local industry, business, and residential needs and recognizes that the ability to ship and receive  freight is essential to the success of many businesses. To implement this policy, the City will  collaborate with local businesses to improve freight access, while maintaining the roadway  infrastructure, whenever possible. This may include adopting City Code and updating the  Auburn Engineering Design and Construction Standards in a manner that favors these priorities.  However, in a limited number of key locations, trucks may be prohibited due to existing design  elements which do not support trucks, protecting sensitive areas such as downtown and  residential neighborhoods, and to extend pavement life.  Page 721 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 22                   Truck Traffic Using S. 277th Street    SAFETY  The City places the highest priority on providing a safe transportation system for all travel  modes. Continual efforts are made to make changes to the street system in a manner that  improves safety and decreases the likelihood and severity of collisions. Pedestrian crossings and  other non‐motorized safety issues are discussed in the following chapters. At‐ grade railroad  crossings, emergency response needs, and collisions related to the street system are discussed  below.  At‐ grade railroad crossings create conflict points between vehicles and non‐motorized road  users and rail traffic. Auburn has several at‐ grade railroad crossings: the Union Pacific tracks  cross 44th St NW, 37th Street NW, 29th Street NW, West Main Street, and 15th Street SW. The  BNSF tracks cross 37th Street NW, 29th Street NW, 3rd Street NW, W Main Street, and Auburn‐ Black Diamond Road.  With as many as 75 trains passing through the City each day, the City has many at‐ grade  crossings, each with unique safety implications. The City coordinates with railroad operators  and the State to upgrade the crossings whenever possible. For instance, the project to grade  separate M Street SE at the BNSF Stampede Pass tracks by lowering M Street SE under the  railroad overpass was completed during 2013.  Recent upgrades include the construction of a pre‐signal where 37th Street NW crosses the  BNSF tracks, to stop westbound vehicles on 37th Street NW to the west of the grade crossing in  advance of the traffic signal at B Street NE. The pre‐signal will prevent vehicles from stopping  on the crossing.  BNSF recently constructed a third rail mainline between Seattle and Auburn to improve service  and reliability for passenger rail. The new mainline is located on the west‐side of the existing  tracks. The third mainline reduces vehicle storage for westbound vehicles on W Main Street and  3rd Street NW between the tracks and traffic signals with C Street NW  Page 722 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 23    Impacts at the remaining at‐grade crossings are anticipated to worsen in the future due to  increased vehicle demands at the crossings, combined with increased rail traffic, resulting in  more frequent, and longer duration, closures.    EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND MANAGEMENT  Providing residents with quick responses in emergency situations is a high priority for the City.  The City maintains a Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan and supporting plans which  identify critical facilities that should be maintained as a first priority during catastrophic events.  Critical transportation facilities, generally include Principal Arterials, bridges, and major  evacuation routes.    In addition, the City works to provide a street network that will ensure multiple alternate routes  for emergency vehicles. Fire and police response vehicles are equipped with traffic signal  controls that enable emergency vehicles to secure safe and rapid passage along signalized  corridors. In addition, the City has mutual‐aid agreements with nearby emergency response  operators to ensure adequate coverage in case of road closures or other obstacles that would  otherwise prevent timely emergency response.    CRASHES  The City collects and reviews crash data to identify intersection and roadway locations where  potential hazards exist. Potential safety problems are identified using the Safety Priority Index  System (SPIS) methodology, an effective problem identification tool for evaluating  locations with higher crash histories. The SPIS score for a location considers three years of data  and considers frequency, crash rate, and severity.  If a hazard is identified, corrective measures can then be identified and implemented as  appropriate. While the City relies primarily on its own data, crash data from other sources,  including neighboring jurisdictions and the State, is utilized whenever available.    2.2 STREET STANDARDS AND LEVELS‐OF‐SERVICE  The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires the City to establish service levels for the street  network and to provide a means for correcting deficiencies and meeting future needs.  Transportation professionals use the term ‘level‐of‐service’ (LOS) to measure the operational  performance of a transportation facility, such as a street corridor or intersection. This measure  considers perception by motorists and passengers in terms of speed, travel time, freedom to  maneuver, traffic interruptions and delays, comfort, and convenience.  The City currently uses a single‐mode LOS system based upon vehicular travel. In the future, a  multi‐ modal system which includes transit, pedestrians, and bicyclists should be developed and  adopted.  The currently adopted LOS methodology gives letter designations from ‘A’ through ‘F’, with LOS  A representing the best operating conditions, and LOS F representing the worst. LOS can be  Page 723 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 24    quantified in different terms, depending on the transportation facility. Definitions for each  level‐of‐serviceLOS and the methodologies for calculating the level‐of‐serviceLOS for various  facilities are contained in the Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, 2000).  The City most commonly uses corridor level‐of‐ serviceLOS for accessing facilities. Generally,  this is considered the most comprehensive way to determine vehicular traffic impacts. The  following descriptions provide some guidance for interpreting the meaning of each LOS letter  for corridor LOS on city streets.   LOS A describes primarily free‐flow operations at average travel speeds, usually about 90  percent of the free‐flow speed (FFS) for the given street class. Vehicles are completely  unimpeded in their ability to maneuver within the traffic stream. Control delay at signalized  intersections is minimal. FFS is the average speed of vehicles on a given facility, measured  under low‐volume conditions, when drivers tend to drive at their desired speed and are not  constrained by control delay. Control delay is the total elapse time from a vehicle joining  the queue until its departure from the stopped position at the head of the queue. This  includes the time required to decelerate into the queue and accelerate back to free‐flow  speed.   LOS B describes reasonably unimpeded operations at average travel speeds, usually about  70 percent of the FFS for the street class. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is  only slightly restricted, and control delays at signalized intersections are not significant.   LOS C describes stable operations; however, ability to maneuver and change lanes in  midblock locations may be more restricted than at LOS B, and longer queues, adverse signal  coordination, or both may contribute to lower average travel speeds of about 50 percent of  the FFS for the street class.   LOS D borders on the range in which small increases in the number of vehicles may cause  substantial increases in delay and decreases in travel speed. LOS D may be due to poor  progression through the signalized intersections along a corridor, inappropriate signal  timing, high traffic volumes, or a combination of these factors. Average travel speeds are  about 40 percent of FFS.   LOS E is characterized by significant delays and average travel speeds of 33 percent or less  or the FFS. Such operations are caused by a combination of adverse signal progression,  close signal spacing, high volumes, extensive delays at critical intersections, and  inappropriate signal timing.   LOS F is characterized by urban street flow at extremely low speeds, typically one‐third to  one‐ fourth of the FFS. Intersection congestion is likely critical at signalized locations, with  high delays, high volumes, and extensive queuing.    CITY LOS STANDARDS AND CURRENT LOS  It is necessary to define LOS standards for transportation facilities to enforce the concurrency  requirements of the GMA. If development causes a facility to degrade below a defined LOS  standard, concurrency requires that the development make improvement to restore operations  to the LOS standard or better, or the permit for that development be denied. Additionally, if  development degrades a facility that is already operating below LOS standards, concurrency  Commented [VB23]: Why aren't these in percentages?  The rest of the LOS levels are described with percentages  Page 724 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 25    requires that the development make improvements to restore operations to the pre‐ development conditions.  Auburn defines unsatisfactory LOS as: an unacceptable increase in hazard or unacceptable  decrease in safety on a roadway; an accelerated deterioration of the street pavement condition  or the proposed regular use of a street not designated as a truck route for truck movements  that can reasonably result in accelerated deterioration of the street pavement (typically  addressed through the payment of the truck impact fee); an unacceptable impact on geometric  design conditions at an intersection where two truck routes meet on the City arterial and  collector network; an increase in congestion which constitutes an unacceptable adverse  environmental impact under the State Environmental Policy Act; or the inability of a facility to  meet the adopted LOS standards.  The City uses corridor LOS as its primary measurement to evaluate the City’s transportation  system and to identify needed improvements. The City corridors typically used for analyzing  LOS are shown in Map 2‐5, although the City may require analysis of a different segment in  order to assess the full LOS impacts. All arterials and collectors in Auburn have designated LOS  standards. The LOS standard for these corridors is primarily LOS D with the exception of some  corridors that may operate as LOS E or F.  While the City uses a weekday PM peak hour based LOS system, weekday AM peak hour LOS  impacts may be required to be analyzed in situations where unique conditions are likely to  result in a LOS deficiency during the weekday AM peak hour.  Table 2‐1 identifies Auburn’s LOS Standards, as well as the 2014 corridor LOS. As indicated in  the table, LOS was calculated for many of Auburn’s street corridors using traffic count data  collected during 2014.  When evaluating the impact of a proposed development, intersection and queuing LOS are  analyzed and evaluated, in addition to these corridor LOS. Typically, a traffic impact analysis is  submitted by the developer and evaluated by the City, to establish which mitigation is required,  if any.     Page 725 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 26      Table 2‐1 Corridor Level of Service – Existing 2014 Weekday PM Peak Hour    ID    Corridor    From    To  LOS  Standard*  2014 LOS  NB/EB SB/WB  1 Auburn Way N 15th St NE S 277th St E C C  2 Auburn Way N E Main St 15th St NE E D D  3 Auburn Way S E Main St M St SE F C D  4 Auburn Way S M St SE Academy Dr. SE D B C  5 M St/Harvey Auburn Way N E Main St E D D  6 M St/Harvey E Main St Auburn Way S E D C  8 37th St NE/NW West Valley Hwy Auburn Way N E C C  9 15th St NE/NW West Valley Hwy Auburn Way N F** D D  10 Auburn Ave/A St 6th St SE E Valley Access Rd D B C  11 Main St West Valley Hwy R St D D D  12 15th St SW West Valley Hwy C St SW E D D  13 C St SW Ellingson Rd SR‐18 D B C  14 West Valley Hwy 37th St NE 15th St NE E B C  15 S 277th St Frontage Rd L St NE E C C  16 R St SE/Kersey Way Howard Rd Lake Tapps Pkwy D B B  17 Lake Tapps Pkwy East Valley Hwy Kersey Way SE D C C  18 A St NW/B St NW 3rd St NW S 277th St D C B  19 8th St NE/Lea Hill Rd Harvey Rd 124th Ave SE E C B  22 SE 312th St/132nd Ave SE 124th Ave SE SR‐18 D B B  25 105th Pl SE/SE 320th St Lea Hill Rd 124th Ave SE D A C  26 Lakeland Hills Way SE Lake Tapps Pkwy A St SE E D C  27 29th St SE/Riverwalk Dr. A St SE Auburn Way S D D C  31 3rd St SW/Cross St C St Auburn Way S F F E  33 41st St SE/Ellingson Rd A St SE C St SE F F F  35 West Valley Hwy 15th St NW 15th St SW E D E  * Corridor segments within Downtown Auburn may operate at LOS E in accordance with the Auburn Downtown Plan. All other arterial and  collector corridors must operate at LOS D or better, unless otherwise indicated.  ** Total travel time in the eastbound direction cannot exceed 1,000 seconds for this corridor to meet LOS standards.    As shown in the table, each of the corridor segments currently meets LOS standards adopted by  the City as part of this plan. The LOS standards for several corridors have been revised  downwards in recognition that a number of corridors are considered to be built out by the City  due to Right‐of‐WayROW constraints, impact to existing development, and project costs. For  example, eastbound Cross Street and both eastbound and westbound 41st Street SE, all of  which currently operate at LOS F. The poor operations on these segments can be attributed to  their short length, closely spaced signalized intersections, and limited storage lengths,  combined with high volumes of turning traffic.  In the majority of cases, it is the traffic operations at the intersections along a corridor which  limit the capacity of the corridor, rather than the capacity of the roadway segments between  intersections. This is especially true along corridors with closely spaced intersections, such as  Cross Street and 41st Street SE, and corridors where two principal arterial roads intersect, such  as Auburn Way S and M Street SE. Along other corridors where the number of intersections is  limited and the distances between them are greater, the corridor LOS may not identify a  bottleneck at one or more of the intersections along the overall corridor. An example of this is  along the Kersey Way corridor, where the overall corridor operates at LOS B, but the  Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.05" Page 726 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 27    intersection with 29th Street SE operates at LOS D, with the highest delays and longest vehicle  queue associated with southbound traffic on Kersey Way.    STATE HIGHWAY LOS  Amendments to the GMA in 1998 added new requirements for local jurisdictions to address  state‐ owned transportation facilities, as well as local transportation system needs in their  comprehensive plans (RCW 47.06.140). House Bill 1487, adopted by the Washington State  Legislature in 1998, requires that the transportation element of local comprehensive plans  include the LOS standards for Highways of Statewide Significance (HSS). HB 1487 clarified that  the concurrency requirement of the GMA does not apply to HSS or other transportation  facilities and services of statewide significance. HB 1487 also requires local jurisdictions to  estimate traffic impacts to state‐owned facilities resulting from land use assumptions in the  Comprehensive Plan.  THE WSDOT STANDARD  WSDOT has identified a LOS D standard for all urban Highways of Statewide Significance (HSS),  according to the State Highway System Plan (HSP). All state highways within the City of Auburn,  including SR‐18, SR‐167, and SR‐164, are classified as urban Highways of Statewide  SignificanceHSS, and therefore have a LOS D standard.    LAND USE/TRANSPORTATION RELATIONSHIP  Land use and the transportation system are intertwined, each influencing the development of  the other. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate how the future transportation system can be  improved to best support both existing and proposed land ‐uses.  In 2003 Auburn was designated as a Regional Growth Center by the Puget Sound Regional  CouncilPSRRC as part of the Vision 2040 plan. Designated regional growth centers are identified  for housing and employment growth, as well as being eligible for regional transportation  funding.  A broad overview of Auburn’s Comprehensive Plan land use map’s more intensive land use  designations shows industrial (light and heavy) designations in the west side of the valley floor  portion of the City, extensive commercial development (light and heavy) located along Auburn  Way N, Auburn Way S, and A Street SE, and sizable heavy commercial designated areas near the  SR‐18 and 15th Street SW interchange (The Outlet Collection) and between 15th Street NW and  37th Street NW (Emerald Downs). Downtown Auburn is near the geographic center of the City,  located generally east of the Interurban Trail, north of SR‐18, west of F Street SE/NE, and south  of 3rd Street NW/NE and 4th Street NE. Residential development generally exists along the east  side of the valley floor and the surrounding hillsides of West Hill, Lea Hill, and Lakeland Hills. A  major land use activity in Lea Hill to the east includes the Green River College located on SE  320th Street.  As with many cities in South King and North Pierce Ccounties, especially those along the SR‐167  corridor, the local land use plan is characterized by a predominance of industrial land use  Page 727 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 28    designations. The land use element identifies “Industrial” as the City’s second most  predominant zoning designation (Rresidential being first). Consequently, the City’s land use  plan establishes a development pattern that has traffic generated by these industrial uses  directed towards the State Highway System.  Another key feature in the Comprehensive Plan land use element is a “Heavy Commercial”  designation at 15th Street SW, adjacent to SR‐167 and SR‐18. This commercial designation is  the site of The Outlet Collection. The Outlet Collection attracts customers on a regional basis  and impacts use of the State Highway System, even more than the downtown, or the  commercial development along Auburn Way and A Street SE. The same can also be said for  Auburn Way N to the north of downtown which serves as an auto mall, which attracts both  local and regional traffic.  Downtown Auburn contains a mix of land ‐uses including residential, commercial, and industrial  uses. Commercial uses in the Downtown are focused along Main Street, Auburn Way, and A  Street SE, and tend to serve more local needs. Historically, this commercial development has  served predominantly local needs. However, the presence of the Auburn Station, Multi Care,  City Hall, and new development projects, combined with regulations and policies that  encourage transit‐ oriented developments (TODs), downtown commercial development will  serve a broader range of needs in the future. Downtown Auburn also has the City’s most robust  non‐motorized infrastructure, including both extensive pedestrian and bicycle facilities. This  provides the opportunity for both residents and employees to rely on proximate transit services  at the Auburn Station, combined with a robust non‐ motorized transportation system for a  portion of their transportation needs. The goal of this plan is to continue to grow and expand  the non‐motorized transportation system to provide the same transportation choices  throughout the City.  The City’s Comprehensive Plan land use map focuses residential development in the eastern  portion of the valley and in the West Hill, Lea Hill, and the Lakeland Hills area. Access to the  State Highway System in Lea Hill is limited to SR‐18 at SE 304th Street. Future impacts on the  State Highway System in the Lea Hill area will primarily be commuter traffic due to the  predominance of residential comprehensive plan designations in that area, and continued  growth of Green River College. The development of Lakeland Hills will also principally result in  increased commuter traffic.  Future impacts to the State Highway System can generally be gauged by projected arterial link  ADT volumes at or near state highway ramps. This is, at best, only a general estimate since not  all traffic passing through these street segments is utilizing the State Highway System. Further,  traffic using the arterial segment may be originating from outside Auburn, and may therefore  not result from assumptions in Auburn’s land use plan.  Several city arterials connect directly to SR‐167 and SR‐18. Some examples include C Street SW,  West Valley Highway, and Auburn Way South connections with SR‐18, and 15th Street NW and  15th Street SW connections with SR‐167. These streets are among the most heavily used in the  City, a function of their relationship to the State Highway System. SR‐164 is also within the city  limits. Year 2019 average daily traffic (ADT) volumes along SR‐164 range from a low of 19,000  near the eastern city boundary up to 38,000 along Auburn Way South near SR‐18. These  Page 728 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 29    volumes are forecast to continue to increase over the next 20 years. However, the growth is  limited by the capacity of the roadway.  The State Highway System also impacts the City’s local street system. A “pass‐through” traffic  pattern results in significant traffic volume increases on the local arterial street system. For  example, many of Auburn’s weekday PM peak hour trips are work to home trips originating  outside of the Auburn area and destined for residential areas outside of Auburn, including  Pierce County and the Enumclaw Plateau. This traffic exits state routes and travels through  Auburn to avoid congestion on the State Highway System. This is evidenced by increases in  traffic counts within the City that clearly exceed that which might be expected through  anticipated growth and development patterns outlined in the City’s land use plan, such as at  SR‐164 at the eastern City limit. The City may implement measures that encourage local traffic  movements and discourage pass‐through trips.    2.3 FUTURE STREET SYSTEM  METHODOLOGY FOR EVALUATING FUTURE SYSTEM  TRAVEL FORECASTS  HOUSING AND EMPLOYMENT GROWTH  Auburn has grown rapidly during the past decade, and housing and employment are expected  to continue to increase significantly by 2035, with the population reaching approximately  95,000 residents, as shown in Figure 2‐1. Much of the housing growth will come from higher  density re‐ development in the downtown area and the rapidly growing Lakeland Hills and Lea  Hill areas.  Page 729 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 30    Figure 2‐1. Population, Housing, and Job Growth For City Of Auburn 2000 – 2035    TRAFFIC GROWTH  The City of Auburn relies on traffic forecasts using the VISUM travel demand model, which is  based upon the land use plan and assumptions found in the land use element of the  Comprehensive Plan. Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) household and employment  forecasts are also used. The model is calibrated to include existing land uses and local  knowledge, including large traffic generators such as Boeing, the Outlet Collection, Emerald  Downs, Muckleshoot Casino, and White River Amphitheater.  Areas outside of the current Ccity limits that are expected to significantly impact the City  transportation system are included in the model. The model enables the City to conduct traffic  forecasts for all arterial and collector streets based upon a number of if‐then development and  land use scenarios.  The more dramatic traffic increases are often caused by development outside the City,  especially along the roadways serving the Enumclaw Plateau. Other areas of major traffic  increase include A Street SE, M Street SE, and the West Valley Highway.  In order to address the growing traffic volumes and congestion levels on city streets, traffic  operations were evaluated for a near‐ term horizon year of 2022 and a long‐ term horizon year  of 2035. This approach was taken to help identify which improvement projects need to be  included in the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) to accommodate short term  growth, versus. those longer‐ term projects which are needed to accommodate additional  growth forecast to occur between 2022 and 2035.    Commented [VB24]: Why is this a different header style  than 'Housing and Employment Growth'?  Page 730 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 31    FUTURE 2022 CONDITIONS  City Projects  The 2015 TIP, adopted in 2015, identified programmed projects for the years 2016 to 2021.  Therefore, the analysis of 2022 traffic operations includes City projects that would increase  capacity along both roadway segments and at intersections that are anticipated to be  constructed by 2022. The included projects are listed in Table 2‐2 and illustrated on Map 2‐6.  This includes a project programmed in the TIP that was not included in the travel demand  model: a new crossing of the BNSF Rail yard between SR‐18 and 41st Street SE (2015 TIP #12).  This is discussed in more detail in the Future System Recommendations section of this chapter  and may be included in future updates to this plan. The 2015 TIP also included non‐capacity  projects such as non‐motorized and preservation projects. The City’s ADA transition plan also  identifies non‐motorized improvements. In addition, non‐motorized improvement projects are  discussed in Chapter 3, Non‐Motorized Transportation.    Regional Transportation Projects  In addition to the City of Auburn projects identified above, a number of regional transportation  projects are planned to be completed, predominantly WSDOT projects planned for the freeway  system. However, none of these projects are anticipated to be completed by 2022.    Additional Projects  In addition to the projects identified in Map 2‐6, four intersections along the City boundaries  were identified as potential level‐of‐serviceLOS concerns during the plan development. While  the following intersections have not been analyzed in detail because they are partially situated  outside of Auburn’s jurisdiction, they should be evaluated by the appropriate jurisdiction and  programmed for improvements as needed:     51st Avenue S/S 316th Street (King County)   S 321st Street/46th Place (City of Auburn/King County)   S 321st Street/Peasley Canyon Road (King County)   West Valley Hwy/Peasley Canyon Rd (WSDOT)  As mitigation for an adjacent development project located within the City of Auburn, the  eastbound stop‐controlled S 316th Street approach to 51st Ave S was widened to provide  separate left‐ and right‐turn lanes. This improvement was required to mitigate a development  related impact to LOS at this intersection. The same development project also identified a  traffic operations impact at the S. 321st Street intersection with 46th Place S. As a mitigation  for this impact, the development dedicated ROW to the city to allow the 46th Place S. approach  Formatted: Not Superscript/ Subscript Formatted: Not Superscript/ Subscript Formatted: Not Superscript/ Subscript Formatted: Not Superscript/ Subscript Formatted: Not Superscript/ Subscript Page 731 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 32    to S. 321th321st Street to be realigned to the east to create two offset “T” intersections. This  project is included in the current TIP, and included in Table 2‐2 below.     Page 732 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 33      Table 2‐2 Future Capacity Projects and Cost Estimate – 2022  Projects shaded green = completed  Map No.  Location   Total  Cost (2015  dollars) (corridor and segment) Description  City Projects Included in the 2022 Analysis    Auburn Way S U‐Turns, pedestrian improvements, and  access control     1 Dogwood St SE to Fir St SE $1.75M    I Street NE Corridor       2 45th St NE to S 277th St Construct 5‐ lane arterial $6.75M    S 277th Street Widen to 5 lanes total and install a Class 1  trail     3 AWN to Green River Bridge $8.3M            4 A Street NW Phase 2 Construct multi‐lane arterial $3.15M    W. Main St to 3rd St NW         F Street SE Pedestrian, bBicycle, and Vvehicular  aAccess Iimprovements     5 4th St SE to Auburn Way S $2.5M    M Street NE       6 E Main St to 4th St NE Widen to 4 lanes $1.5M    8th Street NE Add EB lane to south side of 8th Street NE    7 Pike St NE to R St NE $1.45M    49th Street NE Construct multi‐lane arterial connection    8 Auburn Way N to I St NE $3.35M    46th Place S Realignment Realign 46th Place S to the east to create  two new T intersections     9 S 321st St and 46th Pl S $825K    124th Ave SE Corridor       10 SE 318th St to SE 312th St Widen to 4 lanes and bike lanes $4M    SE 320th Street      11 116th Ave SE to 122nd Ave SE Roundabout, bBike lanes, and safety  improvements $4.64M       Page 733 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 34      City Projects Included in the 2022 Analysis (Continued)      Auburn Way S Additional turn lanes and vehicle storage,  access control, and non‐ motorized  improvements.     12 Muckleshoot Plaza to Dogwood  St SE $2.9M    W Valley Highway  Improvements  Roadway widening, re‐channelization,  non‐motorized improvements, and ITS  upgrades     13 15th St NW to W Main St $3.7M    W Main Street Re‐channelization, non‐motorized  improvements, and ITS upgrades     14 W Valley Hwy to Interurban Trail $4.45M  15 Auburn Way S Widen to 5 ‐lanes, signalize Hemlock St SE $4.6M    Fir St SE to Hemlock St SE      16 M Street SE Corridor Construct multi‐lane corridor $6.7M    8th St SE to Auburn Way S.       17 Lea Hill Road Segment 1 Widen to 2 lanes each direction including  widening of the Green River Bridge.  Includes bike lanes and sidewalks.           $13M    R St NE to 105th Pl SE         Widen corridor to include 2 eastbound  lanes, bike lanes, and sidewalks.     18 Lea Hill Road Segment 2 $12M    105th Pl SE to 112th Ave SE         Widen corridor to include 2 eastbound  lanes, bike lanes, and sidewalks.     19 Lea Hill Road Segment 3 $4M    112th Ave SE to 124th Ave SE             20 W Valley Highway Re‐channelization, non‐motorized  improvements, and ITS upgrades $3M    SR 18 to 15th St SW                21 R Street SE Construct a new roadway connection $10M    17th St SE to M St SE            Page 734 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 35    City Projects Included in the 2022 Analysis (Continued)           22 M Street SE at 12th Street SE Install a new traffic signal $625K           23 M Street SE at 29th Street SE Install a new traffic signal $450K  24 124th Avenue SE at SE 284th  Street Safety and capacity improvements $700K    Lake Tapps Parkway      25 Lakeland Hills Way to E Valley  Hwy Add ITS system $1M  26 29th Street SE at R street SE Increase intersection capacity $1.8M  27 A Street SE at 37th Street SE Install a traffic signal and southbound u‐ turn for future access management $935K  28 I Street NE at 22nd Street NE Construct a new roundabout $1.4M      Subtotal for City Projects $109M      Non‐City Projects included in the 2022 Analysis  51st Avenue  S 288th Street    Add signal    2022 LEVELS OF SERVICE  Weekday PM peak hour levels of service were calculated for 2022 conditions using the same  methodology used to calculate the 2014 levels of service shown previously. The same corridors  were analyzed in both cases. The 2022 levels of service account for the growth forecast to occur  between 2014 and 2022 and the capacity improvement projects identified above. The 2022  levels of serviceLOSs are shown in Table 2‐3. Is should be noted that without the projects  shown in Table 2‐2, the traffic operations presented in Table 2‐3 would be significantly worse,  with a number of corridors operating below adopted LOS standards.     Formatted Table Page 735 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 36    Table 2‐3 Corridor LOS – Future 2022 Weekday PM Peak Hour      ID      Corridor      From      To    LOS  Standard*  2022 LOS  EB/NB SB/WB  1 Auburn Way N 15th St NE S 277th St E C D  2 Auburn Way N E Main St 15th St NE E D D  3 Auburn Way S E Main St M St SE F C E  4 Auburn Way S M St SE Academy Dr. SE D C C  5 M St/Harvey Rd Auburn Way N E Main St E D D  6 M St/Harvey Rd E Main St Auburn Way S E D D  8 37th St NE/NW West Valley Hwy Auburn Way N E C C  9 15th St NE/NW West Valley Hwy Auburn Way N F** D D  10 Auburn Ave/A St 6th St SE E Valley Access Rd D C C  11 Main St West Valley Hwy R St D C D  12 15th St SW West Valley Hwy C St SW E D D  13 C St SW Ellingson Rd SR‐18 D B D  14 West Valley Hwy 37th St NE 15th St NE E B C  15 S 277th St Frontage Rd L St NE E C C  16 R St SE/Kersey Way Howard Rd Lake Tapps Pkwy D B C  17 Lake Tapps Pkwy East Valley Hwy Kersey Way SE D C C  18 A St NW/B St NW 3rd St NW S 277th St D C B  19 8th St NE/Lea Hill Rd Harvey Rd 124th Ave SE E C B  22 SE 312th St/132nd Ave SE 124th Ave SE SR‐18 D B B  25 105th Pl SE/SE 320th St Lea Hill Rd 124th Ave SE D B B  26 Lakeland Hills Way SE Lake Tapps Pkwy A St SE E D D  27 29th St SE/Riverwalk Dr. A St SE Auburn Way S D C C  31 3rd St SW/Cross St C St Auburn Way S F E E  33 41st St SE/Ellingson Rd A St SE C St SE F F F  35 West Valley Hwy 15th St NW 15th St SW E D C  * Corridor segments within Downtown Auburn may operate at LOS E in accordance with the Auburn Downtown Plan. All other arterial and  collector corridors must operate at LOS D or better, unless otherwise indicated.  ** Total travel time in the eastbound direction cannot exceed 1,000 seconds for this corridor to meet LOS standards.    As shown in the table, all of the evaluated corridors would meet the revised LOS standards in  2022 with the inclusion of the improvements identified above. However, the following  segments are forecast to operate at LOS F in 2022:   Southbound Auburn Way S between E Main St and M St SE;   Eastbound 41st Street SE between A St SE and C St SW; and   Westbound 41st Street SE between A St SE and C St SW.  In order to improve traffic operations along these corridor segments additional improvements  beyond those already included in this analysis are required. A review of the segment of Auburn  Way S between E Main St and M St SE shows that traffic operations through the SR‐18  interchange and at the intersection with M St SE cause the overall corridor segment to degrade  to LOS E. The interchange area is constrained by the existing SR‐18 overpass, the configuration  of the SR‐18 on‐ and off‐ramps, and the close spacing of the ramp intersections which provide  limited vehicle storage. As a result, the ability to increase capacity along this section of the  corridor is limited. It is possible that the construction of the new eastbound off‐ramp from SR‐ 18 to SR‐164 in the vicinity of the Muckleshoot Casino could draw traffic away from this area;  however, the scope of this project has not yet been determined so it was not accounted for in  this analysis. It may also be appropriate, as with certain other corridor sections, for the City to  Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.04" Commented [VB25]: But the table shows LOS E?  Page 736 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 37    consider changing the LOS standard for this corridor to reflect that the existing corridor is built‐ out and further improvements are neither desirable nor cost   effective.  Similar circumstances exist for Corridor #33, 41st Street SE/Ellingson Road. This corridor is  forecast to operate at LOS F in both the eastbound and westbound directions in 2022. This  corridor is constrained by the BNSF bridge, the close spacing of the C Street SW and A Street SE  signalized intersections, and the limited storage space between the two intersections. Providing  additional capacity would likely require the BNSF bridge to be reconstructed, an expensive  proposition, with a limited increase in capacity. It is possible that other capacity projects may  reduce traffic volumes on this by constructing additional capacity on alternate routes. These  include the crossing of the BNSF rail yard to the north which would provide another east‐west  connection across southern Auburn, and the completion of the improvements to Stewart Road  to the south, including the replacement of the White River bridge, which would provide  additional capacity between SR‐167 and the Lakeland Hills area. The BNSF rail yard crossing  project was project #12 in the 2015 TIP;, however, construction was shown beyond 2021, so  this project was not included in the analysis of 2022 conditions. As of 2020, this project was  removed from the TIP and included in the comprehensive plan project list in Appendix A, as  funding for this project has not been identified. Completion of the Stewart Road capacity  improvements are being planned by the Cities of Sumner and Pacific. The City of Auburn  supports these improvements, and programmed a project in the 2015 TIP as project #73, which  will provide the City of Pacific with some funds to support construction of their portion of the  project. As of 2020, the City has programmed two projects in the current TIP, one to provide  funding to the City of Pacific, and one to provide funding to the City of Sumner for the Steward  Road capacity improvements. Construction of these improvements is not anticipated until  beyond 2022, so this was not accounted for in this analysis. Another potential option could be  to revise the LOS standard for this corridor to reflect that the existing corridor is built‐out and  further improvements may not be cost effective.  The transportation system can be compared to a three leggedthree‐legged stool in terms of the  improvement strategies which are available to reduce congestion. The three options are to  construct improvements to add capacity, make better use of the existing infrastructure which  that is available, and to manage demand. The analysis presented above accounts for the  construction of additional capacity, and making better use of the available capacity through  expansion of ITS infrastructure and the optimization of signal timing. The analysis does not  account for demand managementTDM strategies which could result in improvements to traffic  operations through the use of the following:   Parking Mmanagement and pParking Ppricing   Car sSharing   Pay‐as‐Yyou‐Ddrive Iinsurance   Ridesharing and HOV Llanes   Transit iIncentives   Transit and non‐motorized Iimprovements   Telework, compressed work week, off‐peak schedulinge    Many of these solutions have been implemented at the state level, with additional  Page 737 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 38    consideration being given to expanding the options which that are currently in use.  Decisions need to be made regarding how these three potential congestion management tools  are balanced to provide the most cost‐ effective solutions. It is unlikely that the City will be able  to implement all of the capacity projects documented above by 2022 due to the cost of the  project portfolio being in excess of available funding. Therefore, the focus should be on the  most cost‐ effective projects which reduce congestion at locations where it is a recurrent  problem, and improving the efficiency of the existing system. Transportation system  managementTSM and transportation demand managementTDM are included in the future  system recommendations section at the end of this chapter.    FUTURE 2035 CONDITIONS  City Projects  In addition to the projects identified above which that were included in the 2022 analysis, a  number of additional projects were included in the analysis of 2035 conditions. These  additional projects include compirse those which are included in the TIP but which are not  anticipated to be constructed until beyond 2022, and the longer‐ term projects included in the  previous Comprehensive Transportation Plan. The included projects are listed in Table 2‐4 and  illustrated on Map 2‐6.  This includes a project programmed in the TIP that is not included in the model: the crossing of  the BNSF Rail yard. This is discussed in more detail in the Future System Recommendations  section of this chapter and will likely be included in future model runs and updates to this plan.    Regional Transportation Projects  In addition to the City of Auburn projects identified above, a number of regional transportation  projects were included in the development of the forecast volumes. These are predominantly  WSDOT projects planned for the freeway system. Table 2‐4 summarizes the included projects,  along with planning level cost estimates.    Additional Projects  Another future project with significant area‐wide impacts is the addition of the Auburn Bypass  connecting SR‐18 to SR‐164. A draft Bypass Feasibility Report (September 2009) was prepared  in partnership with WSDOT, the City of Auburn, the Muckleshoot Indian TribeMIT, and other  regional partners. While a preferred alternative for the bypass has not yet been developed, the  Washington State Legislature included funding in the 2015 transportation budget for the design  and construction of this new connection. It is anticipated that the new roadway will include an  eastbound off‐ramp from SR‐18 to SR‐164 in the vicinity of the Muckleshoot Casino, but no  additional details regarding the project have been determined. Therefore, this was not  accounted for in the traffic forecasts. The impacts of this project will be identified and mitigated  as part of the process to determine the ultimate alignment. The project will be included in  future updates of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan.  Page 738 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 39    Table 2‐4 Future Capacity Projects and Cost Estimates ‐ 2035  Map No.  Location   Total Cost  (2015  dollars) (corridor and segment) Description  Additional City Projects Included in the 2035 Analysis        Widen road to two lanes each  direction plus a center two‐way left  turn lane. Upgrade the intersection of  Auburn Way South and Dogwood  Street to accommodate Bbypass  traffic.            29 SR 164* $61M    Hemlock St SE to Academy  Dr SE       R Street Bypass       30 M St SE to SR 18 Construct a new bypass road $6.2M    SE 304th Street Add signal and NB left turn lane.  Include sidewalks and bike lanes both  sides.     31 112th Avenue SE $1.3M    124th Ave SE & SE 320th St  Intersection Improvements Construct intersection improvements  at the entrance to Green River  College.     32 SE 318th St to SE 320th St $1.85M      Add one‐way (EB) road with  unsignalized free right turn at A Street  SE. Include sidewalks both sides of  new road.     33 A Street Loop $1.7M    A St SW to A St SE          Construct new collector linking 284th  Street at 124th Ave. to 288th Street at  132nd Ave. Road will be one lane  each direction with bike lanes and  sidewalks.       SE 284th/SE 288th St    34 124th Ave SE to 132nd Ave  SE $7.7M      Provide protected SB left turn phase  and signal and SB left turn lane;  Include bike lanes and sidewalks on  all legs.       51st Avenue    35 S 296th S $1.4M            36 D Street NW Construct 4‐ lane arterial $6M    37th Street NW to 44th  Street NW      Subtotal for Projects $87M  Page 739 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 40    *A portion of this project is under design in 2020, from Hemlock St SE to Poplar St SE, which includes road  widening, center turn lane, and sidewalks on each side. This project in included in the current TIP and the City is  actively seeking funding for the construction.  Non‐City Projects included in the 2035 Analysis      SR‐167  I‐405 to SR‐509  From I‐405 to SR‐18, add one NB and one SB general purpose lane; fFrom SR‐ 18 to SR‐161, add one NB HOT lane and one SB HOT lane; aAdd direct NB/SB  HOV/HOT lane connection ramps between SR‐167 and& I‐405; aAdd NB and  SB auxiliary lanes between I‐405 and S 180th Street; aAdd NB and SB auxiliary  lanes between SR‐516 and S 277th Street; and Eextend SR‐167 from SR‐161 to  SR‐509.    SR‐18 at SR‐167  Complete ramp from EB SR‐18 to SB SR‐167 and eliminate SR‐18 access from  West Valley Highway near Peasley Canyon.  SR‐167  15th Street NW to 8th Street E    Add HOV lane each direction.  Stewart Road  SR‐167 to East Valley Highway  Widen to 2 lanes each direction and center turn lane in the Cities of Sumner  and Pacific. Includes widening of the White River bridge.    2035 LEVELS OF SERVICE  Weekday PM peak hour levels of serviceLOSs were calculated for 2035 conditions using the  same methodology used to calculate both the 2014 and 2022 levels of serviceLOSs. The 2035  levels of serviceLOSs account for the growth forecast to occur by 2035 and the capacity  improvement projects identified above. The 2035 levels of serviceLOSs are shown in Table 2‐5.  As shown in the table, all of the evaluated corridors would meet the revised LOS standards in  2035 with the inclusion of the improvements identified above. However, the following  additional corridor segments would operate at LOS E or F in 2035:   Southbound Auburn Way N between S 277th St and 15th St NE;   Southbound Auburn Way S between E Main St and M St SE;   Northbound M St between E Main St and Auburn Way S;   Eastbound 37th St between W Valley Hwy and Auburn Way N;   Westbound 15th St SW between W Valley Hwy and C St SW;   Southbound Lakeland Hill Way SE between Lake Tapps Pkwy and A St SE;   Eastbound 3rd St SW/Cross St between C St and Auburn Way S;   Westbound 3rd St SW/Cross St between C St and Auburn Way S; and   Westbound 41st Street SE between A St SE and C St SE.    In addition, there are two locations where corridors would operate at improvement levels of  Page 740 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 41    serviceLOSs in 2035 relative to 2022 conditions:   Eastbound 41st Street SE between A St SE and C St SE, which would improve from LOS  F to LOS E, the result of the improvements identified above, combined with the  planned improvements to the Stewart Road corridor and SR‐167 which would attract  traffic currently using the 41st Street SE/Ellingson Road corridor to access A  Street/East Valley Highway to the south.   Southbound West Valley Highway between 15th Street NW and 15th Street SW, which  would improve from LOS D to LOS C. This is also likely due to improvements to SR‐167,  which would reduce the use of West Valley Highway as a parallel bypass route.    Table 2‐5. Corridor Levels of Service ‐ Future 2035 Weekday PM Peak Hour        ID      Corridor      From      To    LOS  Standard*  2035 LOS  NB/EB SB/WB  1 Auburn Way N 15th St NE S 277th St E D E  2 Auburn Way N E Main St 15th St NE E D D  3 Auburn Way S E Main St M St SE F C F  4 Auburn Way S M St SE Academy Dr. SE D D C  5 M St/Harvey Rd Auburn Way N E Main St E D E  6 M St E Main St Auburn Way S E E D  8 37th St NE/NW West Valley Hwy Auburn Way N E E C  9 15th St NE/NW West Valley Hwy Auburn Way N F** E E  10 Auburn Ave/A St 6th St SE E Valley Access Rd D C C  11 Main St West Valley Hwy R St D D D  12 15th St SW West Valley Hwy C St SW E D E  13 C St SW Ellingson Rd SR‐18 D C D  14 West Valley Hwy 37th St NE 15th St NE E B C  15 S 277th St Frontage Rd L St NE E E C  16 R St SE/Kersey Way Howard Rd Lake Tapps Pkwy D B C  17 Lake Tapps Pkwy East Valley Hwy Kersey Way SE D C C  18 A St NW/B St NW 3rd St NW S 277th St D C C  19 8th St NE/Lea Hill Rd Harvey Rd 124th Ave SE E C B  22 SE 312th St/132nd Ave SE 124th Ave SE SR‐18 D B B  25 105th Pl SE/SE 320th St Lea Hill Rd 124th Ave SE D C C  26 Lakeland Hills Way SE Lake Tapps Pkwy A St SE E D E  27 29th St SE/Riverwalk Dr. A St SE Auburn Way S D C C  31 3rd St SW/Cross St C St Auburn Way S F F F  33 41st St SE/Ellingson Rd A St SE C St SE F E F  35 West Valley Hwy 15th St NW 15th St SW E C C  * Corridor segments within Downtown Auburn may operate at LOS E in accordance with the Auburn Downtown Plan. All other arterial and  collector corridors must operate at LOS D or better, unless otherwise indicated.  ** Total travel time in the eastbound direction cannot exceed 1,000 seconds for this corridor to meet LOS standards.    To improve traffic operations along the corridor segments which are forecast to operate at LOS  E and F in 2035, additional improvements beyond those already included in this analysis are  required. However, it may not be cost effective to construct the additional capacity needed  along all of these corridor segments. It may, however, be possible to improve traffic operations  at key intersections along these corridors to reduce congestions.  Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted Table Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.35" Page 741 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 42    The City, and the broader region, will need to identify strategies and adopt policies, including  transportation demand managementTDM, transportation system managementTSM, and public‐ private partnerships, to be able to manage congestion while reaching projected growth targets.    FUTURE SYSTEM RECOMMENDATIONS                         West Main Street, Downtown Auburn    FUTURE STREET IMPROVEMENTS  The proposed future street plan consists of a combination of city street and regional  transportation improvements, described in Table 2‐2 and shown in Map 2‐6. The City cannot  adequately solve traffic congestion by making City street improvements alone. Partnerships  with WSDOT, King and Pierce Counties, the Muckleshoot Indian TribeMIT, and other agencies  are essential to implementing the future street system in Auburn. The following actions are  proposed:  1. Implement street projects prioritized in the City’s TIP and CFP;  2. Program and seek additional funding for street capacity projects not currently  identified in the TIP and CFP;  3. Work collaboratively with WSDOT and other partner agencies to implement  roadway improvements to the regional highway network; and  4. Work to implement TSM, TDM, and non‐motorized improvements.    41ST STREET SE/ELLINGSON ROAD BETWEEN A ST SE AND C ST SW  The area around 41st Street SE/Ellingson Road between A Street SE and C Street SW continues  to be a bottleneck for Auburn drivers, especially with additional development in the Lakeland  Hills PUD and the Pierce County cities to the south. The close spacing of these two  intersections, coupled with the numerous business and residential accesses in the area warrant  a more in‐ depth study of the area. This area is included within the scope of the A Street SE  Formatted: Tab stops: 2.09", Centered Page 742 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 43    Corridor Study being completed in 2020. The purpose of the study is to identify potential safety,  capacity, and operational improvements along the corridor, including intersection control, and  access management.     BNSF RAIL YARD CROSSING  The City has identified the need for a new east/west grade separated crossing of the BNSF rail  yard between C Street SW and A Street NE.  There are a variety of criteria that the City will consider to determine the alignment of the  crossing, including potential development of the BNSF property as a multi‐modal rail yard,  commercial development on Auburn Way S and A Street SE, re‐development of the GSA  property, funding feasibility, neighborhood impacts, transportation impacts, and engineering  feasibility. The crossing project was not accounted for in the 2035 traffic model. Therefore, it is  difficult to access the specific impacts of the crossing project. However, it is anticipated that the  project could significantly improve east‐west mobility in southern Auburn, relieving the existing  bottlenecks at 3rd Street SE and 41st Street SE, by providing an additional alternative for the  residential neighborhoods to the east of the rail yard to connect with the commercial and retail  land ‐uses and SR‐167 to the west of the yard. One potential impact of the crossing project,  depending on the alignment selected, could be an increase in traffic through the Terminal Park  neighborhood.    AUBURN BYPASS  Another future project with significant area‐wide impacts is the addition of the  Auburn Bypass connecting SR‐18 to SR‐164. A draft Bypass Feasibility Report  (September 2009) was prepared in partnership with WSDOT, the City of Auburn, the  Muckleshoot Indian TribeMIT, and other regional partners. The Washington State  Legislature included funding in the 2015 transportation budget for the design and  construction of this new connection. The project is currently referred to as the East  Auburn Access project and is being led by the Muckleshoot Indian TribeMIT. The 2015  legislation defined the project as providing an east bound off‐ramp from SR‐18 that  would connect to SR‐164. The currently defined purpose of the project is to develop  an affordable, long‐term solution that:     Improves congestion, reduces corridor travel time, decreases queuing that  blocks driveways and intersections, and improves reliability for emergency  response for SR‐164; and    Accommodates current and future land use in the urban growth areas of King  County, Auburn, Enumclaw, and the Muckleshoot Indian Reservation.  This project has not yet been accounted for in the City’s traffic models and forecasts as the  project has not yet established the preferred alternative. The project will be included in  future updates of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan    Commented [VB26]: Does this need to be updated, since  this is the 2021 update?  Page 743 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 44    TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT  Transportation system management (TSM) techniques, which make more efficient use of the  existing transportation facilities, can reduce the need for costly system capacity expansion  projects. These techniques can also be used to improve LOS when travel corridors reach  adopted LOS standards. TSM techniques used by the City include:   Re‐channelization/restriping, adding turn lanes, adding /increasing number of through  lanes;   Signal interconnect and optimization;   Turn movement restrictions;   Access Management; and   Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS).  The City will continue to use these TSM techniques to maximize the efficiency of the existing  street network. Of the various TSM strategies available, the City continues to invest in and  expand its ITS infrastructure as a cost‐ effective means of increasing system capacity. The ITS  system enables the City to change traffic signals in real‐time, thereby accommodating  unexpected increases in traffic or traffic obstacles such as event related traffic and collisions.  For example, ITS has proven to be a useful tool in helping to manage the impact of event traffic  traveling south on Auburn Way South, often during the PM peak, to the White River  Amphitheatre. The City will continue to roll out ITS capabilities on corridors around the City, as  referenced in Map 2‐7 and detailed in the ITS policies included in Chapter 5.  In addition to TSM strategies, the City strives to provide viable alternatives for travelers, to  ensure freedom of choice among several transportation modes, including transit, biking, and  walking as alternatives to the automobile. The City will prioritize the development of  pedestrian‐friendly environments such as bicycle routes and pedestrian paths as the non‐ motorized system expands.    TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT  Reducing congestion includes strategies to reduce demands on the transportation system. The  State of Washington emphasized the importance of transportation demand management  (TDM) by adopting a Commute Trip ReductionCTR law. That law requires all major employers,  with over 100 employees arriving between the hours of 6:00 and 9:00 AM, to develop programs  and strategies to reduce the number of commuter automobile trips made by their employees.  Transportation demand management reduces demand on the street system. While TDM and  TSM employ a different suite of strategies, they share many of the same benefits. Both increase  the efficiency of the transportation system, reduce the need for costly capacity expansions,  help improve LOS, and contribute to an enhanced quality of life for those who use and benefit  from the transportation system. TDM strategies include:   ride‐sharing through vanpools and carpools;   preferential parking for high‐occupancy vehicles;   car sharing programs;  Page 744 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 45     transit use incentives;   parking management to discourage single occupancyt vehicle (SOV) travel;   telecommuting;   alternative work schedules to compress the work week or shift the commute outside the  typical commute hours; and   urban design encouraging non‐motorized travel through design features.    The City of Auburn will continue to encourage drivers of single occupancy vehicles to consider  alternate modes of travel such as carpools, vanpools, transit, non‐motorized travel, and  alternative work schedules, and has identified mode split goals for the Regional Growth Center.  The goals were developed in consideration of the current mode splits for the Auburn Regional  Growth Center, the current mode splits for all of the designated Regional Growth Centers, and  the 2040 mode split targets identified by PSRC for all of the designated Regional Growth  Centers. The existing and 2035 mode split goals for the Auburn Regional Growth Center are  summarized in Table 2‐6.    Table 2‐.6 Regional Center Mode Split Goals  Mode 2010 Existing 2035  SOV 81% 56%  HOV 8% 8%  Transit 6% 27%  Bike 2% 4%  Walk 3% 5%    The mode split goals for the Regional Growth Center reflect the desire to significantly reduce  automobile travel as a share of work trips, with the most significant increase in the share of  trips by transit. The reduction in the vehicle mode split will be the result of the right mix of land  ‐use changes, transportation investments, and roadway pricing tools. Additionally, factors such  as shifting demographic trends, preferences, and technology may contribute to mode shifts  above and beyond the identified goals.    STREET MAINTENANCE & REHABILITATION  The City is responsible for maintaining the physical structure of the roadway system. However,  pavement maintenance is expensive, and adequate funding is generally not available. An  annual report is published to document the pavement rating throughout the City.     In 2004, the citizens of Auburn voted to establish a funding program for local streets called the  Save Our Streets (SOS) program.  The original SOS funding measure allowed the City’s property  tax levy to generate revenue solely used to fund the preservation and re‐construction of local  streets.  At the end of 2012, the practice of funding the SOS Program from property taxes  ended. In 2013, the city council allocated the sales tax from construction projects within the  City to be dedicated to the SOS Program. Since 2013, funding for the local streets preservation  program has averaged about $2.3 million due to the significant amount of construction activity  Formatted: Space Before: 6 pt Page 745 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 46    within the City during this period. For 2019 and 2020, the funding approach was once again  modified to fund the local streets preservation program with real estate excise tax (REET), or  REET, in place of the sales tax from construction. Unfortunately, REET funds are a limited source  of revenue and funding of the local street preservation program at $1.65 Million per year is not  sustainable from this source.    The City has created a similar program to fund the repair and maintenance of arterials and  collector streets. The program is funded through a one percent utility tax. While the available  funding through this program is limited, which makes prioritizing projects challenging, the City  has been able to maximize the value of the available funds by using them to leverage grant  funds, enabling significantly more arterial and collector street repair and maintenance to be  completed.                      Local Residential Street Before SOS Rebuild               Local Residential Street After SOS Rebuild      NEIGHBORHOOD NEEDS  Transportation systems and facilities can impact adjacent neighborhoods. Potential impacts  result from increased traffic resulting from drivers seeking alternate routes to congested  arterials, in an effort to save time. These impacts can include higher vehicle speeds resulting in  potential safety concerns, and associated air and noise pollution. Neighborhoods throughout  the City are concerned with these traffic impacts and want to discourage cut‐through traffic.  City policies discourage through traffic in neighborhoods. The City also has a traffic calming  program that addresses the pedestrian, bicycle, and automobile traffic safety concerns that  impact neighborhoods. The traffic calming program is a community‐based program with the  goal of identifying potential problems and development of solutions to help mitigate these  impacts. The program raises public awareness of traffic safety issues and ways that people can  help minimize traffic problems in their own neighborhoods.  As part of its adopted Traffic Calming Program, the City conducted approximately 50 multi ‐day  radar studies of streets in local neighborhoods annually. These studies helped target increased  Formatted: Tab stops: 3.38", Left Page 746 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 47    Police enforcement efforts, and resulted in signage changes such as permanent “Your Speed Is”  radar feedback signs. In other locations where they were recommended by the traffic engineer,  physical traffic calming measures, such as speed cushions, were installed.  The Traffic Calming Pprogram is currently on hold due to the limited resources available, and is  being revaluated. At this time, it is unknown when and how it will be re‐established.  Transportation staff work closely with the Police to address speeding concerns received from  residents.    INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION  The Growth Management ActGMA (RCW 36.70A.070) provides that comprehensive plans  should include a discussion of intergovernmental coordination efforts, including “an assessment  of the impacts of the transportation plan and land use assumptions on the transportation  systems of adjacent jurisdictions.” Auburn works closely with neighboring cities, the  Muckleshoot Indian TribeMIT, and state and regional agencies to ensure coordinated efforts  are made in developing all modes of the transportation system.     Page 747 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 48    CHAPTER 3 ‐– NON‐MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION                        Riding on the Interurban Trail  Non‐motorized transportation is an integral component of Auburn’s transportation system.  Non‐motorized travel includes walking and bicycling. The City seeks to enhance the non‐ motorized travel environment both for recreational travel and trips that might otherwise be  taken via a car or bus in order to improve mobility and environmental health.  The City recognizes that the evolution of the transportation system has prioritized the  automobile as the primary travel mode. A side effect of this process has been the erosion of  conditions favorable to non‐motorized travel. This chapter seeks to redress the balance by  enhancing conditions in which non‐motorized modes are a realistic and attractive travel option.  Planning and developing a strong non‐motorized network supports several state and national  acts including Washington’s Growth Management ActGMA, Commute Trip ReductionCTR Act,  the federal Clean Air Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and the Move Ahead for  Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP‐ 21) (Federal Surface Transportation Bill) and its  successors. Supporting the non‐motorized system helps ensure compliance with these  initiatives and the healthy community principles espoused by PSRC through Vision 2040. It also  increases funding opportunities for City projects. Improving the non‐motorized system also  helps address the findings of the citywide Health Impact Assessment process, which  recommended that the City improve sidewalk connectivity,; improve the pedestrian  environment,; eliminate natural and man‐made mobility barriers for pedestrian and bicyclists;,  improve transit access,; and improve traffic safety, pedestrian safety, and personal security.  This chapter is divided into two subsections: pedestrian travel and bicycle travel. Each  subsection contains an assessment of existing conditions and needs, followed by guidelines for  development of the future system.    Formatted: Tab stops: 1.88", Centered + Not at 6.44" Page 748 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 49    3.1 PEDESTRIAN TRAVEL              Pedestrian Crossing at Green River College on S. 320th Street    As a Regional Growth Center, the City encourages transportation planning that emerges from a  clear land ‐use plan based on a community vision and the values expressed in Imagine Auburn.  In this vision, Auburn supports higher density housing in the downtown; neighborhood  commercial districts; and landscaped, pedestrian‐oriented street and sidewalk design. This  pattern of development reinforces a positive pedestrian environment.    NEEDS ASSESSMENT  Auburn has many assets, which contribute to a welcoming pedestrian environment, most  notably a pedestrian‐scaled downtown and an extensive network of trails. The needs  assessment highlights these existing assets and identifies improvement needs.  EXISTING PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT  As a whole, Auburn’s urban fabric in the downtown has remained intact and supports a positive  pedestrian environment. Businesses, shops, and single‐family homes front streets with  sidewalks and street trees. However, some of the older sections of sidewalks need repair or  replacement.  Since adoption of the 2009 Transportation Plan, there have been sidewalk, ADA, and lighting  improvements to Main Street, S Division Street Promenade, City Hall Plaza and Plaza Park, and  behind the shops on East Main Street. New growth in the downtown core has or will result in  the development of multi ‐ story residential and office buildings and senior housing, helping  Page 749 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 50    renew the pedestrian infrastructure and creating a need for continued effort to maintain and  improve the sidewalk system. In addition, the Sounder commuter rail station and transit hub at  West Main Street and C Street SW provide pedestrians more options for connecting to regional  destinations. These improvements contribute to a more hospitable environment for  pedestrians. The city has an annual sidewalk repair program which focuses on ADA  improvements, responding to complaints, repairing identified hazards, and improving areas  with high pedestrian use.  Commercial development outside the downtown exists primarily along arterials and is  dominated by strip development and auto‐oriented businesses. Although sidewalks are  provided on most arterials, pedestrians may feel exposed to the traffic. Surface parking lots  border the sidewalks, and driveways interrupt the continuity of the sidewalk system. The heavy  volumes of vehicular traffic and wide streets along arterials, such as Auburn Way, pose a barrier  for pedestrians walking along or crossing the roadway.  Sidewalk Inventory  The City’s GIS base map shows the approximate locations of sidewalks throughout the City.  Most of this information was generated  as part of the Plan update in 2005 using aerial  photography and other GIS data. The base map was updated in 2008 to show sidewalks on  the  West Hill and Lea Hill where a large scale annexation into the City took place in 2007. The GIS  base map is continuously updated based on updated aerial photography and as‐built plans as  improvements are completed. The City is currently developing a plan to create a  comprehensive sidewalk inventory that would support the City’s ADA Transition Plan, help  identify needed improvements, and assist in overall asset management and maintenance of the  City’s sidewalk infrastructure.  The older residential neighborhoods tend to have sidewalks on both sides of the street, but  they vary widely in condition and construction standards. Some residential areas, such as  southwest Lea Hill, were built under King County’s jurisdiction and sidewalk construction was  not required.  Breaks in the sidewalk network require pedestrians to maneuver around parked cars, into  private yards, or into the street. In newer neighborhoods such as Lakeland Hills, sidewalks built  to the city standards applicable at the time of their construction are provided on both sides of  the street.  The sidewalk survey of the Lea Hill and West Hill annexation areas revealed a sporadic and  often disconnected sidewalk system. Several of the newer residential developments have  sidewalks, but many of the older residential areas and arterial streets are missing large  segments of sidewalk, resulting in an inconsistent pedestrian environment.  Trail Network  Auburn’s developing trail network provides local and regional connections for both recreational  use and commuting. The regional trails that have been developed include the Interurban Trail  and portions of the Green River and White River Trails. The Lakeland Hills Trail network  provides connections to neighborhood parks, community center, and to the City of Sumner via  Page 750 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 51    a tunnel under the BNSF railway. Map 3‐2 illustrates the existing and proposed trail network  within the City.  SCHOOL ACCESSIBILITY  School safety is a major concern for parents, students, the school districts, and the City alike.  The Auburn School District, working with an advisory committee, has established a safe walking  area for each elementary and middle school based on the presence of sidewalks, walking paths,  and safe neighborhood streets, as well as the availability of safe street crossings and the traffic  conditions in the surrounding neighborhoods. All routes within the safe walking areas are  designated as ‘Safe Routes to School’. Occasionally, individual schools will notify parents and  students of preferred walking routes within each area.  Since the last major update of the comprehensive plan the following Safe Walking Routes  improvements have been made throughout Auburn;  Some of these improvements were made possible by a Safe Routes to School grant. The  flashing beacons have been funded through a combination of grant programs and City  resources.  Despite the progress that has been made over the past several years, there are still areas of  need. The following needs were identified to enhance and improve the safety for school  children in and around the school safe walking areas.  The City will continue to work with the School District to identify gaps in the walking boundaries  around each schools.   Lakeland Hills Elementary  Encouraging increased walking and biking to this school would provide the greatest benefit for  easing traffic congestion and safety concerns. Additionally, an onsite parking and access  redesign would further reduce school pick up and drop off related congestion.  Chinook Elementary  Sidewalks along Auburn Way South between Hemlock St SE and Academy Dr SE. Additionally  intersection improvements have been identified to reduce conflicts and improve circulation for  buses.  Accessible Routes of Travel  The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires that all new public, commercial, and  institutional developments meet ADA standards. Furthermore, existing public buildings, public  outdoor facilities, and public rights‐of‐wayROWs shall be retrofitted to achieve accessibility. An  accessible route of travel is designated to accommodate the needs of many different people,  including those who are blind, using wheelchairs, pushing a stroller or cart, or injured. The law  requires that municipalities have a transition plan in place to address ADA issues. The City of  Auburn completed an ADA Transition Plan for Ffacilities in the Public Right‐of‐Way in 2020, with  associated new policies that is published on the City’s website. The City’s Engineering Design  Commented [VB27]: Is there supposed to be a list here?  Commented [VB28]: Are the paragraphs below the list of  needs identified? If so, it needs to be more clear that's what  they are.  Page 751 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 52    and Construction standards are also published on the City’s website and include design and  construction specifications that support ADA compliance.    Site Design  Pedestrian conditions should be evaluated at the earliest stage of new development. The zone  between the development and the public right‐of‐wayROW needs to contribute to pedestrian  network connectivity and continuity. In addition to the public right‐of‐wayROW, the interior of  the site ought to be examined for suitable pedestrian circulation, and how the two are  connected. Wherever possible, walkways should be placed along the most direct routes to  connect buildings, parking, bus stops, and other attractions. In some cases, walking trails that  link residential streets to collectors or arterials can provide a more direct pedestrian connection  than travel along the sidewalk network, particularly in neighborhoods without a street grid  system, specifically those with cul‐de‐sacs.  FUTURE SYSTEM  This section describes the City’s vision for the future pedestrian system, and identifies programs  and initiatives that will enable it to achieve this vision.  Downtown  The downtown is historically the social heart of the community, a place for people to interact. It  is considered one of the primary pedestrian‐oriented areas in the City. Important existing  pedestrian downtown linkages include connections from W Main Street to the transit hub and  commuter rail station, and between W Main Street and the Multicare Auburn Medical Center.  The Downtown Plan, a special area plan adopted in 2001 as part of the City’s Comprehensive  Plan, anticipates high pedestrian‐ oriented developments in this area, particularly around the  Auburn Station. The Downtown Plan also identifies W Main Street, A Street SW, Division Street,  and the alley south of   Main Street as high priority pedestrian corridors. In addition, several recently completed  projects have helped improve non‐motorized access to the downtown and transit station,  including the City Hall Plaza and Plaza Park project completed in 2010, the Division Street  Promenade Project completed in 2012, and the A Street NW Extension project, opened in June  2013.  Auburn Station has created demand for new mixed‐use development, including commercial  and residential elements. The City is committed to focusing new commercial and residential  development adjacent to the Auburn Station and has been working on partnerships to bring  several mixed‐use developments to Downtown. These developments include pedestrian  friendly design and streetscape improvements.  A vital pedestrian network that extends beyond downtown is a key element in the revitalization  of the downtown core.  Commercial Corridors  Formatted: Font: 12 pt Commented [VB29]: How we refer to downtown is  inconsistent. Sometimes it's 'the downtown,' sometimes it's  'downtown,' and sometimes it's 'Downtown.' Which one is  correct?  Page 752 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 53    The City encourages major employers to locate near transit routes and stops. Furthermore,  pedestrian connections from residential areas to commercial corridors can be enhanced  through site design policies that encourage more direct non‐motorized connections to major  retail locations.  Future planning along commercial corridors should also include amenities such as landscaping  adjacent to the sidewalk, improved pedestrian crossings, and enhanced bus stops at high use  locations.  Auburn has several commercial corridors, most notably Auburn Way North and South, that are  frequently traveled by pedestrians. While most of these areas have sidewalks, there is the  opportunity to enhance the pedestrian environment by providing additional protected  crossings, making improvements to lighting, completing remaining sidewalk gaps, and  eliminating ADA accessibility barriers. For instance, pedestrian crossing issues arise because  pedestrians often cross at uncontrolled or mid‐block locations rather than walking to the  nearest signalized crossing. This dynamic is partially attributable to the location of bus stops in  relation to employment centers.   Hence, efforts should be made to locate bus stops so commuters crossing to the opposite side  of the road are dropped off and picked up near a signalized intersection.  Residential Neighborhoods  Investment in Auburn’s neighborhoods is an essential component of providing a comprehensive  and functional pedestrian network. As noted in the needs assessment, sidewalk conditions vary  throughout the City. This plan acknowledges the need to retrofit the pedestrian network in  many areas of the City and incorporate pedestrian facilities into new development. Financial  mechanisms to help accomplish this goal are described later in this chapter.  High Priority Pedestrian Corridors and Locations  Map 3‐1 identifies High Priority Pedestrian Corridors and locations such as schools, parks, and  the Downtown Urban Center where providing pedestrian facilities is vital to safety, mobility,  economic development, and accessibility in the City. The map distinguishes between corridor  segments with complete existing pedestrian facilities and corridor segments that are not yet  complete (lacking sidewalks on one or both sides of the corridor).  While some corridors need  sidewalk on both sides of the roadway, some will meet the needs of pedestrians with sidewalk  on one side only. The map identifies where sidewalk exists and where sidewalk is needed. The  map does not distinguish where sidewalks meet the City’s current standards, and where the  City expects to have sidewalk on both sides in the future. The High Priority Pedestrian Corridors  were selected based on the following criteria: pedestrian volumes; proximity to schools, parks,  transit routes, downtown center, and commercial areas,; and connections between pedestrian  facilities to provide a network throughout the city.  Page 753 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 54    The City’s current half street policy requires sidewalk to be constructed by developers  whenever significant improvements are made to a property. This has proven to be an effective  means of building out the sidewalk network. However, it is a slow process because it relies on  new development or redevelopment to occur, making it difficult to complete whole corridors.  By programming specific pedestrian corridors for investment, the City can leverage grant dollars  and other resources to more strategically complete gaps in key pedestrian corridors.  NON‐MOTORIZED TRAILS                                Auburn Multi‐Use Trail  The Auburn Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan was updated in 2015 and identifies specific  projects for the development of local and regional trails. The long‐ term list includes:  The Auburn‐Pacific Trail provides a multi‐use path that improves access from the White River to  the Interurban Trail. A planned pedestrian crossing, under the BNSF railroad tracks just north of  the BNSF Stuck River Bridge (over the White River), will improve the regional trail system by  providing a connection between the City of Pacific and Auburn’s White River Trail connection to  A Street SE.  Funding is still needed for the Auburn section of the Green River Trail. King County, which is the  lead agency for this trail, published a new alignment study for the Green River Trail in  December 2019. Planning efforts are also focused on the Auburn Environmental Park and  connecting the park to the Interurban Trail. This unique park project shows residents the  diversity of the ecosystem along the Mill Creek corridor.  Additional trail planning is underway for connecting the Fenster Natural Park to the Green  Valley Road area.  An important component of Auburn’s trail system includes trailheads. Trailheads should be  inviting to users and provide amenities such as parking, bicycle racks, information kiosks,  restroom facilities, water fountains, trash receptacles, and seating facilities. Trailheads should  be constructed and improved as Auburn’s trail system further develops. See Map 3‐2 for  existing and proposed trails and trailhead locations.    Formatted: Tab stops: 2.13", Centered + Not at 6.44" Commented [VB30]: Are the paragraphs below the list? If  so, it needs to be made more clear. Most other lists in the  plan are bullets  Page 754 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 55    FUNDING MECHANISMS  Sidewalk Improvement Program  The City of Auburn has an Annual Citywide Sidewalk Repair and Improvement Program to repair  damaged sidewalks, tripping hazards, and to complete small missing links in the sidewalk  network.  These funds are essential for promoting non‐motorized travel and can be used to leverage  other funding sources, such as state and federal grants or other city capital projects.  Auburn has identified three principal areas in which sidewalk improvements should be  prioritized: corridors that provide access to and within the downtown, school zones, and parks,  with a focus on addressing potential hazards and areas of known complaints. Additional criteria  for priority access improvement could include, but are not limited to, areas with high  concentrations of senior citizens or disabled citizens, areas with high volumes of pedestrian‐ transit interaction, areas where private improvements such as trees have damaged the public  infrastructure, and areas where property owners are willing to financially participate in the  construction of sidewalk improvements through a local improvement district (LID). In  considering projects, staff also review existing street deferral agreements to determine if the  improvements previously allowed to be deferred are now needed and should be completed by  the private party.  “Save Our Streets” Program  In November 2004, Auburn residents approved Proposition 1, “Save Our Street” Program,  which created a dedicated local street fund. This money was set aside for repair and  maintenance of local roadways which can sometimes also include sidewalk repair and rebuild.  In 2013, the city council modified the funding source for this program to be from Construction  Sales Tax revenues and no longer from property taxes. In 2018, City Council modified the funds  for this program, which are currently provided by Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) for 2019 and  2020.    S idewalks will be prioritized:   Where hazardous conditions are present;   On school walk routes;   Where extensive improvements are needed in a single neighborhood;   Along streets with curb and gutter;   Along Downtown pedestrian corridors;   Where curb ramps are missing; and   Where they will complete a missing link in a pedestrian network; and.   Where property owners are willing to financially participate in the construction of  Formatted: Font: 12 pt Formatted: Normal, No bullets or numbering Page 755 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 56    sidewalk improvements through an LID.    “Arterial Preservation” Program  The City also currently implements the annual arterial street preservation program funded by a  1% utility tax. Pedestrian, ADA, and safety improvements are included in many of the arterial  improvement projects funded by this program.  Arterial Bicycle and Safety Improvement Program  The City implements this bi‐annual program to fund bicycle and pedestrian improvements on  classified roadways.   Local Improvement Districts  Local Improvement Districts (LIDs) enable city investment in a specified area by leveraging city  funds with contributions from property owners in the district. LID’s use limited city resources to  improve neighborhood quality and can be used to finance new sidewalks.  Safety Education and Enforcement  Awareness of pedestrian safety issues should be promoted through educational programs and  enforcement efforts. This combination helps reinforce key safety issues such as safe pedestrian  crossings and speeding. The City will proactively work to identify problem areas and issues. The  following list contains examples of some techniques that can be employed in these efforts.   Maintaining non‐motorized travel information kiosks at key City destinations (e.g. Main  Street, Outlet Collection, Emerald Downs, trails).   Displaying educational information in City publications, on the website, and on TV.   Maintaining and expanding wayfinding signage to direct pedestrians and bicyclists.   Partnering with the School District to teach children safe walking and biking behaviors.   Launching public information campaigns for problematic locations and partnering with  the Police Department to provide enforcement.   Increasing driver awareness of vehicle speeds through the presence of radar speed signs  where appropriate. Enforcing pedestrian, bicyclist, and driver infractions.    3.2 BICYCLE TRAVEL  Bicycle facilities are an important component of Auburn’s transportation and recreational  infrastructure. Bicycling provides an environmentally friendly travel mode and helps citizens to  maintain a healthy lifestyle. It also helps improve traffic congestion and air quality by providing  an alternative to driving. Increasingly, bicycle commuting is becoming a more popular  alternative, and the City is taking steps to provide a more functional and attractive network for  commute cyclists, in addition to recreational cyclists.  Commented [VB31]: In other locations, 1% is spelled out  (one percent)  Page 756 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 57       Page 757 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 58    NEEDS ASSESSMENT  Existing Conditions  The topography in the Auburn Valley is flat and conducive to cycling for a range of skill levels.  Areas along the Green and White Rivers provide recreational opportunities for multi‐use trails  that accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians. The Interurban Trail is part of a major north‐  south regional trail system. The Green River trail is also an extension of a north‐south regional  trail. Therefore, Auburn has a good network of existing or planned north‐south recreational  trails.   However, there are few existing cross‐town connections, and new connections onto the West  Hill and Lea Hill are needed.  Cross‐town bike connections to the West Hill and Lea Hill areas of Auburn are more challenging  due to steep topography. Yet investing in these connections is important because a significant  number of Auburn residents live in these areas. Building these connections would improve  bicycle access to regional transit, local employment, the regional trail system, and to downtown  Auburn.  Recreational and commuter cyclists travel along the Interurban Trail to areas north and south of  Auburn. Cyclists also frequently ride along S 277th Street to the east side of Green River Road,  and down along the Green River to 8th Street NE, or down R Street NE to SE Auburn Black  Diamond Road. SE Auburn Black Diamond Road and SE Green Valley Road are popular routes  for accessing areas east of Auburn. However, these roads are characterized by challenging  cycling conditions and are not suitable for inexperienced cyclists. Once in Auburn, there is  especially a need to increase the number of east‐west bicycle facilities. Investing in trail  connections to improve bicycle access in these areas should also be a priority.  Bicycle lanes are limited on city arterials and collectors, making it difficult both for regional and  local riders to navigate for any reasonable distance through the City. Limited bicycle storage is  also a hindrance to cyclists. Map 3‐2 identifies existing and planned trails and bike facilities in  the City.  Auburn Bicycle Task Force  In March 2010, the city formed the City of Auburn Bicycle Task Force. This task force dissolved  upon completion of their goals. It was intended that the Bicycle Task Force would further refine  the City’s goals and policies for its bicycle transportation system. The Task Force was comprised  of a broad cross section of community members and interested parties that were charged to  develop recommendations on bicycle facilities, issues and opportunities centered on the  following three principles:   Connections – for example, how do bicycle riders get from the north end to the south  end of the City or from Lakeland to Lea Hill?  Formatted: Keep with next Page 758 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 59     Recreation Opportunities – for example, how does the City further build and capitalize on  a bicycle network to support and enhance the recreation options for its citizens?   Economic Development – for example, how does the City capitalize on the Interurban  Trail as a conduit of customers for existing and new businesses?    Bike Improvements Completed and Planned in the Near ‐ Term Future  The work of the task force has informed and guided Ccity decisions on future bike lane and trail  improvements and connections. Its work is directly reflected in improvements already made as  well as the future bike lanes and trail improvements shown in Map 3‐2.  Since 2009 bike lanes were added to 124th Ave SE, and SE 320th Street near Green River  College on Lea Hill, and a new bike lane connection was created by the construction of the new  A Street NW corridor. Bikes lanes were added as part of the new M Street SE BNSF underpass  project and sharrows (share the road with bike symbols) were added to East Main Street.  Bike lanes are part of the new planned West Main Street project and the F Street SE project  includes development of a bBicycle Bboulevard and Bbike Sshare Pprogram.  Bicycle Facility Classification  The American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) has developed  classifications for bicycle facilities and parking. Bicycle classification is based on the design and  exclusivity of use.  Bicycle Facility Classification   Separate Facility (Class I) – A non‐ motorized two‐way paved facility, that is physically  separated from motorized vehicular traffic by an open space or barrier.   Bike Lane (Class II) – An exclusive on‐ street one‐ way lane for bicyclists, delineated  with signing and striping   Shared Lanes (Class III) – A lane shared by vehicles and bicycles. Wider lanes that  may be delineated with shared use markings and signage.   Bicycle Boulevard– A bicycle‐ focused roadway designated with enhanced signage  and special pavement markings and bicycle friendly design standards, such as wide  curb lanes and bicycle safe drain grates. Typically designed to connect key bicycle  destinations.    Existing Class I multi‐use trails in the City include S 277th St from the Interurban Trail to L St NE,  the Interurban Trail, the White River Trail, and the Green River Trails.  Class II bicycle lanes added since 2009 include:;  Page 759 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 60     Terrace Drive NW (15th to W St)   A StT NW/B STt NW (3rd to 30th)   14th St NW (A NW to A NE)   R St SE (17th to White River)   M St SE (3rd to 8th)   116th Ave SE (SE 304th to SE 312th)   SE 312th St, 132nd Ave SE, SE     Class III shared facilities were tested on R St NE/SE, Auburn Black Diamond Road, and E Main St.  They were well received by the cycling community and continue to be maintained. Shared  facilities will continue to be implemented on other appropriate roadways. The F Street Bike  Boulevard is scheduled to be completed in 2020.  Bike parking facilities are classified by length of use: long term, and short term. The longer bikes  are to be stored, the more durable the facility’s design must be.  Long‐ term bike storage facilities are available at Auburn Station. The City currently provides  short‐ term bike storage throughout the downtown core.  Improvement Needs  Cyclists desire safe routes that make connections throughout the City and to regional points of  interests. The existing facilities, while being continuously improved, still fall short of creating a  well‐ connected bicycle network in Auburn. The City plans to build out the bicycle network  shown in Map 3‐2 and provide better east‐west connections. Upgrading bicycle facilities on  Ccity streets is an important component of this plan.  Auburn shall make greater efforts in the future to encourage bicycle use, particularly for  commuting purposes, as a form of transportation demand management (TDM). One  mechanism of doing so is to ensure that bike lanes and trails that serve major employers are  prioritized. The City needs to take a more aggressive role in programming implementation of  the future bicycle network identified in this chapter, ensuring that eventually all residents of  and employees in Auburn feel comfortable commuting on bike. In addition, Auburn should seek  outlets, including the City’s website, to provide up‐to‐date information on bicycling options  within the City and to regional destinations.  The Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) program provides a formal mechanism for encouraging  these practices, and is required by state law for employers with 100 or more employees arriving  at a single location during the AM peak travel time. Auburn’s CTR program calls out bicycle  storage facilities, lockers, changing areas, and showers as measures employers can take to meet  their CTR goals. In addition, Auburn can use the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) process  to encourage development of these facilities at the time of new development or tenant  improvements.  Commented [VB32]: Does this need to be updated?  Page 760 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 61    The Downtown Plan also discusses the need for improving bicycle facilities in the area. On‐ street bicycle facilities will be sought in association with planned roadway improvements. In  addition, the City should investigate providing bicycle storage and other amenities on City ‐ owned properties.  FUTURE TRAVEL                       The work is easier when shared    The future bicycle network includes corridors for regional, recreational, and cross‐town  connections. The regional corridors will provide connections to the Valley communities as well  other areas of King and Pierce Counties. Local biking groups have identified the Interurban Trail  and Green River Trail as important regional connections. Other planned regional connections  will link Auburn to attractions around the Puget Sound.  The Green and White River corridors are multi‐functional, providing recreational opportunities  for regional and local bicycle trips. Therefore, the City has prioritized the completion of both  these trail systems. Also, Auburn will seek to enhance portions of City trail systems whenever  possible, by providing amenities for non‐motorized travelers, such as rest areas, as well as  safety improvements, including warning signage and grade‐ separated trails. As shown in Map  3‐2, the bicycle routes identified for future development will consist of a mix of interconnected  local trails and on‐ street bike facilities linking Auburn's neighborhoods.  The future Bonneville Power Trail will be a separated, hard surfaced trail crossing the Lea Hill  area and connecting to the Interurban Trail and West Hill via on‐street bicycle facilities. This  new bike route is planned from Lea Hill through Isaac Evans and Dykstra Park to connect to  downtown Auburn via the new A Street NW corridor. Numerous other on‐street bicycle  facilities and trails are planned.  Formatted: Tab stops: 1.85", Centered + Not at 6.44" Page 761 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 62    The selection of bike facility projects will be based upon safety, route continuity, and  connectivity. In addition to new bicycle corridors, spot safety improvements are an important  component of the City’s future bicycle network. Improvements including flashing beacons have  already been made at the Interurban Trail crossing of 15th Street SW, and are planned at the  Interurban Trail crossing of West Main Street and C Street SW and Ellingson. In addition, safe  access to downtown Auburn and onto West Hill, Lea Hill, and Lakeland are a priority for the  City.  Typical bicycle route improvements along a Class I facility include purchasing the right‐of‐ wayROW, designing the trail, and constructing the trail and trailhead. For a Class II pathway,  improvements include striping lanes, installing warning and directional signage, and painting  bike symbols on the pavement. For a roadway where bikes will share the lane with vehicles, it  may include the installation of shared use markings and signage.  As this plan is updated in the future, emphasis should continue to be placed on developing a  safe and convenient bicycling environment for both recreational and commuter cyclists of all  experience levels.    3.3 FUTURE NON‐MOTORIZED SYSTEM    Auburn’s future non‐motorized system consists of an interconnected network of sidewalks, bike  lanes, and multi‐use trails. The list of proposed projects in Table 3‐2 is developed for planning  purposes. Map 3‐2 identifies the location of the trail projects identified in Table 3‐2 and maps  the future trail and bicycle network.  Table 3.1 Proposed Trail Projects  Trail Name Description Potential Users  Green River  Trail This paved trail will be part of a regional recreational corridor. King County is the lead  administrator of the project but will work in collaboration with the City for the portion of the trail  in Auburn. The trail alignment will extend along the west bank of the Green River from S. 277th  St., south to Brannan Park. From Brannan Park, the trail will then run south along M Street SE to  22nd Street NE, where it will turn east towards Dykstra Park. It will then cross the river at the  Dykstra foot bridge to the east bank of the river. It will then parallel Green River Road and 104th  Ave SE. Once across Lea Hill Road SE the trail will follow 104th PlL. SE to the dead end. From the  dead end the trail will follow the wooded bluff until it reaches a point opposite of Fenster Nature  Park. At the alignment of 2nd St. SE the trail will cross at a future bridge location to the west side  of the river and into Fenster Nature Park. The trail will continue south through the park and into  the King County owned Auburn Narrows area where it will end near the intersection of Auburn  Black Diamond Rd. and Green Valley Road.  Bicyclists  Pedestrians  Auburn  Environment  al Park Loop  This looped recreational path spurs off the Interurban Trail and will go through the Auburn  Environmental Park.  Off‐road Cyclists  Pedestrians   Commented [VB33]: Needs a title for the table. "Table 3‐ 2: Proposed Non‐Motorized Projects"?  Page 762 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 63    White River  Trail  The White River Trail runs along the south side of the White River from Roegner Park to the  eastern edge of Game Farm Wilderness Park. Future extensions of the trail are planned from A  Street SE to Roegner Park, across the White River via the future BNSF Railroad underpass, on the  south side of the river within the City of Pacific, and from Game Farm Wilderness Park to  southeast Auburn along the White River.  Bicyclists   Off‐road Cyclists  Pedestrians  Williams Trail These recreational trails are intended to use public or quasi‐public lands, including utility  corridors. A variety of loop trails may be possible within this large area.  Bicyclists   Off‐road Cyclists  Pedestrians  Bonneville  Power Trail  This east‐west trail will extend from Lea Hill to Dykstra Park Street, where it will connect to  downtown Auburn and West Hill via an existing and planned series of bike lanes. There are  topographical and environmental challenges that will need to be addressed during the design  phase.  Bicyclists  Pedestrians   Academy Trail The portion of Academy Drive from SR 164 to Green Valley Road is currently closed due to slope  failures. However, it has the potential to be re‐opened as a multi‐use recreational trail.  Bicyclists  Pedestrians   Lakeland Hills  Trail  This trail serves the Lakeland community and links Sunset Park and Dorothy Bothell Park via a  meandering sidewalk path along Lakeland Hills Way SE.  Pedestrians  A Street SE  Trail  This mixed‐ use trail would be along the BNSF tracks to the west of A St SE, from 6th St SE to 41st  St SE / Ellingson Rd.  Bicyclists  Pedestrians    This network will provide local and regional connections for a variety of non‐motorized modes.  The completed portions of the Interurban and Green River Trails connect pedestrians and  cyclists to areas north and south of Auburn, while the White River Trail provides for east‐west  travel. Additional bike lanes and completion of the paved trail network will guide cyclists safely  to points of interests, and through congested areas of the City.  Pedestrians will be able to travel more safely and comfortably with upgrades and expansion of  the sidewalk network, new crossings and street lighting, and better street design near schools  and frequently traveled pedestrian locations. The addition of a BNSF undercrossing, just north  of the White River and west of A Street SE, will provide safe passage for pedestrians. A new trail  connection along C Street SW will provide pedestrians and cyclists with a safer connection to  downtown and the Auburn Station.     Formatted: Not Superscript/ Subscript Formatted: Not Superscript/ Subscript Page 763 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 64    PROMOTING HEALTHY COMMUNITIES                    White River Trail – Multi‐Use Path    The City of Auburn envisions a transportation system that will help promote healthy community  principles by coordinating land use, the non‐motorized transportation system, and transit in a  manner that encourages walking and bicycling. The Puget Sound Regional CouncilPSRC has  identified several elements, which that contribute to the desirability of walking, bicycling, and  transit use, in their Vision 2040 “Update Paper on Health”:.    Concentrating complementary uses such as restaurants, retail, and grocery stores  proximate to residences and employment.   Linking neighborhoods by connecting streets, sidewalks, and trails.   Designing for safe and welcoming pedestrian and bicycle facilities.   Enhancing transit opportunities and non‐motorized connections to transit facilities.   Reducing and mitigating the effects of parking.    These principles, many of which can be promoted by thoughtful transportation systems  planning, encourage healthier communities by increasing physical activity and decreasing air  pollution caused by vehicle emissions. Auburn has historically planned for a transportation  system that incorporates many healthy community principles, such as transit facility planning  and regional trail planning. In addition, the Downtown Plan calls for a mixed‐use, high density,  pedestrian‐ oriented downtown. Improving the non‐motorized system also helps address the  findings of the citywide Health Impact Assessment process, which recommended that the City  improve sidewalk connectivity;, improve the pedestrian environment,; eliminate natural and  man‐made mobility barriers for pedestrian and bicyclists,; improve transit access,; and improve  traffic safety, pedestrian safety, and personal security.  Formatted: Tab stops: 1.99", Centered Page 764 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 65    In the future, Auburn shall continue to promote these principles through long‐range planning  efforts, capital facility improvements, development review, and community activities involving  active lifestyle elements.  IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS  The City developed policies and identified funding strategies that will help implement the  future non‐motorized network. They can be found in Chapters 5 and 6,  consecutivelyrespectively, of this plan. The planning direction outlined in this chapter shall be  used as the foundation for implementing the non‐motorized policies and securing funding.     Page 765 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 66    CHAPTER 4 – TRANSIT      Auburn Station  Transit service is a key component of Auburn’s transportation system, providing mobility within  the City and access to and from the City. Unlike the street and non‐motorized systems, Auburn  does not directly administer transit service. Rather, the City works with local and regional  transit agencies to coordinate service in, to, and from Auburn. The transit agencies are publicly  funded and are responsible for providing transit service within their service boundaries.  Today, Auburn is served by local and regional bus, as well as a commuter rail line that runs  between Seattle and Tacoma/Lakewood.    4.1 NEEDS ASSESSMENT    EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICES  The following section provides a brief summary of the public transportation services offered in  Auburn. Existing transit service for the Auburn area is identified in Map 4‐1 at the end of this  section.  Due to the 2020 COVID‐19 pandemic, all transit agencies saw a reduction in ridership and  implemented service reductions, which may continue into 2021. The service levels outlined in  this section are for normal operation.  Commented [VB34]: Does this need to be updated?  Page 766 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 67    KING COUNTY METRO TRANSIT  Bus Service  Metro Transit provides local bus services linking destinations within the community and  providing regional connections to the Auburn Station. With the deletion of Routes 910 and 952,  and Route 160 alignment on Auburn Way, Metro will no longer serves the 15th Street NW Park  and Ride in as of September 2020.  However, the lot will continue to be served by Sound Transit  Route 566.  Metro Transit offers a network of bus service in Auburn, connecting the city to the  region. Metro adopted and implemented changes to its network in September 2020, via the  Renton‐Kent‐Auburn Area Mobility Plan (RKAAMP), and some of the routes were affected.  These changes were in part to accommodate the planned RapidRide I Line, which would replace  a portion of Rroute 180, and provide frequent, reliable, and extended (early mornings to late  night) service from Auburn Station, along the Auburn Way N corridor, connecting Auburn, Kent,  and Renton transit stations.   Route 160 replaces the portion of former Rroute 180 from Auburn Station to Kent, with minor  changes in its alignment. This route provides 15‐ minute service during peak hours, and 30‐  minute service during off‐peak, and operates from 4 am to 3 am on week days, and from 5 am  to 3 am on weekends. This route will become the RapidRide I Line in 2023, and will provide  service every 10 to 15 minutes.   Route 165 replaces Rroute 164 and provides regional service between Kent, Auburn, and the  Green River College. It connects with the Route 181 at Green River College. This route is not  changed within the city limits.  Route 181 provides daily service between the Twin Lakes Park‐and‐Ride, Sea‐Tac Mall, Federal  Way Transit Center, the Outlet Collection, Auburn Station, and Green River College.  Route 184 replaces the portion of Rroute 180 from Auburn Station to south Auburn, and  provides 20‐ to 30 ‐minute service during the day, and 30‐ to 60 ‐minute service during nights  and weekends, and operates from 5 am to 1 am on weekdays, and 5:30 am to midnight on  weekends.  Route 186 was combined in 2020 with Route 915merged into Route 195 in 2020 to have one  route number only.   Route 910  was discontinued in 2020.   Route 915 absorbed rRoute 186, and provides weekday and  weekend service between the  Auburn Station and Enumclaw via Auburn Way South. The route also includes a small portion of  Demand Area Responsive Transit (DART) service with limited, variable routing in response to  rider requests.  Route 917 provides weekday and Saturday service between A Street SE, 41st Street SE, Algona,  the Outlet Collection, and the Auburn Station. The route offers DART service (limited variable  Commented [VB35]: There is inconsistency throughout  the plan on how Metro is referred to. In a previous section,  it is referred to as King County Transit. Here, it goes  between Metro Transit and Metro.  Formatted: Not Superscript/ Subscript Commented [VB36]: I'm confused by this. Can't find this  on a map, is this a real landmark?  Page 767 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 68    route) in portions of Pacific. As of September 2020, service is more frequent at 30 to 40 minutes  on weekdays, and Sunday service is added, with 60‐ minute service on weekends. The route  was shortened to begin in Pacific and will to no longer serve the A Street/ 41st St SE area of  Auburn.  The peak ‐hour deviation to serve the Social Security Administration (SSA) and the  General Services Aadministration (GSA), which are in the process of relocation, was deleted due  to low ridership, and an off‐peak deviation to directly serve the Wal‐Mmart was added to  maintain access lost with the deletion of Route 910.   Route 952  was discontinued in 2020.      ACCESS  ACCESS Transportation is a King County Metro paratransit service, providing door‐to‐door,  shared‐ ride van transportation within most of King County. The Americans with Disabilities Act  (ADA) requires curb‐to‐curb paratransit service for persons whose disabilities prevent use of  accessible non‐commuter, fixed ‐route bus service. This service is intended to offer a  comparable level of service to that provided by regular bus service.  Vanpool Services  Metro Transit sponsors vanpool services that serve residents and employees in Auburn.  Vanpool is a shared‐ride service that provides group transport for commuters with proximate  origins and destinations. Vanpool is a popular and flexible service that provides commuters  with an alternative to driving alone and fixed‐route transit service. Vanpool will continue to be  an important strategy for mitigating peak period congestion throughout Auburn and the region.  Metro Transit Facilities  Metro Transit owns and operates the Auburn 15th Street NW Park‐and‐Ride with 244 surface  parking stalls. Metro also operates into the Auburn Station, which is managed by Sound Transit.  Additionally, Metro maintains approximately 177 bus stops in Auburn, 42 of which contain  passenger shelters.  Commute Trip Reduction (CTR)  Under state law, the City is required to administer a Commute Trip ReductionCTR program for  all employers in Auburn with at least 100 employees arriving during the peak morning commute  hours. The City of Auburn contracts with Metro Transit to provide CTR support services for the  CTR affected local employers. Currently, there are 10 CTR employers in Auburn with a total of  5,500 employees. Metro Transit assists employers in complying with state law by providing  rideshare support and a host of other incentives aimed at reducing single occupant vehicle  travel.     Formatted: Not Superscript/ Subscript Page 768 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 69    PIERCE TRANSIT  Route 497 is operated by Pierce Transit in partnership with the City of Auburn, and King County  Metro Transit. It operates peak hour weekday service between Lakeland Hills and the Auburn  Station. As a morning and evening service meeting Sounder trains, the Route 497 is a commuter  ‐ oriented route, but is open to all riders. In the future, the City hopes to expand the Route 497  to serve all peak hour Sounder trips. Because Route 497 primarily serves Sounder passengers,  and because it significantly reduces the demand for commuter parking at the Auburn Station  parking garage managed by Sound Transit, the Ccity is seeking financial participation from  Sound Transit in operating this route and making this a permanent route.  Vanpool Services are provided by Pierce Transit similar to those offered by King County Metro  Transit.  Future RapidRide I Line: The new Rroute 160 will become the RapidRide I Line in September  2023,; the first to serve the City of Auburn. City staff collaborate with Metro on this project, to  offer support, review, information, and help. King County Metro is applying for a grant to the  Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and Auburn supplied a support letter for the project and  grant application. When the new service begins, Auburn will be served with frequent and  reliable (10‐ to 15 ‐minutes) and reliable service, connecting Auburn to Kent and Renton nearly  24 hours a day.  SOUND TRANSIT  Sound Transit is the regional transit provider for the Puget Sound. It provides limited‐ stop,  transit services linking Auburn to major regional destinations in King and Pierce Counties. The  agency offers Sounder commuter rail and regional express bus services in Auburn.  Sounder Commuter Rail  Sound Transit operates the Sounder commuter rail service on the Lakewood‐Tacoma – Seattle  route via the BNSF Railway. Sound Transit provides weekday peak hour trips northbound to  Seattle in the morning and southbound from Seattle to Tacoma ‐Lakewood in the afternoon.  Reverse direction trips are also provided in each peak hour with limited mid‐day service. Some  connections are available between south line Sounder trains, which terminate in Seattle, and  north line Sounder trains from Everett to Seattle. Additional special event service to and from  Seattle for Mariners, Seahawks, Storm, and Sounders games on some weekends.  Currently, nine eight trains operate northbound to Seattle in the morning peak, with an  additional train during the mid‐morning, and ten eight trains return southbound during the PM  peak. Three One trains operates southbound to Tacoma/Lakewood in the morning and  northbound to Seattle in the early evening.      Commented [VB37]: technically, ST doesn't serve the  entire Puget Sound (its tax district doesn't extend into  Thurston County or into Kitsap or Island Counties), so  should this statement be more specific?  Commented [VB38]: the current schedule doesn't show  any mid‐day service, and only one reverse trip each in the  am and pm  Commented [VB39]: Is this still accurate, since they are  currently playing in Everett/UW? I didn't see any mention of  Sounder service for Storm games on the ST website (they  have a page talking about Storm games)  Commented [VB40]: Updated per the current schedule  (3/21 ‐ 9/21)  Page 769 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 70    Regional Express Bus Service  Route 566/567 offers daily weekday, limited‐ stop service between the Auburn Station, the  Kent Station, the Renton Transit Center, the Bellevue Transit Center, and the Overlake Transit  Center.  Route 577/578 offers daily limited‐ stop service between Puyallup, Sumner, Auburn, Federal  Way, and Seattle. The Route 577 provides service between the Federal Way Transit Center and  Seattle during the peak periods when the Sounder trains is in operation. The 578 provides  service between Puyallup and Seattle during the off‐peak hours when train service is not  currently provided.  Transit Facilities  Sound Transit owns and operates the Auburn Station located in downtown Auburn. This full ‐ service multi‐modal facility provides parking for a total of 633 vehicles in a 6‐story parking  garage and a surface parking lot. A new parking garage is expected to be available for transit  users in September 2023, offering an additional 525 parking stalls. A number of parking stalls  are reserved for carpool/vanpool, and a number of stalls are reserved for paying single ‐ occupant vehicles.  The facility currently handles approximately 470 daily bus trips. Approximately 3,000  passengers ride bus service to/from the station on a daily basis. Boardings at Auburn on  Sounder commuter rail are approximately 1,300 per day. The facility draws numerous transit  riders from outside Auburn including from outside the Sound Transit taxing District, the  geographic area where residents contribute tax revenue to fund Sound Transit.  MIT TRANSIT  The Muckleshoot TribeMIT runs two publicly available tTransit routes along State RoadSR 164.  The Reservation Route runs through the Tribe MIT community, and stops southeast of Les Gove  Park. It runs every 30 minutes starting at 7:00am. The Auburn Route Express runs from the  Tribe through the City of Auburn, making stops along the way. It runs every hour starting at  7:00am.  4.2 TRANSIT USER NEEDS    DEMOGRAPHICS  People use public transportation for two reasons: because they have to ride or because they  choose to ride. Carrying the choice rider, such as commuters, often has the greatest positive  impact on the transportation system by helping control peak hour traffic demand. But providing  a “safety net” of adequate transportation to those who absolutely depend on it is, arguably,  public transportation’s most important role.  Commented [VB41]: Should this tax district be described  in greater detail elsewhere? This is the first mention of it  and seems somewhat out of place  Commented [VB42]: reservation?  Commented [VB43]: reservation?  Page 770 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 71    There are a number of ways to identify “transit dependency,”, but the most effective way is to  identify locations with high concentrations of residents who have no vehicle available in their  household. An examination of the most recent year 2000 Census data available from the  Bureau of the Census shows that some areas of Auburn have a high number of households with  no vehicle available. This remains the most recent information available with the level of detail  necessary to identify needs on a block level. As a comparison baseline, 9 percent of Auburn  households have no vehicle available; this percentage is consistent with that of King County (9  percent) and slightly higher than that of Pierce County (8 percent). For the purpose of this  analysis, block groups with significant concentrations of residential development in which over  12 percent of households have no vehicle available are considered transit dependent areas.  There are eleven census block groups in Auburn in which over 12 percent of households have  no vehicle available, nine of which have significant concentrations of residential development  and are therefore identified as transit dependent areas. It is also notable that four of the nine  block groups with large concentrations of residential development have at least 20 percent of  households with no vehicle available. The nine block groups comprising the transit dependent  areas had a total of 3,698 households in 2000, 771 (21 percent) of which had no vehicle  available. Map 4‐2 shows the transit dependent areas and overlays the existing transit service  in order to identify if adequate transit service is available to these highly transit dependent  neighborhoods.  Comparing the neighborhoods in question to the transit route structure, it is apparent that the  vast majority of Auburn’s most transit dependent population lives within ¼ miles of a fixed ‐ route bus – the distance standard most often identified by the transit industry as a reasonable  walking distance to transit. An exception to that rule is the area near Dogwood Street SE north  of Auburn Way South where many of the transit dependent residents are located more than ¼  mile from fixed‐ route bus service.  In the future, it will be critical to ensure these areas continue to be well served by transit  service, both in terms of route and schedule coverage.  SERVICE COVERAGE  Generally speaking, local transit service coverage in Auburn is well‐ planned and well‐ operated.  Even thoughNevertheless, there are some areas of the community that do not have adequate  local service coverage, as well as some important regional bus links and commuter rail services  that have yet to be fully developed.  Local Bus Service  Some of Auburn’s most populated neighborhoods are deficient in local bus service, including  the West Hill, Lakeland Hills during the non‐peak hours, and parts of east and north Auburn.  The least served residential area of Auburn is West Hill, an area with approximately 5,000  residents with no transit service. Lakeland Hills, a planned residential community with  approximately 3,800 homes, has peak‐ hour service to downtown Auburn, but lacks all‐ day  Commented [VB44]: Number of vehicles available per  occupied housing unit is available at the block group level  for ACS, if that is useful for this analysis. Table B25044  Commented [VB45]: Is the analysis at the block or block  group level? Further down in this paragraph, only block  groups are referred to, not blocks.  Commented [VB46]: what is considered adequate transit  service. A lot of time is spent explaining what transit  dependent areas are, but we don't have an explanation of  what is considered adequate transit service  Commented [VB47R46]: We talk about distance from  routes below as a measure, but should we also take route  frequency into account as a measure of service adequacy?  Commented [VB48]: within a 1/4 mile of the route or of  a stop?  Commented [VB49R48]: Also, ideally, I think an analysis  that shows 1/4 mile from stops via walking (along streets,  or, ideally, sidewalks), rather than euclidean, distance  should be done (I know how to do it!), if this is an area we  want to focus on  Page 771 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 72    service. Lea Hill, a predominantly residential community on Auburn’s east hill, has two transit  routes, which that predominantly serve Green River College, leaving a large portion of the  residents unable to walk to a transit route. In 2014, a license plate survey of the Auburn Station  garage indicated that a substantial number of Lea Hill residents utilize transit service at Auburn  Station. This suggests that a commuter‐ oriented shuttle serving Lea Hill, similar to the Route  497 shuttle implemented in Lakeland Hills, could be successful.  Additionally, residential areas of east Auburn, east of M Street NE and south of 8th Street NE,  and parts of northeast Auburn, east of I Street NE, are also located more than ¼ mile from fixed  ‐route bus service. It is difficult for these areas to access transit, both for local and regional  trips.  The design of King County Metro’s local bus routes in Auburn should be reviewed in relation to  future changes in Sound Transit’s Sounder commuter rail and regional express bus services to  identify opportunities and priorities for productive improvements to transit coverage,  frequency, and hours of operation.  Regional Bus Service  The most important unmet regional transit need is for all‐ day, express bus and commuter rail  service between Auburn, Tacoma/Lakewood, and Seattle. While the original Sound Transit  Regional Express Bus Service Plan contained a direct link between Auburn and  Tacoma/Lakewood, the connection was discontinued in Sound Transit’s later service plans.  Sounder Commuter Rail  Sounder Commuter Rail, a highly popular and attractive service, operates bi‐directionally in the  peak periods. Most of the trips are operated in the peak direction:; northbound during the  weekday AM peak and southbound during the weekday PM peak. No midday, evening, or  weekend regular service is currently provided, except for the special events times. These  services are needed, as is additional capacity on some of the currently most popular runs.  Intercity Passenger Rail  Auburn is an ideal location for a future stop on the Pacific Northwest Rail Corridor, which runs  from Vancouver, BC to Eugene, OR. A former iIntercity passenger rail stop and Amtrak city,  Auburn is centrally located in South King County at the intersection of SR‐18 and SR‐167 and is a  10‐ minute drive from I‐5. The Auburn Station is the only facility in King or Pierce County with  direct freeway access, and currently serves over 3,000 bus passengers and 1,300 commuter rail  passengers, and is centrally located within 10 miles of 500,000 people. Amtrak should  implement more intercity rail stations in the high density and traffic congested areas of Puget  Sound, such as at Auburn Station. A new Auburn stop would have great ridership benefits since  it is at a station with available overnight parking and is in close proximity to hundreds of  thousands of potential new customers. Furthermore, the projected schedule impacts of a stop  in Auburn could be largely absorbed in the overall route schedule.  Commented [VB50]: Since these are identified here, I  think they should be considered as measures of adequate  service  Page 772 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 73    TRANSIT SCHEDULING  The scheduling of transit service is often as important as route alignment and coverage in  determining the success of the service.  Scheduling to Successfully Serve Employers  One of the most overlooked aspects of transit system design is scheduled transit arrival times  versus major employer shift times. While a transit system can physically serve the front door of  a business, its actual scheduled arrival times will often determine if anyone rides the system. It  is not the intention of this effort to conduct an exhaustive employer shift time analysis of the  community. However, an example of the challenge can be found in examining one of Auburn’s  major employers, the Boeing Company with over 6,000 employees. The company’s primary  morning shift time arrival occurs at 6 AM, yet the earliest southbound Sounder train from  Seattle, arrives in Auburn at 6:32 AM. The first run of the day for the Metro Route 181 from  Federal Way and Lea Hill arrives near Boeing at approximately 6 AM, making it difficult for  employees to meet the shift time. The first runs of the Route 917, which serve the nearby GSA  and SSA offices, arrive after the Boeing shift time as well. None of the existing bus routes stop  close enough to the Boeing facility to allow employees to walk to the facility. This shows how it  is beneficial to continue to coordinate with major employers to offer alternate transit options  that can meet various shift times, such as dedicated Vanpools or Vanshares.  The lack of transit schedule synchronization with key employers in a community can also  negatively impact other opportunities. The City of Auburn, in partnership with Metro Transit,  was the first agency in the Puget Sound to create the concept of ‘Van Share’, a specialized  transit service in which Vvanpools carry employees to their employer’s front door from regional  transit centers. Where the schedules work, such as in providing a direct link between Boeing’s  Renton facilities and the Tukwila Station, the concept has been highly successful. On the other  end of the trip, the Van Share concept can be successfully implemented to transport employees  between their homes and the tTransit Sstation, saving capacity on the roadway and at the  Auburn Station parking facilities.  Due to the fact that Auburn’s major employer shift times sometimes don’t match Sounder and  regional bus transit arrival times, Van Share has not yet achieved its full potential in Auburn.  However, as Sounder and bus service to the Auburn Station increase, this option may become  more viable for major employers in Auburn.  To maximize the investment in public transit service in Auburn, it is recommended that both  Sound Transit and Metro Transit conduct an evaluation of their schedules with a focus on  improving service to major employers in the Auburn area.  Transit Capacity  A second consideration in scheduling service is ensuring that enough service is available to  meet the demand.  Commented [VB51]: is it Vanshare (as seen in the  previous paragraph) or Van Share?  Page 773 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 74    Sounder Ccommuter Rrail has also been immensely popular, indicating that increased service is  supported by the ridership demand. Daily Sounder boardings at south end stations total around  6,000 riders, the equivalent of a lane of traffic on SR‐ 167 or I 5, emphasizing the importance of  expanding Sounder service.  The Auburn Station is a highly successful component of the Sounder service. Total rail boardings  at the Auburn Station today averages over 1,300 riders per day, making Auburn one of the  busiest stations on the Sounder route.  URBAN DESIGN  The design of the buildt environment has direct implications on the quality and availability of  transit service. Urban design can either encourage or inhibit the provision of local transit  service. Some inhibitors to providing neighborhood service include inadequate street geometry  and construction, lack of a satisfactory location for a terminal at the end of the route, absence  of a street grid that could be used to turn around a bus, and the absence of a connected  sidewalk network. Ideally, new residential developments should be laid out with future transit  route alignments in mind and supporting transit facilities. Likewise, retrofits of the existing  street network should accommodate transit design considerations.  IMPROVING LOCAL SERVICE  Preserving the Route 910  Since 2010, Auburn and Metro Transit have partnered through the Transit Now initiative to  implement community shuttle circulator service. The Route 910 shuttle serves nNortheast  Auburn commercial and activity areas. The service has become steadily more popular, doubling  in productivity since its inception. This partnership route between, Auburn and King County  Metro has now been extended until 2020, when. Tthe Transit Now initiative was terminated in  2020. The rRoute 910 service was discontinued in 2020 when the COVID‐19 pandemic caused  service reductions, and was has not been renewed due to the added service frequency along  Auburn Way N, along former rRoute 180, and the changes and added frequency to Rroute 917.    Preserve and Expand Commuter Connection Bus Routes  Auburn should work with Pierce Transit, Metro Transit, and Sound Transit to preserve the  Route   497 and add service to the Rroute to meet all existing and future Sounder trains, while  encouraging Sound Transit to fund a portion of the Route 497.  Auburn should explore the concept with Metro Transit and Sound Transit of adding a new  commuter bus/van service to the Sounder from Lea Hill and the wWest hHill of Auburn with  Metro Transit and Sound Transit and encourage Sound Transit to fund a portion of the routes.  Commented [VB52]: a lane at what length?  Commented [VB53]: So, are we advocating for preserving  Rout 910? If so, we should add a sentence or two explicitly  saying that and why the added service frequency and  changes mentioned (Routes 180 and 917) aren't adequate  Page 774 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 75    Similar to the Route 497, these routes would be timed to meet Sounder trains and operate on a  direct route and express schedule after leaving the Lea Hill or wWest hHill areas. These  potential services are particularly relevant given Metro Transit’s recent focus on the expanded  use of Aalternative sService concepts for covering areas which that cannot support the use of a  traditional fixed‐ route bus but which are still in need of public transportation.  TRANSIT FACILITIES  Transit facilities include parking, bust stop, and pedestrian facilities. Transit parking facilities  stand out as the facility improvement of greatest ongoing need. One type of transit facility  improvement stands out as the most important ongoing need: parking. Comparing the number  of current Sounder daily boardings (1,300) to the available number of parking stalls at the  Auburn Station (633) and the number of passengers who transfer daily from bus to Sounder  (approximately 150) shows there is a lack of parking for Sounder at the Auburn Station.  Additional train trips are currently being planned, including three new round trips, and these  will attract more ridership (and result in more parking needs) in downtown Auburn.  Although there is always a desire to have as many people as possible access commuter rail  without parking, the reality of the service is that it is usually used by customers who want to  start and end their day with a direct, fast trip to and from the station. Only the Route 497 is  specifically designed to link commuters to the Sounder. It accounts for the majority of transfers  between bus service and rail service. Given the strength of the demand for the Sounder and the  location of many of its users, other lifestyle choices (bike, pedestrian, or TOD) will also not be  sufficient to ultimately negate the continued demand for more parking.  ThereforeSo, for the foreseeable future, parking will be a continuing challenge at the Auburn  Station and even more will be needed as three more Sounder roundtrips are added, as  scheduled in 2016 and 2017.  Building the infrastructure to accommodate commuter parking demand is an essential  component of making transit an attractive option for commuters. In order to do so, action is  essential to clearly identify the future demand and acquire the land needed to build the  parking. The plans created in ST2 and ST3, which were approved by voters in 2008 and 2016  respectively, (ST2 is the Sound Transit Plan approved by voters during 2008, ST3 was approved  by voters in November 2016 to build parking should be followed. If this is not done,  neighborhoods within walking distance of Auburn Station, particularly those bordering W Main  Street, will experience an increase in on‐street commuter parking, making it difficult for  residents to find parking during the day and early evening. To combat this issue, the City has  established a restricted parking zone for residents to the west of C Street NW,; however the  problem may, however, begin in other locations. Sound Transit should also examine the usage  of the Auburn Station garage by people who live outside the Sound Transit Taxing District. The  agency should consider requiring those users to pay to park in the Auburn Station garage. In a  Commented [VB54]: Added the introductory sentence to  make later transitions into paragraphs about other transit  facilities smoother. Reworded the second sentence due to  the added introductory sentence.  Commented [VB55]: Is this saying that the three  additional roundtrips were scheduled in 2016 and 2017, or  that the roundtrips are in addition to the roundtrips that  were scheduled in 2016 and 2017? Either way, does this  need to be updated?  Page 775 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 76    2014 survey of the vehicles parked at the Auburn facility, over 90 vehicles (15 percent of the  parking supply) were registered at addresses outside the Sound Transit Taxing District.  Bus shelters in Auburn are installed and maintained by King County Metro Transit is responsible  for installing new and maintaining existing bus shelters in Auburn. Both the City and agency  Metro Transit should continue to prioritize potential improvements to shelters, benches, pads,  bus zones, customer information, and pedestrian access. Currently, about 20 Metro bus stops  that meet warrants for the installation of shelters have not received them yet and City staff is  focused on working with Metro to accomplish that installation.  Pedestrian improvements around existing or planned transit stops, including enhanced  crosswalks and pedestrian refuges, should also be examined by the City. The placement of bus  stops is driven by a variety of criteria including transit system operating and design standards,  professional engineering field evaluation, and public input.  4.3 TRANSIT SYSTEM RECOMMENDATIONS  This section contains the recommendations derived from the transit needs assessment, as  discussed in the first part of this chapter. Recommendations are organized by lead agency, with  the understanding that implementation of any major system improvement will require the  collaboration of many multiple agencies.  KING COUNTY METRO TRANSIT  Explore partnering with Metro Transit and the Muckleshoot Indian tribeMIT to create a new  route combining the best features of the former Route 919 and the MIT tribal shuttle to provide  better transit service to the city and the Reservation.  Work with Metro Transit to create new, limited stop AM and PM peak transit services designed  for commuters from Lea Hill and wWest hHill to and from the downtown Auburn Station.  Conduct an evaluation of transit schedules; improve service to major employers.  Work with Metro Transit to add service to the Route 497 to meet more Sounder trains.  Work with Metro Transit to implement the Rapid Ride I line, which is part of Metro Connects.  Work with Metro Transit to introduce new Mobility Options to improve access to Rapid Ride   and other high‐ capacity transit services, such as Sound Transit commuter rail and regional bus  routes.  Explore, assist, and encourage the implementation of commuter Vanpool and Van Share, linking  Boeing to the Auburn Station, to meet Sounder and Regional bus routes.  PIERCE TRANSIT  Work with Pierce Transit to add service to the Route 497 to meet more Sounder trains.  Commented [VB56]: Just shelters? Or all bus stop  amenities (signs, benches where there are no shelters, etc)?  Page 776 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 77    SOUND TRANSIT  Work with Sound Transit to add service to the Route 497 to meet more Sounder trains and fund  a portion of the rRoute.  Work with Sound Transit to add new commuter bus service to the Sounder from Lea Hill and  West Hill and fund a portion of the routes.  Institute midday Sounder service to and from Tacoma/Lakewood and Seattle, and plan for  evening and weekend service in the near future.  Address the loss of existing parking at the Auburn Station due to the use of the overcrowded  Sounder parking facility by Sounder riders who live outside the Sound Transit tTaxing dDistrict  and pay nothing for the facility.  Continue to work with the City of Auburn to create additional parking near the Auburn Station,  as specified in ST2.   CITY OF AUBURN  Partner with local transit agencies to provide transit service similar to the rRoute 497 to serve  other areas of Auburn, including the Lea Hill Area. The route would collect commuters to  provide them access to the Sounder Sstation in downtown Auburn.   Explore partnering with the Muckleshoot Indian TribeMIT to create a new route combining the  best features of the former Route 919 and the MIT tribal shuttle to provide better transit  service to the City and the Reservation.  Work with Pierce Transit and Metro Transit to add service to the Route 497 to meet more  Sounder trains and encourage Sound Transit to fund a portion of the Route 497 to continue the  route in service for multiple years beyond 2016.  Continue to work with Sound Transit to address the loss of existing parking at the Auburn  Station due to the use of the overcrowded Sounder parking facility by Sounder riders who live  outside the Sound Transit tTaxing dDistrict and pay nothing for the facility.     Commented [VB57]: use? Loss sounds weird in this  context.  Page 777 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 78    CHAPTER 5 – POLICIES  Transportation objectives and policies establish the framework for realizing the City’s vision of  its transportation system. Policies provide guidance for the City, other governmental entities,  and private developers, enabling the City to achieve its goal in accordance with the City’s  Comprehensive Plan. The policy framework presented below is a guideline, which the City will  use to evaluate individual projects and address its infrastructure needs.  The objectives and policies are organized according to five broad headings. The first heading,  Coordination, Planning, and Implementation, addresses the system comprehensively, detailing  policies that pertain to the planning and implementation of the system as a whole. The  subsequent four headings list policies specific to the following systems: Street Ssystem, Non‐ mMotorized sSystem, Transit Ssystem, and Air Ttransportation. The analysis of the  transportation system, as well as any individual proposals, shall consider all modes of  transportation and all methods of efficiently managing the network.  GOAL  To plan, expand, and improve the transportation system in cooperation and coordination with  adjacent and regional jurisdictions to ensure concurrency compliance with the gGrowth  Mmanagement aAct, and to provide a safe and efficient multimodal system that meets the  community needs and facilitates the land use plan.  5.1 COORDINATION, PLANNING, AND IMPLEMENTATION  OBJECTIVE: COORDINATION  To be consistent with regional plans and the plans of neighboring cities, to encourage partnerships,  and not to unreasonably preclude an adjacent jurisdiction from implementing its planned  improvements.  Coord‐01: Coordinate transportation operations, planning, and improvements with other  transportation authorities and governmental entities (cities, counties, tribes, state, federal) to  address transportation issues. These include:   Improvement of the state highway network through strong advocacy with state officials,  both elected and staff, for improvements to state highways and interchanges;   Improvements to roadways connecting Auburn to the surrounding region, including SR ‐ 167, SR‐ 18, SR‐ 181/West Valley Hwy, SR‐ 164, and S 277th Street;   Improved access to the Interstate ‐5 corridor and regional employment centers;   Transit connections to the Regional Growth Centers;   Establishing the Auburn Station as a center for multi‐modal transportation connections to  proposed future intercity rail service;   Strong advocacy with US Ccongressional members to provide funding to mitigate  transportation problems connected to interstate commerce; and  Page 778 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 79     Proactively pursuing forums to coordinate transportation project priorities among other  governmental entities, including proposed future intercity rail service.    OBJECTIVE: LONG‐RANGE PLANNING & AND PROGRAMMING  To continue to plan for the future of the multi‐modal transportation system through long‐range  planning, programmatic planning, and financial planning, in compliance with the Growth  Management ActGMA.  Plan‐01: The Comprehensive Transportation Plan shall be evaluated and amended annually to  ensure it is technically accurate, consistent with state, regional, and other local plans, and in  keeping with the City's vision of the future transportation system.  Plan‐02: The Six‐Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Capital Facilities Plan  (CFP) shall be updated annually to reevaluate project priorities, develop a plan to fund capital  improvement projects, and ensure consistency between project priorities and financing plans.  Project evaluation criteria shall foster economic development, maximize utilization of city  financing to match transportation grants, promote safety, integrate planning of other projects  requiring disturbance of pavements, promote mobility, and optimize the utilization of existing  infrastructure.  OBJECTIVE: SAFETY  To provide a transportation system that is safe for all users.  Safety‐01: A safe and efficient transportation system shall be prioritized over driving  convenience.  Safety‐02: Utilize education to increase awareness of existing traffic laws and safety issues,  especially as they relate to pedestrians and bicyclists.  Safety‐03: Engage the community in transportation issues through public involvement and  partnerships with organizations such as the Auburn School District.  Safety‐04: Identify areas with persistent traffic violations and address these violations, in part,  through Police Department enforcement.  Safety‐05: Emphasize enforcement of the "rules of the road" for pedestrians, bicyclists, and  motorists whose actions endanger others. Conduct enforcement in a manner that reinforces  the messages found in non‐motorized education and& safety programs.  Safety‐06: Recognize the potential effects of hazards on transportation facilities and  incorporate such considerations into the planning and design of transportation projects, where  feasible.     Page 779 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 80    OBJECTIVE: CONNECTIVITY  To provide a highly interconnected network of streets and trails for ease and variety of travel.  Connect‐01: An efficient transportation system seeks to spread vehicle movements over a  series of planned streets. The goal of the system is to encourage connectivity while preventing  unacceptably high traffic volumes on any one street. Ample alternatives should exist to  accommodate access for emergency vehicles. For these reasons the City will continue to plan a  series of collectors and arterials designed to national standards to provide efficient service to  the community.  Connect‐02: Encourage the use of trails and other connections that provide ease of travel  within and between neighborhoods, community activity centers, and transit services.  Development patterns that block direct pedestrian access are discouraged. Ample alternatives  should exist to accommodate non‐motorized transportation on arterials, collectors, and local  roads.  OBJECTIVE: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  Minimize the environmental impacts of all new transportation projects and transportation related  improvements.  Environ‐01: Thoroughly evaluate the impacts of all transportation projects and apply  appropriate mitigation measures in conformance with SEPA,; the Critical Areas Ordinance,; and  other city, county, state, and federal regulations.  Environ‐02: Identify and consider the environmental impacts of transportation projects at the  earliest possible time to ensure planning and decisions reflect environmental values, to avoid  delays later in the process, and to reduce or avoid potential problems that may adversely  impact the environment and project outcome.  Environ‐03: Incorporate Low Impact Development (LID), green technology, and sustainability  practices into transportation improvements as primary alternatives whenever feasible.  Environ‐04: Support efforts to improve air quality throughout the Auburn area and develop a  transportation system compatible with the goals of the Federal and State Clean Air Acts.  Environ‐05: Require air quality studies of future major development to assess impacts created  by site generated traffic.    OBJECTIVE: LEVEL‐OF‐SERVICE (LOS) THRESHOLD  To ensure that new development does not degrade transportation facilities to below LOS standards.  LOS‐01: New development shall not be allowed when the impacts of the new development on  the transportation system degrades the LOS to below the adopted LOS standard, unless the  impacts are mitigated concurrent with the development as described in Chapter 2.  LOS‐02: The term "below level‐of‐service" shall apply to situations where traffic attributed to a  development likely results in any of the following.   An unacceptable increase in hazard or an unacceptable decrease in safety at an  Formatted: Space After: 8 pt, Keep with next, Tab stops: Not at 6.44" Formatted: Keep with next Formatted: Keep lines together Commented [VB58]: We use LID for local improvement  district previously, so I don't think we should use LID here to  avoid confusion  Page 780 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 81    intersection or on a roadway segment.   An accelerated deterioration of the street pavement condition or the proposed regular use  of a street not designated as a truck route for truck movements that can reasonably result  in accelerated deterioration of the street pavement.   An unacceptable impact on geometric design conditions at an intersection where two truck  routes meet on the City arterial and collector network.   An increase in congestion which constitutes an unacceptable adverse environmental  impact under the State Environmental Policy ActSEPA.   An increase in queuing that causes blocking of adjacent land uses or intersections.   A reduction in any of the four (4) LOS standards below.    1. Arterial and Collector Corridor LOS: The level‐of‐serviceLOS standard for each arterial and  collector corridor is “D”, unless otherwise specified in Chapter 2 of this plan. The City may  require a development or redevelopment to examine a shorter or longer corridor segment  than is specified in Chapter 2, to ensure a project's total LOS impacts are evaluated.  2. Signalized Intersection LOS: The level‐of‐serviceLOS standard for signalized intersections is  “D”, with the following exceptions:; for signalized intersections of two aArterial roads the level‐ of‐serviceLOS standard during the AM and PM peak periods is “E” for a maximum duration of  30 minutes and for signalized intersections of two Principal Arterial roads the level‐of‐ serviceLOS standard during the AM and PM peak periods is “E” for a maximum duration of 60  minutes. The City may require a development or redevelopment to examine individual  signalized or roundabout intersections for LOS impacts to ensure a project's total LOS impacts  are evaluated.  3. Two‐Way and All‐Way Stop Controlled Intersection LOS: The level‐of‐serviceLOS standard  for two‐ way stop controlled and all‐way stop controlled intersections, is “D”. If LOS falls below  the standard, analysis and mitigation may be required in a manner commensurate with the  associated impacts. This may include, among other requirements, conducting a traffic signal  warrant analysis and installing or financing a signal or roundabout.  4. Roundabout Intersection LOS: The level‐of‐serviceLOS standard for roundabout controlled  intersections is “D”. The City may require a development or redevelopment to examine to  examine roundabout intersections for LOS impacts to ensure a project’s total LOS impacts are  evaluated.  LOS‐03: Establish a multi‐modal level‐of‐serviceLOS system in the future.  LOS‐04: PM level of serviceLOS is the city standard. AM level of serviceLOS may need to be  analyzed in situations where specialized conditions exist that disproportionately impact AM  traffic.  OBJECTIVE: CONCURRENCY  To ensure transportation facilities do not fall below the adopted level‐of‐serviceLOS standard, as  required by the Growth Management ActGMA.  GMA‐01: Require developments to construct or finance transportation improvements and/or  Page 781 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 82    implement strategies that mitigate the impacts of new development concurrent with (within 6  years of) development, as required by the Growth Management ActGMA.  GMA‐02: New development that lowers a facility’s level‐of‐serviceLOS standard below the  locally adopted minimum standard shall be denied, as required by the Growth Management  ActGMA. Strategies that may allow a development to proceed include, but are not limited to:   Reducing the scope of a project (e.g., platting fewer lots or building less square  footage);   Building or financing new transportation improvements concurrent with (within 6 years  of) development;   Phasing/delaying a project;   Requiring the development to incorporate Transportation Demand ManagementTDM  strategies; or   Lowering level‐of‐service LOS standards.  GMA‐03: The denial of development in order to maintain concurrency may be grounds for  declaring an emergency for the purpose of amending the Comprehensive Plan outside of the  annual amendment cycle.    OBJECTIVE: QUALITY OF LIFE  To improve the quality of life for Auburn residents and businesses through design of the  transportation system.  QOL‐01: Enhance the livability of Auburn through a variety of mechanisms, including the  innovative design and construction of roadways, non‐ motorized facilities, and associated  improvements. Apply design standards that result in attractive and functional transportation  facilities.    OBJECTIVE: TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT (TSM)  To efficiently operate the existing transportation system through Transportation System Management  (TSM) strategies, thereby maximizing resources and reducing the need for costly system capacity  expansion projects.  TSM‐01: Use TSM strategies to more efficiently utilize the existing infrastructure to optimize  traffic flow and relieve congestion. Examples include:   Re‐channelization/restriping, adding turn lanes, adding /increasing number of through  lanes;   Signal interconnect and optimization;   Turn movement restrictions;   Access mManagement; and   Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS).  TSM‐02: Support Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) implementation in coordination with  Map 2‐7. Future ITS corridors will be prioritized using the following criteria.  Page 782 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 83     Grants, loans, or partner funding can be leveraged to expand the ITS system on a  specific corridor(s).   There is eExisting infrastructure that would make it easier and more cost efficient to  implement ITS elements.   The corridor(s) completes a logical segment or missing link in the citywide ITS network.   Significant travel‐ time savings can be achieved with ITS implementation.   Corridor(s) supports other City communication and technology needs.   ITS implementation would have significant safety benefits, including reducing the need  for police flaggers in intersections during events.  TSM‐03: ITS elements include but are not limited to:   Operational improvements such as traffic signal coordination;   Traveler information including traffic alerts and emergency notification;   Incident management; and   Traffic data collection.  TSM‐04: Require development to contribute its share of ITS improvements as mitigation.  TSM‐05: Program signal timing to encourage specific movements and the use of travel routes  that are underutilized.    OBJECTIVE: TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM)  To utilize transportation demand managementTDM strategies to lessen demand for increased street  system capacity, help maintain the LOS standard, and enhance quality of life for those who use and  benefit from the transportation system.  TDM‐01: Encourage the use of high‐occupancy vehiclesHOVs (buses, carpool, and vanpool)  through both private programs and under the direction of Metro and Pierce Transit.  TDM‐02: Promote reduced employee travel during the daily peak travel periods through  flexible work schedules and programs to allow employees to work part‐time or full‐time or at  alternate work sites closer to home.  TDM‐03: Encourage employers to provide TDM measures in the workplace through such  programs as preferential parking for high‐occupancy vehiclesHOVs, car sharing, improved  access for transit vehicles, and employee incentives for using high‐occupancy vehiclesHOVs.  TDM‐04: In making funding decisions, consider transportation investments that support  transportation demand managementTDM approaches by providing alternatives to single‐ occupant vehiclesSOVs, such as transit, bikeways, and pedestrian paths.  TDM‐05: Recognize that emerging TDM strategies such as tolling, variable‐priced lanes, and car  sharing may be effective in certain situations.  TDM‐06: Coordinate with Metro and other jurisdictions to enhance Commute Trip Reduction  (CTR) programs for CTR employers in Auburn.  TDM‐07: Lead by example through implementation of a thorough and successful Commute‐Trip  Page 783 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 84    Reduction (CTR) Program for City employees.       Page 784 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 85    OBJECTIVE: PARKING  To ensure adequate coordination of parking needs with traffic and development needs and support  development of a regional park‐and ride lot system by Metro Transit, Pierce Transit, Sound Transit,  and the Washington State Department of TransportationWSDOT.  Parking‐01: On‐street parking should be allowed only when consistent with the function of the  street and with traffic volumes.  Parking‐02: New developments should provide adequate off‐street parking to meet their  needs.  Parking‐03: Develop and maintain regulations, which that foster a balance between meeting  the need for public parking and ensuring developers provide adequate parking to meet the  demand generated by new development.  Parking‐04: In certain cases, such as in the Regional Growth Center and in areas with high  pedestrian and transit use, it may be appropriate to reduce the developer parking obligation to  achieve other community benefits or employ innovative parking strategies such as the use of  "park‐ and‐& walk" lots, where people could park their vehicles and walk to nearby  destinations.  Parking‐05: The City shall evaluate new residential subdivisions with constrained space for  driveways, utility services, street lights, street trees, and fire hydrants and the resultant impact  on the provision of adequate on‐street parking. Where appropriate, the City shall require the  subdivision to provide dispersed locations of on‐street parking (or street accessible parking) to  meet their needs in addition to the zoning code required off‐street parking.  Parking‐06: Encourage park‐ & and‐ride lots on sites adjacent to compatible land uses with  convenient access to the Auburn Station, SR‐ 18, SR‐ 167, and all regional transportation  corridors.  Parking‐07: Work proactively with Sound Transit, WSDOT, Metro Transit, and Pierce Transit to  ensure the adequate supply of park‐ & and‐ride capacity in Auburn.    OBJECTIVE: RIGHT‐OF‐WAY  To retain and preserve existing right‐of‐wayROW, and identify and acquire new right‐of‐wayROW as  needed to achieve the City's objectives.  ROW‐01: The acquisition and preservation of right‐of‐wayROW is a key component of  maintaining a viable transportation system. Methods used to acquire and preserve right‐of‐ wayROW include:   Requiring dedication of right‐of‐wayROW as a condition of development;   Purchasing right‐of‐wayROW at fair market value; and   Acquiring development rights and easements from property owners.  ROW‐02: Preserve and protect existing right‐of‐wayROW through the issuance of permits such  as ROW Use Ppermits and franchise agreements, by monitoring and responding to right‐of‐  wayROW encroachments and safety impacts, and by limiting vacations of public right‐of‐ wayROW.  Formatted: Keep with next Page 785 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 86    ROW‐03: Vacate right‐of‐wayROW only when it clearly will not be a future need or to support  economic development.    OBJECTIVE: MAINTENANCE AND PRESERVATION  To maintain the City’s transportation system at a level that is comparable with the design standards  applied to new facilities.  Prsrv‐01: Establish programs and schedules for the level and frequency of roadway and non‐  motorized system maintenance.  Prsrv‐02: In order to help ensure the long ‐term preservation of the city street system, the City  shall prohibit non‐local trip heavy vehicles from traveling on city streets , unless the City  permits such travel via the issuance of a temporary haul permit that requires appropriate  mitigation.  Prsrv‐03: Establish standards of street repair and seek to obtain sufficient financing to attain  and maintain a safe system in good condition.  Prsrv‐04: Continue to implement the “Save Our Streets” program for maintenance and  rehabilitation of local streets.  Prsrv‐05: Continue to implement the arterial/collector streets maintenance and rehabilitation  program.  Prsrv‐06: Develop and implement operations and maintenance procedures to ensure ongoing  effectiveness of LID infrastructure.  Prsrv‐07: In order to help ensure the long‐ term preservation of the city street system, the City  may prohibit trenching or cutting into newly constructed or newly overlaid pavements for a  period of 5 years. Overlays of up to the full roadway width of affected pavement surface should  be required as mitigation in the event cuts into new pavements cannot be avoided.  Prsrv‐08: City shall notify and coordinate with all private and public utilities within the City  limits when planning to complete pavement overlay’s or reconstruction.                        Save our Streets – Patching Treatment                        Save our Streets‐ Overlay       Commented [VB59]: Which LID is this referring to? Local  improvement district or low impact development?  Formatted: Tab stops: 1.38", Centered + 4.69", Centered + Not at 6.44" Page 786 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 87    5.2 STREET SYSTEM    OBJECTIVE: COMPLETE STREETS  Ensure Auburn’s transportation system is designed to enable comprehensive, integrated, safe access  for users of all abilities, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, transit riders and operators, and  truck operators.  Street‐01: Plan for and develop a balanced transportation system, which provides safe access  and connectivity to transportation facilities for users of all ages and abilities, including  pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, transit users and operators, and truck operators.  Street‐02: Plan for, design, and construct all transportation projects, whether City led or  development driven, to provide appropriate accommodation for bicyclists, pedestrians, and  transit users in a manner consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, except in situations where  the establishment of such facilities would be contrary to public health and safety or the cost  would be excessively disproportionate to the need.  Street‐03: Ensure the transportation system meets the requirements outlined in the Americans  with Disabilities Act (ADA) ) and the ADA Transition Plan for Facilities in the Public Right‐Oof‐ Way and its policies.  Street‐04: The Auburn Engineering Design Standards is the primary vehicle for executing the  Complete Streets Objective and should include standards for each roadway classification to  guide implementation.  Street‐05: Context and flexibility in balancing user needs shall be considered in the design of all  projects and, if necessary, a deviation from the Auburn Engineering Design Standards may be  granted to ensure the Complete Streets Objective and supporting policies are achieved.    OBJECTIVE: STREET NETWORK  To provide an integrated street network of appropriate classes of streets designed to facilitate  different types of traffic flows and access needs.  Street‐06: The city street system shall be made up of three classes of streets:   Arterials ‐ a system of city, county, and state streets designed to move traffic to or  from major traffic and activity generators. Arterials should be adequate in number,  appropriately situated, and designed to accommodate moderate to high traffic  volumes with a minimum of flow disruption.   Collectors ‐ a system of city streets that collect traffic and move it from the local street  system to the arterial street system.   Local streets ‐ a system of city streets, which collect traffic from individual sites and  conveys the traffic to the collector and arterial systems.  Street‐07: The Functional Roadway Classifications Map shall serve as the adopted standard for  identifying classified streets in the City of Auburn and the potential annexation areas.  Street‐08: Ensure all eligible streets classified in the Comprehensive Transportation Plan are  Formatted: Keep with next Formatted: Space Before: 6 pt Page 787 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 88    federally classified.  Street‐09: Street standards shall be developed, modified, and implemented that reflect the  street classification system and function. The design and management of the street network  shall seek to improve the appearance of existing street corridors. Streets are recognized as an  important component of the public spaces within the City and should include, where  appropriate, landscaping to enhance the appearance of city street corridors. The standards  should include provisions for streetscaping.  Street‐10: The classification standards adopted in the Auburn Engineering Design Standards are  considered the City’s minimum standards for new streets. In cases in which the City attempts to  rebuild an existing street within an established right‐ of‐wayROW, the City Council reserves the  authority to determine if additional right‐of‐wayROW should be obtained in order to realize the  improvement. Preservation of neighborhood continuity and cohesiveness will be respected.  Street‐11: The standards for residential streets may be modified in cross section to provide  better relationships between the different components of the street including, but not limited  to, on‐street parking, the landscape strip, and the sidewalk. Among other objectives, this may  be done to balance the need to provide adequate parking and buffer pedestrians from traffic.  Street‐12: These minimum standards do not limit or prevent developers from providing  facilities that exceed the City’s standards.  Street‐13: Encourage King and Pierce Ccounties to develop and implement a similar system of  arterial designations within Auburn's potential annexation area.  Street‐14: Designate new arterials to serve developing areas concurrent with approval of such  development. Arterials shall be spaced in compliance with good transportation network  planning principles, and support the importance of overall system circulation.  Street‐15: Encourage King and Pierce cCounties to develop and implement a similar system of  collector designations within Auburn's potential annexation area.  Street‐16: Designate new collectors to serve developing areas concurrent with approval of such  development. Collectors shall be spaced in compliance with good transportation network  planning principles, and support the importance of overall system circulation.  Street‐17: Access tTracts may be permitted, as long as emergency access can be guaranteed at  all times.  Street‐18: The local street network shall be developed to maximize the efficiency of the  transportation network in residential areas and minimize through traffic in neighborhoods.   The internal local residential street network for a subdivision should be designed to  discourage regional through traffic and non‐residential traffic from penetrating the  subdivision or adjacent subdivisions.   Where possible, streets shall be planned, designed, and constructed to connect to  future development.   When applicable, non‐motorized paths shall be provided at the end of dead end streets  to shorten walking distances to an adjacent arterial or public facilities including, but not  Page 788 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 89    limited to, schools and parks.   Residential developments should be planned in a manner that minimizes the number of  local street accesses to arterials and collectors.   To promote efficient connectivity between areas of the community, existing stub end  streets shall be linked to other streets in new development whenever the opportunity  arises and the resulting traffic volumes are not likely to exceed acceptable volumes as  identified in the Auburn Engineering Design Standards.    OBJECTIVE: PRIVATE STREETS  To discourage the development of private streets and ensure, if they are permitted by the City, they  are constructed and maintained according to City standards.  Street‐19: Private streets are discouraged, but may be permitted on a discretionary basis, as  regulated by Ccity code and the Auburn Engineering Design Standards.  Street‐20: If a private street is permitted, it must be built to public street standards as identified  in the Auburn Engineering Design Standards and Construction Standards manuals.  Street‐21: Private streets must provide for emergency vehicle access and be privately  maintained by an approved association or business. The City does not maintain private streets.    OBJECTIVE: ACCESS MANAGEMENT  To limit and provide access to the street network in a manner which improves and maintains public  safety and roadway capacity.  Street‐22: Seek consolidation of access points to state highways, arterials, and collectors. This  will benefit the highway and city street system, reduce interference with traffic flows on  arterials, and discourage through traffic on local streets. To achieve this level of access control,  the City:   Adopts and supports the State’s controlled access policy on all state highway facilities;   May acquire access rights along some arterials and collectors;   Adopts design standards that identify access standards for each type of functional  street classification;   Encourages consolidation of access in developing commercial and high‐ density  residential areas through shared use of driveways and local access streets; and   Will establish standards for access management, develop a planning process to work  with the community, and implement access management solutions on arterial  corridors.  Street‐23: Strive to prevent negative impacts to existing businesses, without compromising  safety, when implementing access management.    OBJECTIVE: THROUGH TRAFFIC  To accommodate through traffic in the City as efficiently as possible, with a minimum of disruption to  neighborhoods.  Page 789 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 90    Street‐24: Continue to coordinate with the Washington State Department of  TransportationWSDOT to facilitate the movement of traffic through the City.  Street‐25: Encourage the State and Counties to develop through routes, which that minimize  the impact of through traffic on Auburn's residential neighborhoods.  Street‐26: Actively solicit action by the State and Counties to program and construct those  improvements needed to serve Auburn to the state and county arterial and freeway systems.    OBJECTIVE: TRAFFIC CALMING  To employ traffic calming techniques to improve safety and neighborhood quality.  Street‐27: Implement the City’s traffic calming program to improve neighborhood safety and  quality.  Street‐28: The traffic calming program shall require a technical analysis of existing conditions  and appropriate treatments before actions are taken to fund and implement traffic calming  measures.  Street‐29: The traffic calming program shall incorporate neighborhood involvement and seek  community support.  Street‐30: New construction should incorporate traffic calming measures, as appropriate.    OBJECTIVE: FREIGHT MOVEMENTS  To facilitate the movements of freight and goods through Auburn with minimal adverse traffic and  other environmental impacts.  Freight‐01: The movement of freight and goods is recognized as an important component of  Auburn’s transportation system.  Freight‐02: The movement of freight and goods which that serve largely national, state, or  regional needs should take place in such a way so that the impacts on the local transportation  system are minimized. These movements should take place primarily on state highways,  iInterstates, or on grade‐separated rail corridors in order to minimize the local impacts.  Freight‐03: Seek public and private partners to leverage funds for freight improvement projects  and associated mitigation.  Freight‐04: Continue to work with the Freight Mobility Roundtable, Freight Action Strategy  Team (FAST), FMSIB, and other local and regional groups to ensure regional needs are met, and  local impacts are mitigated.  Freight‐05: All through truck trips and the majority of local trips shall take place on designated  truck routes, as identified on the truck route map, Map 2‐3, of the Comprehensive  Transportation Plan. This policy shall not apply to developments and uses operating under  existing right‐of‐wayROW use permits, traffic mitigation agreements, or equivalent agreements  directly related to the regulation of permitted haul routes.  Freight‐06: If the City is unable to acquire funding to maintain existing truck routes to a  Pavement Condition Index Standard of 70 on a segment of roadway, that route may be  Commented [VB60]: Why are all the policies under the  Street System objectives thus far labeled 'Street‐XX', but  then the policies under the Freight Movement objective are  labeled 'Freight.' Also, the policies under the Coordination,  Planning, and Implementation heading were labeled after  their respective objective (e.g., GMA, TDM, Parking, etc).  Page 790 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 91    restricted or closed to truck travel.  Freight‐07: Work towards designing and constructing future truck routes, as identified on the  truck route map in Chapter 2 of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan, to sustain routine  truck traffic.  Freight‐08: Local truck trips that have origins and/or destinations in Auburn may have to  sometimes use routes not designated as truck routes. The City may approve the use of  alternate routes not currently designated as truck routes for truck traffic, with appropriate  mitigation. Approval may be made through issuance of right‐of‐wayROW use permits, traffic  mitigation agreements, or equivalent agreements.  Freight‐09: Development shall be required to mitigate the impacts of construction generated  truck traffic on the City’s transportation system, based on the City’s LOS standard.  Freight‐10: Temporary haul routes for overweight or oversized vehicles shall be permitted  under circumstances acceptable to the City and with appropriate mitigation. A temporary haul  permit must be obtained prior to the hauling of oversized or overweight freight.  Freight‐11: Truck traffic in residential neighborhoods shall be prohibited, except for local  deliveries within said neighborhood, unless no other possible route is available, in which case  mitigation may be required.    OBJECTIVE: LATECOMER POLICY  To enable private investors to recover a portion of improvement costs for transportation facility  improvements that benefit other developments.  LC‐01: The City may enter into latecomer (payback) agreements where substantial  transportation investments are made by one party that legitimately should be reimbursed by  others, such as, when the infrastructure improvement will benefit a future development. Such  agreements will be at the discretion of the City Council. Latecomer or payback agreements do  not apply to situations in which a property owner is required to construct improvements per an  existing city code provision, such as in the case of half‐street and other frontage improvements.    OBJECTIVE: ROUNDABOUTS  To seek air quality, safety, and capacity benefits by promoting the use of roundabouts over traffic  signals.  RB‐01: Intersections controlled with roundabouts are preferred over signalized intersections  whenever feasible and appropriate due to the benefits achieved with roundabouts including  reduced collision rate for vehicles and pedestrians, less severe collisions, smoother traffic flow,  reduced vehicle emissions and fuel consumption, lower long‐term maintenance costs, and  improved aesthetics.  RB‐02: Developments required to signalize an intersection as mitigation for a project may be  required to install a roundabout instead of a traffic signal. The feasibility of acquiring the land  needed for a roundabout will be considered as a factor in this requirement.   Formatted: Don't keep with next Page 791 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 92    5.3 NON‐MOTORIZED SYSTEM    OBJECTIVE: PLANNING THE NON‐MOTORIZED SYSTEM  To plan a coordinated, interconnected network of non‐motorized transportation facilities that  effectively provide access to local and regional destinations, improve overall quality of life, and  support healthy community and environmental principles.  NM‐01: Implement land use regulations and encourage site design that promotes non‐ motorized forms of transportation.  NM‐02: Include the role of non‐motorized transportation in all transportation planning,  programming, and, if suitable, capital improvement projects.  NM‐03: Plan for continuous non‐motorized circulation routes within and between existing,  new, or redeveloping commercial, residential, and industrial developments. Transportation  planning shall seek to allow pedestrians and bicyclists the ability to cross or avoid barriers in a  manner that is safe and convenient.  NM‐04: Actively seek to acquire land along corridors identified for future trail development in  the current Comprehensive Transportation Plan and Auburn Parks, Recreation, & Open Space  Plan.  NM‐05: Schedule, plan, and co‐sponsor events that support recreational walking and bicycling.  These events should emphasize their recreational and health values and introduce people to  the transportation capabilities of bicycling and walking.  NM‐06: Improve and protect the non‐motorized transportation system through the  establishment of level‐of‐serviceLOS goals for non‐motorized facilities.    OBJECTIVE: DEVELOPING THE NON‐MOTORIZED SYSTEM  To build a safe, attractive, and inter‐connected non‐motorized transportation system.  NM‐06: Develop and maintain the non‐motorized system, including bike routes and walkways,  to encourage significant recreational use.  NM‐07: Develop and maintain the non‐motorized system, including bike routes, sidewalks, and  multi‐use paths in a manner that promotes non‐motorized travel as a viable mode of  transportation.  NM‐08: Develop the non‐motorized system to accommodate appropriate alternative forms of  non‐ motorized transport, as well as medically necessary motorized transport.  NM‐09: Appropriate street furniture, lighting, signage, and landscaping should be installed  along non‐motorized routes to increase safety and to ensure that facilities are inviting to users.  NM‐10: Clearly sign and mark major non‐motorized routes to guide travelers and improve  safety.   NM‐11: Non‐motorized routes shall be constructed to accommodate emergency vehicle access  and be amenable to law enforcement.  Formatted: Keep with next Commented [VB61]: Numbering. Also, same question as  the streets policy labeling  Formatted: Font: Bold Page 792 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 93    NM‐12: Locate and design non‐motorized transportation systems so that they contribute to the  safety, efficiency, enjoyment, and convenience of residential neighborhoods.  NM‐13: The development of facilities supporting non‐motorized transportation should be  provided as a regular element of new construction projects. Improvements shall be secured  through the development review process.  NM‐14: Minimize hazards and obstructions on the non‐motorized transportation system by  properly designing, constructing, managing, and maintaining designated routes in the system.    OBJECTIVE: PEDESTRIAN TRAVEL  To enhance and encourage pedestrian travel in Auburn.  Ped‐01: Promote pedestrian travel within the city and connections to adjacent communities  with emphasis placed on safety and on connectivity to priority destinations such as schools,  parks, the downtown, and other pedestrian‐oriented areas. Pedestrian‐oriented areas are  those areas with high pedestrian traffic or potential and are identified in this plan. These areas  and streets shall encourage pedestrian travel by providing enhanced pedestrian improvements  or controls on motorized traffic.  Ped‐02: Focus investments on and aggressively seek funding for the high priority pedestrian  corridors, identified in Map 3‐2.  Ped‐03: Require developers to incorporate pedestrian facilities into new development and  redevelopment in conformance with the Auburn City Code.  Ped‐04: Continue to construct new and rehabilitate existing sidewalks through a sidewalk  improvement program.  Ped‐05: Seek ways to provide pedestrian amenities such as streetlights, trees, seating areas,  signage, and public art along all major pedestrian travel routes.  Ped‐06: Work towards buffering pedestrian walkways from moving traffic, particularly in areas  with high levels of pedestrian movements, such as near schools and commercial areas, and  along corridors with heavy vehicular traffic.  Ped‐07: Pedestrian crossings shall be developed at locations with significant pedestrian traffic  and designed to match pedestrian desire lines.  Ped‐08: Encourage the formation of LIDs to develop pedestrian pathways and other non‐  motorized amenities throughout the City. Partner with the local school districts to improve Safe  Walking Routes to School.    OBJECTIVE: BICYCLE TRAVEL  To improve Auburn's bicycling network.  Bike‐01: Develop programs and publications, and work with local employers to encourage  citywide bicycle commuting.  Bike‐02: Designate, develop, and maintain high priority bicycle routes, in conformance with  Map 3‐ 4, that create an interconnected system of bike facilities for local and regional travel,  Commented [VB62]: Which LIDs are we talking about?  Page 793 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 94    including on‐ street bike routes, and multi‐purpose trails.  Bike‐03: During the development review process, ensure projects are consistent with the nNon‐  motorized chapter of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan by requiring right‐of‐wayROW  dedications and other improvements as needed to develop the bicycle network.  Bike‐04: Focus investments on and aggressively seek funding for the high priority future bicycle  corridors, identified in Map 3‐4, and corridors and connectors, as applicable, specified in Map 3‐ 5.  Bike‐05: Encourage the inclusion of convenient and secure bicycle storage facilities in all large  public and private developments.  Bike‐06: Continue to develop and implement sSharrows and associated Share the Road signage  in residential and some non‐residential areas of City.  Bike‐07: Continue installation of bike lanes in parts of City where there is existing/adequate  right‐ of‐wayROW.  Bike‐08: Develop an Auburn specific bicycle signage program to highlight corridors, connectors,  and in‐city/out‐ of ‐city destinations.  Bike‐09: Make improvements to existing Interurban Trail – signage, pavement conditions,  vegetation maintenance, grade crossings, and upgrades to user facilities at Main Street  crossing.  Bike‐10: Develop a capital improvement programCIP project with cost estimate for the design  and construction of bicycle/pedestrian bridge at southern terminus of M St. west of existing  Stuck River Vehicle Bridge.  Bike‐11: Develop a capital improvement programCIP project with cost estimate for the design  and construction of innovative and safe pedestrian/bicycle crossing at the M St. and /Auburn  Way South intersection.  Bike‐12: Install one or more bike boxes through a pilot program approach to test effectiveness  and public response. Focus pilot program efforts at key intersections such as the West Main  Street and C Street intersection, the M Street and Auburn Way South intersection and the  Ellingson Road and A Street intersection.  Bike‐13: Continue to install bicycle/pedestrian crossing warning systems along the Interurban  Trail at all crossing locations consisting of S 277th Street, 37th Street NW, and W Main Street.  Bike‐14: Develop and maintain an official Auburn Bicycling Guide Map.  Bike‐15: In coordination with the City Council, Mayor’s Office, Auburn Area Chamber of  Commerce, Auburn Tourism Board, and appropriate City departments, develop strategies and  actions for the implementation of the bicycle‐ oriented economic development  recommendations of the Auburn Bicycle Task Force.  Page 794 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 95    5.4 TRANSIT SYSTEM  OBJECTIVE: TRANSIT SERVICES  To encourage the continued development of public transit systems and other alternatives to single  occupant vehicleSOV travel, to relieve traffic congestion, to reduce reliance on the automobile for  personal transportation needs, to improve route coverage and scheduling, and to ensure transit is a  convenient and reliable mode option for both local and regional trips.  Transit‐01: Partner with WSDOT, Metro Transit, Pierce Transit, Sound Transit, Muckleshoot  Indian TribeMIT, and private businesses to achieve Auburn's transit and passenger rail  objectives.  Transit‐02: Work with local and regional transit agencies to serve new and existing trip  generators in Auburn, such as colleges, commercial areas, and community facilities.  Transit‐03: Encourage Sound Transit, Metro Transit, and Pierce Transit to expand transit to  underserved areas of Auburn.  Transit‐04: Partner with WSDOT, Amtrak, and Sound Transit to establish an intercity passenger  rail stop at the Auburn Station.  Transit‐05: Consider both the transit impacts and the opportunities presented by major  development proposals when reviewing development under the State Environmental Policy  ActSEPA.  Transit‐06: Encourage the inclusion of transit facilities in new development when appropriate.  Transit‐07: Encourage bus stops to be located at well‐lit and accessible areas.  Transit‐08: Work with transit providers and regional agencies to develop a transit system that is  fully accessible to pedestrians and the physically challenged, and which that integrates the  access, safety, and parking requirements of bicyclists.  Transit‐09: Identify areas of concentrated transit traffic and impose design and construction  standards that accommodate the unique considerations associated with bus travel, such as  street geometry and pedestrian linkages.  Transit‐10: Work with transit providers to create new commuter‐ – oriented transit routes and  maintain existing commuter routes linked with Sounder commuter rail.  Transit‐11: Develop rider information packages that inform users of commuter, transit, rail,  trail, and air transportation opportunities.  5.5 AIR TRANSPORTATION  OBJECTIVE: AIR TRANSPORTATION  To provide an efficient municipal airport, serving light general aviation aircraft, as an integral part of  the City’s transportation system.  Air‐01: Continue to develop the Auburn Municipal Airport in accordance with the Airport  Master Plan.  Air‐02: The airport shall be managed as a general aviation facility. General aviation includes all  Formatted: Keep with next Formatted: Keep lines together Page 795 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 96    civilian flying except scheduled passenger airline service.  Air‐03: When siting new or revised facilities or operations at the airport, the impacts on  neighborhoods such as increased noise generated from the use of those facilities shall be  considered.  Air‐04: Use of the airport by non‐conventional aircraft, such as ultra lights, is discouraged by  the City.  Air‐05: Minimize or eliminate the potentially adverse effects of light and glare on the operation  of the Auburn Airport. Page 796 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 97    CHAPTER 6 – FUNDING  The ability to finance the maintenance and enhancement of the transportation system is critical  to the implementation of this plan and the success of the future transportation system. This  chapter details the financial planning tools and funding mechanisms available to accomplish  these goals.  6.1 FINANCIAL PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING  The City updates its financial plan annually in order to ensure programmed transportation  improvements are financially feasible and prioritized in accordance with available funds. The  Transportation Improvement Program and Capital Facilities Plan are the two financial planning  documents the City uses to identify its financial strategy for implementing transportation  improvements.  TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM  The Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is a six ‐year plan which lists programmed  transportation improvements in the following categories: roadway improvement projects,  intersection improvement projects, non‐motorized and transit projects, preliminary  engineering and miscellaneous projects, and preservation projects. Transportation needs are  identified by examining the latest information concerning safety and accident history, growth  trends, the traffic model, traffic studies, and the Comprehensive Transportation Plan. The City  adopts an updated TIP annually, including a revenue forecast and analysis of available funding.  Projects are then prioritized according to a number of factors including safety, capacity needs,  access needs, and the likelihood of securing funding. The first three years of the TIP must be  financially constrained, so project programming is often limited due to funding limitations.   The TIP is an important tool for identifying funding and developing a financial plan for project  implementation. It also feeds into the Capital Facilities PlanCFP.  CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN  The Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) is the Comprehensive Plan element which identifies the  financial plan for implementing all capital improvements in Auburn. Transportation  improvements are included in the CFPCapital Facilities Plan, which is amended annually. The  Capital Facilities PlanCFP enables the City to fulfill the GMA requirement of having a multi‐year  financing plan based on identified transportation needs. It also enables the City to make  informed decisions about its investment of public dollars and make timely decisions about  maintaining levels‐of‐serviceLOS’s in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan standards. The  2016‐2035 Transportation Plan capacity projects are forecast to cost approximately $196  million. The revenue sources proposed to be used by the City of Auburn for these  transportation improvements are described below. Forecasts are based on current funding  levels for City funds and based on past trends for grants and partnerships.  6.2 FUNDING SOURCES  The City uses a combination of public and private funding sources to implement transportation  improvements in Auburn, both for maintenance activities and capital improvements.  Formatted: Font: Not Italic Formatted: Font: Not Italic Page 797 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 98      GENERAL TAX REVENUES  The City receives tax revenues from a variety of state, regional, and local sources including the  real estate excise tax (REET), sales tax, and the motor vehicle fuel tax (MVFT). Despite these  revenues, the City has numerous maintenance and capital improvement needs that cannot be  met by existing tax revenues alone.  Recognizing the need to raise additional revenues for the local street system, Auburn residents  approved the ‘Save Our Streets’ (SOS) program in 2004 for specific funding from property taxes,  and in doing so, created a funding program to help rehabilitate Auburn’s residential streets. In  2013, the City Council modified the funding source for the program to be from Construction  Sales Tax instead of property taxes. In 2018, City Council modified the funds for this program,  which are currently provided by Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) for 2019 and 2020.  With the success of the ‘Save Our Streets’ program, the City intends to pursue a program that  will help fund arterial and collector street maintenance. The City has an Arterial Street Fund;  however, these funds have proven inadequate in addressing all the maintenance and capital  needs of the arterial system.  In addition, the City has also created an Arterial Street Preservation Program to preserve and  rehabilitate the pavement on these classes of streets. The program is funded through a one  percent utility tax which was adopted by City Council during 2008.  2016 – 2035 Forecast:   REET: $6,000,000  Sales Tax: $32,000,000 (Local Roads Fund)   MVFT: $10,700,000  Utility Tax: $40,000,000 (Arterial Roads Fund)  GRANTS  The City has an active grant program and continually seeks grants, both private and public, to  improve Auburn’s transportation system. The following is a list of some of the grants the City  has historically applied for and will likely apply for again in the future.  FEDERALLY FUNDED PROGRAMS  The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP‐21) replaced the Transportation  Enhancement (TE) Activities with the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP). The original TE  activities remain eligible for TE funds that were previously apportioned until the TE funds are  obligated, rescinded, or lapse. MAP‐21 funds projects designed to strengthen the cultural,  aesthetic, and environmental aspects of the inter‐modal transportation system. The program  provides for the implementation of a variety of non‐traditional projects, including the  restoration of historic transportation facilities, the construction of bicycle and pedestrian  Page 798 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 99    facilities, landscaping and scenic beautification, and the mitigation of water pollution from  highway runoff.  The Surface Transportation Program (STP) provides flexible funding that may be used by states  and localities for projects on any public road, non‐motorized improvements, bridge projects,  and transit capital projects.  The Safety Program is a federal program targeted at reducing accident rates at intersections  and along corridors, particularly at those locations with higher than average fatality and injury  rates. Funds come from the Highway Safety Improvement (HSIP) Program included in MAP‐21.  HSIP requires that states program and spend safety funds according to their Strategic Highway  Safety Plan. Washington State's plan is called Target Zero.  The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program is a federally funded program  administered through PSRC. CMAQ funds projects and programs in air quality non‐attainment  and maintenance areas, which reduce transportation related emissions.  In addition to the aforementioned programs, the federal government has an annual  appropriations bill. Auburn may apply through the offices of Washington senators and  Ccongressional members for funding for specific projects. This funding source has historically  been a successful means of financing some of the City’s more expensive capital improvement  projects.  FEDERAL LEGISLATION  In 2018, the Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development (BUILD), or BUILD  Transportation Discretionary Grant program, replaced the Transportation Investment  Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Grant program which that was established in 2009. This  program provides a unique opportunity for the US Department of Transportation (USDOT) to  invest in road, rail, transit, and port projects that promise to achieve national objectives.  Previously known as Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery, or TIGER  Discretionary Grants, Congress has dedicated nearly $7.1 billion for ten rounds of National  Infrastructure Investments to fund projects that have a significant local or regional impact.   The 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act also dedicates funding to numerous  programs, many of which can be used to help finance the City’s programmed transportation  improvement projects.  STATE FUNDED PROGRAMS  The Safe Routes to Schools Program is a state and federally funded program that aims to  protect children from traffic related deaths and injuries and promotes a healthy lifestyle by  encouraging bicycling and walking to school.  The Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Grant is a state funded program that funds non‐motorized  safety improvements.  Commented [VB63]: Why are these bolded, but not  MAP‐21, TE, or TAP?  Formatted: Font: Not Italic Page 799 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 100    The Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) administers annual grant programs that fund  roadway and non‐motorized projects that improve safety, mobility, capacity, and promote  economic development. The TIB offers several programs, each of which emphasizes different  funding criteria.  The Community Economic Revitalization Board (CERB) is a state funded program that provides  low‐cost financing for public facility improvements. Public entities are eligible to apply for and  receive loans and grants for public facilities linked to economic development outcomes such as  private business investment and job creation. CERB also finances site‐specific studies and plans.  2016‐2035 Forecast:  Federal Grants: $60,000,000   State Grants: $30,000,000  LOANS  Low‐interest loans are also available to municipalities. For example, the Washington State  Department of Commerce Public Works Board offers low‐interest loans (PWTF) for local  governments to finance public infrastructure construction and rehabilitation. Eligible projects  must improve public health and safety, respond to environmental issues, promote economic  development, or upgrade system performance. Roads, streets, and bridges are eligible for these  loans. The loans can be strategically employed to leverage grant funding by providing a local  match, enabling the City to compete for funding for public infrastructure projects. In addition,  the City has the option of issuing bonds for public infrastructure projects.  2016‐2035 Forecast:  PWTFL: No PWTF loans are included in the forecast.  PRIVATE SECTOR CONTRIBUTIONS  The City has an established traffic impact fee system based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers  (ITE) guidelines, as amended by the City Council. The fee system estimates the amount of traffic  each development is anticipated to create, based on the land use type and size. Traffic impact  fees compensate the City for the capacity improvements needed to accommodate the new  trips generated by new development. In turn, the City uses the revenues to expand the street  network through the capacity projects included in the TIP. The fees are based on the costs of  the capacity project included in the TIP and forecast growth throughout the City. The fees are  updated annually following the adoption of the TIP by City Council. Payment of the impact fee  does not relieve developers of their codified obligation to construct half‐street improvements,  nor the need to mitigate project impacts identified through the SEPA process, which may  include the construction of an identified TIP project (and a credit for the impact fee  contribution towards that project).  Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5" Page 800 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 101    The City also charges a truck impact fee for certain land‐use types which are associated with  significant truck traffic generation, such as commercial and industrial uses. These fees are used  to address impacts on the City’s truck routes and other truck‐related infrastructure.  2016‐2035 Forecast:  Traffic Impact Fees: $20,000,000   Development Improvements: $15,000,000  FUNDING PARTNERSHIPS  The City has successfully formed several funding partnerships, which have enabled it to  leverage its resources in implementing transportation improvements.  MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE (MIT)  The City anticipates continuing to partner with MIT on funding projects of mutual benefit  throughout the City. A recent partnership project is Auburn Way South (Dogwood to Hemlock).  The City expects MIT to be a major funding partner on the Auburn Way South Bypass project  and also to participate in the remainder of the (SR‐ 164) Auburn Way South Corridor  improvement projects.  WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (WSDOT)  The City anticipates continuing to partner with WSDOT on funding projects involving the sState  Rroutes through the City. Recent appropriations by the state legislature budgeted $15 million  for the Auburn Way South Bypass project for the eEastbound Ooff‐Rramp.  LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS  Local Improvement Districts (LID) enable city investment in a specified area by leveraging city  funds, when available, with contributions from property owners in the district. In essence, LID’s  are a means of using limited city resources to improve neighborhood quality through  improvement of streets, sidewalks, and other features of the roadway.  FAST (FREIGHT ACTION STRATEGY TEAM)  FAST is an innovative partnership composed of transportation agencies, ports, cities, economic  development organizations, trucking, rail, and business interests. One of FAST’s primary  objectives is to obtain funding for projects that improve freight mobility. FAST helped fund the  S 277th Street Grade Separation, the 3rd Street SW Grade Separation, and the M Street  Underpass projects.  FMSIB (FREIGHT MOBILITY STRATEGIC INVESTMENT BOARD)  The mission of the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) is to create a  comprehensive and coordinated state program to facilitate freight movement to local, national,  and international markets. FMSIB is also charged with lessening the impact of freight  Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5" Page 801 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 102    movements on local communities. FMSIB obtains funding directly from legislative  appropriations and has contributed funds to the 3rd Street SW Grade Separation, the S 277th  Street Grade Separation, and the M Street Underpass projects.  2016‐2035 Forecast:  MIT: $15,000,000 WSDOT: $20,000,000  LID: No LID funds are included in the forecast.  FAST: No future FAST funding is included in the forecast.   FMSIB: No FMSIB funds are included in the forecast.  FUTURE FINANCING POSSIBILITIES  As the transportation system evolves, so will the range of financing options available to the  City. In general, the financing options currently available under state law fall short of meeting  current and anticipated transportation improvement needs. Hence, the City will continue to  seek fair and sustainable strategies for funding the maintenance activities and capital  improvements needed to preserve the City’s transportation network. Among other strategies,  the implementation of a street utility may be employed to fund many of the City’s  transportation needs.  TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT  In 1987, the State Legislature created Transportation Benefit Districts (TBDs) as an option for  local governments to fund transportation improvements. Chapter 36.73 of the Revised Code of  Washington provides for the establishment of TBD by cities and counties to levy and impose  various taxes and fees to generate revenues to support transportation improvements within  the district. A TBD is a quasi‐municipal corporation and independent taxing district created for  the sole purpose of acquiring, constructing, improving, providing, and funding transportation  improvements within the district. In 2005 and 2007, the Legislature amended the TBD statute  to expand its uses and revenue authority, including the ability to authorize a $20 annual vehicle  license fee (VLF), and up to an additional $80 of VLF, if approved by voters within the district.  The state legislature provided local governments with these tools because inflation has eroded  the local share of gas tax and a series of statewide ballot initiatives passed over the last 12  years have eliminated other traditional sources of funding for local transportation needs.  The City of Auburn created a TBD in 2011. The TBD is currently considering the implementation  of the $20 annual vehicle fee, possible local sales tax increase, and how the revenue raised  could be best used to achieve the goals of the TBD.  2016‐2035 Forecast: (If Authorized)  TBD: $16,000,000    Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5" Page 802 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 103    STREET UTILITY  A street utility would be used similarly to how sewer and water utility fees are now collected. A  monthly or annual fee would be charged to residents and businesses in Auburn, for example via  a flat fee or through a pro‐rated fee based on anticipated usage.  The implementation of a street utility would require a change in state law. The street utility  system is one in which all residents and businesses would pay their fair share of funding street  maintenance and repair. If implemented, a street utility would undoubtedly be combined with  the suite of other financing strategies the City currently employs.  2016‐2035 Forecast: (If Authorized)  Street Utility: $5‐9 Million per year  6.3 REVENUE SHORTFALL CONTINGENCY  Revenue forecasts for City funds are considered to be relatively secured. Other revenue such as  grants and partnership funding can be slightly more unpredictable. While all the revenue  currently forecast above does fully fund the transportation plan improvements, if shortfalls  arise the City will have to take one or more of the following actions to maintain compliance  with GMA concurrency requirements:;   Supplant the projected budget shortfall with other existing City funds.   Enact new sources of revenue.   Revise the Land Use Plan to reduce development capacity and resultant need for  additional transportation improvements.   Lower the LOS Standard sufficiently to reduce the need for additional transportation  improvements.   Impose restriction (moratorium) on further development with impacts to areas not  meeting LOS standards until the current LOS standard is met.  6.4 FUNDING STRATEGIES, PROJECT PRIORITIZATION  The City uses a variety of criteria to prioritize transportation projects, including safety, mobility,  and overall community benefit. In addition, the City also considers the availability of funding  and the ability to leverage City dollars to raise addition funds. For example, grants are often  available for specific types of capital investments, whereas they are more limited for  maintenance/preservation. Hence, the City often needs to budget for  maintenance/preservation through tax revenues. Capital improvements may be financially  secured through a combination of public and private investment. Hence, project prioritization  for capital improvements is often partially dependent on the ability to secure outside funding.  Likewise, maintenance and preservation isare highly dependent on the limited tax revenues  available to the City. In the future, the City will need to continue lobbying for its share of  federal, state, and county tax revenues, seek creative avenues for securing private investment  dollars and grant funds, and potentially implement new funding strategies such as tolling and  street utility fees.     Page 803 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 104    CHAPTER 7 – MONITORING AND EVALUATION    The Comprehensive Transportation Plan, a long‐ range plan with the horizon year 2035,  predicts the needs and conditions of the future transportation system, enabling the City to  anticipate its future needs. Nonetheless, the transportation network is dynamic, constantly  evolving due to circumstances beyond the scope and influence of this plan. Hence, regular  updates are necessary to ensure the Plan remains current and relevant.    7.1 ANNUAL UPDATES    The Comprehensive Transportation Plan can be amended annually as part of the City’s regular  Comprehensive Plan amendment cycle, which ensures proposed changes go through a public  review process before the amended plan is adopted by the City Council at the end of the  calendar year. In preparation for the annual amendment cycle, the City will review the plan and  propose updates as needed. These proposed updates may be due to changes to City priorities,  the availability of new information, or the relevance of certain plan components.    RE‐EVALUATION  The annual re‐evaluation process provides an opportunity for the City to identify progress made  in implementing the Plan, as well as identify new needs that have arisen since the previous  update. The update will consider the street, non‐motorized, and transit systems, and assess  whether the Plan adequately addresses the implementation strategies necessary to ensure the  transportation infrastructure continues to grow in line with the City’s objectives.  As part of this process, the City will review its future projects list and update the TIP  Transportation Improvement Program and the CPFCapital Facilities Plan as appropriate. It will  also review and update the Policies and Funding chapters, in order to remain consistent with  the City’s vision and current with potential funding strategies.    TECHNICAL INFORMATION  The Comprehensive Transportation Plan contains a range of technical data, much of which  informs other elements of the Plan. As part of the annual amendment cycle, technical  information, such as traffic volumes, existing levels‐of‐serviceLOS’s, roadway classifications, and  transit route and ridership information, will be updated as appropriate. Updated information  will inform much of the evaluation process, enabling the City to quantify system changes over  time and make appropriate decisions in planning the future system.    MODEL UPDATES  The City’s traffic model shall be updated on a regular basis, every few years, as new land use,  employment, and housing data becomes available. Model updates are important as they  Page 804 of 967 20210 Comprehensive Transportation Plan ‐ Page 105    ensure the City has an accurate understanding of how land use patterns, employment, and  other factors impact future transportation conditions, enabling the City Council to make  informed policy decisions. The model also provides an understanding of the impacts associated  with different projects, allowing the City to devise a revised list of future projects to improve  capacity and safety, as well as achieve other priorities.    COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY  The annual evaluation process is an opportunity to ensure the Comprehensive Transportation  Plan is consistent with other elements of the City’s Comprehensive Plan, including the land ‐use  element,  and economic development elements,; Auburn Parks, Recreation and Open Space  Plan, Transportation Improvement Program,; and CFPCapital Facilities Plan. Hence, as part of  the annual amendment cycle, the City will ensure these plan components are consistent with  and supportive of each other.    7.2 MULTI‐YEAR UPDATES  The City has the opportunity to preform annual updates to the Comprehensive Transportation  Plan on an as needed basis to account for significant changes which have occurred during the  previous year. A more exhaustive process is periodically necessary,; hence, a thorough rewrite  of the Plan shall be conducted every five to eight years. This endeavor will include a broad  public outreach effort with input from neighboring jurisdictions, state and regional agencies,  and Auburn residents and businesses. Much like the process for the 2015 update, it will present  an opportunity to holistically examine the current transportation system and lay the framework  for development of the future system.    Page 805 of 967 POLICY/TEXT (P/T) AMENDMENTS (CPA-21- 0001) P/T #8 – Housing Element Volume 2. The changes the Housing Element consist of the following: • Include reference and brief description of Housing Action Plan in Conditions and Trends section beginning on page H-1 of the Housing Element. • Revise Policy H-24(f) to include text regarding minimizing displacement impacts. The revision of this policy will better align with PSRC Vision 2050’s recognition of displacement risk. Revising this policy allows for alignment with PSRC requirements in advance of the 2024 Periodic Update. • Address text formatting for Policy H-24 sub-policies Page 806 of 967 Proposed Text Amendment to the Housing Element  HOUSING ELEMENT  Conditions and Trends (page H‐1)  The City of Auburn commissioned a Housing Needs and Characteristics Report (BERK 2014) to identify  community needs and develop housing element policies. The key findings of that report  (summarized below) led to the development of updated goals and policies.    In 2020, the City of Auburn prepared and adopted a Housing Action Plan (HAP), funded by a state grant  (authorized by HB 1923) for the purpose of identifying city strategies and recommendations to increase  residential capacity.  Data and analysis found in the HAP may vary from the 2014 Housing Needs and  Characteristics Report (and subsequently in this Housing Element) due to differences in the timeframe  for data collection and the sources of data.  The HAP analysis is anticipated to be included in the City's  next periodic update of the Comprehensive Plan scheduled for 2024.    Auburn is diverse. Approximately 25% of Auburn residents speak a language other than English.  This percentage is similar to that of King County (25%) and higher than that of Pierce County (14%).  Other than English, Spanish (9%), Asian and Pacific Island (8%), and other Indo‐European (7%) are the  most common languages spoken in Auburn. See Exhibit 1.   Page 807 of 967 Vol. 2Volume 2 H-1 Housing element Vision Auburn is a place that those in our diverse community are proud to call home for a lifetime. Auburn pro- vides opportunities for attainable housing in a variety of styles to meet the needs of all ages, abilities, cultures, and incomes. Our neighborhoods are safe and attractive, offer gathering places to meet friends and family, are connected by trails, streets, and transit, and are well kept. Our households are aware of the opportunities and services offered by governmental, educational, employment, health, and service providers that can enhance their quality of life. Volunteerism to improve our parks, schools, streets, and homes makes our neighborhoods and families stronger. Our quality housing and neighborhoods sup- port our local economy. Conditions and trends The City of Auburn commissioned a Housing Needs and Characteristics Report (BERK 2014) to identify community needs and develop housing element policies. The key findings of that report (summarized below) led to the development of updated goals and policies. Auburn is diverse. Approximately 25% of Auburn residents speak a language other than English. This percentage is similar to that of King County (25%) and higher than that of Pierce County (14%). Other than English, Spanish (9%), Asian and Pacific Island (8%), and other Indo-European (7%) are the most common languages spoken in Auburn. See Exhibit 1. Exhibit 1 – Languages Spoken at Home in Auburn, 2008–2012 Five-Year Average language Spoken at Home # of Persons % of Total % of Group only English 48,919 75%— Spanish or Spanish Creole 5,928 9%48% other Indo-European languages 4,385 7%44% Asian and Pacific Island languages 5,245 8%42% other languages 943 1%32% ToTA l 65,400 100%11% Source: 2008–2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Page 808 of 967 City of Auburn Comprehensive plAn H-2Vol. 2Auburn’s diverse communities may have differ- ent housing, neighborhood amenity, and ser- vice needs. For example, outreach conducted with the Hispanic community in association with the Housing Element update showed that most would recommend Auburn as a place to live for family and friends, and though residents wanted their children to grow up and remain in Auburn, they desired improved security and traffic calm- ing. Outreach participants were interested in helping to improve their neighborhood and in volunteering. Trends in household size indicate that Auburn will need to ensure the availability of a variety of housing types to match the needs of both small and large households. Auburn has both a larger household size and a larger average family size than do King and Pierce Counties overall. Data on household composition indicate, however, that significant portions of the City’s households are made up of single-person and two-person house- holds without children, and Auburn also has a higher-than-average percentage of single-par- ent households. The types of homes needed for smaller households may be different than those needed for larger households. See Exhibit 2. Auburn is affordable. A higher proportion of Auburn’s population has lower incomes, and Auburn’s housing is more affordable than hous- ing in the region as a whole. Average rent is less than King County fair market rent, and the me- dian sales price of owner-occupied housing is at least $100,000 below that of King County overall. Almost half the City’s households could afford the median-priced home in Auburn, and more than two-thirds could afford the median-priced con- dominium unit. Auburn’s housing stock is older than average, and much of its rental housing stock is in fair or poor condition. Though housing is affordable in Auburn, the City could lose some of its most af- fordable rental housing as structures approach the ends of their useful lives. Exhibit 3 illustrates year-built information for the City, with older housing stock concentrated in the valley and West Hill, and newer housing predom- inantly in Lea Hill and Lakeland Hills. Exhibit 2—Household Composition and Average Household Size – City of Auburn, King County, and Pierce County Household Composition Average Household/Family Size Area Average Household Size Family Size Auburn 2.67 3.22 King County 2.40 3.05 Pierce County 2.59 3.09 Source: King County Assessor, 2014; Pierce County Assessor 2014; BERK Consulting 2014 Page 809 of 967 HOUSING ELEMENT  Attainability (page H‐7)    H‐23 Promote affordable housing that meets changing demographic needs. [Element audit, needs  assessment, outreach]    H‐24 Work in partnership with King and Pierce Counties and other cities to address the countywide need  for housing affordable to households with moderate, low‐ and very low incomes, including those with  special needs and our veterans. [Element audit, needs assessment, outreach]  a. The King County need for housing, countywide, by percentage of area median income is:  i. 50%–80% of AMI (moderate) – 16% of total housing supply  ii. 30%–50% of AMI (low) – 12% of total housing supply  iii. 30% and below AMI (very low) – 12% of total housing supply  bd. Address the King County need for housing affordable to households at less than 30% AMI  (very low income), through all jurisdictions working individually and collectively.  ce. Meet Pierce County countywide planning policies to provide opportunities for housing  affordable to all incomes including low incomes.  df. Focus Auburn’s efforts toward the countywide and community need for low‐ and moderate‐ income housing on preserving existing affordable housing with robust maintenance and repair  programs, minimizing displacement impacts, and ensuring long‐term affordability of existing  housing.  eg. Act as a County leader in the exploration and implementation of new funding mechanisms  and strategies to develop housing affordable at 30% AMI and below across King County and  throughout South King County.    H‐25 Encourage and assist in the renovation of surplus public and commercial buildings and land into  affordable housing. Additionally, explore opportunities to dedicate revenues from sales of publicly  owned properties, including tax title sales, to affordable housing projects. [extension of HO‐22; element  audit]    H‐26 Seek, encourage and assist nonprofit organizations in acquiring depreciated apartment units for  the purpose of maintaining and ensuring their long‐term affordability. [HO‐23]  Page 810 of 967 Housing element H-7 Vol. 2d. Help identify professional volunteers at educational or professional associations to plan redesign or architectural upgrades of the properties. [Public Works, 2012] e. Support additional healthy housing and preservation strategies, such as property tax exemptions to preserve affordable housing opportunities and utilizing community health workers to offer property owners and residents the education and resources needed to maintain housing. H-22 Evaluate and update codes applicable to housing and provide effective and appro- priate enforcement. [HO-9] a. Enforce city ordinances regarding abandoned properties. [Public Works, 2012] b. Consider a multifamily inspection program. [Public Works, 2012]. c. Consider public identification of landlords who are found to be out of compliance for extended time periods and unwilling to take steps to ameliorate substandard conditions. [Public Works, 2012] d. Consider a landlord compliance program where code enforcement penalties can be reduced if attending landlord training programs. [Public Works, 2012] e. Work with park owners, managers and park tenants to develop policies and regulations to preserve manufactured home parks and the affordable housing they offer. [HO-21] f. Consider an Auburn Housing Authority. [Council Vision] Attainability H-23 Promote affordable housing that meets changing demographic needs. [Element audit, needs assessment, outreach] H-24 Work in partnership with King and Pierce Counties and other cities to address the countywide need for housing affordable to households with moderate, low- and very- low incomes, including those with special needs and our veterans. [Element audit, needs assessment, outreach] a. The King County need for housing, countywide, by percentage of area median income is: i. 50%–80% of AMI (moderate) – 16% of total housing supply ii. 30%–50% of AMI (low) – 12% of total housing supply iii. 30% and below AMI (very low) – 12% of total housing supply d. Address the King County need for housing affordable to households at less than 30% AMI (very low income), through all jurisdictions working indi- vidually and collectively. e. Meet Pierce County countywide plan- ning policies to provide opportunities for housing affordable to all incomes including low incomes. f. Focus Auburn’s efforts toward the countywide and community need for low- and moderate-income hous- ing on preserving existing affordable housing with robust maintenance and repair programs, and ensuring long- term affordability of existing housing. g. Act as a County leader in the explora- tion and implementation of new fund- ing mechanisms and strategies to de- velop housing affordable at 30% AMI and below across King County and throughout South King County. H-25 Encourage and assist in the renovation of surplus public and commercial build- ings and land into affordable housing. Additionally, explore opportunities to dedi- cate revenues from sales of publicly owned properties, including tax title sales, to af- fordable housing projects. [extension of HO-22; element audit] H-26 Seek, encourage and assist nonprof- it organizations in acquiring depreci- ated apartment units for the purpose of Page 811 of 967 POLICY/TEXT (P/T) AMENDMENTS (CPA-21- 0001) P/T #9 – Land Use Element Volume 1. The changes the Housing Element consist of the following: • Revise Policy LU-39 to include affordable housing and mixed-income development. In addition to allowing additional height or density in exchange for supplemental amenities identified in this policy, this revision would include affordable housing development as eligible uses for deviations in height, density, or intensity. Page 812 of 967 Proposed Text Amendment to the Land Use Element  LAND USE ELEMENT  Downtown Urban Center Designation (page LU‐7)  Description  This category should be applied exclusively in downtown Auburn. The area should be developed in a  manner consistent with and conducive to pedestrian‐oriented activities. The ambiance of the downtown  should encourage leisure shopping, provide services to local residents and area employees, and provide  amenities that attract regional visitors and shoppers.  Design Criteria  1. Located within the Urban Center boundaries established by the King County Countywide  planning policies or within Business Improvement Area boundaries.  Implementing Zoning Designations  Downtown Urban Center  Policies  LU‐38 Vertical mixed‐use should be encouraged; the location of retail sales and services should  predominately be on the ground floor with residential or more retail or services above. However, small  freestanding commercial spaces may be established as an accessory use to a larger vertical mixed‐use  development.   LU‐39 Deviations of height, density or intensity limitations should be allowed when supplemental  amenities are incorporated into site and building design. Examples of amenities include use of low‐ impact development, use of sustainable site and building techniques, public space and art, transit‐ oriented development, landscaping and lighting, and bike shelters. – as well as the inclusion of  affordable housing.  LU‐40 Encourage a broad mix of uses within the downtown area. A wide range of consumer‐oriented  goods and services are compatible within this designation since creating an attractive shopping  environment is a primary emphasis. Permitted uses include retail trade, offices, personal services, eating  and drinking establishments, financial institutions, governmental offices, and similar uses. Legally  established existing uses that do not fit within the range of desired new uses continue to be a valuable  part of the downtown economy and character and should be allowed to evolve and operate in a manner  that resembles listed permitted uses.   LU‐41 Encourage multiple family dwellings, particularly within the upper stories of buildings.  Page 813 of 967 land use element LU-7 Vol. 1Celebration: Auburn will have a thriving and ex- panding arts and culture community. There will be events, amenities, and attractions that draw people to congregate and socialize. Environment: Local businesses benefit from Auburn’s collection of natural resources and amenities because residents and visitors are choosing Auburn as their home or destination. Sustainability: Local businesses benefit from, and contribute to, a sustainable economy because Auburn is an easy location to start up, main- tains opportunity for growth, and has a business friendly economic climate. General Policies LU-32 The commercial uses permitted must be carefully regulated in regards to perfor- mance criteria and design. LU-33 Permitted uses would consist of lo- cal-serving and community-serving retail trade, offices, personal services, and eat- ing establishments. LU-34 Encourage uses that provide health and human services to the adjacent community. LU-35 Encourage adaptive reuse, particularly of historic properties. LU-36 Promote the use of energy and water con- servation measures (PSRC 11/12/15) LU-37 Ensure that legally established existing uses that may not conform with the under- lying zone, but that are compatible with their surrounding uses, and are allowed to continue to evolve and operate without being classified as “nonconforming” uses. downtown urban Center designation Description This category should be applied exclusively in downtown Auburn. The area should be devel- oped in a manner consistent with and conducive to pedestrian-oriented activities. The ambiance of the downtown should encourage leisure shop- ping, provide services to local residents and area employees, and provide amenities that attract regional visitors and shoppers. Designation Criteria 1. Located within the Urban Center boundaries established by the King County Countywide planning policies or within Business Improvement Area boundaries. Implementing Zoning Designations Downtown Urban Center Policies LU-38 Vertical mixed-use should be encouraged; the location of retail sales and services should predominately be on the ground floor with residential or more retail or ser- vices above. However, small freestanding commercial spaces may be established as an accessory use to a larger vertical mixed-use development. LU-39 Deviations of height, density or intensity limitations should be allowed when sup- plemental amenities are incorporated into site and building design. Examples of amenities include use of low-impact development, use of sustainable site and building techniques, public space and art, transit-oriented development, landscap- ing and lighting, and bike shelters. LU-40 Encourage a broad mix of uses within the downtown area. A wide range of con- sumer-oriented goods and services are compatible within this designation since creating an attractive shopping environ- ment is a primary emphasis. Permitted uses include retail trade, offices, personal services, eating and drinking establish- ments, financial institutions, governmental offices, and similar uses. Legally estab- lished existing uses that do not fit within the range of desired new uses continue to be a valuable part of the downtown econ- omy and character and should be allowed to evolve and operate in a manner that re- sembles listed permitted uses. LU-41 Encourage multiple family dwellings, particularly within the upper stories of buildings. Page 814 of 967 COMP PLAN MAP AMENDMENTSPage 815 of 967 Page 816 of 967 CITY-INITIATED (CPM) MAP AMENDMENTS (CPA-21-0001) CPM #1 – Transportation Element Volume 5 (Separate document incorporated by reference). The changes the Transportation Element consist of the following: • Several maps found throughout Volume 5 have been updated to reflect current conditions. Page 817 of 967 PART 1 – PROPOSED EDITS Page 818 of 967 TS18 TS18 TS167 TS167 A ST SEB ST NWAUBURN WAY SI ST NEC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE124TH AVE SEE MAIN STWESTVALLEYHWYN SE 304TH ST C ST NWS 277TH ST 15TH ST SW 2ND ST E STUCKRIVERDRSE W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW 132ND AVE SELAKETAPPS PKWYSE 41 S T ST SE 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST KERSEYWAY S E SE 288TH ST 8TH ST NE 37TH ST NW LAKELANDHILLSWAYSEO R A V ETZR D S E 25TH ST SE EAST BLVD55TH AVE S56TH AVE SSE 320TH ST D ST SE110TH AVE SE4TH ST SE 104THAVESEI ST NW51ST AVE SWESTVALLEYHWYSN ST NEW ST NWO ST NESCE NICD RSES 287TH ST 112TH AVE SED ST NE58TH AVE SK ST SEEAST VALLEY HWY E4THSTSW 7TH ST SE T ST SEC ST SE57THPLSM ST NEH ST SEJOHNREDDINGTONRDN E FOSTER AVE SEB ST SE47T H STSE 56THSTSEU ST NWS 305TH ST 130TH AVE SE35THWAYSER ST NW26TH ST SEB ST NESE318THWAY SE 323RD PL 17TH ST S E SE 301ST ST 36THSTSE 50TH ST NE 64TH ST SE A S TE 108TH AV ESESE304T HWAY SE 298TH PL 22ND ST SE 42ND ST NW S 292ND ST SE 282ND ST 51STSTSE SE 286TH ST V CT SE32ND ST SE 42ND ST NE 73RD ST SE PEARL AVE SESE 285TH ST 62ND ST SE SE 307TH PL118TH AVE SE65TH ST SEA ST SE51ST AVE SMUCKLESHOOT CASINO MUCKLESHOOT CASINO THE OUTLET COLLECTION THE OUTLET COLLECTION Auburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 4609Printed On: 7/24/2020 °0 1 Miles City of Auburn Highway Principal Arterial Future Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Future Minor Arterial Residential Collector Future Residential Collector Non Residential Collector Future Non Resident Collector Rustic Collector Local Private Functional Roadway Classification Map 2-1 Source: City of Auburn GIS Department Page 819 of 967 .-14,478.-2,900.-7,095.-2,815.-87,550.-19,608 .-4,237.-1 4, 2 8 7 .-35,583 .-18,999.-540.-3,890 .-8,593.-27,204.-1,638.-2,881.-6,161.-1,548.-4,517.-10,444.-5,844.-12,049.-9,450.-23,813.-9,482.-24,792.-9,675.-1,303.-26,293.-1 8,888.-22,447.-318,790 .-22,172 .-33,290 .-17,834.-1 9 ,50 0.-5,113.-7,866.-8,525.-1 8 ,0 0 9 .-5 ,2 1 2 .-4,146 .-7,959.-12,177 .-6,500 .-3 5 0,2 4 0 .-6,980.-2 5 , 1 4 5 .-2,616 .-12,894.-2,270.-10,950.-4,804 .-24,921.-20,329 .-26,027.-25,159 .-17,613.-21,818.-5,509.-4,612.-4,907.-3,580 .-2,321.-15,503 .-7,380 .-11,098.-3,1 79 .-9,147.-2,126 .-4,114 .-22,510 .-15,295.-9,892.-30,760 .-25,865.-2 1,1 5 7 .-6,191.-9,054.-28,701.-3,905.-3,311 .-14,455 .-3,817 .-6,072.-6,828 .-12,455.-4,218 .-27,785 .-8,207.-20,333.-9,415.-21,113.-22,540.-5 ,714.-12,618.-5,941.-2,498 .-5,738 .-8,807 .-5,276 .-24,294 .-18,749.-6,812.-22,503 .-5,250.-32,300.-10,391.-6,0 86 .-9,6 44 .-3,519 .-6,576 .-2,881.-3,580 TS18 TS18 TS167 TS167 A ST SEB ST NWI ST NEA U B U R N W A Y S C ST SWM ST SER ST SE124TH AVE SEE MAIN ST SE 304TH ST S 277TH ST C ST NW15TH ST SW STUCK RIVER DR S E 2ND ST E W MAIN ST 132ND AVE SEL A KE TAPPSPK WY S E 4 1 STST S E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST SE 288TH ST 8TH ST NE 37TH ST NW L A K E L A N D H IL L SWAYSE25TH ST SE EAST BLVD55TH AVE S56TH AVE SD ST SE110TH AVE SE4TH ST SE104THAVESEI ST NW51ST AVE SN ST NEW ST NWSCENIC D R SES 287TH ST 118TH AVE SED ST NE112TH AVE SE58TH AVE S4TH ST NE K ST SE4TH ST SW 7TH ST SE 6 7 T H S T SEM ST NEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNEH ST SEFOSTER AVE SE47TH ST S E 56TH ST SEUSTNW 35T H W A Y S ER ST NW26TH ST SE SE 323RD PL 1 7 T H S T S E 3 6 T H S T S E 6 4 T H S T S E50THSTSE AST E 21ST ST N E1 08TH AVESES 297TH P L S 31 8TH ST 22ND ST SEE ST NES 292ND ST O ST SEV CT SE42ND ST NE 7 3 R D S T S E SE 285TH ST PEARL AVE SE6 2 N D S T S E SE 307TH PL 4 9 T H S T N E S 303RD PL 22ND ST NW K ST NE19TH ST SE 65TH ST SE SE 315TH PL108THAVESE104TH AVE SEA ST SET H E T H E O U T L E T O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N C O L L E C T I O N Auburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 4592Printed On: 7/21/2020 °0 1 Miles Parks City of Auburn 100-999 1,000-9,999 10,000+ Average Daily Traffic Volumes (2019) Map 2-2 Source: City of Auburn GIS Department Page 820 of 967 TS18 TS18 TS167 TS167 A ST SEB ST NWAUBURN WAY SI ST NEC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE124TH AVE SEE MAIN STWESTVALLEYHWYN SE 304TH ST C ST NWS 277TH ST 15TH ST SW 2ND ST E STUCKRIVERDRSE W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW 132ND AVE SELAKETAPPS PKWYSE 41 S T ST SE 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST KERSEYWAY S E SE 288TH ST 8TH ST NE 37TH ST NW LAKELANDHILLSWAYSEO R A V ETZR D S E 25TH ST SE EAST BLVD55TH AVE S56TH AVE SSE 320TH ST D ST SE110TH AVE SE4TH ST SE 104THAVESEI ST NW51ST AVE SWESTVALLEYHWYSN ST NEW ST NWO ST NES 287TH ST SCE NI CDRSE118TH AVE SE112TH AVE SED ST NE58TH AVE SK ST SEEAST VALLEY HWY E4THSTSW 7TH ST SE T ST SEC ST SE57THPLSM ST NEH ST SEJOHNREDDINGTONR D N E FOSTER AVE SEB ST SE47THSTSE 56THSTSEU ST NWS 305TH ST Auburn Ave130TH AVE SE35THWAYSER ST NW26TH ST SE SE318THWAY SE 323RD PL 17TH ST S E SE 301ST ST 36THSTSE 50TH ST NE 64TH ST SE A S TE 108TH AV ESESE304T H WAY SE 298TH PL 22ND ST SE 42ND ST NW S 292ND ST SE 282ND ST 51STSTSE SE 286TH ST V CT SE32ND ST SE 42ND ST NE 73RD ST SE PEARL AVE SESE 285TH ST 62ND ST SE SE 307TH PL 65TH ST SEA ST SE51ST AVE SMUCKLESHOOT CASINO MUCKLESHOOT CASINO THE OUTLET COLLECTION THE OUTLET COLLECTION Auburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 4681Printed On: 10/18/2019 °0 1 Miles Truck Routes Map 2-3 Source: City of Auburn GIS Department Priority 2 WSDOT Parks City of Auburn Priority 1 Current Local Truck Routes Future Local Truck Route Current Through Truck Route Future Through Truck Route Current Local Truck Route Future Local Truck Route Page 821 of 967 TS18 TS18 TS167 TS167 A ST SEB ST NWI ST NEA U B U R N W A Y S C ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE124TH AVE SEE MA IN STWESTVALLEYHWYN SE 304TH ST S 277TH ST C ST NW15TH ST SW STUCK RIVER DR S E 2ND ST E W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW 132ND AVE SELAKE T A P P S P K W Y S E 4 1 STST S E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST K E R S E Y W AYSE SE 288TH ST 8TH ST NE 37TH ST NW L A K E L ANDHI LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSE25TH ST SE EAST BLVD55TH AVE SSE 320TH ST 56TH AVE SD ST SE110TH AVE SE4TH ST SE 104THAVESEI ST NW51ST AVE SWESTVALLEYHWYSN ST NEW ST NWO ST NESCENIC D R SES 287TH ST 118TH AVE SED ST NE112TH AVE SE58TH AVE SK ST SEEAST VALLEY HWY E4TH ST SW 8 TH ST S E T ST SE57THPLSM ST NEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNEH ST SEB ST SEFOSTER AVE SE47TH ST S E 56TH ST SERIVERDRSES305THSTU ST NW130TH AVE SE35 T H W A Y S ER ST NW26TH ST SEB ST NESE 323RD PL 1 7 T H S T S E S E 3 1 8 T H W A Y 3 6 T H S T S E 5 0 T H S T N E 6 4 T H S T S E AST ESE304THWAY108THAVESE22ND ST SE 42ND ST NW S 292ND ST SE 282ND ST SE 286TH ST V CT SE32ND ST SE 42ND ST NE 7 3 R D S T S E SE 285TH ST PEARL AVE SE6 2 N D S T S E SE 307TH PL 65TH ST SEA ST SE51ST AVE ST H E T H E O U T L E T O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N C O L L E C T I O N Auburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 4588Printed On: 7/21/2020 °0 1 Miles City of Auburn T1 (Over 10,000) T2 (4,000 - 10,000) T3 (300 - 4,000) T4 (100 - 300) T5 (Over 20 in 60 Days) Freight Routes Classification MapClass T-1 to T-5Annual Tons (in thousands) Map 2-4 Source: City of Auburn GIS Department Page 822 of 967 ")10")4 ")16")18")1")13")11 ")35")17 ")19 ")27 ")26")9 ")12 ")8 ")14")25 ")15 ")3 ")23")5 ")22")6")2")33 ")31 TS18 TS18 TS167 TS167 A ST SEB ST NWAUBURN WAY S C ST SWI ST NEM ST SEAUBURN WAY N124TH AVE SER ST SE132ND AVE SEE M A I N S TWESTVALLEYHWYN SE 304TH ST S 277TH ST C ST NW15TH ST SW 2ND ST E STUCK RIVER DR S E W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW LAKE T A P PSPKW Y S E4 1STSTS E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST 51ST AVE SK ER SEYWAYSE SE 288TH ST 8T H ST N E 37TH ST NW ORAVETZRDSE25TH ST SE EAST BLVDSE 320TH ST D ST SE110TH AVE SE4TH ST SE 104THAVESEI ST NWSE 299TH ST N ST NEW ST NWO ST NE37TH ST NE S 287TH ST 56TH AVE SSCENIC D R S E118TH AVE SESE 316TH ST 3 2 1 S T S T S AUBURN-BLACKDIAMOND RD SED ST NE112TH AVE SEACADEMYDRSEK ST SEEAST VALLEY HWY E4TH ST SW 7TH ST SE 67TH S T SELSTSEC ST SEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNEB ST SEFOSTER AVE SE52ND AVE S47THST S E 56TH ST SE57THPLSSE290TH ST 130TH AVE SE35T H W A Y S ER ST NW26TH ST SEBSTNE SE 323RD PL 1 7 T H S T S E 3 6 T H S T SE50TH S T N E 6 4 T H S T S EV ST NWAST ESE304THWAY108THAVESE31ST ST SE 22ND ST SEE ST NE42ND ST NW S 292ND ST SE 282ND ST SE295TH ST 5 1 S T S T S E SE 286TH ST V CT SE7 2 N D S T S E 42ND ST NE 2ND ST SE PEARL AVE SESE 307TH PL K ST NE5 7 T H D R S E S 324TH ST F ST NE56THAV E S 6 4 T H S T S E SE 282ND ST OSTNERSTSEA ST SEM U C K L E S H O O TMUCKLESHOOTCASINOCASINO T H E T H E O U T L E T O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N C O L L E C T I O N Auburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 4603Printed On: 10/8/2015 °0 1 Miles Corridor Sections City of Auburn Auburn L OS Corridors Map 2-5 Source: City of Auburn GIS Department Page 823 of 967 ")V ")V ")V ")V ")V ")V ")V ")V !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(XW!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(XW!( !( !( !(XWXWXW!( ") !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !. !. !(XW!( !( ") !. !.!. !. !. !.!. !. !. !.!. !( !( TS18 TS18 TS167 TS167 A ST SEB ST NWI ST NEA U B U R N W A Y S C ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE124TH AVE SEE MA IN STWESTVALLEYHWYN SE 304TH ST S 277TH ST C ST NW15TH ST SW STUCK RIVER DR S E 2ND ST E W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW 132ND AVE SELAKE T A P P S P K W Y S E 4 1STST S E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST K E R S E Y W AYSE SE 288TH ST 8TH ST NE 37TH ST NW L A K E L ANDHI LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSE25TH ST SE EAST BLVD55TH AVE SSE 320TH ST 56TH AVE SD ST SE110TH AVE SE4TH ST SE 104THAVESEI ST NW51ST AVE SWESTVALLEYHWYSN ST NEW ST NWO ST NESCENIC D R SES 287TH ST D ST NE112TH AVE SE58TH AVE SK ST SEEAST VALLEY HWY E4TH ST SW 8 TH ST S E T ST SE57THPLSM ST NEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNEH ST SEB ST SEFOSTER AVE SE47TH ST S E 56TH ST SERIVERDRSES 305TH ST U ST NW130TH AVE SE35T H W A Y S ER ST NW26TH ST SEB ST NESE 323RD PL 1 7 T H S T S E S E 3 1 8 T H W A Y 3 6 T H S T S E 5 0 T H S T N E 6 4 T H S T S E AST ESE304THWAY108THAVESE SE 298TH PL 22ND ST SE 42ND ST NW S 292ND ST SE 282ND ST 5 1 S T S T S E SE 286TH ST V CT SE32ND ST SE 7 2 N D S T S E 42ND ST NE SE 285TH ST PEARL AVE SE6 2 N D S T S E SE 307TH PL118TH AVE SE65TH ST SE51ST AVE ST H E T H E O U T L E T O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N C O L L E C T I O N Auburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 4589Printed On: 7/28/2020 °0 1 Miles City of Auburn ")V Future Variable Message ")V Existing Variable Message !(City Signal XWPED Signal ")County Signal !.WSDOT ITS Copper ITS Fiber Future ITS Corridor Intelligent Transportation Systems Map 2-7 Source: City of Auburn GIS Department Page 824 of 967 T H E T H E O U T L E T O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N C O L L E C T I O N M U C K L E S H O O TMUCKLESHOOT C A S I N OCASINO A U B URNWA Y S MONTEVISTADRSES 285TH ST S 289TH PL 16THST E 1 1 1 T H P L S E B ST SE9 T H S T S E 5 8 T H P L S E 20THST NE 36TH ST SE HOPEAVE SE126THCT SE114THPL SE134TH CT SE SE 30 1 ST WAY UDALLCT SENATHANAVE SE7 3 R D S T S E87TH AVE S5 7 T H AV E S 61ST AVE S122NDLN SE6 2 N D S T S E U PL NE 56THST SE S 3 17 TH ST 129THPL SE24TH ST SE PI KEST NE57THPL S21ST ST NEL CT NE35THST SE 120THCT SEF ST SE2 8 T H S T S E 30TH ST NE 37THPLSES 2 84 T H ST S 318TH ST 5 9 T H S T S E 32ND ST SE 18TH ST NE 67THST SE 55TH ST SE26TH PL NEF CT SE55THPL SSE 290TH STO PL NES301S T S T 11TH ST SE SE 291ST ST 23 R D ST N E SC EN IC DR SE59THPL S4TH ST SE V CT SE3 7 T H S T S E57THPL SV ST NE54THAVE S2 1 S T S T N W H OWARDRDSE O CT SE60T HSTS E2ND ST E S 336TH PL 51STST NE B ST NWSE 322ND PL S 29 8 TH PLQ ST NE3RDST SW 4 9 T H S T N E 33RDST SE LA K E T A P P S P K W Y S E55TH PL SSE 312TH CT 40THST SED ST NWS 291ST ST S DIVISION STDUNCANAVE SES 3 2 5 T H CT 26TH ST NE C ST SEALPINESTSEA ST SEISTSES 292ND ST 5 3 R D A VES55THAVE SE L AIN E A V E S EPIKEST NEK ST SEE M A IN ST 40TH ST NE K ST NESE 3 08 TH PL 15TH ST NW 104TH AVE SE12 5 T HPL SEE ST SW2N D ST N E 6 7 T H L N S EG PL SEC ST SEF P L N E J ST NEO ST SEE ST SE125THPL SE71ST ST SE5THSTSW L ST NESE 309TH PL 49THST SEA ST NE18TH ST NE K ST SE1 STSTNE4TH ST SE T ST SEA ST NWVS TSER ST NE19TH ST SE 117THPL SE15TH ST NW 112TH PL SEE ST NE27THPL SES 297TH PL 114THPL SE72ND ST SEISAACAVE SE58THPL S29TH ST SE9THCTNW WESLEYA V E SES C E NI CDR S E 31ST ST SE 119THPLS ESE 323R D S T PERRYAVE SE58THAVE S1S T ST N E E V A N CTSESE 299TH PL 47THAVE S15TH ST SE 35THW AYSE15TH ST SE 28TH ST SE 108T H AVE S E 127THPL SE108THAVE SE121ST PL SE121STPLS E51STAVE S72NDST SEAABYDRNW2ND ST NE51STAVE SS 296TH PL S 320TH ST 112THAVE SEHAZELLOOP SESE 306TH ST 17 TH S T SE SE 296THWAY JAMESPL SE305TH PL SE 29THST NW E ST SW3RD ST NE F ST SWIPLNE43RDST NE 6 0 T H P L S 15TH ST NW R ST SE1ST ST SE 8TH ST NE 181STAVE E101STAV E S E 55TH AVE S56THAVE S129THPL SERIVERDR SEPOPLARST SEW ST NWO ST SE118THAVE SEN ST SE59THAVE S29TH S T NW 122NDPL SESE 309TH ST 52NDAVE SSE 326TH ST 33RD ST SE 32ND ST NE 11TH ST SET STNW8TH ST SE S 321ST ST V PL SE58THAVE SD PL SE 19TH ST SE 67THCT SE61ST AVE S54THCTS35TH ST NEB STNWS 329TH PL S 328TH ST 63RDPLSE100THAVE SEJORDANAVE SE33RD ST SE SE 308TH PL D STSER STSE33RD ST SE 57TH ST SEN STSE5 8 T HAVES130THAVE SE56THCT S 16TH ST SE FIR ST SEG STSE20TH ST N W 56THAVE S114THAVE SES 277TH ST 27TH ST SE GINKGOSTSE36THSTSE56TH ST SE 114THPLSE9T HST N E I STNEB STNWHAZELAVE SE4 8T H C T S E 6T H S T NE D STSE57THPL S5TH ST SE51STAVE SVICTORIAAVE SES E 3 2 1ST PL 7TH ST SE 138TH AVE SE118THAVE SE17TH ST SE 14TH ST SE SE295TH ST C STNWG STNW10TH ST NE 53RD ST SE 13TH ST SE 6TH ST NE 1 1 4 THWAYSEA STSE54THST SE 66TH ST SE56THAVE SS 326TH CT T ERRACEDRNWSE 315TH ST C STSEAUBURNWAY N26TH ST NW I STNE112THAVE SE63RDPL SS E 45TH ST52NDAVE SMSTNE17TH ST NE 129THPLSEK STNE15TH ST NE NATHANAVESEPERRYAVESEN STNEPIKESTNE60THAVESB STNE106THAVESES E 293R D S T E STSE19THPLSE5TH ST SE K STNEW MAIN ST 12TH ST NE 14TH ST NW K STNE8TH ST NE B STSESE288TH PLI STNEG STSES 305TH ST 2ND ST NE 107THAVE SE124TH AVE SE59THAVE SM STSE110THAVE SEA STNWJ STSE9TH ST SE66THAVE S8TH ST SE7TH ST SEJ STNEE STSE176THAVE EG STSEL STSE2ND ST SE L STSE51STAVE S14TH ST SEN STNEI STSE176THAVE E28TH ST SE SE 304TH STI STNEBOUNDARY BLVD SW A STSE168THAVEEAUBURNWAY S31STST NE 28TH ST SE 26TH ST SE 108THAVESE52NDAVE S118THAVE SEPIKEST NE120THAVE SES 322ND PL SE 281STST H STSE7TH ST SE 124TH AVE SES E 3 1 3TH ST 23 RD ST SE SE 296TH ST 19TH PL SET STSEPIKEST NEI STNEN STNEFRANCI SCTSE25TH ST SEM STSE124THAVE SESE 300TH WAY H STSE29TH ST SE B STSEPIKESTNEQUINCYAVESE22ND ST SE 110THAVE SE128TH PL SED STSE63RDPLSE127THPL SE8T H ST NE ASTNE5T H S T NE 25TH ST S E 3 5 TH W AY S EN STNEQ U I N C Y A V E S E2ND ST E SE 288TH ST 8TH ST SW 116TH AVE SEPIKESTN E 108THAVE SE31ST ST SE 5TH ST SE 15TH ST SW 4 9 T H S T N E L STNE21STCTSE59THAVES6 5 T H A V ES58THWAYSE SE 320TH ST 37T H ST S E E MAIN ST SE 3 2 3 R D P L 15TH ST SW 23 RD S T SEAUBURNWAY NI STNE109THPLSESE 316TH ST 32ND ST NE 25TH ST SE LAKELANDHILLS WAY SE16TH S T NW R STSESE 282ND ST U STNWCROSSST SES298THPL I STNEC STSWAUBURNWAYN53RD ST SE 127 THPLS ESE 297TH ST S E 300TH S T 112THAVE SE46THAVES 5 1 S T P L N E H A R V E Y R D N E 16TH ST SE ELMSTSECSTSEWEST VALLEYHWY S108THAVESEASTNE111THPLSE110THPL SE6TH ST SE S 3 24 T H ST SE 288TH ST 19TH D R N E 124THAVE SEMAPLE DR SE R STSE55TH ST SE58THAVE SELAINEAVE SE15TH ST NE 4TH ST SW SE 294TH ST L A K E L A N D H IL L S WA Y S E DOGWOODDR SESE 320TH ST 124THAVE SESE 320TH ST 133RDAVE SEHENRYRDNESE282N D S T 42ND ST NE PERR Y D RSEH STNE124THAVE SE15THSTNW RSTNWS 302ND PL SE 292ND ST O STSER I V E R WALKD R SESE 307TH PL AUBURNWAY NWSTNW56 T HAV E S 4TH ST NE NATHANWAYSER STSE8T H ST N E 10TH ST NE E STNES 319TH ST LEAHILLRDSEAUBURNWAY NSE 43RD STW STNWCSTS W SE 290TH ST KENNEDYAVE SELAKE TAPPS PKW Y SE49THAVE SAUBURN WAY NSE299TH ST 15TH ST SW AUBURNWAYNS 303RD PL SE 297TH ST KENNEDYAVESEI ST NE10TH ST NE 5 5THA VESSE 304TH ST 37 TH ST NE W MAINST HSTNEM ST SEM ST SE15THST NW 2ND ST E 134THPL SE37TH ST NW S 277TH ST JASMINEAVE SE22ND ST NW ST U ARTPL SE15TH ST NE SE 288TH ST SE 281ST ST SE 290TH PL ORAVETZPLSE 1 6 7THA V EE28TH S T S E WARDAVE SEOLYMPICST SEA ST SEAUBURNWAY S 68THLOOPSEWYMANDR SEL E A H IL L R D S E 37TH ST NW AUBU R NWAY N A ST SE55THAVE SSE 295THST 37TH ST NE SCENICDRSE ASTE 57TH ST SE 107THAVE SE 37 TH ST NW S E 3 04TH S T S 312 T H S T NOBLECTSESE289TH STI ST NES E 31 8 THW A Y52NDAVE SSE 310TH ST ELIZ ABETHLOO PSESE 285TH ST 140THAVE SEA U B U R NWA Y N 62ND LO OP SE42ND ST NE EASTVALLEYHWYE8T H ST NE F O R E S T R ID G E D R S E55THAVES112TH AVE SEKATHERINE AVE SEA U B U R N W A Y S FORESTR I D GE DR SE 37THST NW 20TH ST SEWEST VALLEYHWY NSE 294TH ST 118THAVE SE15TH ST SW 124THAVE SE140THAVE SE23RD ST SE F RANCISL O OPSEB ST NWW M A I N S T A ST SESE 304THS TBO UNDARY BLVD SW SKYLARK VILLAG E RD SEWESTERNAVE NW16TH ST NE 109THAVESE A U B U R N W A Y S L A K E TA P P S P K W Y S E S 277TH ST SE 286TH ST CSTNW5 7 T HD R SE142NDAVESE SE 326THPLPEARLAVE SESE 312TH ST SE 312TH ST SE 299TH ST SE 288TH ST 132NDAVE SE51STAVE SA ST SES 318TH ST G ST SEH ST SE124THAVE SES 316TH ST PIKEST NW23RD ST SE 25TH ST SE A U B U R N W A Y S HEATHERAVE SES K Y W A Y L N S E 148THAVE SEA ST NE42ND ST NW MSTSEBSTNWLUNDRD SWMONTEVISTADRSE L A K E T A P P S P K W Y S E 3 6THS T S E21STSTNE SE 3 1 2THW A YMILLPO N D LOOPS E SE 295TH S T EAST VALLEYHWY EORAVETZRDSE1 0 8THA V E SE37TH PL SES 277TH ST WEST VALLEYHWY NTERRAC EVIEWLNS E DSTNEL A K E LANDH IL L S W AYSESE 301ST ST 15TH ST NW AUBURNWAY NA ST SEA ST NW2ND ST E54TH AVE SWESTVALLEYHWYSAU BU RN WAY S55THAVE S56THAVE SWEST VALLEYHWY NWESTVALLEYHWYNC ST SWA ST SEAUB U R N W A Y S S E 287THST 47TH ST SERIVERWALKDRSEA ST SEWESTVALLEYHWYNKER S E Y WAY S EHIGHLANDDRSE EASTVALLE YRDSEUSTNWB ST NWISTNWB ST NWOUTLETCOLL E CTIONRDS W 124TH AVE SEAUBURN-BLACKDIAMONDRDSE WESTVALLEYHWYSORAVETZRDSEKERSEY WAY SE LAKETA P P S PKWYS E O R A VETZRDSECLAY ST NWS 287TH ST FOSTER AVE SEL A K E TAPPS P K W YSEAUBURNMANORRDSE S UMNE R -TAPPSHWY EDSTNWRONCROCKETTDRNWA U B U R N W A Y SWESTVALLEYHWYNA U B U R N W A Y S AUBURN WAY S KERS E Y WA Y S E 144TH AVE SET ERRACEDRNWHICR E S TDR NWC ST NWB ST NWEASTBLVDP E A S LEY CAN Y O N RDS RONCROCKETTDRNW104THAVESEOUT LE T COLLECTI ONDRS WPA CIFICAVES4 1 S TSTSEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNEC ST SWSTUCK RIVER DR SE TS167 TS167 TS18 COMP-11 COMP-20 COMP-21 COMP-2 COMP-12 COMP-10 COMP-20 COMP-24 COMP-20 COMP-6 COMP-8 COMP-17 COMP-1 COMP-3 COMP-9 COMP-18 COMP-5 COMP-14 COMP-13 COMP-25 COMP-7 COMP-22 COMP-23 COMP-19 COMP-4 Auburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 6184Printed On: 8/14/2020 °0 1 Miles Parks City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan Projects Comprehensive Plan Projects Source: City of Auburn GIS Department COMP-15 Page 825 of 967 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 55 5 5 55 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 A ST SEB ST NWAUBURN WAY SC ST SWI ST NEM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE124TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY NC ST NW15TH ST SW LAKE TAPPS PKWY SE W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW SE 304TH ST E MAIN ST 132ND AVE SE51ST AVE SKERSEY WAY SE 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST 8TH ST NE 37TH ST NW LAKELAND HILLS WAY SEORAVETZ RD SEM ST NESE 320TH STD ST NWA ST NE4TH ST SE 104TH AVE SERON CROCKETT DR NWA ST NWWEST VALLEY H WY S LEA HILL R D S E 37TH ST NE S 316TH ST S 277TH ST RIVERWALK DR SED ST NE112TH AVE SEEAST VALLEY HWY EHARVEY RD NE 15TH ST NE PEASLEY CANYON RD S BOUNDARY BLVD SW SE 30 4 T H W A Y Auburn Ave41ST ST SETERRACE DR NWSE 281ST ST SUMNER- T A P P S H W Y E AU B U R N - B L A C K D I A M O N D R D S E 17TH ST SE HO W A R D R D S E 6TH ST SE 3RD ST SW 3RD ST NW INDUSTRY DR SW16TH ST NW 9 T H S T N E A ST SESE 304TH ST R ST SE124TH AVE SESE 304TH ST SE 320TH ST 112TH AVE SEA ST NWC ST NESTUCK RIVER DR SE 2ND ST E 53RD ST SEM ST NWM ST NESE 288TH ST 37TH ST SE SE 284TH ST 22ND ST NE 46TH PL S 41ST ST SE 17TH ST SE 25TH ST SE EAST BLVDPERIMETER RD SW12TH ST SE S 296TH ST R ST NED ST SE55TH AVE S56TH AVE S110TH AVE SEPACIFIC AVE S116TH AVE SE51ST AVE SI ST NWM ST SESE 299TH ST N ST NEE ST NEO ST NESCENIC DR SEW ST NW69TH ST S E S 287TH ST H ST NW62ND ST SE 6TH ST SE S 300TH PL 44TH ST NW A ST NECLAY ST NWSE 316TH ST 14TH ST NE 127TH PL SEEVERGREE N W A Y S E58TH AVE SK ST SE49TH ST NE 144TH AVE SE4TH ST NE 7TH ST SE 4TH ST SW 5TH ST SE BRIDGET AVE SEFRONTAGE RDD ST NES 331ST ST L ST SEI ST SEDOGWOOD ST SEF ST SEC ST SE67TH ST S E PIKE ST NE8TH ST SE T ST SE118TH AVE SEFOSTER AVE SEG ST SEH ST SE57TH PL SB ST SEMILL POND DR SE140TH AVE SEE ST SEG PL SE52ND AVE S105TH PL SE32ND ST NE RIVER D R S E SE 310TH ST 47TH ST SE 56TH ST SE54TH AVE SSE 296TH WAY QUINCY AVE SESE 290TH ST U ST NWS 305TH ST 112TH AVE SEE MAIN ST J ST SE130TH AVE SED ST NW28TH ST NE R ST NWOLIVE AVE SEELIZABETH AVE SE30TH ST NE 61ST AVE S51ST ST NE SE 323RD PLB ST NE26TH ST SE65TH AVE SSE 318TH W A Y SE 301ST ST 32ND ST S E 36TH ST SE SE 287TH ST 64TH AVE S50TH S T S E 10TH ST NE 29TH ST NW HEMLOCK ST SEV ST NWA ST E21ST ST N E 31ST ST SE 30TH ST SE S 2 9 7TH P L SE 298TH PL85TH AVE S24TH ST SE HIGH L AND D R S E S 318TH ST 23RD ST SEH ST NE22ND ST SEPIKE ST NWO ST SESE 282ND ST 42ND ST NW LUND RD SWS 288TH ST 24TH ST NE 19TH DR NE 111TH PL SED ST SW27TH ST SE 108TH AVE SE V ST SE10TH ST SE 8TH ST NE 20TH ST SE V CT SESE 295TH ST 176TH AVE EF ST SWSE 286TH ST 49TH AVE SE ST SW66TH ST SE104TH PL SE72ND ST SE 148TH AVE SEALPINE ST SE128TH PL SEB PL NW 16TH ST SE 13TH ST SE 42ND ST NE G ST SW2ND ST SE ELM ST SE6TH ST NW 73RD ST SE S E 3 1 2 T H W A Y 57TH ST SE55TH PL SL ST NES 312TH ST S 292ND ST CHARLOTTE AVE SE9TH ST SE52ND PL SSE 285TH ST ISAAC AVE SEHAZEL AVE SESE 307TH PL 28TH ST SE T ST NEJ ST NE15TH ST SE 45TH S T N E SE 308TH PL 14TH ST S E 26TH ST NE HEATHER AVE SEMAPLE DR SE RANDALL AVE SEK ST NESE 43RD ST S 319TH ST 20TH ST NW 22ND ST NW NOBLE CT SER PL SE S 322ND ST S 314TH S T 19TH ST SE WARD AVE SESE 297TH ST 129TH PL SE21ST ST SEI PL NE33RD ST SE SE 307TH ST 63RD PL S E 55TH ST SE SE 32 3 R D S T WESTERN AVE NW111TH AVE SE114TH AVE SE117TH PL SETERRACE VIEW LN SEF ST NESE 296TH ST 112TH PL SE134TH PL SESE 306TH ST 12TH ST NE ORAVETZ PL SE 35TH ST NE SE 286TH PL 8TH ST SW KATHERINE AVE SE142ND AVE SEJASMINE AVE SESE 300TH ST 43RD ST NE 59TH AVE S46TH AVE S63RD PL S22ND WAY NE S 322ND PL STILLMAN ST SE 18TH ST SE FIR ST SEELAINE AVE SE6TH ST NE66TH AVE SV P L SE107TH AVE SESE 305TH PL KENNEDY AVE SESE 314TH PL S 307TH ST 56TH PL SAABY DR NWSE 3 1 8 T H P L121ST PL SEC PL SE14TH ST NW I ST NE37TH PL SE56TH CT S49TH ST NW 28TH PL SESE 304TH PL 71ST ST SE 26TH ST NW 120TH AVE SE113TH PL SES 329TH PL S 328TH ST 58TH W A Y S E SE 321ST PL 49TH S T S E SE 311TH ST S 321ST ST 114TH WAY SE54TH CT SFRANKLIN AVE SE11TH ST SE 168TH AVE ESE 315TH PL S 320TH ST 181ST AVE E13TH ST NEQ ST NE23RD ST NE 305TH PL SE 27TH PL SEL P L S E 53RD A V E S S 292ND ST SE 310TH ST 26TH ST NE 118TH AVE SESE 282N D S T SE 29 5TH STK ST NE47TH S T S ED ST SET ST SEE ST NE17TH ST SE 24TH ST SE 14TH ST SEPIKE ST NWB ST NE28TH ST SE56TH AVE S4TH ST NE I ST SE22ND ST SEV ST NW9TH ST SE PIKE ST NEL ST SEK ST SE29TH ST NW 57TH ST SEOLIVE AVE SE61ST AVE S50TH S T S E 30TH ST NE ELM ST SEL ST NEC ST SE49TH ST NE 107TH AVE SE37TH ST SE112TH PL SEF ST SE129TH PL SE2ND ST SE ELIZABETH AVE SE16TH ST SE DOGWOOD ST SESE 286TH PL SE 295TH ST 36TH S T S EA ST SEB ST NWAUBURNWAYSI ST NEC ST SWM ST SER ST SE124THAVESEWESTVALLEYHWYNSE304THST CSTNW15TH ST SW STUCKRIVERDRSE 15TH ST NW LAKETAPPS PKWYSE 41 ST ST SE 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST SE 288TH ST 37TH ST NW ORAVETZ R D SE25TH ST SE EAST BLVD110TH AVE SEA ST NE104THAVESEISTNW51ST AVE SRONCROCKETTDRNWN ST NE 112THAVESEA C ADEMYDRSE MONTEVI STADRS E JOHNREDDINGTONRDNEG ST SEESTSE108THAVESE16TH ST NE O ST SESE 32 6 T H P LT ST NW2NDSTSE SE294THST ELMLNSE 118THAVESEPERRY AVE SES303RDPL SE289THST 5 7 T H DRSE 33RD ST S E S 310TH ST U CT NWR ST NEO PL NEA ST SETS18 TS18 MUCKLESHOOT CASINO MUCKLESHOOT CASINO TS167 TS167 THE OUTLET COLLECTION THE OUTLET COLLECTION Auburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 4587Printed On: 8/18/2020 °0 1 Miles 5 Education Facilities Existing Sidewalk on One Side Existing Sidewalk on Both Sides Future Pedestrian Corridors Multi-Use Trail Downtown Urban Center (DUC) Zone Future Priority Sidewalk Corridors Map 3-1 Source: City of Auburn GIS Department Page 826 of 967 TS18 TS18 A ST SEB ST NWI ST NEA U B U R N W A Y S C ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE124TH AVE SEE MA IN STWESTVALLEYHWYN SE 304TH ST S 277TH ST C ST NW15TH ST SW STUCK RIVER DR S E 2ND ST E W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW 132ND AVE SELAKE T A P P S P K W Y S E 4 1 STST S E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST K E R S E Y W AYSE SE 288TH ST 8TH ST NE 37TH ST NW L A K E L ANDHI LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSE25TH ST SE EAST BLVD55TH AVE SSE 320TH ST 56TH AVE SD ST SE110TH AVE SE4TH ST SE 104THAVESEI ST NW51ST AVE SWESTVALLEYHWYSN ST NEW ST NWO ST NESCENIC D R SES 287TH ST D ST NE112TH AVE SE58TH AVE SK ST SEEAST VALLEY HWY E4TH ST SW 8 TH ST S E T ST SE57THPLSM ST NEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNEH ST SEB ST SEFOSTER AVE SE47TH ST S E 56TH ST SERIVERDRSES305THSTU ST NW130TH AVE SE35T H W A Y S ER ST NW26TH ST SEB ST NESE 323RD PL 1 7 T H S T S E S E 3 1 8 T H W A Y 3 6 T H S T S E 5 0 T H S T N E 6 4 T H S T S E AST ESE304THWAY108THAVESE22ND ST SE 42ND ST NW S 292ND ST SE 282ND ST SE 286TH ST V CT SE32ND ST SE 42ND ST NE 7 3 R D S T S E SE 285TH ST PEARL AVE SE6 2 N D S T S E SE 307TH PL118TH AVE SE65TH ST SEA ST SE51ST AVE STS167 TS167 T H E T H E O U T L E T O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N C O L L E C T I O N Auburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 4604Printed On: 7/27/2020 °0 1 Miles Existing Trailheads Future Trailheads Bike Facility Future Bike Facility Trail Future Trail Existing and Future Bicycle Facilities and Multi-Use Trails Map 3-2 Source: City of Auburn GIS Department Page 827 of 967 5 55 5 5 5 5 5 5 55 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 INTERURBAN TRAILMAIN ST CONNEC TORA/B STREET CORRIDOR124TH AVE SE CORRIDORGREEN RIVER ROAD CORRIDORLEA HILL CONNECTOR STE WART/L AKE TA PPS CONNECTORSOUTH AUBURN M STREET SE CORRIDORWEST VALLEY CORRIDORA ST SE AND LAKELAND HI LLS CORRI DORNORTH 37TH ST NW AND WEST HILL CONNECTOR NORTH AUBURN R STREET NE / I STREET NE CORRIDORRIVERWALK-AUBURN WAY S-ENUMCLAW CONNECTOR KERSEY W AY / LA KE T APPS C O R RID O RC STREET TRAIL AND 15TH ST SW CORRIDORTS18 TS18 TS167 TS167 A ST SEAUBURNWAYSB ST NWC ST SWISTNEM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE124TH AVE SE132ND AVE SEE MA IN S TWESTVALLEYHWYN SE 304TH ST S 277TH ST C ST NW15TH ST SW 2ND ST E STUCK RIVER DR S E W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW LAKE T A P PSPKW Y S E4 1STSTS E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST 51ST AVE SKERSEYWAYSE SE 288TH ST 8T H ST N E ORAVETZRDSE25TH ST SE EAST BLVDSE 320TH ST D ST SE110TH AVE SE4TH ST SE 104TH AVE SEI ST NWWESTVALLEYHWYSSE 299TH ST N ST NEW ST NWOSTNE37TH ST NE S 287TH ST 56TH AVE SSCENICD R S E118TH AVE SESE 316TH ST AUBURN-BLACKDIAMOND RD SED ST NE112TH AVE SEACADEMYDRSE P E A S LEYCA N Y O N RDS EAST VALLEY HWY E4TH ST SW 8TH ST SE C ST SEM ST NEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNEH ST SEB ST SEFOSTER AVE SE47THST S E 56TH ST SE S 305TH ST57TH PLS130TH AVE SE35T H W A Y S ER ST NWBSTNESE 323RD PL 17TH ST SE 5 0 T H S T N E 6 4 T H S T S EV ST NW21ST S T N E 108THAVESE23R D ST S E 36 T H S TSE42ND ST NW S 292ND ST SE 282ND ST O ST SE5 1 S T S T S E SE 286TH ST 7 2 N D S T S E 2ND ST SE PEARL AVE SE6 2 N D S T S E SE 307TH PL J ST NEK ST NE5 7 T H D R S E S 324TH ST FIR ST SE43RD ST NE A ST SEM U C K L E S H O O TMUCKLESHOOTCASINOCASINOTHE T H E O U T L E T O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N C O L L E C T I O N K E N TKENT P I E R C EPIERCECOUNTYCOUNTY K I N GKINGCOUNT YCOUNTY P A C I F I CPACIFIC S U M N E RSUMNER E D G E W O O DEDGEWOOD A L G O N AALGONA F STREET / LES GOVE CORRIDOR AUBURN BLACK DIAMOND/GREEN VALLEY ROAD CONNECTORDownhillB.P.A Pow er li ne R ight of Way B.P.A Pow erline Right of W ayB .P .A P o w e rlin e R igh t o f W ayVALENTINET oToFlami n g F l a m i n g G e y s e rGeyser @ EMERALDDOWNS AUBURNDOWNTOWN SUPERMALL YMCA LES GOVE H ill AUBURNGOLFCOURSEBRANNAN PARK MARYOLSONPARK LAKELAND HILLSCOMMERCIALAREA Only T oToKen tKent@ T oToKen tKent@ T oToKen tKent@ @ T oToKen tKent&&S e a t t l eSeattle@ @T oToFeder a l F e d e r a l W a yWay @T oToFeder a l F e d e r a l W a yWay @T oToFeder a l F e d e r a l W a yWay @T oToEdgew o o dEdgewood @T oToMilt o nMilton @T o T o T a c o m aTacoma @T oToSumn e rSumner&&P u y a l l u pPuyallup @T oToSumn e rSumner&&B o n n e yBonneyLakeLake @T oToBonn e yBonneyLakeLake @ T oToEnumc l a wEnumclaw T oToBlac kBlackDiamon dDiamond @ T oToPacif i cPacificRaceway sRaceways @ GRCC GAMEFARMPARK MUCKLESHOOTCASINO PACIFICRACEWAYS INTERURBAN TRAILINTERURBAN TRAILT oToKen tKent@ RecommendedU p h illR o u te AUBURNENVIRONMENTALPARK Auburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 4593Printed On: 10/6/2015 °0 1 Miles Connectors Corridors Interurban Trail City of Auburn Bicycle Corridors and Connectors Map 3-3 Source: City of Auburn GIS Department Focus Area Page 828 of 967 ^_ TS18 TS18 TS167 TS167 MUCKLESHOOT CASINO MUCKLESHOOT CASINO THE OUTLET COLLECTION THE OUTLET COLLECTION A ST SEB ST NWAUBURN WAY SI ST NEC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE124TH AVE SEE MAIN STWESTVALLEYHWYN SE 304TH ST C ST NWS 277TH ST 15TH ST SW 2ND ST E STUCKRIVERDRSE W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW 132ND AVE SELAKETAPPS PKWYSE 41 ST ST SE 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST KERSEYWAY S E SE 288TH ST 8TH ST NE 37TH ST NW LAKELANDHILLSWAYSEO R A V ETZRD S E 25TH ST SE EAST BLVD55TH AVE S56TH AVE SSE 320TH ST D ST SE110TH AVE SE4TH ST SE 104THAVESEI ST NW51ST AVE SWESTVALLEYHWYSN ST NEW ST NWO ST NESCE NI CDRSES 287TH ST 118TH AVE SE112TH AVE SED ST NE58TH AVE SK ST SEEAST VALLEY HWY E4THSTSW 7TH ST SE T ST SEC ST SE57THPLSM ST NEH ST SEJOHNREDDINGTONR D N E FOSTER AVE SEB ST SE47THSTSE 56THSTSEU ST NWS 305TH ST 35THWAYSER ST NW130TH AVE SE26TH ST SEB ST NESE318THWAY SE 323RD PL 17TH ST S E 36THST SE 50TH ST NE 64TH ST SE A S TE 108TH AV ESESE304T H WAY SE 298TH PL 42ND ST NW S 292ND ST SE 282ND ST 51STSTSE SE 286TH ST V CT SE32ND ST SE 42ND ST NE 73RD ST SE PEARL AVE SESE 285TH ST 62ND ST SE SE 307TH PL 21ST ST SE 65TH ST SEA ST SE51ST AVE SAuburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 4510Printed On: 7/15/2020 °0 1 Miles ^_Auburn Transit Station Park & Ride Metro Transit Routes Pierce Transit Routes Sound Transit Routes Muckleshoot Shuttle Routes Auburn Transit Routes and MIT Shuttle Route Map 4-1 Source: City of Auburn GIS Department ")164 ")181 ")181 ")160 ")952 ")566 ")566 ")578")181 ")917 ")180 ")497 ")917 ")578 ")497 ")915")MIT Shuttle Page 829 of 967 ^_ TS18 TS18 MUCKLESHOOT CASINO MUCKLESHOOT CASINO THE OUTLET COLLECTION THE OUTLET COLLECTION TS167 TS167 A ST SEB ST NWAUBURN WAY SI ST NEC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE124TH AVE SEE MAIN STWESTVALLEYHWYN SE 304TH ST C ST NWS 277TH ST 15TH ST SW 2ND ST E STUCKRIVERDRSE W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW 132ND AVE SELAKETAPPS PKWYSE 41 ST ST SE 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST KERSEYWAY S E SE 288TH ST 8TH ST NE 37TH ST NW LAKELANDHILLSWAYSEO R A V ETZRD S E 25TH ST SE EAST BLVD55TH AVE S56TH AVE SSE 320TH ST D ST SE110TH AVE SE4TH ST SE 104THAVESEI ST NW51ST AVE SWESTVALLEYHWYSN ST NEW ST NWO ST NESCE NI CDRSES 287TH ST 118TH AVE SE112TH AVE SED ST NE58TH AVE SK ST SEEAST VALLEY HWY E4THSTSW 7TH ST SE T ST SEC ST SE57THPLSM ST NEH ST SEJOHNREDDINGTONR D N E FOSTER AVE SEB ST SE47THSTSE 56THSTSEU ST NWS 305TH ST 35THWAYSER ST NW130TH AVE SE26TH ST SEB ST NESE318THWAY SE 323RD PL 17TH ST S E 36THST SE 50TH ST NE 64TH ST SE A S TE 108TH AV ESESE304T H WAY SE 298TH PL 42ND ST NW S 292ND ST SE 282ND ST 51STSTSE SE 286TH ST V CT SE32ND ST SE 42ND ST NE 73RD ST SE PEARL AVE SESE 285TH ST 62ND ST SE SE 307TH PL 21ST ST SE 65TH ST SEA ST SE51ST AVE SAuburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 4684Printed On: 7/15/2020 °0 1 Miles ^_Auburn Transit Station Park & Ride Transit Dependent Areas Metro Transit Routes Pierce Transit Routes Sound Transit Routes Muckleshoot Shuttle Routes Auburn Transit Routes and Transit Dependent Areas Map 4-2 Source: City of Auburn GIS Department ")164 ")181 ")181 ")160 ")952 ")566 ")566 ")578")181 ")917 ")184 ")497 ")917 ")578 ")497 ")915 ")MIT Shuttle Page 830 of 967 PART 2 – FINAL MAPS Page 831 of 967 TS18 TS18 TS167 TS167 A ST SEB ST NWA U B U R N W A Y SI ST NEC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE124TH AVE SEE MAIN STWESTVALLEYHWYN SE 304TH ST C ST NWS 277TH ST 15TH ST SW 2ND ST E STUCK RIVER DR S E W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW 132ND AVE SELAKE T A P P S P K W Y S E 4 1 STST S E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST KE R S E Y W AYSE SE 288TH ST 8TH ST NE 37TH ST NW L A K E L ANDHILLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSE25TH ST SE EAST BLVD55TH AVE SD ST SE56TH AVE SSE 320TH ST 110TH AVE SE4TH ST SE 104THAVESEI ST NW51ST AVE SWESTVALLEYHWYSN ST NEW ST NWO ST NESCENIC D RSES 287TH ST 112TH AVE SED ST NE58TH AVE SK ST SEEAST VALLEY HWY E4TH ST SW 7TH ST SE T ST SEC ST SE57THPLSM ST NEH ST SEFOSTER AVE SEB ST SE47TH ST S E 56TH ST SEU ST NWS 305TH ST 130TH AVE SE35 T H W A Y S ER ST NW31ST ST NE 26TH ST SEB ST NES E 3 1 8 T H W A Y SE 323RD PL 17TH ST S E SE 301ST ST 3 6 T H S T S E 50TH ST NE 64TH ST S E AST E108THAVESESE304THWAY SE 298TH PL 22ND ST SE 42ND ST NW S 292ND ST SE 282ND ST 5 1 S T S T S E SE 286TH ST V CT SE32ND ST SE 42ND ST NE 73RD ST SE PEARL AVE SESE 285TH ST 62ND ST SE SE 307TH PL118TH AVE SE65TH ST SE51ST AVE SA ST SEM U C K L E S H O O T C A S I N O M U C K L E S H O O T C A S I N O T H E O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N T H E O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N Auburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 4609Printed On: 10/26/2021 °0 1 Miles City of Auburn Highway Principal Arterial Future Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Future Minor Arterial Residential Collector Future Residential Collector Non Residential Collector Future Non Resident Collector Rustic Collector Local Private Functional Roadway Classification Map 2-1 Source: City of Auburn GIS Department GREEN RIVER RD SEPage 832 of 967 Page 833 of 967 TS18 TS18 TS167 TS167 A ST SEB ST NWA U B U R N W A Y SI ST NEC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE124TH AVE SEE MAIN STWESTVALLEYHWYN SE 304TH ST C ST NWS 277TH ST 15TH ST SW 2ND ST E STUCK RIVER DR S E W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW 132ND AVE SELAKE T A P P S P K W Y S E 4 1 STST S E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST KE R S E Y W AYSE SE 288TH ST 8TH ST NE 37TH ST NW L A K E L ANDHILLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSE25TH ST SE EAST BLVD55TH AVE SD ST SE56TH AVE SSE 320TH ST 110TH AVE SE4TH ST SE 104THAVESEI ST NW51ST AVE SWESTVALLEYHWYSN ST NEW ST NWO ST NESCENIC D RSES 287TH ST 112TH AVE SED ST NE58TH AVE SK ST SEEAST VALLEY HWY E4TH ST SW 7TH ST SE T ST SEC ST SE57THPLSM ST NEH ST SEFOSTER AVE SEB ST SE47TH ST S E 56TH ST SEU ST NWS 305TH ST 130TH AVE SE35 T H W A Y S ER ST NW31ST ST NE 26TH ST SEB ST NES E 3 1 8 T H W A Y SE 323RD PL 17TH ST S E SE 301ST ST 3 6 T H S T S E 50TH ST NE 64TH ST S E AST E108THAVESESE304THWAY SE 298TH PL 22ND ST SE 42ND ST NW S 292ND ST SE 282ND ST 5 1 S T S T S E SE 286TH ST V CT SE32ND ST SE 42ND ST NE 73RD ST SE PEARL AVE SESE 285TH ST 62ND ST SE SE 307TH PL118TH AVE SE65TH ST SE51ST AVE SA ST SEM U C K L E S H O O T C A S I N O M U C K L E S H O O T C A S I N O T H E O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N T H E O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N Auburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 4681Printed On: 10/26/2021 °0 1 Miles Truck Routes Map 2-3 Source: City of Auburn GIS Department Priority 2 WSDOT City of Auburn Priority 1 Current Local Truck Routes Future Local Truck Route Current Through Truck Route Future Through Truck Route Current Local Truck Route Future Local Truck Route GREEN RIVER RD SEPage 834 of 967 TS18 TS18 TS167 TS167 A ST SEB ST NWA U B U R N W A Y SI ST NEC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE124TH AVE SEE MAIN STWESTVALLEYHWYN SE 304TH ST C ST NWS 277TH ST 15TH ST SW 2ND ST E STUCK RIVER DR S E W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW 132ND AVE SELAKE T A P P S P K W Y S E 4 1 STS T S E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST K E R S E Y W AYSE SE 288TH ST 8TH ST NE 37TH ST NW L A K E L ANDHILLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSE25TH ST SE EAST BLVD55TH AVE SD ST SE56TH AVE SSE 320TH ST 110TH AVE SE4TH ST SE 104THAVESEI ST NW51ST AVE SWESTVALLEYHWYSN ST NEW ST NWO ST NESCENIC D RSES 287TH ST 112TH AVE SED ST NE58TH AVE SK ST SEEAST VALLEY HWY E4TH ST SW 8TH ST SE T ST SE57THPLSM ST NEH ST SEFOSTER AVE SEB ST SE47TH ST S E 56TH ST SE R IVERDRSEU ST NWS 305TH ST 130TH AVE SE35 T H W A Y S ER ST NW31ST ST NE 26TH ST SEB ST NES E 3 1 8 T H W A Y SE 323RD PL 17TH ST S E 3 6 T H S T S E 50TH ST NE 64TH ST S E AST E108THAVESESE304THWAY SE 298TH PL 22ND ST SE 42ND ST NW S 292ND ST SE 282ND ST 5 1 S T S T S E SE 286TH ST V CT SE32ND ST SE 42ND ST NE 73RD ST SE PEARL AVE SESE 285TH ST 62ND ST SE SE 307TH PL118TH AVE SE65TH ST SE51ST AVE SM U C K L E S H O O T C A S I N O M U C K L E S H O O T C A S I N O T H E O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N T H E O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N Auburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 4681Printed On: 10/26/2021 °0 1 Miles Freight Routes Classification Map Class T-1 to T-5 Annual Tons (in thousands) Map 2-4 Source: City of Auburn GIS Department City of Auburn T-1 (Over 10,000) T-2 (4,000-10,000) T-3 (300-4,000) T-4 (100-300) T-5 (Over 20 in 60 days)GREEN RIVER RD SEPage 835 of 967 ")10")4 ")16")18")1")13")11 ")35")17 ")19 ")27 ")26")9 ")12 ")8 ")14")25 ")15 ")3 ")23")5 ")22")6")2")33 ")31TS18 TS18 TS167 TS167 A ST SEB ST NWA U B U R N W A Y SI ST NEC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE124TH AVE SEE MAIN STWESTVALLEYHWYN SE 304TH ST C ST NWS 277TH ST 15TH ST SW 2ND ST E STUCK RIVER DR S E W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW 132ND AVE SELAKE T A P P S P K W Y S E 4 1STS T S E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST K E R S E Y W AYSE SE 288TH ST 8TH ST NE 37TH ST NW ORAVETZRDSE25TH ST SE EAST BLVD55TH AVE SD ST SE56TH AVE SSE 320TH ST 110TH AVE SE4TH ST SE 104THAVESEI ST NW51ST AVE SN ST NEW ST NWOSTNE37TH ST NE SCENIC D R SES 287TH ST 112TH AVE SED ST NE58TH AVE SK ST SEEAST VALLEY HWY E4TH ST SW MONTEVISTADRSE7TH ST SE LSTSE6 7 T H S T SE T ST SEC ST SE57THPLSM ST NEH ST SEFOSTER AVE SEB ST SESE 316TH PL 47TH ST SE 56TH ST SEU ST NWS 305TH ST PEASLEY CANYONRD S 130TH AVE SE35 T H W A Y S ER ST NW31ST ST NE 26TH ST SEBSTNE SE 323RD PL 17TH ST S E SE 301ST ST 36 T H S T S E 50TH S T N E 6 4 T H S T S E AST E108THAVESESE304THWAY31ST ST SE SE 298TH PL 22ND ST SEE ST NE42ND ST NW S 292ND ST SE 282ND ST 5 1 S T S T S E SE 286TH ST V CT SE72ND ST SE 42ND ST NE PEARL AVE SESE 285TH ST SE 307TH PL118TH AVE SES 319TH ST F ST NESE 315TH PL51ST AVE SA ST SEM U C K L E S H O O T C A S I N O M U C K L E S H O O T C A S I N O T H E O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N T H E O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N Auburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 4603Printed On: 10/26/2021 °0 1 Miles Corridor Sections City of Auburn Auburn LOS Corridors Map 2-5 Source: City of Auburn GIS Department GREEN RIVER RD SEPage 836 of 967 ")V ")V ")V ")V ")V ")V ")V ")V TS18 TS18 TS167 TS167 A ST SEB ST NWA U B U R N W A Y SI ST NEC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE124TH AVE SEE MAIN STWESTVALLEYHWYN SE 304TH ST C ST NWS 277TH ST 15TH ST SW 2ND ST E STUCK RIVER DR S E W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW 132ND AVE SELAKE T A P P S P K W Y S E 4 1 STST S E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST KE R S E Y W AYSE SE 288TH ST 8TH ST NE 37TH ST NW L A K E L ANDHILLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSE25TH ST SE EAST BLVD55TH AVE SD ST SE56TH AVE SSE 320TH ST 110TH AVE SE4TH ST SE 104THAVESEI ST NW51ST AVE SWESTVALLEYHWYSN ST NEW ST NWO ST NESCENIC D RSES 287TH ST 112TH AVE SED ST NE58TH AVE SK ST SEEAST VALLEY HWY E4TH ST SW 7TH ST SE T ST SEC ST SE57THPLSM ST NEH ST SEFOSTER AVE SEB ST SE47TH ST S E 56TH ST SEU ST NWS 305TH ST 130TH AVE SE35 T H W A Y S ER ST NW31ST ST NE 26TH ST SEB ST NES E 3 1 8 T H W A Y SE 323RD PL 17TH ST S E SE 301ST ST 3 6 T H S T S E 50TH ST NE 64TH ST S E AST E108THAVESESE304THWAY SE 298TH PL 22ND ST SE 42ND ST NW S 292ND ST SE 282ND ST 5 1 S T S T S E SE 286TH ST V CT SE32ND ST SE 42ND ST NE 73RD ST SE PEARL AVE SESE 285TH ST 62ND ST SE SE 307TH PL118TH AVE SE65TH ST SE51ST AVE SA ST SEM U C K L E S H O O T C A S I N O M U C K L E S H O O T C A S I N O T H E O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N T H E O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N Auburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 4589Printed On: 10/26/2021 °0 1 Miles City of Auburn ")V Existing Variable Message ")V Future Variable Message Future City Signal City Signal PED Signal County Signal WSDOT ITS Copper ITS Fiber Future ITS Corridor Intelligent Transportation Systems Map 2-7 Source: City of Auburn GIS Department GREEN RIVER RD SEPage 837 of 967 TS18 TS18 TS167 TS167 A ST SEB ST NWA U B U R N W A Y SI ST NEC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE124TH AVE SEE MAIN STWESTVALLEYHWYN SE 304TH ST C ST NW15TH ST SW 2ND ST E STUCK RIVER DR S E W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW 132ND AVE SELAKE T A P P S P K W Y S E 4 1STS T S E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST K E R S E Y W AYSE SE 288TH ST 8TH ST NE 37TH ST NW L A K E L ANDHILLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSE25TH ST SE EAST BLVD55TH AVE SD ST SE56TH AVE SSE 320TH ST 110TH AVE SE4TH ST SE 104THAVESEI ST NW51ST AVE SWESTVALLEYHWYSN ST NEW ST NWO ST NES 277TH ST SCENIC D RSES 287TH ST 112TH AVE SED ST NE58TH AVE SK ST SEEAST VALLEY HWY E4TH ST SW 7TH ST SE T ST SEC ST SE57THPLSM ST NEH ST SEFOSTER AVE SEB ST SE47TH ST SE 56TH ST SEU ST NWS 305TH ST 130TH AVE SE35 T H W A Y S ER ST NW31ST ST NE 26TH ST SEB ST NES E 3 1 8 T H W A Y SE 323RD PL 17TH ST S E 3 6 T H S T S E 50TH ST NE 64TH ST S E AST E108THAVESESE304THWAY SE 298TH PL 22ND ST SE 42ND ST NW S 292ND ST SE 282ND ST 5 1 S T S T S E SE 286TH ST V CT SE32ND ST SE 42ND ST NE 73RD ST SE PEARL AVE SESE 285TH ST 62ND ST SE SE 307TH PL118TH AVE SE65TH ST SEA ST SE51ST AVE SM U C K L E S H O O T C A S I N O M U C K L E S H O O T C A S I N O T H E O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N T H E O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N Auburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 6184Printed On: 10/26/2021 °0 1 Miles City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan Projects Comprehensive Plan Projects Source: City of Auburn GIS Department GREEN RIVER RD SEPage 838 of 967 5 5 5 5 5 55 5 5 55 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 A ST SEB ST NWAUBURN WAY S C ST SWI ST NEM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE124TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY NC ST NW15TH ST SW L A K E T A P P S P KW Y S E W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW SE 304TH ST E MAIN ST 132ND AVE SE51ST AVE SK E R S E Y W A Y S E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST 8TH ST NE 37TH ST NW LAKELAND HILLS WAY SEORAVETZ RD SEM ST NESE 320TH STD ST NWA ST NE4TH ST SE 104TH AVE SERON CROCKETT DR NWA ST NWWEST VALLEY HWY SLEA HIL L R D S E 37TH ST NE S 316TH ST S 277TH ST RIVERWALK DR SED ST NE112TH AVE SEEAST VALLEY HWY EH A R V E Y R D N E 15TH ST NE PEASLEY CANYON RD S BOUNDARY BLVD SW SE 304TH WAYAuburn Ave41ST ST SETERRACE DR NWSE 281ST ST SUMNER- T A P P S H W Y E AUB U R N - B L A C K D I A M O N D R D S E 17TH ST SE HO W A R D R D S E 6TH ST SE 3RD ST SW 3RD ST NW INDUSTRY DR SW16TH ST NW 9T H S T N E A ST SESE 304TH ST R ST SE124TH AVE SESE 304TH ST SE 320TH ST 112TH AVE SEA ST NWC ST NESTUCK RIVER DR SE 2ND ST E 53RD ST SEM ST NWM ST NESE 288TH ST 37TH ST SE SE 284TH ST 22ND ST NE 4 6 TH P L S 41ST ST SE 17TH ST SE 25TH ST SE EAST BLVDPERIMETER RD SW12TH ST SE S 296TH ST R ST NED ST SE55TH AVE S56TH AVE S110TH AVE SEPACIFIC AVE S116TH AVE SE51ST AVE SI ST NWM ST SESE 299TH ST N ST NEE ST NEO ST NES C EN I C D R S EW ST NW69TH S T S E S 287TH ST H ST NW62ND ST SE 6TH ST SE S 300TH PL 44TH ST NW A ST NECLAY ST NWSE 316TH ST 14TH ST NE 127TH PL SEEVERGRE E N W A Y S E58TH AVE SK ST SE49TH ST NE 144TH AVE SE4TH ST NE 7TH ST SE 4TH ST SW 5TH ST SE BRIDGET AVE SEFRONTAGE RDD ST NES 331ST ST L ST SEI ST SEDOGWOOD ST SEF ST SEC ST SE67TH S T S E PIKE ST NE8TH ST SE T ST SE118TH AVE SEFOSTER AVE SEG ST SEH ST SE57TH PL SB ST SEMILL POND DR SE140TH AVE SEE ST SEG PL SE52ND AVE S105TH PL SE 32ND ST NE RIVER DR SESE 310TH ST 47TH ST SE 56TH ST SE54TH AVE SSE 296TH WAY QUINCY AV E S E SE 290TH ST U ST NWS 305TH ST 112TH AVE SEE MAIN ST J ST SE130TH AVE SED ST NW28TH ST NE SE 2 8 6 T H S T R ST NWOLIVE AVE SEELIZABETH AVE SE30TH ST NE 61ST AVE S51ST ST NE SE 323RD PLB ST NE26TH ST SE65TH AVE SSE 318TH W A Y SE 301ST ST 32ND ST S E 36TH ST SE SE 287TH ST 64TH AVE S50TH ST SE10TH ST NE 29TH ST NW HEMLOCK ST SEV ST NW21ST ST N E 31ST ST SE 30TH ST SE S 2 9 7 T H P L SE 298TH PL85TH AVE S24TH ST SE HI G H L A N D D R S E S 318TH ST 23RD ST SEH ST NE22ND ST SEPIKE ST NWO ST SESE 282ND ST 42ND ST NW LUND RD SWS 288TH ST 24TH ST NE 19TH DR NE 111TH PL SED ST SW27TH ST SE 108TH AVE SE V ST SE10TH ST SE 8TH ST NE 20TH ST SE V CT SESE 295TH ST 176TH AVE EF ST SW49TH AVE SE ST SW66TH ST SE 1 0 4 TH P L S E 72ND ST SE 148TH AVE SEALPINE ST SE128TH PL SEB PL NW 16TH ST SE 13TH ST SE 42ND ST NE G ST SW2ND ST SE ELM ST SE6TH ST NW 73RD ST SE SE 3 1 2 T H W A Y 57TH ST SE55TH PL SL ST NES 312TH ST S 292ND ST CHARLOTTE AVE SE9TH ST SE 2 9 T H S T S E52ND PL SSE 285TH ST ISAAC AVE SEHAZEL AVE SESE 307TH PL 28TH ST SE T ST NEJ ST NE15TH ST SE 45TH ST NE SE 308TH PL 14TH ST S E 26TH ST NE S 303RD ST HEATHER AVE SEMAPLE DR SE RANDALL AVE SEK ST NESE 43RD ST S 319TH ST 20TH ST NW 22ND ST NW NOBLE CT SER PL SE S 322ND ST S 314T H S T 19TH ST SE WARD AVE SESE 297TH ST 129TH PL SE21ST ST SEI PL NE33RD ST SE SE 307TH ST 63RD P L S E 55TH ST SE SE 323 R D S T WESTERN AVE NW111TH AVE SE114TH AVE SE117TH PL SETERRACE VIEW LN SEF ST NESE 296TH ST 112TH PL SE134TH PL SESE 306TH ST 12TH ST NE ORAVETZ PL SE 35TH ST NE SE 286TH PL 8TH ST SW KATHERINE AVE SE142ND AVE SEJASMINE AVE SESE 300TH ST 43RD ST NE 59TH AVE S46TH AVE S63RD PL S22ND WAY NE S 322ND PL STILLMAN ST SE 18TH ST SE FIR ST SEELAINE AVE SE 6TH ST NE66TH AVE SV P L S E 107TH AVE SESE 305TH PL KENNEDY AVE SESE 314TH PL S 307TH ST 56TH PL SAABY DR NWSE 3 1 8 T H P L121ST PL SEC PL SE14TH ST NW I ST NE37TH PL SE56TH CT S 49TH ST NW 28TH PL SESE 304TH PL 71ST ST SE 26TH ST NW 120TH AVE SE113TH PL SES 329TH PL S 328TH ST 58TH WAY SE SE 321ST PL 49TH S T S E SE 311TH ST S 321ST ST 114TH WAY SE 34TH ST SE54TH CT SFRANKLIN AVE SE11TH ST SE 168TH AVE ESE 315TH PL S 320TH ST 178TH AVE E181ST AVE E13TH ST NE Q ST NE23RD ST NE 305TH PL SE 27TH PL SEL P L S E53RD AVE SD ST SE4TH ST NE T ST SE26TH ST NE 47TH ST SEK ST NE17TH ST SE SE 310TH ST D ST SE49TH ST N E 14TH ST SEW ST NW26TH ST SE SE 282ND S T 22ND ST SEE ST NEL ST NESE 295TH ST118TH AVE SE28TH ST SE L ST SEPIKE ST NE129TH PL SED ST SEOLIVE AVE SE16TH ST SE 30TH ST NE 29TH ST NW 9TH ST SE S 292ND ST 24TH ST SEB ST NE50TH ST SE24TH ST SE K ST SEELM ST SE36TH ST S E ELIZABETH AVE SEC ST SEPIKE ST NW61ST AVE SSE 286TH ST 107TH AVE SE112TH PL SE56TH AVE S2ND ST SE I ST SEF ST SEK ST SE37TH ST SE SE 2 9 5 T H S T A ST SEB ST NWA U B U R N WA Y SI ST NEC ST SWM ST SER ST SE124TH AVE SEWESTVALLEYHWYNSE 304TH ST CSTNW15TH ST SW S T U C K R IV E R D R SE 15TH ST NW L A K E T A P P S P K W Y S E 4 1STSTSE 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST SE 288TH ST 37TH ST NW O RAVETZRD S E 25TH ST SE EAST BLVD110TH AVE SEA ST NE104THAVESEISTNW51ST AVE SRONCROCKETTDRNWN ST NE112THAVESEACADEMYDRSE MONTEV ISTA DR SEG ST SEESTSE108THAVESE16TH ST NE O ST SESE 326TH PLT ST NW2ND ST SE SE 294TH ST ELM LN SE 118THAVESEPERRY AVE SES 303RD PL SE 289TH S T 57THDRSE S 310TH ST U CT NWR ST NEO PL NEA ST SETS18 TS18 M U C K L E S H O O T C A S I N O M U C K L E S H O O T C A S I N O TS167 TS167 T H E O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N T H E O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N Auburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 4587Printed On: 10/26/2021 °0 1 Miles 5 Education Facilities Existing Sidewalk on One Side Existing Sidewalk on Both Sides Future Pedestrian Corridors Multi-Use Trails Downtown Urban Center (DUC) Zone Priority Sidewalk Corridors Map 3-1 Source: City of Auburn GIS Department GREEN RIVER RD SEPage 839 of 967 TS18 TS18 A ST SEB ST NWA U B U R N W A Y SI ST NEC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE124TH AVE SEE MAIN STWESTVALLEYHWYN SE 304TH ST C ST NWS 277TH ST 15TH ST SW 2ND ST E STUCK RIVER DR S E W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW 132ND AVE SELAKE T A P P S P K W Y S E 4 1 STST S E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST KE R S E Y W AYSE SE 288TH ST 8TH ST NE 37TH ST NW L A K E L ANDHILLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSE25TH ST SE EAST BLVD55TH AVE SD ST SE56TH AVE SSE 320TH ST 110TH AVE SE4TH ST SE 104THAVESEI ST NW51ST AVE SWESTVALLEYHWYSN ST NEW ST NWO ST NESCENIC D RSES 287TH ST 112TH AVE SED ST NE58TH AVE SK ST SEEAST VALLEY HWY E4TH ST SW 7TH ST SE T ST SEC ST SE57THPLSM ST NEH ST SEFOSTER AVE SEB ST SE47TH ST S E 56TH ST SEU ST NWS 305TH ST 130TH AVE SE35 T H W A Y S ER ST NW31ST ST NE 26TH ST SEB ST NES E 3 1 8 T H W A Y SE 323RD PL 17TH ST S E SE 301ST ST 3 6 T H S T S E 50TH ST NE 64TH ST S E AST E108THAVESESE304THWAY SE 298TH PL 22ND ST SE 42ND ST NW S 292ND ST SE 282ND ST 5 1 S T S T S E SE 286TH ST V CT SE32ND ST SE 42ND ST NE 73RD ST SE PEARL AVE SESE 285TH ST 62ND ST SE SE 307TH PL118TH AVE SE65TH ST SE51ST AVE SA ST SEM U C K L E S H O O T C A S I N O M U C K L E S H O O T C A S I N O TS167 TS167 T H E O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N T H E O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N Auburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 4604Printed On: 10/26/2021 °0 1 Miles Existing Trailheads Future Trailheads Bike Facility Future Bike Facility Trail Future Trail Parks Existing and Future Bicycle Facilities and Multi-Use Trails Map 3-2 Source: City of Auburn GIS Department GREEN RIVER RD SEPage 840 of 967 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 55 5 5 55 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5INTERURBAN TRAILMAIN ST CONNECTORA/B STREET CORRIDOR124TH AVE SE CORRIDORGREEN RIVER ROAD CORRIDORLEA HILL CONNECTOR STEWART/LAKE TAPPS CONNECTORSOUTH AUBURN M STREET SE CORRIDORWEST VALLEY CORRIDORA ST SE AND LAKELAND HILLS CORRIDORNORTH 37TH ST NW AND WEST HILL CONNECTOR NORTH AUBURN R STREET NE / I STREET NE CORRIDORRI V E R W A L K - A U B U R N W A Y S - E N U M C L A W C O N N E C T O R K E R S E Y W A Y / L A K E T A P P S C O R R I D O RC STREET TRAIL AND 15TH ST SW CORRIDORF STREET / LES GOVE CORRIDORAUBU R N B L A C K D I A M O N D / G R E E N V A L L E Y R O A D C O N N E C T O R TS18 TS18 TS167 TS167 A ST SEB ST NWAUBURN WAY SI ST NEC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE124TH AVE SEE MAIN STWESTVALLEYHWYN SE 304TH ST C ST NWS 277TH ST 15TH ST SW 2ND ST E STUCK RIVER DR S E W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW 132ND AVE SELAKE T A P P S P K W Y S E 4 1STST S E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST KERSEY W AY S E SE 288TH ST 8TH ST NE L A K E L ANDHILLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSEEAST BLVD55TH AVE SD ST SE56TH AVE SSE 320TH ST 110TH AVE SE4TH ST SE 104THAVESEI ST NW51ST AVE SWESTVALLEYHWYSN ST NEW ST NW37TH ST NE SCENIC D RSES 287TH ST 112TH AVE SED ST NE58TH AVE S4TH ST NE EAST VALLEY HWY E4TH ST SW 7TH ST SE C ST SE57THPLSM ST NEH ST SEFOSTER AVE SEB ST SE32ND ST NE 47TH ST S E 56TH ST SEU ST NWS 305TH ST 35 T H W A Y S ER ST NW130TH AVE SE26TH ST SEB ST NES E 3 1 8 T H W A Y SE 323RD PL 17TH ST SE 36 T H S T S E 50TH ST NE 64TH ST S E 108T H A VESESE304THW AY23RD ST SE E ST NE42ND ST NW S 292ND ST SE 282ND ST V ST SE5 1 S T S T S E SE 286TH ST V CT SE32ND ST SE 73RD ST SE PEARL AVE SESE 285TH ST 62ND ST SE SE 307TH PL118TH AVE SE43RD ST NE A ST SE51ST AVE S17TH ST S E M U C K L E S H O O T C A S I N O M U C K L E S H O O T C A S I N O T H E O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N T H E O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N K E N T K E N T P I E R C E C O U N T Y P I E R C E C O U N T Y K I N G C O U N T Y K I N G C O U N T Y PA C I F I C PA C I F I C S U M N E R S U M N E R E D G E W O O D E D G E W O O D A L G O N A A L G O N A DownhillB.P.A Powerline Right of Way B.P.A P o w erli n e Ri g ht of W a y B.P.A P o w e rli n e Ri g h t o f W a y VALENTINETo F l a m i n g G e y s e r To F l a m i n g G e y s e r @ EMERALD DOWNS AUBURN DOWNTOWN OUTLET COLLECTION YMCA LES GOVE Hil l AUBURN GOLF COURSEBRANNAN PARK MARY OLSON PARK LAKELAND HILLS COMMERCIAL AREA Only To K e n t To K e n t@ To K e n t To K e n t@ To K e n t To K e n t@ @ To K e n t & S e a t t l e To K e n t & S e a t t l e@ @To F e d e r a l Wa y To F e d e r a l Wa y @To F e d e r a l Wa y To F e d e r a l Wa y @To F e d e r a l Wa y To F e d e r a l Wa y @To E d g e w o o d To E d g e w o o d @To M i l t o n To M i l t o n @To Ta c o m a To Ta c o m a @To S u m n e r & P u y a l l u p To S u m n e r & P u y a l l u p @To S u m n e r & B o n n e y L a k e To S u m n e r & B o n n e y L a k e @To B o n n e y L a k e To B o n n e y L a k e @ To E n u m c l a w To E n u m c l a w To B l a c k D i a m o n d To B l a c k D i a m o n d @ To P a c i f i c R a c e w a y s To P a c i f i c R a c e w a y s @ GRCC GAME FARM PARK MUCKLESHOOT CASINO PACIFIC RACEWAYS INTERURBAN TRAILINTERURBAN TRAILTo K e n t To K e n t@ RecommendedUphill Route AUBURN ENVIRONMENTAL PARK Auburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 4593Printed On: 10/26/2021 °0 1 Miles Connectors Corridors Interurban Trail City of Auburn Bicycle Corridors and Connectors Map 3-3 Source: City of Auburn GIS Department Focus Area GREEN RIVER RD SEPage 841 of 967 ^_ TS18 TS18 TS167 TS167 M U C K L E S H O O T C A S I N O M U C K L E S H O O T C A S I N O T H E O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N T H E O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N A ST SEB ST NWA U B U R N W A Y SI ST NEC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE124TH AVE SEE MAIN STWESTVALLEYHWYN SE 304TH ST C ST NWS 277TH ST 15TH ST SW 2ND ST E STUCK RIVER DR S E W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW 132ND AVE SELAKE T A P P S P K W Y S E 4 1STST S E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST K E R S E Y W AYSE SE 288TH ST 8TH ST NE 37TH ST NW L A K E L ANDHILLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSE25TH ST SE EAST BLVD55TH AVE SD ST SE56TH AVE SSE 320TH ST 110TH AVE SE4TH ST SE 104THAVESEI ST NW51ST AVE SWESTVALLEYHWYSN ST NEW ST NWO ST NESCENIC D RSES 287TH ST 112TH AVE SED ST NE58TH AVE SK ST SEEAST VALLEY HWY E4TH ST SW 7TH ST SE T ST SEC ST SE57THPLSM ST NEH ST SEFOSTER AVE SEB ST SE47TH ST S E 56TH ST SEU ST NWS 305TH ST 35 T H W A Y S ER ST NW31ST ST NE 130TH AVE SE26TH ST SEB ST NES E 3 1 8 T H W A Y SE 323RD PL 17TH ST S E 36 T H S T S E 50TH ST NE 64TH ST S E AST E108THAVESESE304THWAY SE 298TH PL 42ND ST NW S 292ND ST SE 282ND ST 5 1 S T S T S E SE 286TH ST V CT SE32ND ST SE 42ND ST NE 73RD ST SE PEARL AVE SESE 285TH ST 62ND ST SE SE 307TH PL118TH AVE SE21ST ST SE 65TH ST SE51ST AVE SA ST SEAuburn Transportation Plan Map ID: 4510Printed On: 10/26/2021 °0 1 Miles ^_Auburn Transit Station Park & Ride Metro Transit Routes Pierce Transit Routes Sound Transit Routes Muckleshoot Shuttle Routes Transit Dependent Areas Sounder Train Auburn Transit Routes and MIT Shuttle Route Map 4-2 Source: City of Auburn GIS Department ")165 ")181 ")181 ")160 ")566 ")566 ")578")181 ")917 ")184 ")497 ")917 ")578 ")497 ")915")MIT ShuttleGREEN RIVER RD SEPage 842 of 967 AUBURN VALUES SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2021 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANNUAL AMENDMENTS CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION JOSH STEINER, AICP –SENIOR PLANNER NOVEMBER 8, 2021 Department of Community Development Planning Building Development Engineering Permit Center Sustainability Community Services ●Code Enforcement Page 843 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2021 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANNUAL AMENDMENTS Auburn adopted a growth management compliant Comprehensive Plan in 1995 in response to the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements, as amended. The City adopted a substantially revised Comprehensive Plan in Dec. 2015 by Ordinance #6584 The Comprehensive Plan has been amended annually each year since. Page 844 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2021 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANNUAL AMENDMENTS Purpose of Comprehensive Plan &Amendments The City’s Comprehensive Plan document provides the policy basis for the future development regulations to ensure that the they are consistent as required by City code: “ACC 14.22.050 Conformance and consistency. The zoning,land division and other development codes contained or referenced within Auburn City Code shall be consistent with and implement the intent of the Comprehensive Plan.Capital budget decisions shall be made in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan.” Page 845 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2021 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANNUAL AMENDMENTS Annually, the City amends its Comprehensive Plan. These routine amendments are distinguished from the “periodic update” completed on 8-year cycles, as required by the state. There are two sources of these amendments: “city –initiated amendments”in response to items that are “docketed” (text or map). “private–initiated amendments” in response to applications that are submitted (text or map). Private-initiated Comprehensive Plan amendment applications (text or map) were publicly advertised in advance and accepted until Friday, June 7, 2021, this year. Page 846 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2021 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANNUAL AMENDMENTS Requests are reviewed during a public hearing before the City of Auburn Planning Commission; The Planning Commission then makes a recommendation to the City Council for final action; The City Council will consider and act on the amendments generally prior to the end of this year. Auburn City Code (ACC) Chapter 14.22 outlines the process for submittal of privately -initiated amendments and the general processing of comprehensive plan amendments as follows: Page 847 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2021 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANNUAL AMENDMENTS This Year’s docket: 9 Policy/Text (P/T) & 1 Map (CPM) Amendments Text Changes (9): CPA21 -0001 (City-initiated) P/T #1-5 –Incorporate School District & City Capital Facilities Plans P/T #6 –Vol. #3 Capital Facilities Element –Incorporate referenced Comprehensive Water Plan, anticipated to be update in 2024. P/T #7 –Vol. #5 Transportation Element –Add one project from the Comprehensive Plan to the TIP and three Main Street TOD projects P/T #8 –Vol. #2 Housing Element –Add language referencing Housing Action Plan and update policy H-24 to address minimizing displacement impacts. P/T #9 –Vol. #1 Land Use Element –Update policy LU-39 to include affordable housing as an approved supplemental amenity that allows for deviations in height, density, or intensity. Map Changes (1): CPA21 -0001 (City-initiated) CPM #1 –Several maps throughout Volume 5 (Transportation Element) have been updated to reflect current condition, address formatting, and combine redundant maps. Page 848 of 967 P/T #1 –Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update for Auburn School District P/T #2 –Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update for Dieringer School District P/T #3 –Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update for Federal Way Public Schools P/T #4 –Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update for Kent School District CITY INITIATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS Page 849 of 967 P/T #5 –City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan Update CITY INITIATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS 2020 CFP Total 2021 CFP Total +$8.67 million increase between 2021-2020 Source: City of Auburn Financial Analyst Page 850 of 967 P/T #6 –Comprehensive Plan Volume 3, Capital Facilities Element, Update Water Services is requesting a 4-year extension of the Comprehensive Water Plan (CWP), due to be updated in 2022, through the Department of Health The City Council approved of the adoption process for this Extension Request at its August 2, 2021 meeting. Allows for a full update in 2024 on same timeline as Periodic Update The current plan analysis period is through 2026. Capital projects, water demand, and growth projections are still valid and accurate. Only minor text and map changes in the Comprehensive Water Plan are expected P/T #6 –COMPREHENSIVE PLAN VOLUME 3, CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Page 851 of 967 P/T #7 –Comprehensive Plan Volume 5, Transportation Element, Update Add one project from the Comprehensive Plan to the TIP and add Main Street TOD projects. P/T #7 –COMPREHENSIVE PLAN VOLUME 5, TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT New Projects added: Main Street TOD Page 852 of 967 P/T #8 –Comprehensive Plan Volume 2, Housing Element Update Staff wants to begin incorporating Housing Action Plan (HAP) into the Comprehensive Plan Updates set the foundation for staff to development regulations to support policies. Comprehensive Plan policies are guiding principles. HAP Presentations were provided at City Council Study Sessions on February 22, 2021 and May 24, 2021. Council approved HAP in July 2021. Adds language referencing Housing Action Plan (HAP) adoption Update policy H-24 to reflect HAP recommendation of including minimizing displacement impacts to address community need for low -and moderate-income housing by preserving existing affordable housing (see page XX in packet for more information). This policy is consistent with PSRC Vision 2050 policy (MPP-H -11) which policy supports identifying potential physical, economic, and cultural displacement and mitigating to the extent feasible. P/T #8 –COMPREHENSIVE PLAN VOLUME 2, HOUSING ELEMENT Page 853 of 967 P/T #9 –Comprehensive Plan Volume 1, Land Use Element, Update This policy supports a Recommendation in the HAP. Update policy LU-39 to include affordable housing as an approved supplemental amenity that would allow deviations in height, density, or intensity limitations. This update sets the foundation for staff to development regulations to support this policy. Other examples supplemental amenities currently allowed include use of low -impact development, use of sustainable site and building techniques, public space and art, transit-oriented development, landscaping and lighting, and bike shelters (see page XX in packet for more information). This policy is intended to encourage the development of affordable housing by providing building incentives. P/T #9 –COMPREHENSIVE PLAN VOLUME 1, LAND USE ELEMENT Page 854 of 967 CPM #1 –Several maps found throughout Volume 5 (Transportation Element) have been updated to reflect current conditions, address formatting, and combine redundant maps. These changes were discussed during the 9-8 -21 Planning Commission meeting by Transportation CPM #1 –COMPREHENSIVE PLAN VOLUME 5, TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Page 855 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2021 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANNUAL AMENDMENTS Recommendation (in summary) Planning Commission recommends to City Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendments P/T #1-9, and CPM #1 Page 856 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2021 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANNUAL AMENDMENTS Any questions? (end) Page 857 of 967 AUBURN VALUES SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2022 SCHOOL IMPACT FEES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION NOVEMBER 8, 2021 Department of Community Development Planning Building Development Engineering Permit Center Sustainability Community Services ●Code Enforcement Page 858 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2022 SCHOOL IMPACT FEES Within city limits are four school districts: -Auburn School District -Dieringer School District -Federal Way Public Schools -Kent School District Page 859 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2022 SCHOOL IMPACT FEES Auburn School District -Single Family Fee: $3,652.19 -Down from $6,456.31 -Multifamily Fee: $8,938.23 -Decrease/Increase -$7,387.57 to +$2,612.43 School district is requesting a shift away from the tiered multi-family fee structure used since 2019. Page 860 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2021 SCHOOL IMPACT FEES Dieringer School District -CFP Identified Fees -Single Family: $6,247.00 -Multifamily: $1,903.00 -Pierce County Maximum Fee Obligation -Single Family: $4,176.00 -Multifamily: $789.00 Page 861 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2021 SCHOOL IMPACT FEES Federal Way School District -CFP Identified Fees and Staff Recommendation -Single Family: $1,845.00 -Last Year $3,243.00 -Multifamily: $15,073.00 -Last Year: $16,003.00 Page 862 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2022 SCHOOL IMPACT FEES Kent School District -CFP Identified Fees and Staff Recommendation -Single Family: $5,818.09 -Last Year $5,692.85 -Multifamily: $2,457.53 -Last Year: $2,403.63 Page 863 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2022 SCHOOL IMPACT FEES Highlights: -Pierce County rate used for Dieringer School District -Single Multifamily fee for Auburn School District -School district identified fees for Federal Way and Kent Page 864 of 967 SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION 2021 SCHOOL IMPACT FEES Any questions? (end) Page 865 of 967 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Ordinance No. 6841 (Tate)(5 Minutes) Date: November 2, 2021 Department: Community Development Attachments: Ordinance No. 6841 (2022 School Impact Fees ) Exhibit A - Auburn School Dis trict Multifamily Impact Fee Letter Exhibit B - Dieringer School District Impact Fee Letter Exhibit C - Pierce County Ordinance 2019-92s Exhibit D - Federal Way Public Schools Impact Fee Letter Exhibit E - Kent School Dis trict Impact Fee Letter Exhibit F – Comparis on of 2022 School Impact Fees (Table) Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrativ e Recommendation: For discussion only. Background for Motion: Background Summary: Title 19 (Impact Fees) of the Auburn City Code contains standards and regulations pertaining to the collection of impact fees in the City of Auburn. Impact fees are authorized by state law. Specifically, Chapter 19.02 (School Impact Fees) addresses the establishment, calculation, collection and amendment of school impact fees within the municipal boundaries of the City of Auburn. T he city originally established school impact fees in 1998 by Ordinance No. 5078. Portions of four school districts occur within the City limits. Pursuant to Code Section 19.02.060 (Annual Council Review) of the Auburn City Code, on at least an annual basis, the Auburn City Council shall review the information submitted by the Districts pursuant to ACC 19.02.050. T he review shall be in conjunction with any update of the capital facilities plan element of the city's comprehensive plan. T he City Council may also at this time determine if an adjustment to the amount of the impact fees is necessary. T he City of Auburn Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment process for 2021 included requests for City approval of the Capital Facilities Plans of the four districts as follows: * 2021 - 2027 Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan; * 2021 - 2027 Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan; * 2022 Federal Way Public Schools Capital Facilities Plan; and Page 866 of 967 * 2020 - 2021 through 2026 - 2027 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan. T hese requests were submitted in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.02.050 (Submission of District Capital Facilities Plan and Data) of the Auburn City Code. T he School Districts’ Capital Facilities Plans are contained in the working notebooks (three-ring binders) for the 2021 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments, distributed to the City Council prior to the November 8, 2021 study session. De finition T he city’s code section 19.02 contains the city’s regulations governing school impact fees. It provides the following definition: "Impact fee" means a payment of money imposed upon devel opment as a condi ti on of devel opment approval to pay for school facil ities needed to serve new growth and devel opment that is reasonabl y related to the new devel opment that creates addi ti onal demand and need for publ i c faci l i ti es, that is a proporti onate share of the cost of the school facil ities, and that is used for such facil ities that reasonabl y benefi t the new devel opment. Re late d Authority Other key points of the city’s regulations include: v RCW 82.02.050 - .110 and WAC 365-196-850 authorize cities (towns & counties) planning under the Growth Management Act (GMA) to impose impact fees. v T he impact fee shall be based on a capital facilities plan adopted by the school district and incorporated by reference by the city as part of the capital facilities element of the city's comprehensive plan, adopted pursuant to Chapter 36.70A R C W, for the purpose of establishing the fee program. v Separate fees shall be calculated for single-family and multifamily types of dwelling units, and separate student generation rates must be determined by the district for each type of dwelling unit. v T he fee shall be calculated on a district-wide basis using the appropriate factors and data supplied by the district. T he fee calculations shall also be made on a district-wide basis to assure maximum utilization of all available school facilities in the district which meet district standards. v As a condition of the city's authorization and adoption of a school impact fee ordinance, the city and the applicable district shall enter into an interlocal agreement governing the operation of the school impact fee program and describing the relationship and liabilities of the parties. T he agreement must provide that the district shall hold the city harmless for all damages. v On an annual basis (by July 1st or on a date agreed to by district and the city and stipulated in the interlocal agreement), any district for which the city is collecting impact Page 867 of 967 fees shall submit the Capital facilities plan and supporting information to the city. v Applicants for single-family and multifamily residential building permits shall pay the total amount of the impact fees assessed before the building permit is issued, using the impact fee schedules in effect, unless the fee has been deferred pursuant to City Ordinance No. 6341. v T he impact fee calculation shall be based upon the formula set forth in ACC 19.02.110, “Impact fee formula”. T he formula is the city's determination of the appropriate proportionate share of the costs of public school capital facilities needed to serve new growth and development to be funded by school impact fees based on the factors defined in AC C 19.02.020. Based on this formula, the “Fee Obligation” is the “Total Unfunded Need” x 50% = Fee Calculation. T he Capital Facilities Plans that were approved by each of the school boards contain proposed school impact fees for each of the Districts. T he requests for adjustment of the school impact fees are required to be submitted concurrent with the submittal of the Capital Facilities Plans. Under City regulations a separate letter request is only required to be submitted to the city when the fee adjustment is requesting an increase. Council Rev ie w and Decision T he establishment of the actual fee amount occurs through separate Council action amending Chapter 19.02 of the Auburn City Code. Section 19.02.060, (Annual Council Review) specifies the following: “On at l east an annual basi s, the ci ty counci l shall revi ew the i nformati on submitted by the di strict pursuant to ACC 19.02.050. The review shall be i n conjunction wi th any update of the capital faci l i ti es plan element of the city's comprehensi ve pl an. The city counci l may al so at thi s time determi ne if an adjustment to the amount of the i mpact fees is necessary; provided, that any school i mpact fee adjustment that woul d i ncrease the school impact fee shall require the submi ttal of a wri tten request for the adjustment by the appl icable school di strict concurrent wi th the submi ttal of the annual capi tal facil ities pl an pursuant to ACC 19.02.050. In maki ng i ts decision to adjust impact fees, the ci ty counci l wi ll take into consi derati on the quali ty and compl eteness of the i nformati on provi ded i n the appl icable school di stri ct capital faci li ti es pl an and may deci de to enact a fee l ess than the amount supported by the capi tal faci li ti es plan.” T his Section provides the Auburn City Council is not obligated to accept the fees proposed by the School Districts within their submitted Capital Facilities Plans and may establish fees that the Council determines are more appropriate and consistent with the public’s interest in reasonably mitigating school impacts within the affected portion of the City. Re comme ndation (Containe d in draft Ordinance No. 6841) Auburn School District: T he Auburn School District indicated by letter submitted with their Capital Facilities Plan, that Page 868 of 967 they are requesting an increase in school impact fees for the year 2022. T he year 2022 fees for single-family dwellings is proposed to be $3,652.19, a decrease of $2,804.12, and the requested fee for multiple-family dwellings is $8,938.23, a decrease of $7,387.57. Auburn School District has requested to move to a lump sum fee for all multi-family development instead of fees based on the unit size, consistent with the methodology they used prior to 2019. T his change would mean a decrease in overall multi-family fees compared to 2021, but this fee would exceed the amount charged for certain unit sizes. T his request is document in the attached letter provided by the District. Dieringer School District: T he Dieringer School District is requesting to maintain the same impact fee rates as those calculated in the 2021-2026 Capital Facilities Plan of $4,176.00 for single family units and $789.00 for multifamily units. T hese proposed impact fee rates are a decrease over those contained in the 2021-2027 Capital Facilities Plan of $6,247.00 for single family units and $1,903.00 for multifamily units. Historically, the City has established fee rates for the Dieringer School district that is the same as the fee implemented in Pierce County’s fee since it is more appropriate and consistent with the public’s interest in reasonably mitigating school impacts within the affected portion of the City. T he single-family dwelling school district fee calculation exceeds the maximum fee obligation obligations proposed by Pierce County Ordinance by No. 2021-111, which was discussed during the October 19, 2021, regular council hearing; anticipated to be effective February 1, 2022. An adjustment by the City of Auburn is necessary for the fee to be consistent with Pierce County. T he proposed ordinance identifies a maximum impact fee obligation for single family dwelling units of $4,176.00, and for multi-family dwelling units of $789.00. T he Dieringer School District is the only school district common to both the jurisdictions of the City of Auburn and Pierce County. Federal Way Public Schools: T he Federal Way Public Schools indicated by letter submitted with their Capital Facilities Plan that they are requesting an increase in school impact fees for year 2022. T he year 2022 fees for single-family dwellings is proposed to be $1,845.00, representing a decrease of $1,398.00 and the requested fee for multi-family dwellings is $15,073.00, a decrease of $930.00. Kent School District T he Kent School District indicated by letter submitted with their Capital Facilities Plan that they are requesting a 2.2 percent increase in school impact fees for year 2022. Both increases are tied to the Consumer Price Index (C PI) of 2.2% for the Seattle Metropolitan Area in 2021. T he year 2022 fees for single-family dwellings is proposed to be $5,818.09, representing an increase of $125.24 and the requested fee for multi-family dwellings is $2,457.53, an increase of $53.90. Sche duling of Actions A discussion of the School District Capital Facilities Plans school impact fee changes and Ordinance No. 6841 was conducted at the Study Session on November 8, 2021. City Council action on Ordinance No. 6841 is scheduled for December 6, 2021. Page 869 of 967 Rev iewed by Council Committees: Councilmember:Stearns Staff:Tate Meeting Date:November 8, 2021 Item Number: Page 870 of 967 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ordinance No. 6841 November 8, 2021 Page 1 of 7 ORDINANCE NO. 6841 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON AMENDING SECTIONS 19.02.115, 19.02.120, 19.02.130 AND 19.02.140 OF THE AUBURN CITY CODE RELATING TO SCHOOL IMPACT FEES WHEREAS, the City of Auburn has adopted a school impact fee ordinance and collects school impact fees on behalf of certain school districts located in part within the City of Auburn; and WHEREAS, the Auburn School District, Dieringer School District, Federal Way Public Schools, and the Kent School District, each being located in part within the City of Auburn, have provided the City of Auburn with updated capital facilities plans to be considered during the City’s 2021 annual comprehensive plan amendment process that addresses among other things, the appropriate school impact fee for single family residential dwellings and multi-family residential dwellings for each district; and WHEREAS, on May 27, 2021, the Auburn School District issued a Determination of Non-Significance for the 2021 - 2027 Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan; on August 24, 2021 the Dieringer School District issued a Determination of Non-Significance for the 2021-2027 Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan; on June 9, 2021, Federal Way Public Schools issued a Determination of Non-Significance for the 2022 Federal Way Public Schools Capital Facilities Plan; and on May 7, 2021, the Kent School District issued a Determination of Non-Significance for the 2020-2021 through 2026-2027 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan; and WHEREAS the City of Auburn issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) Page 871 of 967 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ordinance No. 6841 November 8, 2021 Page 2 of 7 on September 23, 2021 for the City of Auburn Year 2021 city-initiated comprehensive plan map and text amendments (File No. SEP21-0023), and WHEREAS, after proper notice published in the City’s official newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to the date of hearing, the Auburn Planning Commission on October 19, 2021 conducted public hearings on the proposed Auburn School District 2021-2027 Capital Facilities Plan, the proposed Dieringer School District 2021-2027 Capital Facilities Plan; the proposed Federal Way Public Schools 2022 Capital Facilities Plan; and the proposed Kent School District 2020-2021 through 2026-2027 Capital Facilities Plan; and WHEREAS, following the conclusion of the public hearing on October 19, 2021, and subsequent deliberations, the Auburn Planning Commission, following individual positive motions, made separate recommendations to the Auburn City Council on the approval of the Auburn School District 2021-2027 Capital Facilities Plan, the Dieringer School District 2021-2027 Capital Facilities Plan; the Federal Way Public Schools 2022 Capital Facilities Plan; and the Kent School District 2020-2021 through 2026-2027 Capital Facilities Plan; and WHEREAS, the Auburn City Council reviewed the recommendations of the Auburn Planning Commission for the school districts’ capital facilities plans at both a regularly scheduled study session, on November 8, 2021, and a regularly scheduled meeting, on December 6, 2021; and WHEREAS, on December 6, 2021, the Auburn City Council approved the Auburn School District 2021-2027 Capital Facilities Plan, the Dieringer School District 2021-2027 Capital Facilities Plan; the Federal Way Public Schools 2022 Capital Facilities Plan; and Page 872 of 967 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ordinance No. 6841 November 8, 2021 Page 3 of 7 the Kent School District 2020-2021 through 2026-2027 Capital Facilities Plan; and WHEREAS, the Auburn City Code Chapter 19.02 provides for adjustments to school impact fees based on a review of the capital facilities plans for each of the districts; and WHEREAS, on November 8, 2021 the Auburn City Council at a regularly scheduled study session reviewed amendments to Auburn City Code Chapter 19.02 (School Impact Fees) pertaining to school impact fees for single family residential dwelling units and multi-family dwelling units to be applied in the City of Auburn for the Auburn School District; Dieringer School District, Federal Way Public Schools, and the Kent School District; respectively, based on the aforementioned capital facilities plans for each of these districts; and WHEREAS, Section 19.02.060 (Annual Council Review) of the Auburn City Code specifies that in making its decision to adjust impact fees the Auburn City Council will take into consideration the quality and completeness of the information provided in the applicable school district capital facilities plan and may decide to enact a fee less than the amount supported by the capital facilities plan. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Amendment to the City Code. Section 19.02.120 of the Auburn City Code is amended to read as follows. 19.02.120 Impact fee calculation and schedule for the Auburn School District. Page 873 of 967 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ordinance No. 6841 November 8, 2021 Page 4 of 7 The impact fee calculation and schedule is based upon a review of the impact fee calculation for single-family residences and for multifamily residences set forth in the most recent version of the Auburn School District’s Capital Facilities Plan adopted by the Auburn city council as an element of the Auburn comprehensive plan. The calculation is the determination of the appropriate proportionate share of the costs of public school capital facilities needed to serve new growth and development to be funded by school impact fees based on the factors defined in ACC 19.02.020. Effective January 1, 2022, or the effective date of this ordinance whichever is later, the school impact fee shall be as follows: Per Single-Family Dwelling Unit $3,652.19 Per Multifamily Dwelling Unit $8,938.23 (Ord. 6627 § 1, 2016; Ord. 6581 § 2, 2016; Ord. 6542 § 2, 2014; Ord. 6488 § 2, 2013; Ord. 6445 § 2, 2012; Ord. 6393 § 2, 2011; Ord. 6341 § 2, 2011; Ord. 6340 § 2, 2010; Ord. 6279 § 2, 2009; Ord. 6214 § 2, 2008; Ord. 6134 § 2, 2007; Ord. 6060 § 2, 2006; Ord. 5950 § 1, 2005; Ord. 5793 § 1, 2003; Ord. 5232 § 1, 1999.) Section 2. Amendment to the City Code. Section 19.02.115 of the Auburn City Code is amended to read as follows. 19.02.115 Impact fee calculation and schedule for the Dieringer School District. The impact fee calculation and schedule below is based upon a review of the impact fee calculation for single-family residences and for multifamily residences set forth in the most recent version of the Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan adopted by the Auburn city council as an element of the Auburn comprehensive plan. The calculation is the determination of the appropriate proportionate share of the costs of public school capital facilities needed to serve new growth and development to be funded by school impact fees based on the factors defined in ACC 19.02.020. Effective January 1, 2022, or the effective date of this ordinance whichever is later, the school impact fee shall be as follows: Page 874 of 967 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ordinance No. 6841 November 8, 2021 Page 5 of 7 Per Single-Family Dwelling Unit $4,176.00 Per Multifamily Dwelling Unit $789.00 (Ord. 6627 § 1, 2016; Ord. 6581 § 1, 2016; Ord. 6542 § 1, 2014; Ord. 6488 § 1, 2013; Ord. 6445 § 1, 2012; Ord. 6393 § 1, 2011; Ord. 6341 § 2, 2011; Ord. 6340 § 1, 2010; Ord. 6279 § 1, 2009; Ord. 6214 § 1, 2008; Ord. 6134 § 1, 2007; Ord. 6060 § 1, 2006; Ord. 5950 § 2, 2005.) Section 3. Amendment to the City Code. Section 19.02.140 of the Auburn City Code is amended to read as follows. 19.02.140 Impact fee calculation and schedule for the Federal Way Public Schools The impact fee calculation and schedule is based upon a review of the impact fee and calculation for single-family residences and for multifamily residences set forth in the most recent version of the Federal Way Public Schools’s Capital Facilities Plan adopted by the Auburn city council as an element of the Auburn comprehensive plan. The calculation is the determination of the appropriate proportionate share of the costs of public school capital facilities needed to serve new growth and development to be funded by school impact fees based on the factors defined in ACC 19.02.020. Effective January 1, 2022, or the effective date of this ordinance whichever is later, the school impact fee shall be as follows: Per Single-Family Dwelling Unit $1,845.00 Per Multifamily Dwelling Unit $15,073.00 (Ord. 6627 § 1, 2016; Ord. 6581 § 4, 2016; Ord. 6542 § 4, 2014; Ord. 6488 § 4, 2013; Ord. 6445 § 4, 2012; Ord. 6393 § 4, 2011; Ord. 6341 § 2, 2011; Ord. 6340 § 4, 2010; Ord. 6279 § 4, 2009; Ord. 6214 § 4, 2008; Ord. 6134 § 4, 2007; Ord. 6060 § 4, 2006; Ord. 6042 § 1, 2006.) Section 4. Amendment to the City Code. Section 19.02.130 of the Auburn City Code is amended as follows. Page 875 of 967 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ordinance No. 6841 November 8, 2021 Page 6 of 7 19.02.130 Impact fee calculation and schedule for the Kent School District. The impact fee calculation and schedule is based upon a review of the impact fee and calculation for single-family residences and for multifamily residences set forth in the most recent version of the Kent School District’s Capital Facilities Plan adopted by the Auburn city council as an element of the Auburn comprehensive plan. The calculation is the determination of the appropriate proportionate share of the costs of public school capital facilities needed to serve new growth and development to be funded by school impact fees based on the factors defined in ACC 19.02.020. Effective January 1, 2022, or the effective date of this ordinance whichever is later, the school impact fee shall be as follows: Per Single-Family Dwelling Unit $5,818.09 Per Multifamily Dwelling Unit $2,457.53 (Ord. 6627 § 1, 2016; Ord. 6581 § 3, 2016; Ord. 6542 § 3, 2014; Ord. 6488 § 3, 2013; Ord. 6445 § 3, 2012; Ord. 6393 § 3, 2011; Ord. 6341 § 2, 2011; Ord. 6340 § 3, 2010; Ord. 6279 § 3, 2009; Ord. 6214 § 3, 2008; Ord. 6134 § 3, 2007; Ord. 6060 § 3, 2006; Ord. 5950 § 1, 2005; Ord. 5233 § 1, 1999.) Section 5. Constitutionality and Invalidity. If any section, subsection sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance, 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 6. Implementation. The Mayor is authorized to implement such administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directions of this legislation. Section 7. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force five days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. Page 876 of 967 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ordinance No. 6841 November 8, 2021 Page 7 of 7 INTRODUCED: _________________________ PASSED: _____________________________ APPROVED: ___________________________ CITY OF AUBURN ATTEST: _____ NANCY BACKUS, Mayor _________________________ Shawn Campbell, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________ Kendra Comeau, City Attorney Published: _____________________ Page 877 of 967 Page 878 of 967 Page 879 of 967 IERINGER SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 343 Ed u c at in g e v e ry c hi l d f o r C on f id e n c e t od a y a nd C o nt ri bu t io n t om orro w August 24, 2021 Jeff Tate Director of Planning City of Auburn 25 West Main Street Auburn, WA 98001-4998 Subject: Dieringer School District – Mitigation Impact Fees Dear Mr. Tate: The Dieringer School District has completed the Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan for 2020-2021 to 2029-2030. In preparing the updated Capital Facilities Plan the District once more reviewed the question of the School Impact Fee Calculation. Based on the analysis of the District’s site acquisition and permanent facility costs, the Dieringer School District Board of Directors has determined that the appropriate mitigation impact fee for the permitting of a single family residence is $4,176 and $789 per unit for a multiple family residence. A review of the fees collected by the City of Auburn, on behalf of other school districts within the city, serves to support the validity of the Dieringer requested fee of $4,176 and $789 per unit for a multiple family residence. The property values within the boundaries of the Dieringer School District are the highest in Pierce County; this causes site acquisition to be expensive and contributes to overall higher construction costs than other school districts experience. Therefore, it is most appropriate for the mitigation impact fees collected on behalf of the Dieringer School District to be adjusted to more closely approximate the fees collected for other local school districts. The Dieringer School District requests that the City of Auburn adjust the mitigation impact fees collected on behalf of the District to the $4,176 and $789 per unit for a multiple family residence established in the Capital Facilities Plan for 2020-2021 to 2029-2030. Please let me know if you need further information by contacting me at (253) 862-2537. Sincerely, Michael Farmer Superintendent 1320 – 178th Avenue East * Lake Tapps, Washington 98391 * (253 )862-2537 * FAX (253) 862-8472 Page 880 of 967 Ordinance No. 2021-111 Page 1 of 2 Pierce County Council 930 Tacoma Ave S, Rm 1046 Tacoma, WA 98402 Sponsored by: Councilmember Derek Young 1 Requested by: County Council 2 3 4 5 ORDINANCE NO. 2021-111 6 7 8 9 An Ordinance of the Pierce County Council Amending Section 4A.30.030 of 10 the Pierce County Code, "School Impact Fee Schedule," to 11 Adjust School Impact Fees for 2022 Based Upon Changes in 12 the Construction Cost Index; and Setting an Effective Date. 13 14 Whereas, school impact fees in Pierce County are calculated according to the 15 formulas in Section 4A.30.020 of the Pierce County Code (PCC), then the fee is 16 "capped" by a "Maximum Fee Obligation" (MFO) which changes annually based upon 17 changes in the Construction Cost Index (20-City Average) published by the Engineering 18 News Record; and 19 20 Whereas, the annual adjustment must be adopted by Ordinance following the 21 adoption of the Capital Facilities Plan and any review of impact fees; and 22 23 Whereas, it has been the practice of the Pierce County Council (Council) to only 24 adjust impact fees in increments of five dollars, rounding up to the nearest five-dollar 25 increment; and 26 27 Whereas, school impact fees are collected for residential development in the 28 unincorporated County for school districts that meet the requirements in Title 4A PCC; 29 and 30 31 Whereas, pursuant to PCC 4A.30.020, the Construction Cost Index for February 32 2017 is the base value from which changes are calculated; and 33 34 Whereas, the Construction Cost Index for February 2017 was calculated to be 35 10,559; for September 2021 it is 12,464 which is an increase of 18.04 percent from the 36 base year; and 37 38 Whereas, the MFO for school districts effective February 1, 2021, and adopted in 39 Ordinance No. 2020-124 is $3,890 for single-family dwelling units, and $2,065 for each 40 multi-family dwelling unit; and 41 42 Whereas, after adjusting for changes to the Construction Cost Index through 43 October 2021 and rounding up to the nearest five-dollar increment, the adjusted school 44 MFOs are $4,200 for single-family dwelling units and $2,230 for multi-family dwelling 45 units, an increase of $310 and $165, respectively from the 2021 rates; and 46 47 48 Page 881 of 967 Ordinance No. 2021-111 Page 2 of 2 Pierce County Council 930 Tacoma Ave S, Rm 1046 Tacoma, WA 98402 Whereas, pursuant to PCC 4A.10.130 and 4A.30.010 C., the County has 1 reviewed the relevant School Districts' Capital Facilities Plans, County Comprehensive 2 Plan Amendments, and Title 4A PCC; Now Therefore, 3 4 BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of Pierce County: 5 6 Section 1. Section 4A.30.030 of the Pierce County Code, "School Impact Fee 7 Schedule," is hereby amended as shown in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and 8 incorporated herein by reference. 9 10 Section 2. The effective date of this Ordinance shall be February 1, 2022. 11 12 13 PASSED this day of ______ , 2021. 14 15 ATTEST: PIERCE COUNTY COUNCIL 16 Pierce County, Washington 17 18 19 20 Denise D. Johnson Derek Young 21 Clerk of the Council Council Chair 22 23 24 25 Bruce F. Dammeier 26 Pierce County Executive 27 Approved Vetoed , this 28 day of , 29 2021. 30 31 Date of Publication of 32 Notice of Public Hearing: 33 34 Effective Date of Ordinance: 35 36 Page 882 of 967 Exhibit A to Ordinance No. 2021-111 Page 1 of 1 Pierce County Council 930 Tacoma Ave S, Rm 1046 Tacoma, WA 98402 Exhibit A to Ordinance No. 2021-111 1 2 Only those portions of Section 4A.30.030 that are proposed to be amended are shown. 3 Remainder of text, tables, maps and/or figures is unchanged. 4 5 4A.30.030 School Impact Fee Schedule. 6 7 8 PER SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT PER MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT SCHOOL DISTRICT School District Fee Calculation Impact Fee (Maximum Fee Obligation is $4,200 $3,890) School District Fee Calculation Impact Fee (Maximum Fee Obligation is $2,230 $2,065) Bethel $17,082 $17,181 $3,890 $4,200 $0 ($1,042) $0 Carbonado $4,446 $5,771 $3,890 $4,200 $1,138 $1,520 $1,138 $1,520 Dieringer $4,176 $3,890 $4,176 $789 $789 Eatonville $13,185 $17,652 $3,890 $4,200 $3,414 $3,596 $2,065 $2,230 Fife $4,715 $4,541 $3,890 $4,200 $1,426 $822 $1,426 $822 Franklin Pierce $16,212 $13,420 $3,890 $4,200 $4,893 $2,012 $2,065 $2,012 Orting $16,552 $17,571 $3,890 $4,200 $6,982 $7,899 $2,065 $2,230 Peninsula $4,529 $4,340 $3,890 $4,200 $2,351 $2,143 $2,065 $2,143 Puyallup $12,978 $3,890 $4,200 $5,651 $2,065 $2,230 Steilacoom $8,104 $3,890 $4,200 $0 $0 Sumner-Bonney Lake $22,613 $32,126 $3,890 $4,200 $2,535 $3,862 $2,065 $2,230 White River $11,391 $3,890 $4,200 $4,001 $2,065 $2,230 Yelm $6,417 $4,500 $3,890 $4,200 $14,490 $1,900 $2,065 $1,900 Page 883 of 967 33330 8th Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003 | p.253.945.2043 | f.253.941.0442| www.fwps.org Business Services Each Scholar: A Voice. A Dream. A BRIGHT Future. June 29, 2021 Jeff Dixon Principal Planner City Of Auburn 25 West Main Street Auburn WA 98001-4998 Dear Mr. Dixon, On behalf of Dr. Campbell, Superintendent of Federal Way Public Schools, attached is a copy of the Federal Way Public Schools’ 2022 Capital Facilities Plan. The Federal Way Public Schools’ Board of Education adopted this plan on June 29, 2021. The Federal Way Public Schools’ Board of Education Resolution No. 2021-14 directs the Superintendent to submit the adopted Federal Way Public Schools’ 2021 Capital Facilities Plan to the City of Auburn. A copy of the resolution is attached for your files. The Federal Way Public Schools’ Board of Education requests the City of Auburn to decrease the 2021 impact fee to $1,845 for each single-family development and decrease the impact fee to $15,073 for each multi-family development unit. The expenditure report for the 2020 calendar year is also attached. Please let me know if you have any questions about the changes in the CFP for Federal Way Public Schools. You may contact Jen Thomas at (253)945-2071 or by email at jthomas@fwps.org. Sincerely, Sally McLean Chief Financial and Operations Officer CC: Dr. Tammy Campbell Dr. Dani Pfeiffer Ashley Murphy Mike Benzien Jennifer Thomas Attachments: 3 Page 884 of 967 August 9, 2021 Mr. Jeff Dixon Department of Community Development City of Auburn 25 West Main Street Auburn, WA 98001 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Denise Daniels President Michele Bettinger Vice President Maya Vengadasalam Legislative Representative Leslie Hamada Director Joseph Bento Director Dr. Calvin J. Watts Superintendent MISSION Successfully Preparing All Students For Their Futures Finance Organizational Effectiveness 12033 SE 256th Street • A600 Kent, WA 98030 Phone: (253) 373-7295 Fax: (253) 373-7018 www.kent.k12.wa.us RE: Proposed 2022 School Impact Fees for Kent School District #415 Dear Mr. Dixon The six year (2020-2021) Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) for Kent School District #415 as adopted by the Board of Directors calls for a modest increase in school impact fees for 2022. The impact fees will increase by the percentage increase of the consumer price index (2.20%) for the Seattle metropolitan area in 2021. The single-family residence fee will increase by $125.24 to $5,818.09 from $569.85. The multi-family residence fee will increase by $53.90 to $2,457.53 from $2,403.63. The fee calculations are shown on pages 14 and 15 of the CFP. It should be noted that the District is making an adjustment of $1,538.90 for single family and $5,154 for multi-family residences from what the fees compute. This is to keep the fees reasonable and meet the need of the District and Communities. Sincerely, Ben Rarick Executive Director of Budget & Finance Page 885 of 967 School Impact Fee Proposal (Effective Year 2022) Rev 10-18-2021 School District Multiple Family Single Family Past 2020 fee, Per ACC 19.02 CFP says: Requested Amount Change? Past 2020 fee, Per ACC 19.02 CFP says: Requested Amount Change? Auburn Studio - $6,325.80 1 BD - $8,325.80 2 BD – $11,325.80 3 BD – $14,325.80 4+ BD – $16,325.80 $8,938.23 Page 39 $8,938.23 Decrease/I ncrease -7,387.57 to +$2,612.43 $6,456.31 $3,652.19 Page 39 $3,652.19 Decrease of $2,804.12 Dieringer $789.00 $1,903.00 Page 15 $789.00 $0 $3,890.00 $6,247.00 Page 15 $4,176.00 Increase of $286.00 Federal Way $16,003.00 $15,073.0 0 Page 29 $15,073.00 Decrease of $930 $3,243.00 $1,845.00 Page 29 $1,845.00 Decrease of $1,398 Kent $2,403.63 $2,457.53 Page 35 $2,457.53 Increase of $53.90 $5,692.85 $5,818.09 Page 35 $5,818.09 Increase of $125.24 CFP = Capital Facilities Plan ACC = Auburn City Code Page 886 of 967 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Resolution No. 5623 (Comeau)(5 Minutes) Date: November 2, 2021 Department: Legal Attachments: Resolution No. 5623 King County Access Easement King County Access Easement Presentation Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrativ e Recommendation: For discussion only. Background for Motion: Background Motion: Granting an access easement to King County over this portion of City property - Tract E of Auburn 40 P.U.D., will provide King County the access for their work, while causing very little impact to the City property. Background Summary: The City owns real property, Tract E of Auburn 40 P.U.D (the “City property”). King County owns property along the Green River which includes a levee. Access to the County property in this location is limited and some distance away. Granting an access easement across a portion of the City property will not impact the City’s property rights or the City’s access and use of the property but will provide King County a quicker, more favorable access to the King County properties located in this area. Rev iewed by Council Committees: Councilmember:Staff:Comeau Meeting Date:November 8, 2021 Item Number: Page 887 of 967 -------------------------------- Resolution No. 5623 10/26/2021 Page 1 of 2 Rev. 2020 RESOLUTION NO. 5623 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN ACCESS EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF KING COUNTY FOR ACCESS ACROSS A PORTION OF CITY OWNED PROPERTY – TRACT E OF AUBURN 40 P.U.D. WHEREAS, the City of Auburn owns Tract E of Auburn 40 P.U.D, real property, also designated as King County parcel number 030140-2420; and WHEREAS, King County needs access across a portion of the City property in order to access property it owns; WHEREAS, granting the Access Easement to King County will allow King County access to County-owned property, which contains levees along the Green River and is therefore in the public interest to grant such access that does not diminish the City’s property rights; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, RESOLVES as follows: Section 1. The Mayor is authorized to execute an Access Easement in favor of King County, which easement will be in substantial conformity with the easement attached. Section 2. The Mayor is authorized to implement those administrative procedures necessary to carry out the directives of this Resolution. Page 888 of 967 -------------------------------- Resolution No. 5623 10/26/2021 Page 2 of 2 Rev. 2020 Section 3. This Resolution will take effect and be in full force on passage and signatures. Dated and Signed: CITY OF AUBURN ____________________________ NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR ATTEST: ______________________________ Shawn Campbell, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________________ Kendra Comeau, City Attorney Page 889 of 967 King County / City of Auburn – Access Easement - Page 1 of 7 Recording Requested By and When Recorded Return to: King County Water and Land Resources Division Open Space Acquisitions 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 5600 Seattle, WA 98104 ______________________________________________________________________________ ACCESS EASEMENT Grantor: City of Auburn, a municipal corporation Grantee: King County, a political subdivision of the State of Washington Legal Description (abbreviated): Trt E Subdivision: Auburn 40 P.U.D. Assessor’s Tax Parcel Number: portion of 030140-2420 The undersigned City of Auburn, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, its successors and assigns (the “Grantor”), for and in consideration of mutual benefits and other valuable considerations, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, hereby conveys and grants to King County, a political subdivision of the State of Washington, its employees, contractors or guests (the “Grantee”) an easement for ingress and egress over, across, along a portion of the following described property (the “Property”): TRACT E, AUBURN 40 P.U.D., ACCORDING TO PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 255 OF PLATS, PAGES 51 THROUGH 58 AND RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 20100826001442, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. Said portion of the Property being legally described in Exhibit A and depicted in Exhibit B, which are attached hereto and incorporated herein, (“the Easement Area”). The easement is for the benefit of the following described property (the “Benefitted Property”): PARCEL A, CITY OF AUBURN BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. BLA-17- 0014, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 20180719900022. DocVerify ID: 1B786BEB-991F-46C3-9B08-CC9E57606ED3 www.docverify.com1B786BEB-991F-46C3-9B08-CC9E57606ED3 --- 2021/10/21 12:58:03 -8:00 --- Remote NotaryPage 1 of 7 1CC9E57606ED3 Page 890 of 967 King County / City of Auburn – Access Easement - Page 2 of 7 Grantor and Grantee, by accepting and recording this access easement (the “Easement”), mutually covenant and agree as follows: Grantee, and its employees, agents, contractors and invitees shall have the right to use the Easement Area for non-vehicular and vehicular ingress and egress to the Benefitted Property. In its exercise of the rights herein granted, Grantee shall minimize its impacts to the Easement Area and shall promptly restore any damage arising from its activities or its agents’ activities within the Easement Area. Grantee shall not disturb or destroy any landscaping features, fencing, structures, improvements, or other features located outside of the Easement Area on the remainder of the Property. Grantee covenants to take reasonable accommodations to minimize noise impacts to the surrounding neighborhood when accessing the Easement Area, including but not limited to restricting the use of motorized vehicles or equipment on or across the Easement Area to between the hours of 7am to 7pm unless in response to an emergency situation. Grantor reserves the right to use the Easement Area for purposes consistent with the rights herein granted. Grantor shall not undertake any activity or erect any fence or other structure which would eliminate Grantee’s access to the Benefitted Property through the Easement Area. To the extent permitted by law, each party shall protect, defend, indemnify and save harmless the other party, its officials, employees and agents, from any and all costs, expenses, claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, judgments, attorneys’ fees and/or awards of damages arising out of or in any way resulting from the indemnifying party’s, or its officials’, employees’ or agents’ negligent acts, errors or omissions related to the Easement Area or any improvements therein. If such costs, expenses, claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, judgments, attorneys’ fees and/or awards of damages are caused by, or result from, the concurrent negligence of the parties, or their officials, employees and agents, this Section shall be valid and enforceable only to the extent of the negligence of each party, its officials, employees and agents. If either party shall bring an action to enforce the terms of this Easement in any such action the prevailing party shall be entitled to an award of its reasonable attorneys' fees and reasonable costs. Said costs and attorneys' fees shall include, without limitation, costs and attorneys' fees incurred in any appeal or in any proceedings under any present or future federal bankruptcy, forfeiture or state receivership or similar law. The hourly rates for any award of attorneys’ fees will be calculated based on the rate that would be charged for the services provided by an attorney who is in private practice, of the same expertise and experience as the prevailing party’s attorney(s). This Easement shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. This Easement may be executed in multiple counterparts, all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument. DocVerify ID: 1B786BEB-991F-46C3-9B08-CC9E57606ED3 www.docverify.com1B786BEB-991F-46C3-9B08-CC9E57606ED3 --- 2021/10/21 12:58:03 -8:00 --- Remote NotaryPage 2 of 7 2CC9E57606ED3 Page 891 of 967 King County / City of Auburn – Access Easement - Page 3 of 7 Effective as of this ___ day of ____________, 2021. GRANTOR: City of Auburn, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington. BY: _________________________________ Name: __________________________ Title: __________________________ GRANTEE: King County, a political subdivision of the State of Washington. BY: ________________________________________ Department of Natural Resources & Parks Name: ___________________________ Title: ____________________________ DocVerify ID: 1B786BEB-991F-46C3-9B08-CC9E57606ED3 www.docverify.com1B786BEB-991F-46C3-9B08-CC9E57606ED3 --- 2021/10/21 12:58:03 -8:00 --- Remote NotaryPage 3 of 7 3CC9E57606ED3 WLR Division Director Josh Baldi 28DC7EDE8E7F Signed on 2021/10/21 13:07:50 -8:00 -RVK%DOGL Page 892 of 967 King County / City of Auburn – Access Easement - Page 4 of 7 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS. COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that ____________________________ is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that __he signed this instrument, on oath stated that __he is authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the ____________________of ___________________ to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: _____________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ Printed name Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at __________________ My appointment expires _______ DocVerify ID: 1B786BEB-991F-46C3-9B08-CC9E57606ED3 www.docverify.com1B786BEB-991F-46C3-9B08-CC9E57606ED3 --- 2021/10/21 12:58:03 -8:00 --- Remote NotaryPage 4 of 7 4CC9E57606ED3 Page 893 of 967 King County / City of Auburn – Access Easement - Page 5 of 7 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS. COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that ____________________________ is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that __he signed this instrument, on oath stated that __he is authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the ________________________________________________ of the Department of Natural Resources and Parks of King County to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: _____________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ Printed name Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at __________________________ My appointment expires _______ DocVerify ID: 1B786BEB-991F-46C3-9B08-CC9E57606ED3 www.docverify.com1B786BEB-991F-46C3-9B08-CC9E57606ED3 --- 2021/10/21 12:58:03 -8:00 --- Remote NotaryPage 5 of 7 5CC9E57606ED3 Notarial act performed by audio-visual communication 5/31/2025 Tacoma Julie Sanders 10/21/2021 WLR Division Director Josh Baldi DocVerifyJULIE SANDERS NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF WASHINGTON Commission # 192651 My Commission Expires May 31, 2025 6990205C2711Notary Stamp 2021/10/21 13:07:50 PST 6990205C2711 Signed on 2021/10/21 13:07:50 -8:00Si d 2021/10/21 13 07 50 8 00 Page 894 of 967 King County / City of Auburn – Access Easement - Page 6 of 7 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION – THE EASEMENT AREA All that portion of the hereinabove described Tract E, Open Space, Auburn 40 P.U.D. lying northwesterly of a line connecting the east corner of Lot 167 and the northeast corner of Tract E of said plat. Situate in the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 31, Township 22 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian, King County, Washington. Containing 6,350 sq. ft., more or less. DocVerify ID: 1B786BEB-991F-46C3-9B08-CC9E57606ED3 www.docverify.com1B786BEB-991F-46C3-9B08-CC9E57606ED3 --- 2021/10/21 12:58:03 -8:00 --- Remote NotaryPage 6 of 7 6CC9E57606ED3 Page 895 of 967 King County / City of Auburn – Access Easement - Page 7 of 7 EXHIBIT B MAP OF EASEMENT AREA DocVerify ID: 1B786BEB-991F-46C3-9B08-CC9E57606ED3 www.docverify.com1B786BEB-991F-46C3-9B08-CC9E57606ED3 --- 2021/10/21 12:58:03 -8:00 --- Remote NotaryPage 7 of 7 7CC9E57606ED3 Page 896 of 967 AUBURN VALUES S E R V I C E ENVIRONMENT E C O N O M Y C H A R A C T E R SUSTAINABILITY W E L L N E S S C E L E B R AT I O N KING COUNTY ACCESS EASEMENT OVER CITY OF AUBURN PARCEL 030140 -2420 RESOLUTION 5623 Josh Arndt -Legal Department Page 897 of 967 SERVICE ⚫ENVIRONMENT ⚫ECONOMY ⚫CHARACTER ⚫SUSTAINABILITY ⚫WELLNESS ⚫CELEBRATION Grant King County necessary access across City of Auburn property to property King County owns along the Green River Blue = King County property Green = City of Auburn property Hatched = Easement Area PURPOSE Page 898 of 967 SERVICE ⚫ENVIRONMENT ⚫ECONOMY ⚫CHARACTER ⚫SUSTAINABILITY ⚫WELLNESS ⚫CELEBRATIONSERVICE ⚫ENVIRONMENT ⚫ECONOMY ⚫CHARACTER ⚫SUSTAINABILITY ⚫WELLNESS ⚫CELEBRATION North Auburn, West side of Green River GENERAL LOCATION Page 899 of 967 Legal Department AUBURN VALUES S E R V I C E ENVIRONMENT E C O N O M Y C H A R A C T E R SUSTAINABILITY W E L L N E S S C E L E B R AT I O N JOSH ARNDT REAL ESTATE MANAGER JARNDT@AUBURNWA.GOV 253.288.4325 Page 900 of 967 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Resolution No. 5628 (Tate)(30 Minutes) Date: November 2, 2021 Department: Community Development Attachments: Resolution No. 5628 2022 Annual Action Plan PowerPoint CDBG 2022 Annual Action Plan Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrativ e Recommendation: For discussion only. Background for Motion: Background Summary: Every year, the City of Auburn is required to submit an Annual Action Plan to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to guide the investment of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for the following program year. Auburn’s current Action Plan ends in 2021 with the next plan year scheduled to start on January 1, 2022. The 2022 Annual Action Plan is guided by the priorities and goals established in the 2020 – 2024 Consolidated Plan adopted by City Council in November 2019. The Action Plan outlines the specific programs and activities to be undertaken for the program year and the amount of funds that will be awarded to those projects. The program year for the City of Auburn begins January 1 and ends December 31. A Public Hearing to consider this Plan and hear public comment was held before the City Council on November 1, 2021 in accordance with Auburn’s Citizen Participation Plan for Community Development Block Grant funds. Resolution No. 5628, if adopted by City Council, adopts the 2022 Annual Action Plan, and authorizes the Mayor to implement such administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out directions of the legislation. Rev iewed by Council Committees: Councilmember:Mulenga Staff:Tate Page 901 of 967 Meeting Date:November 8, 2021 Item Number: Page 902 of 967 RESOLUTION NO. 5628 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE 2022 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ACTION PLAN FOR THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN YEARS 2020-2024 WHEREAS, the City of Auburn was designated as an entitlement community by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for its Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program; and WHEREAS, the primary objective of the Consolidated Plan and CDBG Program is the development of viable urban communities by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment and expanding economic opportunities, principally for persons of low-income and moderate-income; and WHEREAS, to be eligible for funding, the City of Auburn must annually update the action plan for its Consolidated Plan that serves as a federally required planning document to guide the City of Auburn’s human service and community development efforts; and WHEREAS, the planning process to develop the Consolidated Plan involved citizen participation and guidance from non-profit and governmental agencies serving low income residents in the community; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Auburn hea rd and considered public comment about its proposed 2022 Action Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, HEREBY RESOLVES as follows: Page 903 of 967 Section 1. Pursuant to the provisions of 24 CFR 91, the City hereby adopts the 2022 Action Plan for the Consolidated Plan for Years 2020-2024. Section 2. That the Mayor is authorized to implement such administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directives of this legislation. Section 3. That this Resolution shall take effect and be in full force upon passage and signatures hereon. Dated and Signed this _____ day of _________________, 2020. CITY OF AUBURN ________________________________ NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR ATTEST: _________________________ Shawn Campbell, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________ Kendra Comeau, City Attorney Page 904 of 967 $8%8519$/8(66(59,&((19,5210(17(&2120<&+$5$&7(56867$,1$%,/,7<:(//1(66&(/(%5$7,21CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSIONCDBG 2022ANNUAL ACTION PLANPRESENTED BY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NOVEMBER 8, 2021Department of Community DevelopmentPlanning zBuilding zDevelopment Engineering zPermit CenterSustainabilityzCommunity Services ŏCode EnforcementPage 905 of 967 ƒGeneral Fund Human Services dollarsƒ$680,000ƒCompetitive funding for direct service nonprofit agenciesƒGuided by Human Services Funding Priorities set by CouncilƒApproved by City Council every other year during budget processƒCDBG dollarsƒ$651,632*ƒFunds support city’s Housing Repair program, public facility ADA improvements, public services (limited), and some economic development activitiesƒGuided by 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan and Annual Action PlansƒApproved by City Council every yearGENERAL FUND VS CDBGPage 906 of 967 BACKGROUNDPage 907 of 967 The CDBG Entitlement Program provides annual grants on a formula basis to entitled cities to develop viable urban communities.Projects must:•Align with HUD’s National Objectives•Be eligible under HUD’s guidelines•Benefit low- and moderate-income personsCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTSERVICE zENVIRONMENT zECONOMY zCHARACTER zSUSTAINABILITY zWELLNESS zCELEBRATIONPage 908 of 967 CDBG ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS•Five Year Consolidated Plan•Eligibility Reviews•Public Participation•AAnnual Action Plans •Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER)•Annual Subrecipient Monitoring•Financial Management•Project Management•Environmental Reviews•Procurement Procedure•Lead MitigationPage 909 of 967 EXAMPLES OF ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES FOR CBDG FUNDS•Acquisition of Real Property•Public Facility ADA improvements•Site Preparation•Public Services ((Max: 15% of annual allocation)•Home Rehabilitation•Economic Development Activities•Job Creation for Low-Income Individuals•Microenterprise Assistance •Homeownership Assistance•Planning and Capacity Building•Program Admin Costs ((Max: 20% of annual allocation)Page 910 of 967 CDBG PROJECT EXAMPLES PAST AND PRESENT•Housing Repair Program (Residential Rehabilitation)•Eviction Prevention/Rent Assistance (Public Service)•Employment Training (Public Service)•Healthcare to under and uninsured Auburn residents (Public Service)•Annual ADA Sidewalk Projects•Fair Housing Testing and Services (Planning and Administration, Public Service)Page 911 of 967 ƒAAffordable Housing– Ensure access to healthy, affordable housing for low- and moderate-income households throughout the region and advance fair housing to end discrimination and overcome historic patterns of segregation.ƒEnding Homelessness– Make homelessness rare, brief, and one-time and eliminate racial disparities.ƒCommunity and Economic Development– Establish and maintain healthy, integrated, and vibrant communities by improving the well-being and mobility of low- and moderate-income residents, and focusing on communities with historic disparities in health, income, and quality of life.CONSOLIDATED PLAN GOALSPage 912 of 967 2022 ANNUAL ACTION PLANPage 913 of 967 March – May 2020: Application process for General Fund and CDBG Public Service funding for 2021-2022September 2020: Recommendations for CDBG-funded Public Service activities approved by Human Services Committee.September 27, 2021: First Public Hearing at Human Services Committee following a comment period on Speak Up Auburn for 2022 AAP.October 1 – November 1: 30 day public comment period for 2022 AAP. Draft available on City website, Speak Up Auburn, and by request. November 1: Second Public Hearing for 2022 AAP at City Council.TIMELINE: DRAFTING THE 2022 AAPPage 914 of 967 •Expected CDBG Funding Allocation*: $650,000•Public Services (Subject to 15% Cap): $95,000•Based on priorities in the Council-adopted 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan•Solid Ground Housing Stability Project: $55,000•Time limited rental assistance to Auburn residents paired with supportive services based on the progressive engagement model to support homelessness prevention and increased housing stability. •Fair Housing Public Service Activity: $40,000•Via RFP in 2021/2022•Based on the priorities established with Auburn’s adopted Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice•Housing Repair: $330,000•At least 65 low- to moderate-income Auburn homeowners served•Over 70% Seniors or Disabled•Sidewalk Accessibility Improvements: $100,000•Provide sidewalk ADA improvements in low- to moderate-income residential areas of Auburn, improving accessibility, safety, and community connectedness.•Administration (Subject to 20% Cap): $125,0002022 ANNUAL ACTION PLANAT A GLANCEPage 915 of 967 ƒResolution 5628 Adopting the 2022 Community Development Block Grant Action Plan for the Consolidated Plan Years 2020-2024 scheduled for November 15, 2021 Council meeting.NEXT STEPSPage 916 of 967 THANK YOUPage 917 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2022 1 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Executive Summary AP-05 Executive Summary - 91.200(c), 91.220(b) 1. Introduction Each year the City of Auburn executes specific actions to implement the goals and strategies of the Consolidated Plan for Years 2020-2024. Actions that will be undertaken in 2022 are outlined in this Annual Action Plan. The City of Auburn anticipates the receipt of $650,000 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds in 2022. In addition to CDBG funds, the City is planned to allocate approximately 0.92% of the City's General Funds to Human Services. The City’s Human Services program, housed in the Community Services Division, oversees and is responsible for providing and managing financial resources to more than 30 non-profit agencies that serve the Auburn community. The Community Services division is also responsible for administering the local housing repair program and developing collaborations among community partners to strengthen the response to residents in need. The 2022 Action Plan proposes to allocate $95,000 of CDBG funds to public services. Most of those funds ($55,000) will be used to support Homelessness Prevention and Intervention. The remaining $40,000 will be allocated to Fair Housing public services, in keeping with our Consolidated Plan priorities and challenges identified in the 2019 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. Approximately $125,000 of the CDBG funds will be allocated to program administration, which includes planning, citizen participation, and administration of the City’s CDBG-funded Housing Repair Program. $100,000 of the 2022 funding is designated to support sidewalk ADA improvements in low- to moderate-income residential areas. The remaining $330,000 will be allocated to residential rehabilitation, providing free minor home repair services to low- and very low-income Auburn residents. The City of Auburn is committed to continuing to focus on achieving equitable outcomes for its community members and achieving a greater collaboration among service providers. Overall the implementation of the Consolidated Plan is progressing as planned and the primary activities included are underway. Page 918 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2022 2 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 2. Summarize the objectives and outcomes identified in the Plan This Action Plan allocates a total of $650,000 dollars in anticipated 2022 Community Development Block Grant funds, to support the Community Development Block Grant program. With the overall goal of reducing the number of people living in poverty within the City of Auburn, the following objectives and outcomes will be employed: 1. Affordable Housing: The City of Auburn will engage in housing activities, collaborations, and partnerships to enhance opportunities for the creation and preservation of affordable housing. The City will plan for and support fair housing strategies and initiatives designed to affirmatively further fair housing choice, and to increase access to housing and housing programs. 2. Ending Homelessness: The City of Auburn will support Public Service activities that work toward the following outcomes: 1) reduce the number of households becoming homeless; 2) reduce the length of time that households are homeless; 3) increase the rate of exits to permanent housing; and 4) reduce the number of households that re- enter the homeless system after exit to permanent housing. 3. Community and Economic Development: In an effort to meet the need of Auburn's economic and demographic growth the City intends to fund programs and activities that will enhance the economy, accessibility, safety, and physical appearance of neighborhoods. Activities that would be eligible for funding include fair housing public services, public infrastructure and ADA improvements for public facilities. These investments help to ensure equitable opportunities for good health, happiness, safety, self-reliance and connection to community. 4. Planning and Administration: Administer the Community Development Block Grant program to meet the community needs and HUD requirements To accomplish these outcomes and objectives, the City invests in programs that meet the community basic needs, increase self-sufficiency, provide economic opportunity and develop a safe community. 3. Evaluation of past performance During the past year Auburn has accomplished significant achievement on its programs and impacted the lives of thousands of residents. In 2020 alone, projects funded by the City completed the following: • 40 very low- and low-income Auburn homeowners received housing repair services. Roughly 70% of these homeowners were seniors. Page 919 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2022 3 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • Over 2,800 low to moderate income residents received free or low cost medical care related to the COVID-19 pandemic. • 161 low- to moderate-income Auburn residents impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic received emergency subsistence supports. • A sidewalk project was completed to support greater ADA accessibility for Auburn residents, with an estimated direct impact for 3,500 residents. The City of Auburn has prioritized COVID response with CDBG funds over the course of the pandemic. In addition to fully allocating the CDBG-CV funds made available, the City reallocated $205,000 of 2020 CDBG-EN funds to public services directed towards those impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. The City also applied for and received over $170,000 of CDBG-CV2 funds from the State Department of Commerce to support eviction prevention efforts in the community in 2021 and 2022. 4. Summary of Citizen Participation Process and consultation process The city is engaged in a public participation process for the 2022 Annual Action Plan, as outlined below: • Drafts of the Action Plan have been made available for public via mail and on the City’s website and notices of its public view were publicized in the local newspaper as of October 1, 2021. Interested community members can provide comment via mail, email, or on the City’s public engagement web platform, Speak Up Auburn!, at www.speakupauburn.org/cdbg. • A public hearing was provided on September 27, 2021, during the City’s Human Services Committee meeting to hear public comment and input on priorities to be included in the 2022 Annual Action Plan. Consistent with local health guidelines related to COVID- 19, this public hearing was conducted virtually. • A public comment period was made available prior to drafting the plan, from September 14-27, 2021. Residents could provide comment through mail, email, or on the City’s public engagement web platform, Speak Up Auburn. • An additional public hearing was held on November 1, 2021, during the Auburn City Council meeting, to hear public comment and input on the published draft of the 2022 Annual Action Plan. The City of Auburn in conjunction with the Consortium consulted with multiple public and private agencies during the development of the consolidated plan. Consultations occurred during regional meetings as well as in individual conversations. Agencies that participated in Page 920 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2022 4 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) consultations regarding public services, fair housing, and other topics relevant to the drafting of the 2022 Annual Action Plan included: the South King Housing and Homelessness Partners, local legal assistance providers, other government human service providers and nonprofit agencies delivering services in Auburn and the sub-region. In addition to conducting consultations during the development of the plan, the City of Auburn collaborates and works closely with numerous coalitions, committees and government entities. 5. Summary of public comments One comment was received via email by a community member seeking emergency financial assistance. In addition to noting their comment, staff reached out to the resident to provide additional resources to provide more immediate support for their individual needs. 6. Summary of comments or views not accepted and the reasons for not accepting them No comments were rejected. 7. Summary Although we did not receive comments through the Speak Up Auburn website, our traffic to the site to review the plan and our City’s CDBG page increased significantly, indicating engagement with the draft plan. During the public comment period of October 1-November 1, 2021, the CDBG page incurred 33 views (up from a monthly average of 6 between May 2021 and July 2021). The majority of these views were from a direct link, likely in the City’s email communications regarding our published plan. Page 921 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2022 5 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies - 91.200(b) 1. Agency/entity responsible for preparing/administering the Consolidated Plan The following are the agencies/entities responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source. Agency Role Name Department/Agency Lead Agency AUBURN Community Development Department CDBG Administrator AUBURN Community Development Department ESG Administrator KING COUNTY DCHS Table 1 – Responsible Agencies Narrative The City of Auburn, as a member of the King County Consortium, administers its own CDBG funds and prepares its own Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plans for the administration of those funds. As a member of the King County Consortium, the City works closely with numerous nonprofit organizations in the region that implement programs funded by the City of Auburn CDBG program. A detailed list of agencies responsible for administering funded programs by CDBG can be found in the Action Plan section of this document. Consolidated Plan Public Contact Information Joy Scott Community Services Manager City of Auburn 25 West Main Street Auburn, WA 98001 253.876.1965 jfscott@auburnwa.gov Page 922 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2022 6 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AP-10 Consultation - 91.100, 91.200(b), 91.215(l) 1. Introduction This section describes the community consultation process followed by the City of Auburn in developing the 2022 Annual Action Plan and the coordination with other local governments, the Continuum of Care, service agencies, and community stakeholders. The City of Auburn consulted with multiple public and private agencies as well as community members during the development of the Consolidated Plan. In addition to conducting consultations during the development of the plan, the City of Auburn collaborates and works closely with numerous coalitions, committees, and government entities throughout the duration of the plan in efforts to enhance strategies and systems to meet established goals and objectives of the plan. Provide a concise summary of the jurisdiction’s activities to enhance coordination between public and assisted housing providers and private and governmental health, mental health and service agencies (91.215(l)). The City of Auburn works closely with partnering King County jurisdictions, public housing authorities and health providers to develop systems in order to improve the quality of service and access for low-income residents as well as the community as a whole within the city and throughout the region. The City of Auburn, in partnership with the Seattle-King County Coalition on Homelessness, convenes a monthly group of service providers, faith communities, community advocates, and others, to coordinate efforts on serving individuals experiencing homelessness in South King County. The meeting provides a venue for resource sharing, collaboration, training, and best practice implementation. City staff also participate in regional collaborative and decision making bodies such as the King County Joint Recommendations Committee (JRC) and the South King County Human Services Planners group. The city is a member of the King County Human Services Funder Collaborative, which provides a more streamlined process for human service agencies to access funding from multiple cities. Additionally, the City participates in monthly Homelessness Action Committee meetings with staff from King County Department of Community and Human Services, Public Health King County, the Housing Development Consortium, Valley Cities, the Multi-Service Center, and the King County Housing Authority to review program progress and delivery of homeless services funded through regional efforts. In addition to these groups, the City’s regional collaboration Page 923 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2022 7 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) work on affordable housing is supported by the South King Housing and Homelessness Partners, which Auburn and other South King County Cities contribute to in order to build additional capacity to address issues related to housing and homelessness in the South King County region. Describe coordination with the Continuum of Care and efforts to address the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans, and unaccompanied youth) and persons at risk of homelessness. In 2016, King County and All Home, our region’s Continuum of Care (CoC) lead agency at the time, launched the Coordinated Entry for All (CEA) system for homeless populations and our region has been refining the system since then. National research identifies coordinated entry as a key component for an effective homeless system because it improves the quality of client screening and assessment, matches clients to appropriately targeted services and resources, and promotes a more efficient use of resources. CEA processes and prioritizes assistance based on vulnerability and severity of service needs to ensure that people who need assistance the most can receive it in a timely manner. Chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans, unaccompanied youth, and young adults are a part of the coordinated system. In addition, CEA utilizes regional access points which serve as the primary “front door” for the homeless housing system. In 2021, the newly-created King County Regional Homelessness Authority (KCRHA) became our CoC lead agency, and has worked to consolidate structures and contracts across King County and Seattle to create greater efficiency and maximize impact. Auburn’s mayor currently sits on the Governance Board of the Regional Homelessness Authority, and staff participate in bi-weekly meetings with KCRHA to collaborate and inform the work they are overseeing, particularly in regards to subregional planning. Describe consultation with the Continuum(s) of Care that serves the jurisdiction’s area in determining how to allocate ESG funds, develop performance standards for and evaluate outcomes of projects and activities assisted by ESG funds, and develop funding, policies and procedures for the operation and administration of HMIS The ESG program focuses on assisting people to quickly regain stability in permanent housing after experiencing homelessness or a housing crisis. Auburn does not receive ESG funds directly. Coordinating with King County’s Continuum of Care (CoC) is critical to our region’s implementation. The City will continue to look for deeper ways of participating in and collaborating with the Regional Homelessness Authority and its Advisory Committee, which serves as our Continuum of Care. The City of Auburn supports the continuum of housing including prevention, emergency shelter, and permanent housing. The City provides financial support for these efforts with City general funds and Page 924 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2022 8 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) also commits staff and leadership time to the ongoing development and implementation of the system to address the needs of persons experiencing homelessness. The City participates in and supports numerous coalitions and committees, such as the South King County Forum on Homelessness and the Homelessness Action Committee, focusing on developing resources in South King County. The City also participates in the annual Count Us In, Point in Time Count, which provides invaluable data for planning. The City provides both CDBG and local funds to agencies that serve chronically homeless individuals and families with children, veterans, and unaccompanied youth. 2. Agencies, groups, organizations and others who participated in the process and consultations 1 Agency/Group/Organization KING COUNTY Agency/Group/Organization Type Other government - County What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment Homelessness Strategy Homeless Needs - Chronically homeless Homeless Needs - Families with children Homelessness Needs - Veterans Homelessness Needs - Unaccompanied youth Non-Homeless Special Needs Market Analysis How was the Agency/Group/Organization consulted and what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination? As a member of the King County Housing Consortium for the purpose of HOME funds, Auburn works closely with King County in the development of the City's and the County's Consolidated Plan. Because the two entities have a cardinal role in each other's program delivery there is active participation from both parties in the development of the plan. Staff from King County and Auburn met regularly prior to and during the development of the plan, and Auburn rotates as a regular voting member of the County’s Joint Recommendations Committee. 2 Agency/Group/Organization KENT Agency/Group/Organization Type Other government - Local Page 925 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2022 9 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment Lead-based Paint Strategy Homelessness Strategy Homeless Needs - Chronically homeless Homeless Needs - Families with children Homelessness Needs - Veterans Homelessness Needs - Unaccompanied youth Non-Homeless Special Needs Market Analysis Anti-poverty Strategy How was the Agency/Group/Organization consulted and what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination? As members of the Urban County Consortium, Auburn and Kent staff worked closely together during the development of the Consolidated Plan. Staff from both cities attend monthly meetings to discuss human services and housing trends, needs, and progress on ongoing initiatives. 3 Agency/Group/Organization FEDERAL WAY Agency/Group/Organization Type Other government - Local What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment Lead-based Paint Strategy Homelessness Strategy Homeless Needs - Chronically homeless Homeless Needs - Families with children Homelessness Needs - Veterans Homelessness Needs - Unaccompanied youth Non-Homeless Special Needs Market Analysis Anti-poverty Strategy How was the Agency/Group/Organization consulted and what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination? As members of the Urban County Consortium, Auburn and Federal Way staff worked closely together during the development of the Consolidated Plan. Staff from both cities attend monthly meetings to discuss human services and housing trends, needs, and progress on ongoing initiatives. 4 Agency/Group/Organization Housing Development Consortium of Seattle-King County Agency/Group/Organization Type Planning organization Page 926 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2022 10 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment Public Housing Needs Homelessness Strategy Homeless Needs - Chronically homeless Homeless Needs - Families with children Homelessness Needs - Veterans Homelessness Needs - Unaccompanied youth How was the Agency/Group/Organization consulted and what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination? Auburn participates in monthly meetings convened by the Housing Development Consortium (HDC) on homeless response needs and strategy in SKC, and bimonthly meetings focused on affordable housing data and developments. The information collected by HDC helps to inform multiple pieces of our Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan, particularly those strategies related to homelessness and affordable housing in our community. 5 Agency/Group/Organization Seattle-King County Coalition on Homelessness Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-homeless Nonprofit agency What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Homelessness Strategy Homeless Needs - Chronically homeless Homeless Needs - Families with children Homelessness Needs - Veterans Homelessness Needs - Unaccompanied youth How was the Agency/Group/Organization consulted and what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination? Auburn is a member of the Seattle-King County Coalition on Homelessness (SKCCH), and co-convenes a monthly group of service providers working with people experiencing homelessness in our communities. The meetings provide a frequent check- in point, and the opportunity to hear from providers directly on the challenges and trends they're seeing in Auburn. The Coalition on Homelessness' organizational members include agencies and community groups that provide emergency shelter and services, transitional housing, and permanent, supported housing to the roughly 27,000 men, women, and children who are homeless in King County during one year. Page 927 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2022 11 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 6 Agency/Group/Organization South King County Housing and Homelessness Partners Agency/Group/Organization Type Other government - Local Regional organization What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment Public Housing Needs Homelessness Strategy Homeless Needs - Chronically homeless Homeless Needs - Families with children Homelessness Needs - Veterans Homelessness Needs - Unaccompanied youth How was the Agency/Group/Organization consulted and what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination? South King Housing and Homelessness Partners (SKHHP) is a coalition formed by an interlocal agreement between the jurisdictions of Auburn, Burien, Covington, Des Moines, Federal Way, Kent, Normandy Park, Renton, Tukwila, and King County. The agreement allows for South King County jurisdictions to work together and share resources in order to effectively address affordable housing and homelessness. This collaborative model is based on similar approaches used in Snohomish County, East King County, and other areas of the country. The purpose of the coalition is to increase the available options for South King County residents to access affordable housing and to preserve the existing affordable housing stock. Page 928 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2022 12 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Table 2 – Agencies, groups, organizations who participated Identify any Agency Types not consulted and provide rationale for not consulting A wide range of groups and organizations participated in the process including public funders from Washington State and King County partner jurisdictions, public housing authorities, members from the Seattle-King County Housing Development Consortium, stakeholders, housing providers for low-and-moderate income persons, agencies who serve persons who are homeless, and Seattle- King County Public Health. In addition to the consultations referenced above, Auburn, King County and Consortium partner staff coordinate closely with each other and fan out to participate and attend a wide range of standing meetings with city planners, housing and service providers. The only types of organizations not consulted with were corrections facilities. The rationale for not consulting with these facilities is that the City does not host this type of organization. Other local/regional/state/federal planning efforts considered when preparing the Plan Name of Plan Lead Organization How do the goals of your Strategic Plan overlap with the goals of each plan? Continuum of Care King County Regional Homeless Authority The goals of Auburn's Strategic Plan overlap with the goals of the CoC to address the needs of homeless residents in the community and reduce the risk of homelessness. Table 3 - Other local / regional / federal planning efforts Narrative Page 929 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2021 13 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AP-12 Participation - 91.401, 91.105, 91.200(c) 1. Summary of citizen participation process/Efforts made to broaden citizen participation Summarize citizen participation process and how it impacted goal-setting Public participation plays a crucial role in the success of the City's Annual Action Plan. The goals are to hear the community's feedback and recommendations on how CDBG funds should be invested and how services can coordinate to achieve the greatest impact. In addition to the targeted outreach listed below, the City regularly engages service providers and stakeholders in discussions regarding human services and local economic development needs. Organizations funded by the city are monitored throughout the year and report quarterly on progress, trends, and challenges. City staff co-host a monthly meeting of service providers working with individuals and families experiencing homelessness in the region to gather feedback and support increased capacity building through broad collaboration of regional providers. In addition, City staff meet regularly with other cities in the area and other funders to evaluate gaps in services and seek solutions to local and regional community development challenges. Page 930 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2021 14 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Citizen Participation Outreach Sort Ord er Mode of Outre ach Target of Outre ach Summary of response/attend ance Summary of comments recei ved Summary of comm ents not accepted and reasons URL (If applicable) 1. Public Hearing Non- targeted/broad community 2. Newspaper Ad Non- targeted/broad community 3. Web posting on Speak Up Auburn Non- targeted/broad community www.speakupauburn.or/cdbg 4. Web posting on City’s Community Services page Broad community, Service providers in Auburn www.auburnwa.gov/community services Table 4 – Citizen Participation Outreach Page 931 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2021 15 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Expected Resources AP-15 Expected Resources - 91.420(b), 91.220(c)(1,2) Introduction The City of Auburn anticipates funding for the duration of the Consolidated Plan from • CDBG • City of Auburn General Fund allocation for Human Services Anticipated Resources Page 932 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2021 16 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Program Source of Funds Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Amount Available Remainder of ConPlan $ Narrative Description Annual Allocation: $ Program Income: $ Prior Year Resources: $ Total: $ CDBG Public- federal Admin and Planning Fair Housing Public Improvements Public Services $650,000 0 0 $650,000 $1,950,000 Auburn is anticipating approximately $650,000 per year in CDBG funds for the remainder of the Consolidated Plan period. ARPA Public - federal Public Services $1,000,000 Auburn is anticipating allocating approximately $1,000,000 of ARPA funds to public services during the remainder of the Con Plan period General Fund Public - local Public Services Estimated: $680,000 0 0 Estimated: $680,000 $1,880,000 Table 5 - Expected Resources – Priority Table Explain how federal funds will leverage those additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a description of how matching requirements will be satisfied The City of Auburn relies on CDBG funds to support community and economic development projects and activities in efforts to support low to moderate income populations to become self-sufficient and sustain affordable housing. However, CDBG funds are not the only source of funds the City uses to support community projects and activities. The City will be distributing federal ARPA funds in the next three years, with an expected allocation of $1,000,000 to support the City’s Human Services Grant program. Page 933 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2021 17 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) The City's general funds are used to support direct services benefitting Auburn's at risk populations in addition to CDBG funds. CDBG funds do not require matching funds. If appropriate, describe publically owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan N/A Discussion The City of Auburn will use CDBG funds to support all eligible projects and activities that align with CDBG guidelines and regulations. Page 934 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2021 18 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Annual Goals and Objectives AP-20 Annual Goals and Objectives - 91.420, 91.220(c)(3)&(e) Goals Summary Information Sort Order Goal Name Start Year End Year Category Geographic Area Needs Addressed Funding Goal Outcome Indicator 1 Affordable Housing 2020 2024 Affordable Housing Public Housing Homeless Non-Homeless Special Needs Affordable Housing CDBG: $370,000 Homeowner Housing Rehabilitated: 65 Household Housing Unit Fair Housing Public Service Activities: 45 Persons Assisted 2 Ending Homelessness 2020 2024 Homeless Ending Homelessness CDBG: $55,000 Public service activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit: 96 Persons Assisted 3 Community and Economic Development 2020 2024 Non-Homeless Special Needs Non-Housing Community Development Community and Economic Development CDBG: $100,000 Public Facility or Infrastructure Activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit: 500 Persons Assisted 4 Planning and Administration 2020 2024 CDBG: $125,000 Other: 0 Other Table 6 – Goals Summary Page 935 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2021 19 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Goal Description 1 Goal Name Affordable Housing Goal Description The City of Auburn will engage in housing activities, collaborations, and partnerships to enhance opportunities for the creation and preservation of affordable housing. The City will plan for and support fair housing strategies and initiatives designed to affirmatively further fair housing choice, and to increase access to housing and housing programs. 2 Goal Name Ending Homelessness Goal Description The City of Auburn will support Public Service activities that work toward the following outcomes: 1) reduce the number of households becoming homeless; 2) reduce the length of time that households are homeless; 3) increase the rate of exits to permanent housing; and 4) reduce the number of households that re-enter the homeless system after exit to permanent housing. 3 Goal Name Community and Economic Development Goal Description In an effort to meet the need of Auburn's economic and demographic growth the City intends to fund programs and activities that will enhance the economy, accessibility, safety, and physical appearance of neighborhoods. Activities that would be eligible for funding include fair housing public services, public infrastructure and ADA improvements for public facilities. These investments help to ensure equitable opportunities for good health, happiness, safety, self-reliance and connection to community. 4 Goal Name Planning and Administration Goal Description General administration and project management Page 936 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2021 20 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AP-35 Projects - 91.420, 91.220(d) Introduction Auburn's Annual Action Plan provides descriptions of proposals of how funds will be prioritized to achieve goals identified in the Consolidated Plan. Projects funded by the City will address the priority needs of providing assistance to prevent homelessness, ensure affordable housing and a suitable living environment. Projects and programs are selected through a competitive application process to ensure optimal quality services is provided to the community in use of the funds. # Project Name 1 HOUSING REPAIR 2 ADMINISTRATION 3 SOLID GROUND HOUSING STABILITY PROGRAM 5 FAIR HOUSING PUBLIC SERVICES 6 ADA SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS Table 7 – Project Information Describe the reasons for allocation priorities and any obstacles to addressing underserved needs The allocations proposed are based on the assessment of Auburn's needs, the resources available in the region, the availability of other funds also focusing on needs, and the purpose of Consolidated Plan funds. Should CDBG revenues exceed the proposed amount, the additional resources shall be allocated in accordance to the following guidelines: • Fill gaps in human services primarily healthcare, homeless prevention and intervention and affordable housing accessibility. • Increase funding for community development projects and activities including housing, community facilities and economic development. If increases are not significant enough to enhance projects or activities funds may be placed in contingency for programming later in the year or the following program year. Should CDBG revenues come in lower than anticipated; the City will continue with its planned policy and to the extent allowed reduce funding allocations in homeowner rehabilitation projects and administrative activities. Should CDBG revenues come in less than originally proposed, the City will continue managing Page 937 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2021 21 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) the programs with decreased resources to the extent possible and reduce funding allocations in administrative activities and not public services. Page 938 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2021 22 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AP-38 Project Summary Project Summary Information 1 Project Name Housing Repair Target Area None Goals Supported Affordable Housing Needs Addressed Affordable Housing Funding CDBG: $330,000 Description Maintain the affordability of decent housing for low-income Auburn residents by providing repairs necessary to maintain suitable housing for low income Auburn homeowners. Target Date 12/31/2022 Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities An estimated 65 low- and very low-income families will benefit from the housing repair program. As the City's largest homeless prevention program, housing repair ensures the sustainability of a safe home for some of Auburn's most vulnerable residents. Of the 65 low to moderate income residents who apply for the program, over half of them are of the senior and disabled population. Location Description n/a Planned Activities Activities include minor home repairs. 2 Project Name Administration Target Area None Goals Supported All Needs Addressed Planning and Administration Funding CDBG: $125,000 Description General administration and project management Page 939 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2021 23 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Target Date 12/31/2022 Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities n/a Location Description n/a Planned Activities General planning and administration of the CDBG programs include: management of the housing repair program, management of all CDBG related finances, all grant reporting, monitoring of subrecipients and providing guidance of program implementation in Auburn. 3 Project Name Solid Ground Housing Stability Program Target Area Goals Supported End Homelessness Needs Addressed Ensure a Suitable Living Environment Funding CDBG: $55,000 Description Provide time limited emergency subsistence/rental assistance to Auburn residents paired with supportive services based on the progressive engagement model to support homelessness prevention and increased housing stability. This is a public service activity. Target Date 12/31/2022 Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities 26 low to moderate income Auburn residents will benefit from the housing stability program. Location Description n/a 5 Project Name Fair Housing Public Services Target Area Page 940 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2021 24 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Goals Supported Affordable Housing Needs Addressed Ensure a Suitable Living Environment. Funding CDBG: $40,000 Description Make funds available through an RFP process to nonprofit agencies to provide Fair Housing services to Auburn residents. Target Date 12/31/2022 Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities An estimated 45 low income households will benefit from the proposed activity. Location Description n/a 6 Project Name ADA Sidewalk Accessibility Improvements Target Area none Goals Supported Community and Economic Development Needs Addressed Ensure a Suitable Living Environment Funding CDBG: $100,000 Page 941 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2021 25 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Description Provide sidewalk ADA improvements in low- to moderate-income residential areas of Auburn, improving accessibility, safety, and community connectedness. Target Date 12/31/2022 Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities 500 low to moderate income Auburn residents will benefit from the improvements. Location Description TBD Planned Activities TBD Page 942 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2021 26 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AP-50 Geographic Distribution - 91.420, 91.220(f) Description of the geographic areas of the entitlement (including areas of low-income and minority concentration) where assistance will be directed The City of Auburn intends on distributing funds throughout the jurisdiction. Geographic Distribution Target Area Percentage of Funds Table 8 - Geographic Distribution Rationale for the priorities for allocating investments geographically Due to the fact that all areas of Auburn have low to moderate income families dispersed throughout the entire City, the City intends on investing throughout the entire jurisdiction to ensure that all populations throughout the region have access to beneficial programs and housing opportunities. Discussion Due to the fact that all areas of Auburn have low to moderate income families dispersed throughout the entire City, the City intends on investing throughout the entire jurisdiction to ensure that all populations throughout the region have access to beneficial programs and housing opportunities. Page 943 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2021 27 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AP-75 Barriers to affordable housing -91.420, 91.220(j) Introduction The City of Auburn will continue to work with service providers, the housing authority and residents in coordination to fully address and develop systems and strategies to promote their efforts in providing sustainable, affordable housing. Auburn's partnerships with organizations such as the King County Housing Authority, South King Housing and Homelessness Partners, and the Housing Development Consortium of Seattle King County have allowed the City to explore new and innovative strategies to continue to offer affordable housing to its current and prospective residents. Actions it planned to remove or ameliorate the negative effects of public policies that serve as barriers to affordable housing such as land use controls, tax policies affecting land, zoning ordinances, building codes, fees and charges, growth limitations, and policies affecting the return on residential investment The City of Auburn will continue to look at policies that remove barriers to affordable housing. The City of Auburn's Comprehensive Land Use Plan includes several policies and objectives that will guide the city toward achieving its affordable and fair housing goals. These policies include maintaining flexibility in land use to achieve a balanced mix of affordable housing opportunities. The City will continue to pursue mixed use developments that are consistent with the transportation oriented developments located in Auburn's downtown. The City will look for opportunities with public and private agencies to implement policies and offer programs that help alleviate physical and economic distress, conserve energy resources, improve the quality and quantity of community services, and eliminate conditions that are detrimental to health, safety and public welfare. In 2019, the Washington State Legislature adopted House Bill 1923, which awarded grants in the amount up to $100,000 to cities for the purpose of increasing residential capacity. The City of Auburn partnered with five other South King County jurisdictions to establish a sub-regional framework of existing conditions. The results of that effort were used to inform and aid in the development of Auburn’s own Housing Action Plan. Page 944 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2021 28 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Auburn’s Housing Action Plan focuses on encouraging construction of additional affordable and market rate housing in a greater variety of housing types and at prices that are accessible to a greater variety of incomes, including strategies aimed at the for-profit single-family home market. The final Housing Action Plan was adopted by Auburn City Council on July 6, 2021. The City will continue its work in implementing strategies identified in the Housing Action Plan in 2022 and through the remainder of the Consolidated Plan period. In 2020 the City of Auburn passed an ordinance adopting a new chapter of Rental Housing Code. Included in this ordinance were multiple housing stability strategies, including increased notice of rental increases, a cap on late fees, and a Just Cause Eviction Ordinance that requires landlords to have good cause in order to evict or terminate tenancy of a renter. Just Cause protections are especially helpful in addressing fair housing issues, and this adoption was consistent with the City’s efforts related to the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. This builds on previous protections passed by Auburn City Council, including Source of Income Discrimination protections and enhanced rental inspections. Auburn staff have been involved in local and regional policy conversations exploring opportunities to further support anti-displacement efforts and reduce barriers to affordable housing development within our jurisdiction. Page 945 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2021 29 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AP-85 Other Actions - 91.420, 91.220(k) Introduction The City of Auburn will continue to work with service providers throughout the region in coordination to develop systems and strategies to promote their efforts in providing optimal, easily accessible services. The City will work to reduce the number of families in poverty, sustain relationships with employment training agencies, and work to preserve and increase the affordable housing stock in our community. Actions planned to address obstacles to meeting underserved needs By establishing a strong foundation of networks between local service providers, stakeholders and government agencies through committees and coalitions, the City will work in partnership to address obstacles and ameliorate barriers to meeting underserved needs. The collaborated organizations will develop detailed strategic plans that will delegate tasks, build systems and ongoing assessment of service delivery. Actions planned to foster and maintain affordable housing The City will continue to maintain the affordability of decent housing for low income Auburn residents by allocating over $300,000 of CDBG funds to the City's Housing Repair Program. The program provides emergency repairs necessary to maintain safe housing for at least 65 Auburn homeowners, many of whom are senior citizens and/or are experiencing barriers to safely accessing their homes due to physical disabilities. In addition to Auburn's Housing Repair program, the City will maintain affordable housing by continuing to engage and partner with coalitions, committees and other government agencies to integrate and enhance efforts on the issue. The City has formally adopted a Housing Action Plan, as discussed in AP-75, that is helping to guide current and future efforts in this area. That plan is available to the public on the City of Auburn’s website. Auburn has been participating in multiple robust regional efforts to coordinate affordable housing activities in King County. One of these efforts, The South King Housing and Homelessness Partners (SKHHP) is a coalition formed by an interlocal agreement between the jurisdictions of Auburn, Burien, Covington, Des Moines, Federal Way, Kent, Normandy Park, Renton, Tukwila, and King County. The agreement allows for South King County jurisdictions to work together and share resources in order to effectively address affordable housing and homelessness. This collaborative model is based on similar approaches used in Snohomish County, East King County, and other areas of the country. The purpose of the coalition is to Page 946 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2021 30 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) increase the available options for South King County residents to access affordable housing and to preserve the existing affordable housing stock. Additionally, the City of Auburn has been an active participant in the recently formed Affordable Housing Committee of the Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC), with a City Councilmember sitting on the Committee as a voting member. The Affordable Housing Committee serves as a regional advisory body to recommend action and assess progress toward implementing the Regional Affordable Housing Task Force (RAHTF) Five Year Action Plan. The Committee functions as a point in coordinating and owning accountability for affordable housing efforts across King County. Actions planned to reduce lead-based paint hazards The City of Auburn includes language in its CDBG contracts that require agencies to comply with HUD Lead-Based Paint Regulations (24 CFR Part 35) issued pursuant to the Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act (42 U.S.C. Sections 4831, et seq.) requiring prohibition of the use of lead-based paint whenever CDBG funds are used. In addition, the City notifies residents of potential lead-based paint hazards when it awards a Housing Repair grant. A copy of the pamphlet – "Protect Your Family from Lead In Your Home" is provided each Housing Repair client when the City conducts the initial inspection of their home. The city takes additional measures when the age of the home indicates a possible presence of lead-based paint. Before housing repair work commences, the city contracts with a certified provider to undertake lead paint testing. When lead-based hazards are positively identified, the city works with the housing repair client and contractors certified in RRP Lead Abatement to implement the necessary mitigation and safety strategies. Actions planned to reduce the number of poverty-level families The City of Auburn's planned actions to reduce the number of poverty- level families within the context of this Annual Action Plan include but are not limited to: • Allocating $335,000 to the Housing Repair program, which serves low- and very low- income residents and supports households to remain in safe and affordable housing. • Allocating $55,000 to public service activities providing Homelessness Prevention and Intervention services. • Participate and partner with coalitions, committees and agencies that provide antipoverty services to develop and enhance strategies and efforts to reduce poverty level families. • Supporting the development and sustainability of affordable multi-family housing in Page 947 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2021 31 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Auburn. In addition, the city will continue to support and fund programs serving families living in poverty through a competitive human services funding process. Actions planned to develop institutional structure The City's planned actions to address the gaps and weaknesses identified in the strategic plan include: • Maintaining partnerships with and participating in the South King County Housing and Homelessness Partnership, the Regional Homelessness Authority of King County and other regional human service providers, coalitions and committees who address homeless issues. The City will also continue to work collaboratively with partnering organizations and groups to integrate and enhance services to provide optimal services to individuals and families currently experiencing or at risk of homelessness. In addition the City plans to prioritize General Fund human services dollars for housing and homelessness interventions, and allocate more than $150,000 to basic needs services such as food, financial assistance, clothing and healthcare. • Take a comprehensive approach to consolidated and comprehensive planning to include all internal City departments, commissions, committees and task forces. Actions planned to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies The City of Auburn has heavily contributed and intends to continue cultivating relationships between public and private housing and social service agencies. In addition the City will continue to participate in collaborations with the South King County Forum on Homelessness, the South King County Council of Human Services, Seattle-King County Housing Development Consortium and the King County Joint Planners Meeting. Discussion The expressed goal of the City's Consolidated Plan is to reduce the number of people living in poverty within Auburn. The City intends to give funding priority to programs that in addition to complying with federal regulations and address a priority a outlined in the Consolidated Plan are consistent with all of the goals and objectives identified. Page 948 of 967 Annual Action Plan 2021 32 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Program Specific Requirements AP-90 Program Specific Requirements - 91.420, 91.220(l)(1,2,4) Introduction Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) Reference 24 CFR 91.220(l)(1) Projects planned with all CDBG funds expected to be available during the year are identified in the Projects Table. The following identifies program income that is available for use that is included in projects to be carried out. 1. The total amount of program income that will have been received before the start of the next program year and that has not yet been reprogrammed 2. The amount of proceeds from section 108 loan guarantees that will be used during the year to address the priority needs and specific objectives identified in the grantee's strategic plan 3. The amount of surplus funds from urban renewal settlements 4. The amount of any grant funds returned to the line of credit for which the planned use has not been included in a prior statement or plan. 5. The amount of income from float-funded activities Total Program Income Other CDBG Requirements Discussion Page 949 of 967 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: BolaWrap Presentation (Caillier)(30 Minutes) Date: November 3, 2021 Department: Police Attachments: BolaWrap Presentation Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrativ e Recommendation: For discussion only. Background for Motion: Background Summary: BolaWrap is used to take a subject into custody without additional use of force and without risk of serious injury to subject or officers. Rev iewed by Council Committees: Councilmember:Jeyaraj Staff:Caillier Meeting Date:November 8, 2021 Item Number: Page 950 of 967 © 2021 WRAP • Confidential​1 November 2021 Page 951 of 967 © 2021 WRAP • Confidential​2June 2021 –V3 BOLAWRAP •Provides for early intervention to reduce use of hands-on force •Will be equipped in Patrol vehicles •Should be a preplanned deployment •Each unit is $924.95 •Each cartridge is $29.95 Page 952 of 967 © 2021 WRAP • Confidential​3© 2021 WRAP • Confidential​June 2021 –V3 3 BOLAWRAP OVERVIEW The BolaWRAP is NOT: •Designed to be a non/less lethal weapon •A pain compliance tool •Intended to replace any other tool •Meant to be used against actively assaultive and violent subjects •Like any other tool on your belt •The BolaWRAP IS a remote restraint device Page 953 of 967 © 2021 WRAP • Confidential​4June 2021 –V3 DEFINING SUCCESS Success = BolaWRAP is used to: take a subject into custody without additional use of force and without risk of serious injury to subject or officers. •Tight Wrap •Partial Wrap •Multiple Wraps •No Wrap •Distraction / Startle Response / Attention Diverted •Laser Compliance Page 954 of 967 © 2021 WRAP • Confidential​5© 2021 WRAP • Confidential​June 2021 –V3 DEVICE OVERVIEW The BolaWRAP is a handheld device powered by a partially charged .380 blank round that propels a 7’6” Kevlar cord with a 230-pound test strength at the velocity of: •~440 fps at the device •~250 fps at 10 feet •~200 fps at 15 feet •~150 fps at 20 feet Page 955 of 967 © 2021 WRAP • Confidential​6© 2021 WRAP • Confidential​June 2021 –V3 DEVICE OVERVIEW •Each end of the cord contains an anchor with 4 hooks designed to attach to a subject’s clothing and temporarily restrains them without relying on pain compliance •Should be used on subjects with clothes on to advoid anchor entering the skin. Page 956 of 967 © 2021 WRAP • Confidential​7© 2021 WRAP • Confidential​June 2021 –V3 7 SITUATIONS WHERE THE BOLAWRAP MAY BE USEFUL •Emotionally Disturbed Persons (EDP) •Passively non-compliant subjects in situations where there is a specific and articulable risk to the safety of the subject or others •Mildly aggressive non-compliant subjects •Mentally ill subjects •Suicidal subjects/Persons in crisis Page 957 of 967 © 2021 WRAP • Confidential​8June 2021 –V3 NOMENCLATURE BolaWRAP Device CARTRIDGE RELEASE LEVER SAFETY CHARGING HANDLE ACTIVATION BUTTON GREEN LINE LASER CARTRIDGE CAVITY Page 958 of 967 © 2021 WRAP • Confidential​9June 2021 –V3 NOMENCLATURE Cartridge 2 year expiration from time of shipping. Training life unlimited. ANCHOR WITH 4 HOOKS (weighs 3.73 grams) HOOKS CARTRIDGE BODY PROPELLANT (.380 partial charge blank) CARTRIDGE COVER 7’6” FOOT KEVLAR CORD (230 lbs. strength) Page 959 of 967 © 2021 WRAP • Confidential​10June 2021 –V3 NOMENCLATURE Safety Caps All cartridges shipped after April 6, 2021, are equipped with safety caps on the end of the anchors for enhanced safety and performance: •Prevents or minimizes skin penetration from direct hits at close range on naked skin •Added weight improves the anchor’s ability to attach to clothing •Easier for officers to locate and avoid anchors during handcuffing Page 960 of 967 © 2021 WRAP • Confidential​11© 2021 WRAP • Confidential​June 2021 –V3 11 Laser Walk-up •Ensure the safety is disengaged and make the device Deployment Ready •Point the laser on the ground in front of the operator –this allows the operator to better see the laser and keeps the device from being pointed at the subject’s face •Walk-up the laser to recommended target area DEVICE OPERATION Page 961 of 967 © 2021 WRAP • Confidential​12© 2021 WRAP • Confidential​June 2021 –V3 12 DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS Recommended Wrap Zones •Recommended Wrap Zone is mid-thigh and below for maximum immobility •If opportunity presents itself, it is possible to wrap a subject’s arms •Deploying the BolaWRAP to the head or neck area can cause serious injury.Avoid aiming above the elbows unless the risk of injury to the subject would justify the use of deadly force Page 962 of 967 © 2021 WRAP • Confidential​13© 2021 WRAP • Confidential​June 2021 –V3 13 Distances ●Minimum effective range is 10 feet o The cord needs 10 feet to fully spread ●Maximum effective range is 25 feet o The anchors and cord lose velocity and cannot effectively wrap ●Optimum range is 10 –20 feet o Measured from the front of the device to the subject DEPLOYMENT CONSIDERATIONS Page 963 of 967 © 2021 WRAP • Confidential​14June 2021 –V3 TACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS Early Intervention •Instead of waiting for an encounter to unfold and escalate, using the BolaWRAP early on can result in a quick apprehension, safely and humanely -ending the situation and facilitating a positive outcome that minimizes the risk of serious injury or use of force. •The BolaWRAP releases a loud bang when deployed, similar to a gunshot. Before deploying, notify all officers on scene and/or those responding that BolaWRAP is being deployed. Page 964 of 967 © 2021 WRAP • Confidential​15June 2021 –V3 •Subject on an elevated position may fall •Wrapping subject’s arms and legs may prevent them from catching themselves if they fall, even at ground level. Consider the type of surface the subject is on or near •If the subject is in, or falls into, a body of water, the wrap may prevent them from being able to support themself and keep their head above water Increased Risk Situations TACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS Page 965 of 967 © 2021 WRAP • Confidential​16June 2021 –V3 Walking/Running Subject •Subjects do not need to be standing still to be wrapped •Consider wrapping between knees and mid thigh for tighter wrap •People often fall when wrapped while walking/running Consider the type of surface and the likelihood of injury if they fall •Even loose wraps tend to trip subjects or distract them while they try to untangle themselves TACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS Page 966 of 967 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: PAC Update (Caillier)(30 Minutes) Date: November 3, 2021 Department: Police Attachments: No Attachments Av ailable Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrativ e Recommendation: For discussion only. Background for Motion: Background Summary: Cheryl Olson will update PAC's agenda items since the last update given. Rev iewed by Council Committees: Councilmember:Jeyaraj Staff:Caillier Meeting Date:November 8, 2021 Item Number: Page 967 of 967