Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
5722
ORDINANCE NO. 5 7 2 2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO PLANNING; ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AND TEXT AMENDMENTS PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF R.C.W. CHAPTERS 36.70A AND 35A.63 OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON; DESIGNATING THESE AMENDMENTS AS GUIDELINES FOR EXERCISING THE CITY'S AUTHORITY UNDER THE WASHINGTON STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA); DIRECTING THAT THIS ORDINANCE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS IT ADOPTS AND APPROVES BE FILED WITH THE AUBURN CITY CLERK AND BE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION. WHEREAS, the City of Auburn on August 18, 1986 adopted a Comprehensive Plan by Resolution No. 1703 which includes a map establishing the location of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations throughout the City; and WHEREAS, on April 17, 1995 the City of Auburn adopted Comprehensive Plan amendments by Resolution No. 2635 to comply with the Washington State Growth Management Act; and WHEREAS, on September 5, 1995 the City of Auburn reaffirmed that action by Ordinance No. 4788; and WHEREAS, draft Comprehensive Plan map and text amendments were prepared by the Auburn Planning and Community Development Department as year 2002 revisions to the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan; and ------------------------ Ordinance No. 5722 December 4, 2002 Pagel WHEREAS, the environmental impacts of the year 2002 draft Comprehensive Plan text amendments were considered in accordance with procedures of the State Environmental Policy Act with no appeals having been filed; and WHEREAS, the proposed year 2002 amendments were transmitted to the Washington Office of Community Development for the 60 -day State agency review period required under RCW 36A.70.106; and WHEREAS, after proper notice published in the City's official newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to the date of hearing, the Auburn Planning Commission on October 8, 2002 conducted a public hearing on the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, at its October 8, 2002 public hearing, the Auburn City Planning Commission heard public testimony and took evidence and exhibits into consideration of said proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, thereafter the Auburn Planning Commission made a recommendation to the City Council of certain Draft Comprehensive Plan map and text amendments and continued the public hearing to November 6, 2002 on one text amendment; and ------------------------ Ordinance No. 5722 December 4, 2000 Page 2 WHEREAS, on November 6, 2002, the Auburn Planning Commission took additional testimony on the one remaining comprehensive plan text amendment and subsequently forwarded a recommendation to City Council; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Community Development Committee of the Auburn City Council reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendations; and WHEREAS, the Auburn City Council on November 4, 2002 held a duly noticed public hearing and considered the proposed amendments as recommended by the Auburn City Planning Commission; and NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The 2002 Comprehensive Plan amendments, attached hereto as Exhibit "A", are herewith adopted and approved and it is herewith directed that they be filed along with this Ordinance with the Auburn City Clerk and be available for public inspection. Section 2. The 2002 Comprehensive Plan amendments modify the Comprehensive Plan adopted on August 18, 1986 by Resolution 1703 and adopted by Ordinance No. 4788 on September 5, 1995. Section 3. The Comprehensive Plan and amendments are herewith designated as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority under the ------------------------ Ordinance No. 5722 December 4, 2000 Page 3 Washington State Environmental Policy Act by the City's responsible environmental official in accordance with R.C.W. 43.21C.060. Section 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance or any of the Comprehensive Plan amendments adopted herein, is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any Court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5. The Mayor is hereby authorized to implement such administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directions of this legislation to include incorporating into one document the adopted Comprehensive Plan map and text amendments, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and preparing and publishing the amended Comprehensive Plan. Section 6. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force five days from and after its passage, approval, and publication as provided by law. ------------------------ Ordinance No. 5722 December 4, 2000 Page 4 INTRODUCED: DEC 1 6 2002 PASSED: DEC 1 6 2002 APPROVED: DEC 1 6 2002 PETER B. LEWIS MAYOR ATTEST: Da ielle E. Daskam, City Clerk WAR s .:r: City Attorney ------------------------ Ordinance No. 5722 December 4, 2000 Page 5 EXHIBIT "A" Approved Year 2002 Comprehensive Plan Map (CPM) and Policy/Text (P/T) Amendments CPM #1 Amend the Comprehensive Plan Map from "Heavy Industrial" to "Heavy Commercial" for property located on 26th Street NE (north side) just west of Auburn Way North (Applicant: Mr. Hooman Bodaghi; Owner: Fred Poe) aawr.VOZJ (A)MF'WWT7PVQnM Tr•ILT %,. — SCALE: 1" = 400' CPM # 1 ® MPOM CMGZ ,ver, �cmr roars P/T #2 (Privately Initiated) Amend Policy AN 1.7 of the Auburn North Business Area Plan to reduce the required 5,000 minimum square footage for land uses with drive through facilities, except for fast food restaurants. (Filed by Auburn Marketplace Investors) P/T # 2 Amendment to North Auburn Business Area Plan AN 1.7. Except as allowed by Policy AN 1. 11, service stations and automobile sales and/or leasing will not be permitted within the Planning Area. Automobile drive-in facilities (the person remains in the vehicle to conduct their business at a drive-in facility), shall only be permitted when clearly incidental and subordinate to pedestrian access to the building. The drive-in facility shall be attached to the building which must be a minimum of 5,000 square feet in size for restaurants and a minimum of 3,000 square feet for all other uses. and Drive in facilities shall not interfere with pedestrian access. P/T#3 Auburn School District Updated 2001-02 to 2007-2008 Capital Facilities Plan Incorporate Auburn School District's updated Capital Facilities Plan into the Cit 's Y Comprehensive Plan. AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 408 Unincorporated lGng County Unincorporated pierce County City of Auburn City of Algona City of Pacific 8. 1 � CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2001-02 through 2007-08 Adopted by the Auburn School District Board of Directors July 22, 2002 AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 408 915 Fourth Street NE Auburn, Washington 98002 (253) 9314900 BOARD of DIRECTORS Craig Schumaker Therald Leonard Ray Vefik Carol Helgerson Janice Nelson Linda S. Cowan, Superintendent Table of Contents Section I Executive Summary Section 11 Enrollment Projections Section III Standard of Service Section IV Inventory of Facilities Section V Pupil Capacity Section VI Capital Construction Plan Section VII • Impact Fees Section VIII Appendices 00117/2002 Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2001-02 through 2007-08 I. Executive Summary This Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan (the'Pians) 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 2002. This Plan is consistent with prior long -tens capital facilities plans adopted by the District However, this Plan is not intended to be the sole plan for all of the District's needs. The District may prepare interim and periodic Long Range Capital Facilities Plans consistent with Board Policies and actions, taking into account a longer or a shorter time period, other factors and trends in the use of facilities, and other needs of the District as may be required. However, any such plan or plans will be consistent with this Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan. To enable impact fees to be collected in the unincorporated areas of King County and Pierce County and within the City of Auburn; the King County Council, the Pierce County Council, and the City of Auburn must adopt this Plan by reference as part of its comprehensive plan. To enable impact fees to be collected in Cities of Algona and Pacific these municipalities must also adopt this Plan and adopt school impact fee ordinances. Pursuant to the requirements of the Growth Management Act, the Plan will be updated on an annual basis, and any changes in the fee schedule(s) adjusted accordingly. The Plan establishes the District's `standard of service' in order to ascertain the Disficrs current and future capacity. While the State Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes square footage guidelines for capacity, those guidelines do not account for the local program needs of the District The Growth Management Act and the school impact fee ordinance authorize the District to define its standard of service based on the District's specific needs. In general, the District's current standard provides -that class size for grades K-2 should not exceed 25 students; Gass size for grades 3-4 should not exceed 27 students; Gass size for grade 5 should not exceed 30 students. When averaged over the six elementary grades, this computes to 26.5 students per classroom. Class size for grades 6-12 should not exceed 30 students, with some subject areas restricted to lesser numbers. (See Section III for more specific information.) . The capacity of the schools in the District is calculated based on this standard of service and the existing inventory of facilities including transitional classrooms. The District's 2001-02 capacity was 13,741 whereas Full Time Equivalent ('FTEJ enrollment for this same period was 12,718.51. The actual number of individual students was 13,461 as of October 1, 2001. (See Section V for more specific information.) The capital construction plan shown in Section VI addresses the modernization of and additions to the District's existing facilities currently underway and provides for a new high school, a new elementary school, and the acquisition of a new middle school site. The new facilities are required to meet the projected student population increase to be generated from the large development area within Pierce County at the southern border of the Auburn School District as well as all other areas of the District The Pierce County area includes most of the Lakeland South development and some adjacent undeveloped properties. The District held the election for voter approval of a third comprehensive high school on February 5, 2002. The measure received a 58:89% yes vote, but did not meet the required 60%, falling short by 131 yes votes. The District held a second election on March 12, 2002; this time the results improved to 59.01 %, falling short by 108 yes votes. Given the results of the election and having very similar results in the spring of 2000, the board of directors held a public hearing on Saturday, April 27 to gather community input regarding the construction of a new high school. The board also, at its regularly scheduled meeting on April 22, 2002, set and adopted two Citizen Ad Hoc Committees: C3 Committee 1 Cha e• Review the conclusions and recommendations of the 1985 and 1995 Ad Hoc Committees related to accommodating high school enrollment growth, including a possrble review of financing plans for new facilities, o Committee 2 Charge. Develop recommendations for accommodating high school enrollment growth for the next 10 years if a now senior high is not built. Committee 2 will research and examine options including, but not limited to, double shifting, night school, year round school, expanding school day, additional relocatable classrooms, leasing space near high schools in churches and other facilities to provide capacity for the growth at the high school level. Reports from both committees will be presented to the board on October 28, 2002. The School Impact Fee Ordinances adopted by King County, Pierce County, and the City of Auburn provide for the assessment of impact fees to assist in meeting some of the fiscal impact incurred by a District experiencing growth and development Section Al sets forth the proposed school impact fees for single family and multi -family dwelling units. The student generation factors have been generated using the students who actually attend school in the Aubum School District from single family and multi -family developments constructed in the last rive years. This is a change in the calculations from previous plans. The method of collecting the data is to use the GIS mapping software, data from King County and Pierce County GIS and to integrate the mapping with student data from the District data system. This method gave the District actual student generation numbers for each grade span for identified developments. These are contained in Appendix A.3. Auburn School District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2000-01 through 2006-07 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN CHANGES FROM 2000-01 TO 2001-02 Listed below is a summary level outline of the changes from the 2000-01 Capital Facilities Plan that are a part of the 2001-02 Plan. The changes are noted by Section for ease of reference. Section Executive Summary Updated to reflect new information within the Plan. Summary level list of changes from previous year. Section Il Enrollment Projections Updated projections. See Appendices A 1 & A.2. Section 111 Standard of Service A Increase in English as a Second Language program required 3 additional classrooms at the elementary level, 2 at the mid level and 1 at the senior high. B. Increase of 6 Special Education Rooms at the elementary, 5 at the middle school, and 3 at the high school level due to program expansion. C. Native American resource room and early childhood special education . D. Class size reduction dollars has created an increase of 7 additional required teaching classrooms at the elementary level Section1v Inventory of Facilities Updated to reflect addition of 2 relocatable units at Mt. Baker and 4 at ARHS. Section V Pupil Capacity Updated to reflect addition of 2 reklcatable units at Mt Baker and 4 at ARHS. Section VI Capital Construction Plan A One year delay in the Senior High 94 project due to bond proposition failure. B. -One year delay in the Elementary #13 project due to reduced enrollment projections. C. One year delay in the Middle School site purchase due to bond proposition failure. D. Updates cost estimate based on current data for Senior High project E. Updates cost estimate based on current data for Elementary project 3.1 Section VI Impact Fees Single Family Elementary Mid School Sr. High Multi -Family Elementary Mid School Sr. High N Facility Cost Sr. High Elementary Site Cost/Acre Boeckhlndex Match % - State Match % - District District Avenge AV Single Family Muld-Family Debt Sery Tax Rate - GO Bond Int Rate - Sectlon Vill Appendices Aubum School DL*kt No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2000-01 through 2006-07 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CHANGES TO IMPACT FEE DATA ELEMENTS 2001 to 2002 0.3227 0.1525 0.1454 0.0840 0.0266 0.2913 0.1398 0.1703 0.1487 0.0642 Consistent with ting County Ordinance 11621, Student Generation Factors are calculated by the school district based on district records of average actual student generation rates for new developments constructed over the last live years. 0.0626 0.0580 Updated to current SPI schedule. $57,000,000 1 Sr. High Cost Estimate, as of Dec 2001, is computed from completed construction documents as submitted to DOES. $15,000,000 2 Elementary cost estimate from architects recent project experience and OSPI facility records. $138,123 Updated from final cost for recent purchases escalated to anticipated 2004 purchase date. $101.63 $110.32 Updated to current SPI schedule. 53.89% 54.02% Updated to current SPI schedule. 46.11% 45.98% Computed 169,239 $174,311 - Updated from March 2002 tong County Dept of Assessments data. :48,747 $48,949 Updated from March 20021Gng County Dept of Assessments data using weighted $2. $2.24 average. Current Fiscal Year 5.32% % 5.19% Current Rate Appendix Al - Updates Non -Lakeland enrollment projections Appendix A2 - Updates Lakeland enrollment projections. Appendix A3 - Student Generation Survey 3.2 0612/2002 Auburn 6d4o1 DkW No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN n01-02 0wough 2007-08 ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS The Auburn School District uses a modified cohort survival model to project future enrollment for all of the District's operations. Table 11.1 Is an extract from the comprehensive projection model found in Appendix A.2 titled "CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Enrollment Projections". This Table shows the anticipated enrollment for the next six years based on the previous 13 year history of the District under the assumptions set forth in the comprehensive projections, Appendix A.1, and the projection for additional students generated from the Lakeland South area as shown in Appendbc A.2. TABLE ASD ENROLLMENT 11.1 PROJECTIONS Oct 2001 GRADE ACTUAL 01/02 PROJ PROJ PROD PROD PROJ PROJ KDG 848 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/08 06/07 07/08 1 988 884 914 877 890 909 918 2 949 1000 927 940 941 954 950 959 967 3 966 984 1028 970 963 979 972 988 980 4 5 1077 991 1003 1049 988 994 996 1002 K-5 1108 5914 1100 5854 1008 1021 1062 998 1008 5783 5824 5841 5820 5869 6 7 1028 1135 1121 1030. 1039 1079 1015 8 1017 1083 1184 1171 1076 1083 1123 6-8 1004 3049 1033 1092 1195r3292 1082 1088 3251 3397 3398 324,1 3227 9 10 1405 1073 1212 1393 1235 1296 1375 1278 11 1090 1057 1191 1370 1216 1368 1349 12 930 1011 972 1170 1285 1245 1341 9-12 4498 4873 4967 1081 4937 1101 1156 TOTALS 13481 13779 _4768 13948 14188 14070 5089 14152 5124 14220 1 1 3251 4498 4673 I 4768 I 49A7 I 3292 I 3244 I 0411 -3049 3127 3397 33 5 O6H2MM2 Aubum school DbMd No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2001-02 through 2007-08 STANDARD OF SERVICE The School Impact fee Ordinances adopted by King County,. Pierce County, and the City of Aubum indicate that each school district must establish a -Standard of Service' in order to ascertain the overall capacity to house its projected student population. The Superintendent of Public Instruction. establishes square footage 'capacity' guidelines for computing state funding support The fundamental purpose of the SPI guidelines is to provide a vehicle to equitably distribute state matching funds for school construction projects, By default these guidelines . have been used to benchmark the disMcYs cepacRY to house its student population. The SPI guidelines do not make adequate provision for local district program needs, facility configurations, emerging educational reform, or the dynamics of each student's educational program. The Aubum School District Standard of Service addresses those local considerations that require space in excess of the SPI guidelines. The effect on the space requirements for both permanent and relocatable faciffies is shown below for each grade articulation pattam. Conditions that may insult in polendal space needs are provided for information purposes without accompanying computations. OVERVIEW The Aubum School District operates twelve elementary schools housing 5,914 students in grades K through 5. The 846 Kindergarten students attend 12 days throughout the year. Grades 1 through 5 attend on a full day basis. When converted to a full time equivalence the K - 5 enrollment is 5,491. Four middle schools house 3,049 students in grades 6 through 8. The District operates two comprehensive senior high schools and one alternative high school housing 4,498 students In grades 9 through 12. CLASS SIZE The number of pupils per classroom determines the number of classrooms required to house the student population. Class sizes are subject to collective bargaining. Changes to class size agreements can have significant impact on available space. The current pupiUteacher limit across all elementary programs is an average of 26.5 students per teacher. Consistent with this staffing limit, room capacities are set at 26.5 students per room at grades K - 5. At grades 6 -12 the limit is set at 30 pupils per room. The SPI space allocation for each grade articulation level, less the computed reduction for the Aubum School District Standard of Service, determines the Districts capacity to house projected pupil populations. These reductions are shown below by grade articulation level. ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS STRUCTURED LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENTALLY DELAYED SPECIAL EDUCATION The Auburn School District operates a structured teaming program for handicapped students at the elementary school level which currently uses thirteen classrooms to provide for 110 students. The housing requirements for this program are provided for in the SPI space guidelines. No loss of capacity Is expected unless handicapped population grows at a disproportionate rate compared to total elementary population. 7 Aubum S&W DbW No. 409 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2001-02 through 2007-H 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. Thirteen standard classrooms are required to house this program. The housing requirements for this program exceed the SPI space guidelines by slot. standard classrooms. The loss of capacity is expected as growth in program is larger than the total elementary population. Loss of Permanent Capacity 6 rooms (cit 26.5 each = (159) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms ® 26.5 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (159) NATIVE AMERICAN RESOURCE ROOM The Auburn School Distrld operates one resource room to support the education of Native American students at the elementary level. One standard classroom is fully dedicated to serve these students. Loss of Permanent Capacity 1 room @ 26.5 each = (27) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each = 0 HEAD START Total Capacity Loss (27) The Auburn School District operates a Head Start program for approximately 108 youngsters in six sections of 112 day in length. The program is housed at Evergreen Heights Elementary School and utilizes three standard elementary classrooms and auxiliary office space. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 3 rooms @ 26.5 each = (g0) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (80) EARLY CHILDHOOD SPECIAL EDUCATION The Auburn School District operates a pre-school program for handicapped youngsters below age five. This program Is housed at seven different elementary schools and currently uses seven standard classrooms. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 7 rooms @ 26.5 each = (186) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (186) READINQLABS The Auburn School District operates a program for students needing remediation and additional language arts instruction. These programs utilize non-standard classroom spaces if available in each elementary school. Four elementary schools do not have non-standard rooms available, thus they are housed in a standard classroom. The housing requirements for this program are not .provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 4 rooms 4@ 26.5 each = (106) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms 1@ 26.5 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (106) Aubum Sana DisM No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2001-02 through 2007-08 STANDARD OF SERVICE MUSIC ROOMS The district elementary music programs require one acoustically modified classroom at each elementary school for music instruction. The housing requirements are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 12 rooms ® 26.5 each = (318) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (318) ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE PROGRAM The Auburn School District operates a pullout program at the elementary school level for students learning English as a second language. This program requires nine standard classrooms that are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 9 rooms @ 26.5 each = (239) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms Q 26.5 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (239) SECOND GRADE TOSA PROGRAM The Auburn School District provides a TOSA reading specialist program for seven 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 seven standard classrooms that are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 7 roomscQ 26.5 each = (186) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 26.5 each = 0 Total Capacity toss (186) ELEMENTARY LEARNING SPECIALIST PROGRAM The Auburn School District provides a teaming specialist program to increase literacy skills for first and second graders. This program model has been created from the 1-728 funds and currently has the specialist going into existing teacher classrooms and working with groups of students. As space becomes available, the district will -provide these teachers with classrooms. Aubum School District No. 4o3 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2001-02 through 2007-06 STANDARD OF SERVICE MIDDLE SCHOOLS STRUCTURED LEARNING SPECIAL EDUCATION The Aubum School District operates two structured learning programs at the middle school level for students with profound disabilities. The housing requirements for this program are provided in the SPI space allocations. ACCESS SPECIAL EDUCATION The Auburn School District provided a transition program for students with behavioral disorders. The program is housed at one of the middle schools and uses one classroom. The housing requirements for this program are provided in the SPI space allocations. SPECIAL EDUCATION RESOURCE ROOMS The Auburn School District operates a resource room program for each grade at the middle school level. This is to accommodate special education students, needing remedial instruction to address their specific disabilities. Three classrooms per school (twelve total) are required to provide for approximately 250 students. The housing requirements for this program are not entirely provided for in the SPI space guidelines. MIDDLE SCHOOL COMPUTER LABS' The Auburn School District operates a minumum of onecomputer labs at each middle school. This program utilizes a standard classrooms per middle school. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 4 rooms @ 30 each = (120) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (120) ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE The Auburn School District operates a pullout program at the middle school level for students leaming English as a second language. This program requires four standard classrooms that are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 4 rooms. @ 30 each = (120) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (120) ROOM UTILIZATION The Auburn School District provides a comprehensive middle school program that includes elective options in special interest areas. Facilities to accommodate special interest activities are not amenable to standard classroom usage. The district averages 95% utilization of all available teaching stations. SPI Report #3 dated 10123/01 identifies 158 teaching stations available in the mid-level facilities. The utilization pattem results in a loss of approximately 8 teaching stations. Loss of Permanent Capacity 8 rooms @ 30 each = {240) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (240) 1 _ 10 Auburn School DlsM No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2001-02 through 2007-08 STANDARD OF SERVICE SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SENIOR HIGH COMPUTER LABS The Auburn School bistrict operates two computer labs at each of the senior high schools. This program utilizes two standard classrooms high schools and one at West Auburn. The housing requirements for this program are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 5 rooms @ 30 each = (150) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms ® 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (150) ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE The Auburn School District operates a pullout program at both comprehensive high schools for students leaming English as a second language. This program requires three standard classrooms that are not provided for in the SPI space guidelines. Loss of Permanent Capacity 3 rooms ® 30 each = (g0) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms (c� 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (90) STRUCTURED LEARNING PROGRAM The Auburn School District operates two struotured Teaming classrooms for 23 students with profound disabilities. The housing requirements for this program are provided in the SPI space guidelines. SPECIAL EDUCATION RESOURCE ROOMS The Auburn School District operates a resource room program at the senior high. level for special education students requiring instruction to address their specific teaming disabilities. The current senior high school program requires thirteen classrooms to provide for approximately 375 students. The SPI space guidelines provide for one of the thirteen teaching stations. Loss of Permanent Capacity 12 rooms C 30 each = (360) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (360) PERFORMING ARTS CENTERS Auburn High School includes 25,000 square feet used exclusively for a Performing Arts Center. The SPI Inventory includes this space when computing unhoused student capacity. This space was not intended for nor is it usable for classroom instruction. It was constructed to provide a community center for the performing arts. Using SPI capacity guidelines, 25,000 square feet computes to 208 unhoused students or 8.33 classrooms. Loss of Permanent Capacity 8.33 rooms ® 30 each = (Y50) 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 11 Aubum sdrod District No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2001-02 through 2007-0& STANDARD OF SERVICE not amenable to standard classroom usage. The district averages 90% utilization of all available teaching stations. SPI Report #3 dated 10/23/01 identifies 150 teaching stations available in the senior high facilities. The utilization pattern results in a loss of approximately 15 teaching stations. Loss of Permanent Capacity 15 rooms @ 30 each = (450) Loss of Temporary Capacity .0 rooms @ 30 each = 0 Total Capacity Loss (450) STANDARD OF SERVICE COMPUTED TOTALS ELEMENTARY Loss of Permanent Capacity = (1,140) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 Total Capacity Loss (1,140) MIDDLE SCHOOL Loss of Permanent Capacity = (480) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 Total Capacity Loss (480) SENIOR HIGH Loss of Permanent Capacity = (1,300) . Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 Total Capacity Loss (1,300) TOTAL Loss of Permanent Capacity = (2,919) Loss of Temporary Capacity 0 . Total Capacity Loss (2,919) 12 OW12 M Atin n School Disblct No. 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 200142 #Waugh 2M48 INVENTORY OF FACILITIES Table IVA shows the current inventory of permanent district facilities and their SPI rated capacities. Table IV.2 shows the number and location of each relocatable unit by school. The district uses relocatable facilities to: 1) provide Interim housing in school attendance areas uniquely impacted by increasing school populations that would otherwise require continual redistricting, 2) make space available for changing program requirements and offerings determined by unique student needs, and 3) provide housing to cover our needs until permanent facilities can be financed and constructed. Relocatabie facilities are deemed to be interim, stop gap measures that often place undesirable stress on the existing physical plants. Core facilities, p.e. gymnasiums, restrooms, kitchens, labs, lockers, libraries, etc.) are not of sufficient Size or quantity to handle the increased school population served by adding relocatable classrooms. TABLE PERMANENT FACILITIES IV.1 @ SPI Rated Capacity (January 2002) A. Elementary schools a C. Building 2001-02 2002-03 . 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 Washington 553 553 553 553 553 553 553 Terminal Park 441 441 441 441 441 441 441 . Dick Scobee 618 618 618 618 618 618 dib Pioneer 449 449 449 449 449 449 449 Chinook 552 552 552 552 552 552 552 Lea Hill 498 498 498 498 498 498 498 Gildo Rey 596 596 596 596 598 596 596 Ever Heights 512 512 512 512 512 512 512 Alpac 554 554 554 554 554 554 554 Lake View 685 685 685 685 685 685 685 Hazelwood 639 639 639 639 639 639 639 Ilalko 648 648 648 848 648 648 648 ELEM CAPACITY 8,745 8,745 8,745 8,745 6,745 8,745 6,74 Building 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 ,2007-08 Cascade 897 897 897 897 897 897 897 Olympic 960 960 960 960 960 960 960 Alternative JH 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Rainier 902. 902 902 902 902 902 902 M. Baker 903 903 903 903 903 903 903 US CAPACITY 3,702 3,702 3,702 3,702 3,702 3,702 3,702_ Building 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 20W-07 2007-08 West Auburn Auburn Auburn Riverside 250 2,447 1,503 250 2,447 1,503 250 2,447 1,503 250 2,447 1,503 250 2,447 1 503 250 2,447 11503 250 2,447 1,503 SH CAPACITY 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,200 COMB'D CAPACITY 14,647 14,847 141847 14,647 14,647 14,647 14,847 ^. _ 13 Auburn School DWM No 408 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2001412 through 2007-08 INVENTORY OF FACILITIES TABLE IV.2 TEMPORARYIRELOCATABLE FACILITIES INVENTORY (May2002 2002-03 ElemeMa Location 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 Washington 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Terminal Park 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Dick Scobee 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Pioneer 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Chinook 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Lea Hill 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Gildo Rey 6 6 8 8 B 8 Ever Heights 0 0 0 0 0 0 .8 0 Alpac 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Lake View 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Hazelwood 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 Ilaiko 3 3 1 3 1 3 13 3 3 TOTAL UNITS 28 28 28 30 30 30 30 TOTAL CAPACITY 742 742 742 795 795 795 795 Middle School Location 2001-02 2002-03 200344 2004-05 2005-M 1 20W-07 2007-08 Cascade 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Olympic 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rainier 5 5 5 5 7 7 7 ML Baker 2 2 6 8 6 7 7 TOTAL UNITS 7 7 11 11 13 14 14 TOTAL CAPACITY 210 210 330 330 390 420 420 Sr. High School Location 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 200405 2005-06 2008417 F2007-08 West Auburn 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,515 Auburn 12 12 16 18 12 8 0 2 Auburn Riverside 12 12 18 18 12 12 8 TOTAL UNITS 24 _ 74 32 38 24 20 10 TOTAL CAPACITY 720 720 - 960 1,080 720 600 300 COMBINED TOTAL UNITS 1 59 1 59 71 77 67 84 54 COMBINED TOTAL CAPACITY 1,672 1,672 1 2,032 2,205 1905 1,815 1,515 — 14 oammm W 21 BA Auburn School District No. 406 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2001-02 through 2007-08 PUPIL CAPACITY While the Auburn School District uses the SPI inventory of permanent facilities as the data from which to determine space needs, the Districts educational program requires more space than tht provided for under the formula. This additional square footage is converted to numbers of pupils Section III, Standard of Service. The District's capacity Is adjusted to reflect the need for additior space to house ifs programs. Changes in the capacity of the district recognize new unfunded facilities and the elimination of the facility that formerly housed the Alternative Jr. High. The combined effect of these adjustments is shown on Line B in Tables VA and V.2 below. Table V. shows the Disticts capacity with relocatable units included and Table V.2 without these units. Table VA Capacity 1 WITH relocatables 2001-02 1 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-08 1 2008-07 2007-08 A. A.1 SPI Capacity SPI Capacity -New Elem 14,647 14,647. 14,647 14,647 14,647 650 16,797 16,797 A.2 SPI Capacity -New Sr. High 11,688 11,688 13,394 13,394 1,500 D. ASD Enrollment B. C. Capacity Adjustments Net Capacity 1,28 1,28 92 54 1,498 1,588 1,888 .13,360 13,360 13,720 13,893 15,299 15,209 14,909 D. ASD Enrollment 13,461 13,779 13,948 14,186 14,070 14,152 14,220 E. ASD Surplus/Dencit (101) (419) (229) (294) 1,230 1,058 690 CAPACITY ADJUSTMENTS Exdude Aft JH Include Rebeatable Exclude SOS 1 (40)(40) 1,672 ,919 1,672 ,919 (40) 2,032 ,919 (40) 2,205 ,9191 (40) 1,905 3,363) (40) 1,815 (3-3fnl (40) 1,515 n 363 Tofal Adjustments (1,287) (1,287) (927) 9541 (1,498) (1,588) (1,888) Table V.2 J / Capacity WITHOUT relocatables 1 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005.06 2008-07 2007-08 A. A.1 A.2 B. C. SPI Capacity SPI Capacity -New Elem SPI Capadly-New Sr. High Capacity Adjustments Not Capacity 14,647 ,959 14,647 2,959 14,647 ,959 14,647 -(2.959) 14,647 650 1.6w ,403 16,797 3,403 16,797 3,403 11,688 11,688 11,688 11,688 13,394 13,394 13,394 D. ASD Enrollment 13,461 13,779 13,948 14,186 14,070 14,152 14,220 E ASD Surplus/Deficit (1,773) (2,091) (2,261) (2,499) (675) (757) (825) CAPACITY ADJUSTMENT Exclude Aft JH Exclude SOS 12 Total Adjustments (40) 919 (2,959) (40) ,919 (2,959) (40) 919 (2,959) (40) 919 (2,959) (40) 3,363 (3,403) (40) 3,363 (3,403) (40) 3,363 (3,403) J/ New facilities shown n in 20040s are not funded under the current Capital Facilities Pian. 2/ The Standard of Service represents 19% of SPI capacity. When new facilities are added the Standard Of Service computations are increased by 15%. 21 Students beyond the Capacity are aceomodated in non -classroom spaces (commons, library, theater) which violates the Districrs standard of service. 16 asn2MM Auburn School District No. 409 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2001.92 nuough 2907-42 CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN The formal process used by the Board to address current and future facility needs began in 1974 with the formation of a communitywide 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 lioc citizens committee to pick up from the work of the first and address the needs of the District for subsequent years. The work of this committee was published in the document titled 'Directions for the Nineties'. In 1995 the Board commissioned a third Ad Hoc citizens committee to make recommendations for improvements to the Districts programs and physical facilities. The committee recommendations are published in the document titled 'Education Into fie Twenty -First Century - - A Community Involved'. The 1995 Ad Hoc committee recommended the District develop plans for the implementation, funding, and deployment of technology throughout the District's programs. The 1996 Bond proposition provided funding to enhance the capacity of each facility to accommodate technological applications. The 1998 Capital Levy provided funding to further deploy technology at a level sufficient to support program requirements in every classroom and department. In addition to the technology needs of the District the Ad Hoc committee recognized the District must prepare for continued student enrollment growth. As stated in their report She District must pursue an appropriate high school site as soon as possible.' The Ad Hoc recommendation included commentary that the financing should be timed to maintain consistent rates of assessment. A proposition was approved by the voters on April 28, 1998 that Is providing $8,000,000 over sic years to address some of the technology needs of the District, and $5,000,000 to provide funds to acquire school sites. During the 1997-98 school year a Joint District Citizen's Ad Hoc Committee was appointed by the Auburn and Dieringer School Boards to make recommendations on how best to serve the school population that will come from an area that includes a large development known as Lakeland South. Lakeland South is immediately adjacent to the southern boundary of the Auburn School District. On June 16, 1998 the Ad Hoc Committee presented its recommendation at a joint meeting of the Auburn and Dieringer Boards of Directors. On June 22, 1998 the Auburn School Board adopted Resolution No. 933 authorizing the process to initiate the adjustment of the boundaries of the District in accordance with the Ad Hoc Committee's recommendation. On June 23, 1998 the Dieringer School Board adopted a companion Resolution No. 24-97-98 authorizing the process to initiate the adjustment,of the boundaries in accordance with the Ad Hoc Committee's recommendation. These actions resulted in the transfer of an area from Dieringer to Auburn containing most of the Lakeland South development and certain other undeveloped properties. Development in this area is progressing at an aggressive rate. The District is projecting an additional 1260 students within the sbc year period including the Lakeland area. This increase requires the construction of a new high school, a new elementary school, and the acquisition of a new middle school site during the.six year window. A new middle school is anticipated just beyond the six year time frame for this pian. 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 regarding the following: a. A review of the conclusion and recommendations of 1985 and 1995 Ad Hoc Committees related to aocommodating high school enrollment growth. This Includes the review of possible financing plans for new facilities b. Develop recommendations for accommodating high school enrollment growth for the next 10 years if a new senior high school is not built. 18 1/ 1 J 1/ Audra Schad DMict No. 40a CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2001-02 &""h 2007-09 CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN The table below illustrates the current capital construction plan for the next six years. The exact timelines are wholly dependent on the rate of growth in the school age population. 2001-08 Capital Construction Plan (May 2002 Funded Projected Fund Project Timelines Project as of Cost Source Jun -02 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 1 06-07 07-08 All Facilities Yes $37,268,354 1996 XX Modernization Bonds All Facilities - 1998 Technology Yes $8,000,000 6 Year XX XX XX XX Modernization Cap Levy Impact Portables Yes $700,000 Fees XX XX XX XX Property Purchase Surplus New Elementary Yes $2,800,000 Property XX School Sale Property Purchase New Middle No $5,000,000 XX School New Elem #13 No $15,000,000 XX gyp( open New Sr. High No $57,000,000 XX XX XX XX XX openF 1/ These funds may be secured through local bond issues, sale of real property, impact fees, and state matching funds. The District currently is not eligible for state assistance at the elementary school level. 19 06/1 MM �HN cscs cs! ;° � �— -4 \ ■qq �\2�kk e§. . §l.., !CL9 a".-°8 °. �k§ ■2§ . ��� - I �� C k ¢ !!!22■ j�/\ )���■s 41,3:ul . 2- $ // . ! w!U) k.is27 � �— -4 \ ■qq �\2�kk > .. — m i k #Rm/#q §7; . an IRE k«k ■ � § § l� § § � k /k = Lb §22 fj \ g}2 !■U .z�..LL ui LL1■ O J O m Q z' W o F 81 „ W J 4 a g O m a N v N qm S O pp pp n r {� tt�p NGO C i' 00 S ♦N � O N O t7�mW0 vl�aa0 ;$a g N _@ N � 's J O IL O L U 10 N O W syn n aC S W � X W M O nq Vf W S C O W 'i h SO h m ho vt8 N N r J N W OS O O O yN� pp mm ��pp ^N S'Go m R I�l W� 32M W N N NN tNgo OIo V n 2 `0 ro E n q N O N O pp m O p H m l`7 N 0 O C, vCL WNNO vi N M 99 �N tl of LL LL o y v c O N N W W 21 yW9oHarg W "v V agt ? E 22 ;Iui 8 8 8 4S a N0ygel miw Wi a3v omeO'a1 ! c lef r aaa tWiEi�a goo= Co(/d�a X04 �yy$���3 NE N N .@ �g N (��Bpp y `d N EEE LL 6 N W a q Z < y b N a F LL X ! G v U U a eel'] e e1 -4111 �a o `d U. > fZ= CeU.G L X X C LL LLLL E n li O acs V) V% (� o �wCOLJ- Q yiSS j y WO a toi v�iU) axle-12*9t wm2 o 0,ri N qm S [M - (J M C 1Y � O N O g _@ N � 's O IL O C O 1O w O N l g OW1 O A N � O j NMN M �WW WWW S CL' CL os11=002 Appendix A.1 - Student Enrollment Projections osnz AM Auburn School District #408 Student Enrollment Projections October 2001 Introduction The projective techniques give some consideration to historical and current data as a basis for forecasting the future. In addition, the `projector, must make certain assumptions about the operant variables within the data being used These assumptions are "judgmental' by definition. Forecasting can be defined as the extrapolation or logical extension from history to the future, or from the known to the unknown. The attached tabular data reviews the history of student enrollment, sets out some quantitative assumptions, and provides projections based on these numerical factors. The projection logic does not attempt to weigh the individual sociological, psychological, economic, and political factors that are present in any demographic analysis and projection. The logic embraces the assumptions that whatever these individual factors have been in the past, are present today, and will be in the future. It fiuther moderates the impact of singular factors by averaging data over thirteen years and six years respectfully. The results provide a trend, which reflects a long (13 year) and a short (6 year) base from to extrapolate. Two methods of estimating the number of kindergarten students have been used. The first uses the average increase over the past 13 and 6 -year time frame and adds it to each succeeding year. The second derives what the average percentage Auburn kindergartners have been of the live births in King County for the past 5 years and uses this to project the subsequent four years. The degree to which the actuals deviate from the projections can only be measured after of the fact. This deviation provides a point of departure to evaluate the effectivene assumptions and logic being used to calculate th late future projections. Monitoring deviation is critical to the viability and credibility of the projections derived by these techniques. Tables Table 1— Thirteen year History of October 1 Enrollments — page 3 The data shown in this table is the baseline information used to project future enrollment. This data shows the past record of enrollment in the district on October l of each year. Table 2 — Historical Factors Used in Projections - page 4 This table shows the three basic factors derived form the data in Table 1. These factors have been used in the subsequent projections. The three factors are: 1. Factor 1— Average Pupil Change Between Grade Levels This factor is sometimes referred to as the "holding power" or "cohort survival." It is a measure of the number of pupils gained or last as they move from one grade level to the next. 2. Factor 2 - Average Pupil Change by Grade Level This factor is the average change at each grade level over the 13 or &year period. 3. Factor 3 —Auburn School District Kindergarten Enrollment as a Function of King County Live Births. This factor calculates what percent each kindergarten class was of the King County live births in the 5 previous years. From this information has been extrapolation of the kindergarten pupils expected for the next 4 years. Table 3 - This set of tables, found on pages 5 through 13 utilizes the above mentioned variables and generates several projections. a Table 3.13 (pg 5) — shows a projection based on the 13 -year average gain in kindergarten (Factor 2) and the 13 -year average change between grade levels (Factor 1). The data is shown for the district as a whole. o Table 3.6 (pg 5) — shows a projection using the same scheme as Table 3.13 except it shortens the historical to only the most recent 6 years. o Table 3.13A and 3.6A (pg 6) — uses the same factors above except Factor 3 is substituted for Factor 2. The kindergarten rates aro derived from the King County live births instead of the average gain. o Tables 3E.13, 313.6, 3E. 13A, 3E.6A (pg 7) — breaks out the K-5 grades from the district projection. Summary level data is provided for percentage gain and pupil gain by grade articulation. o. Tables 3M.13, W6, 3M 13A, 3M.6A (pg 8) — breaks out the 6-8 grades from the district projection. Summary level data is provided for percentage gain and pupil gain by grade articulation. o Tables 3SR13, 3SR6, 3SR13A, 3SR6A (pg 9)—breaks out the 9-12 grades from the district projection. Summary level data is provided for percentage gain and pupil gain by grade articulation. o Table 4 (pg 10) — Collects the four projection models by grade group for ease of comparison o Table, 5 (pgs 11-13) — shows how well each projection model performed when compared with actual enrollments. Data is provided in both number and percent formats for the past 13 years. .S ._ Imanfin 11HU s M --a�emmnmw�; Cq All Ail 11 o� "Rai 191 Ago 41 � d Q Q 0 It Me R13 Ail H gill III ao $c� R J °p Cid Rim EPA 19 t yq t� M Rig 11 SII R v I h I II IMR1 2H 99N a map�Ymm �mm mmw E a 0 4 LL t N 6 0 0 z W 9 � vt Hill 11111 I m o N O^-----------.m-.m-- � �M N fYV fml` N te'N �N p N fV W O Ir u WR >- W ^ m N co F cc :co�rc `m LL �> n n^ n vJ aD a0 O Q G! O 52 O O ld ad o o v .i e v v .r o vi ad p o ad o 0 o r: CL a: o ed l: a6 o n o a: n n n RE Cwoom.ow�; ^�NNeJ." y'- a. m- �.p..m��v p4tUpli7vv2M6§gm mem oy��m�a�Ny p� aoyN agy AB I - - - — - m — - — ad ad — >'"ul m A Id G O• 3 ^� NPlvmmnmwa^SV! 'n ly ��33333333330 3 y T� � �m .-N17vN mAmw^ $ 4g4 S p a� m A p # 8`aa OIR OeA-�N{AO Yb •D_ ul lJ N G Id OI v � a LL vIYsNlrlvNmsm was LL CS a 38aeOa�lV Y b 8 aD ^YO C oa`a lRn A10 NO �IA na�t7 �� m gyy� w N 4K g Y N LL a 'yr= — N 11 T` CL ��`�a^o�$�w'3SF1�g rc6F:n'n��$a'nF3o Q yy ugngg �di�Sduioi ye_ '� - IL g gg »_�Q3 �?admif'a za�o��.. CL .bbiv��n �N d a°.-e�m�A� a�mpm�dmsg� 05n�8$ gp g a 'a��Z6wwadSn''=�oR ay$�y 05^ga�o2bd'r'p''�i ebp mp .- N m eq� G qN � N a`0 10 O W' Q 0 y O fV �' O" � wt iFff n 0 O O 10 0 O O df o O' O 0 lV a^ Om tpV p♦p ^ p � p Z:. O N Q p �$j a CL Vt �Qi` a: 6w r N IL r d � 0 N m CL rr IL O a' O y� 7f63f��d6^e3n� F W�3A� a aaneaiaoKl?f o WO a Z 09 a� yy��yyrr Qg �8� �6B6MoSi 'o �� LLI310 i IL Z W F3� W ao da63OaN2Si MIxefdebbog�'go 2J ���`211 m epi g. g f F' U D ISLib�d8ib�23o'25�08�, 6w r S a N IL Kle m rr IL ass25i$r$d y� 7f63f��d6^e3n� W�3A� a aaneaiaoKl?f o Ix$ del�G�$�3a�S23d 'o 3t6d��'o2So�a'N'�� i IL . IL 2L 26 0' $ w 23 env 2S w 2J ���`211 m epi g. g f S a a I E a 'a a 1 55991§1 N 0aDa000 � spy '®8 O � n 0 � � N N a nwa a as In Pan 4 naa'o��w o �dbb� � � �diS00 C3 � a w 6 a 36d3o� w m o Pwf 'NgON o Q �NWYtD w �! G • a I E a J() �'aW��1m Q P 7 O m m ' m a'a N &'a da�� d� a x iA 2S C a p ac a N . �? $a$e7S�C d5 25 Ka v CL Fi� 2 a,^_o'iddom a?m'wd�C yy a,^. Bi 2iac°$ a��3s�c� O W aa'w gggg '$dc°Dio 1O a5 OG ��C aa3i gg55��gg 5t 86�K}Pq K3, egg �'i O a •- Z a9 yy no �� o.. y�T6o a6 W V a ia ¢$ m � o Z W 0 a��7Gr.m �i gg 7R _ a"o�L xx aoo$�N KnoZ3��' gg W a WG a I$ � - a 2i73o �� an12S$ n� �n23�sr $ �v a fav V K n o K o�� v_ G a' a a a _ IL ao� 'rc$�$Fd3i crcQG73$f' OL C KK rcaH s AL a n �8IL s� � � � �ss�$�3 � g v :a -n�� a • :< a' < ..<o.-it ' `o w mai Omnm�a P w �ai Omnm�a f- maai �' - m gmnma 0 r n aa� d p0- CL aa� e� 25 Q p�m' CL af�3 a�wmRpjQa K ` o a at'�O6 N k 9 y � at7Clm'Y'OO 5� Y CL O aR IL C f7 d (V fV� isgfH� a�`f�2S8� a'?;$o a'i�v232G2f La���g� aa�3N$� aa�sg °0a�9$ (mp ppmm�� yt ' m aN�O qqm ��o' �� i3 o f�f�A�O'ro SBR.-� OOeq� ��"'�� SOA a �O Ir 9� £1 a e L IL 0 a ry a $ o y�gQ 0 S n y O g q1♦q W �N000'f IL ��..r Yi og'N d0���.. O a N� IL 0 ?i O -. toms o� aA aA IWL 'mN� �'e73^b R�0�6. 0.CL wCL nGC $ S apv af�i3fimclig ga �� �� `¢ �i� pw m d IL :a `� IL a ' o w N~ N a m s W a w o N FO f ebb Q= a� q C2.N- O N n a (O c i dl K R 9 is E 'a W O a a ' a a � o � a jL 0: a m d a _ K IL alm � IL a J Q O A 013331 a: 4 a a i3 M E 5 I 4 6 Y 0 r n Z 3 z vt xx� o^ c ^ �aggm m �pAl3 ZR � x 0000 q O O R^ r 0 h RJR G :m o ^ It x�ZR 3 go T t O O G G �o e N g N Vt odv clo eJ M X X Vdd. H 0000 �o�rF'i8^Fr'18 22SS r�AF1 g b m b 2 K c$C$a V m agal U zz r addad k MIRI � m a a a a a * 10;Rxx l qm 0 o c o �aggm m �pAl3 R x 2�{(0000 m q O O R^ r 0 h RJR G :m o ^ It x�ZR 3 go T t O O G G y F e N g N Vt odv clo eJ o c o 0 H N lV lV H �o�rF'i8^Fr'18 a 2 $ $ r�AF1 F1A m c$C$a N N F �tRN N m U zz r addad W .>aaa Ur U M Fro. E ^a *oao orie vi �aggm m �pAl3 R x ddsd �o �nS3nIR 0 h RJR G :m o ^ It x�ZR 3 go O O G G 8 $ Vt odv clo eJ o c o 0 H N lV lV H a 2 $ $ o m F N N F QN IR 16 . W Ill Ill ul H W U zz r addad E ^a �n D l9i$ 8 x ddsd aoaa 0 It x�ZR 3 go O O G G QQ m Vt tai o c o 0 W flEfl—wL aWw aIW E ^a ^e a m a N n N b x (d C) ^ gg��y c c o 0 r r stag Cj tV ^ ZS Q 1�1 W V n q 0 W ^ Gt0 �O is G O G O ci N G O r O r O X 3All Elivi �j 66� ^ C ^ G o a a 14 G 17 Pl o NG P C` & r G O C C r am �Hsai it B� gte,8n O O O 44 N N P P P P •:�uiduiui � �Mn U r'cr 'adddd a d d d d ^e a m a x 91t; N O c c o 0 r r 6�e Cj tV ^ ZS Q 1�1 W V n q 0 W S� v�vm G O G O r O X 3All IA ^ C ^ G o a a 14 aft Sj A r G O C C 5 5n Ego All gte,8n ^ ^ ^ 44 N N P P P P •:�uiduiui 'adddd U r r r ^e a m a x 91t; N c c o 0 r 6�e Cj tV ^ ZS Q 1�1 W V n O Or v G O G O r X jt N n N ^ C ^ G o a a 14 t a r " �oa^�eo e S gte,8n tsOOfJ!�� 44 N N P P P P 0 ^e a m a x 91t; N c c o 0 r 6�e Q 1�1 W V n O Or v O O G O n t a r " ZR tsOOfJ!�� 44 N N P P P P 0 r� ^ � ui ui ui u1 r 17 t7 n19 U r r r 4 d d d d ^e a m a ���0000 aR aR a e v v � ZS 8ifa �� F mom e EE 6 ���0000 aR aR a e v v � ZS 8ifa �� F mom e �fi of o"oo m w M Ne g "M a O !t i1. R; y��j I� m *10 ` ".1, " csd—— aR aR a • v v � ZS 8ifa �� F mom e �fi a n} h f 3 x X53=93� vi v iri d Q Ll Imp- �vvf Ili���� all 7 m �WiE 1-n 0 CL IL Q � m F n -W n crrrar aaaaa Ne g "M a O !t i1. R; y��j I� m *10 ` ".1, " csd—— aR aR a e v v � ZS 8ifa �� F mom e �fi N � FQ^ ui W ui ui M ..r vi v iri d Q Imp- Ili���� all 7 m �WiE 1-n 0 CL IL Ne g "M a O !t i1. R; y��j I� m *10 ` ".1, " csd—— E a' O a• v v � 8ifa �� F �fi FQ^ ui W ui ui nenm �m E a' O a• Appendix A.2 - CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Enrollment Projections 06/,2J2002 7 Na NO o00 ado P W m m M O) C W 0 O LL 0 C M m w a O al N N A N O `o O' 9 n 7 r Z O m a o V o of Ol � � w c w m a m (00 o a + O. s a ~ o '. raaammao � oFL- S� a' a'12 UO 2. �,o �2v c C w F- N Na NO o00 ado P W m m W FtlO O) C oUoa .c 0 O LL 0 C gY 3 z o 0 0 w0 C o 3 c w al V o Z o " N O `o O' 9 n 7 r Z O m a o V o of Ol � � w c w m a m (00 o a + O. s a ~ o '. raaammao � oFL- S� a' a'12 UO 2. �,o �2v c C w .v o w C) 9 o =1� E E (9Y C to G "a � N Y m = 0 dl E a Ex'LCL I'D— c W cZUU m9 C Co 0 o NRINM o o� C O Q U O toPN7w d m d ri "sr-- -- 'Of Na NO o00 w m m w P09 O'a 0. mm W mb m W sN �0.'0q N '. raaammao It C4 m o-tot, to co poPtomm Co 0 o NRINM o o� toPN7w a o W m m m m bO � �W'+�. �N W G O (a cow A •N -r4 A V a p W m W m 0 4 0 0 N m N q � p0c°mmm000mm�mnM Gomm mm o'0���- cMWNa�-.�mm.-� b.b ��o^gw�w..p�t�cb1ND N�4'!�A O Q m W N MNr,o m Y3 ; `� O �m 0) N0 O ON wtn O O N a o m ai � amo mw d, C4 a 'a to w Oro a 'O.'O In V a s in co In M m Q3 a a c[ C a a b a a a tfp� Q000{7mf0 N�`3a3mm10raa 73OMNO�P �Q IL W W O anDm ~Y+ �SJS 9Y00 r- 4c PmaD w w w.�-�.`-� YYY ^Yam — to�' to :3p, q,t W m W O' O' MM Ny N P mzi % p,p C� E m m n m N' C s P If dam N O' ene uaNm er- N eEe� 1, IC eIea3g'eit aGoom mw000�s O 0O v v oao WCD o ~�N�oo, oM w J 'oM{a° w 3 w �oo cMl:~ o joom�p�o1pnow V pccoi W 0� co P. 000o Ncno V040 o !' 94 WN 2 �No'17N� N to m ro � W � �N (7 Y wr C% Y ■IL 0 LU kp0 CO a ¥ A !%K§ u ,.Is= - - § 2-e�-§§s&�■§;2• ° �R & � coo 2 §)§k))(§§kiCq 40 ]§2 ) §2§}§§§2E§§)B§k/= §22§§(22((§(§BB/§ IM §(k2Cb §!2§id22o2MC4 §E)/§§§§§\ƒ(dE\§B ©a°k/§§$/m §§§S§§;;coa . wco M §Elft§'§§■®§k 00 amamm maw wco ~§A\ m _ §2§§G�§§&§}2E§(§ 2 3. 2 § ■■ ma Go wGogo ! . $ § ct .ate§§B52SR2to 0 . ! = - mon L ��3` a GoM Q.#5 #� 0_..�f/!G/§`B§ Cs ) us 2_2§��_»..�.Q_=�)} e do ,.Is= - - § ' abomo�m.- .eine vmo� m;RN a w m m m m W m 0 W ,'N., m N N N t7 •' ON m In to N Nm wto m o �m^mamomam a�vm �OOa Fjoo CL �aC4r, 00 ,vv cmia4)ton CD O mmmmm co comm 000 mIV ae N O -a N to O to O to m h Cl) m O v 0 N ` a N n m 0 O p N n W m m m m m m m W N r �nm m N Nn 0 m •-m V o a m� amD m W OD m m� � •' � � N 7 a aO m m o yypp.� m N m O n 0 m cq `•^. Q aN0 anD m W m m 0) m C4 A m N m N n 7 IV O O g� 0.O m O N m v C4 m N N p a Y o a 0 GCI am0 O m m W m m '' er- ' CD V. Z H U G W W a �y v'r ~j& o:n co w Go O t7 m,�minGmq� tmPN0 O ^� O V 0 a a O m m m m a b m W N � o LL F C V JQ _775 '�e o m Q0 0) Go �m m d'mm cm to mba q�m%a 7S 2 a O m m m m m m m O O h N N 0 of m g W a ci v O'omnmtnntnm �mnom ��mmmm 0 mCOaom 0. m ` m�o�omtn°D: m�M, C94 m�O1m In", m m q° O m n N t() 3 n ? too In Yf m O {.t b � a as ac oimpmm vtob4` a0n �� me aq a f0 m m m m m ± O n a W M j 4 a o to m .- m m N to .- b to n v n N , m •- .� n �}�ao oam�o� o'oo o�tm�na om'�, o Ina ti ti 12'd a� 2 O c c K N Q N m 0v mm o.~. NI`o OnmOmq O 7Uotbmm�O�� 000 OO W C O� r Q m Q G C � �a o w0 o qN Nmvvo mnm mO�N t - a � r r r � O n IL I v n 4 X ZRitZft ititZfto O •O 09 :Cm NV*I: vvivNW�m o I� a7 C � h ` {� 10 G PJ �T O h N Ca t4 N t0 Ol v a m N .r.. � o dm o A sey>ma�oovoim��twt oaa�Y®rciovi���mom CL CL W mmIQ a�� QC>O� �e'+ Y�N�namm�maee.�� m a W Y N M Y'm m n m Q O r r O Fa Y�N�nvwmnma���F I v n 4 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O •O g O N m O O a0 0 N 0 0 0 m N •C y' � I� a7 C � h ` {� 10 G PJ �T O h N Ca t4 N t0 Ol v a m N .r.. � o dm o A sey>ma�oovoim��twt oaa�Y®rciovi���mom QC>O� �e'+ Y�N�namm�maee.�� Y N M Y'm m n m Q O r r I v n 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O •O g O Y O N m N N 7 m O m N •? O l7 O '7 Pl aD fV m .6 (V 6 1A � T o. m O �e'+ Y�N�namm�maee.�� I v n 4 - �!k§§\ ■aQ )§ © 3-° ■§;. �� C)%f j %/)k\3k )§§� ; .` uoAL of 2f IE/W §�9) !a co�l�j\ao ;;|e;aa mm " ^ nlsa; . _0 !§. . ! % ■CO _ 00 E°q a � \ LL §k ! \ 2 Stood R` C6 b ».co © 3-° ■§;. �� C)%f j )§§� ; .` uoAL of IE/W §�9) !a mm -§CC `§ LU . _0 !§. . ! % ■CO _ !/ | � C4 a 0 ^ k! a a� ')0 -co C4 co . . - #. . 7R ' ! . ■ 2| }0# a� � §■± ) o LL - G�■ §(J§,0) !®a, I|�)- $a;2k !§ £2IaJ ■-- . . . — .. E°q a � \ LL §k ! \ 2 Stood R` C6 b nm amD m m Q W W M W W�2 m m m W W OMD O OND W M m awD m Nw m Nm mN � aW0 Q W g N OND W W mw � p j a m W OND W N o o Q� o W DO N F- O n M m o p N r b 00000000000000 O N m M 7 N n m w w w m M Y N m tO0 m m m m m m 1� r O p r 0.0000000000000 O O N w MO<7 V'7Y 7'77Y VMO r.- MN mm N N b NN tD m NNA m p N b N N DI m N m r m w w w M M M M M M M M M 7 Y Y M N r .- r �- r r �- •- r Iq C N co n � N O N 0 N 4 `1 N Ea Qm 7 V N O '- W O N 9W QNq � m L N N 4 M Nmmmmmmmmwmmv� � O J rrC O p N a` � 30 M N y MYC�t af�Y��nm�Nco � N b O v c mbmwwwmmm�wmn� � M N I e: x S a O w N mXy ♦ A G ~ z mm N N et at 0 :t vt :t :t :t �= ��D;rm;nallo,maa�rynmm m A A A A A A H n w m n m �aa.a m m o oCJm<>W www��wwww���a�o za w m A p r N M C N m n m w N Y f- 0 nm amD m m Q W W M W W�2 m m m W W OMD O OND W M m awD m O m Nm mN � aW0 Q W g N OND W W mw � e O N n r r r 1� r m aD m m m m m aD o p N r m M 7 N n m w w w m M Y N m tO0 m m m m m m 1� r N p m r r m N qdd r.- MN mm N N b NN tD m NNA i N p N m r m w w w M M M M M M M M M 7 Y Y M N co p y N N N lV N N N fV N N N N N H N O N 4 N Ea m m m w o w m m m olw w A 7 V N O 9W � lL IL Did o � O J rrC O p 7ta m S " a` c e m 30 o o toJu a,aIm(o o�,�, �o� �;f - m®* O �wNa fy mNr o N R • CL ui �. m C4 .0.•. .{ .r0..•. W I m� N O T A t D ^ ix d��`o 5`o CO 0 m OIL (1at p,u o 20 um) mU v toC v - u b m ti o �ocr y K�mtvo r m�� o ot n co w z d o 'n p ri v to o v o . W A m W �� a o °p room A �r:V, v �mm -� `comm . , A �N a o vi c �m of " o to mQ m id y M o C4Ncv K�°u�� o owo co m.o V O d vi v of .-. ,ri •- o$ QQN Oa0 a.'mm, C4 NOO { A1.� orN `rYO C N W a. 0 U) 2 W W W s �0 10 V go Q) mco a a K min IL L c! co `�Tv QIZ LL o a TNr m� Q N�avaaom or��� moVnn� O��^� �mva ^ �� �mV a do �`� co v � N ���-. 44 le Q� T r lO O W n Yi T T vi v T O T er O m 0 0 N Q F � A nnW m n , - m d�N ")Nm Qrm ��N m - - ... �o��a,mN ���� �W�m�r ��m gCD o 0 a W; " Q � LL W N Eco �COVaon,� mN ar�� ronv�� = e w - �' U Y m m F c E .. W U m« sr w o 0 m v v m N n N Yf ,w N n �D o 0 h qN r r U) m .00 (� E NMOm0 � mAm� t C4 •� YY r m y� OL �_ -- � O G A Appendix A.3 Student Generation Survey M12r2= 9 -- O N m n to N n n r O O m at O r o O M r W N O W n N N Y n M r m O r Y N m W M fV M N M O t0 Om M 01 O O M O O O O O O O O O O O O G C C O mco;crs- F s O O r OO m W n r 0 O 0 O 0 O M n O 0 r W r 0 O m W O O O r W 3 O W M M M W ee}} M W m r m r O 0 O fO m x 0 0 �y 0 N 0 M 0 r W O e- tO n M .t O fO CCC m O w r O C n r cO r m p n r n n L = 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 f7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r 0 r 0tm Le = C% m O OO m r m m W m O 0 0 O O o O O M co M M n N C O O m N W eq N O b N W r t0 co W co N CO t0 0 O O W co N t0 M N N r "p r O 0 O 10 W o O O CO. CO n n CO CO m p r r r O N O N N co M M tD O �Ny O O M O m O r N p r n O O r O r r 9 -0 O O O C O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'O O O C O O O O O O O C O 6:2 0 � N E t7 M 1D r V n O W m O M N M m 0 O p 0 O o 0 O N N m r O O b W m coo W m et O O O M M t0 co N W W m M n N O O M M n M N A CO C n M r N O 0 O e� t0 O O n m t0 M M r m W C G N 0 N C 'tf 0 O 0 n 0 O 0 N C m r O O M C O �- O 6 r 6 m r 6 r 6 n 0 0 O 0 m t0 0 to N 0 N 6 N N 0 CO r r N O N IQ O V M r O N n V N N W E N m 0 0 0 0 0 C C O O O W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m O O W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a q �' N n m cel N n N W O r m r N r r r O ar K f0 c0 W O W W V N N fO m m CO fO tO m r N r n m N r M W V M M O �- O IT N O O. n C 7 V N W) O) 7 m � m V 0 e t m N r n r t0 W N n t0 W O r O r N r r r 0 a0 W O tD W <f N N tO m m M to tO m r N� r m O O V N N O� n m m W .V a+ �a lm to M N '7 m N t0 W m aD W n N n O m N M W W Ftf N T r r er 10 �- I O F L O M N r M N Y N O CO O M O N r N N170 70 N Y m O n M m O M r r r S Ct O "1010174 O V co O f0 N N mW fO r com tO co r M n �- M N m two m O r 'O r t0 N m n O M OF N �t m CO M' n n n W n N t0 M O m O IT W N m y m L a m N Wy N N d N m d {p •0 �_ d c m it c c m V O tEs Z m c m m8 m _v ��'a m as m 0 0 o v1 m m �. L N tG m �i m 0 O m m 2> '2tg9 W t F—� m m yUt rod W O.0 m m> m 1-9 C! E>=m0mc ¢ � a v E ��awwar533 o ov-ovvvvvv a m $'� Y —= trim Y m mr m i� m Ecca'—'�'�—v°mmmmm_m`mmco3mxx�jmw a� as > r n' E a c d m m m m m d d m d d 1� F m m m m E O a ¢ m 0 0 0 W W x Ytpp Y J { Y{pp Y J {0p Ymm Y J Y J E O m m O E 2 S9 O sO x -9 J J J J d 2 0' Q' W� h W 9 -- —. – O m. O m m m 014'1,01101 N} 7V W_ _ .� L 1 coo t.OD coo S0 NNP O . O ( N O .� N H O o O C C C O r C r C O - 0 F s to a O O O CD t o Nm ti a00 o O O O O O ac = OCC OO C C C C O cs i e 0.2 'p 0 O r r m O O O O W P NN W C W -IR �f O N m a.�} 'O C 9 N N r r r O O O N r N 0 r 0 N 0 N 0 CD 0 'O �e�CCCCCCCCCei� NO O m 1� m M W m o N r W N l�Q m N m e hqp R E w 0 C 0 o co C r C o r o 0 C 0 C 0 C r m oul a o e o e o o e m o« o 0 0 0 0 o O o O 0 oam,00-ou)0000 'E ci m m 17 N N `esj� m m Ih `C c V m r U v'o 0. M m iD r a0 r W. co N !h t0 N O P O V r '7 'O � C r r H +tea J N h ao m 0 Co 1p m O F 2 O'1 N r O m r r r {Q M v E ao r r 1p O N In ch r r m r W _ .. m o q E E = —' `c c F m p ¢F�v m a o o o U ? U m a a c v c = d a E m m m a o a E i -co s m > Q m p D$ C t� c LL E 10 N CL mt g�7 E E -O, YY m w v www-,j320a —. – P/T#4 Kent School District Updated 2002- 03 to 2007-2008 Capital Facilities Plan Incorporate Kent School District's updated Capital Facilities Plan into the City's Comprehensive Plan. 2002-2003 - 2007-2006 EMMM Pok EkmmorySite bn=M Pak Ek =Wy SehoW Serving Vnincorporated2iUng County 7(pnt, Covington Au6um, BlackoiamoniC Winton SeaT", 'Washington Apa2002 J. Kent School 01strict 12033 SE 256A Street Kent, Washington 98031-6643 (253) 373-7000 SIX-YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2002-2003 2007-2008 April .2002 BOARD of DIRECTORS Bill Boyce Sandra Collins Scott Floyd Mike Jensen Linda Petersen ADMINISTRATION Barbara Grohe, Ph.D. Superintendent Daniel L. Moberly Assistant Superintendent - Business Services Fred H. High Executive Director of Finance Margaret A. Whitney Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources 8 Special Services Carla Jackson K -12 Executive Director, Kent -Meridian Gwen Dupree K -12 Executive Director, Kentlake Mem Rieger K - 12 Executive Director, Kentridge Janis McBrayer K -12 Executive Director, Kentwood Gary Plano Executive Director of Instructional Services Valerie Lynch, Ed.D. Executive Director of Special Services Donald Hall Executive Director of Information Technology Kent Sdx)d txshid Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan APd 2002 i. S=. School 11811cl Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan 2002-2003 - 2007-2008 April 2002 For information on the Plan, -please call the Finance & Planning Department at (253) 373-7295. Capital Facilities Plan Contributing Staff Gwenn Escher-Derdowski, Forecast & Planning Administrator Cover Design by Debbl Smith Maps by Jana Tucker Joe Zimmer, Special Projects Accountant yt Bonnie Catton, Transportation Department Fred Long, Interim Director of Facilities & Construction Karla Wilkerson, Facilities Department Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2002 - '5• . — lem. school 11SVICI Sim Fear Capital Facilities Flan 7a6re of Contents Section I Executive Summary 11 Six -Year Enrollment Projection III Current District "Standard of Service" I V Inventory and Capacity of Existing Schools V Six -Year Planning and Construction Plan V I Relocatable Classrooms VII Projected Classroom Capacity VIII Finance Plan, Cost Basis and Impact Fee Schedules I X Summary of Changes to Previous Pian X Appendixes Kent Sdxxtt District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Page Number 2 4 8 11 14 17 18, 23 30 31 Apra 2002 Page 1 Executive Summary This Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") has been prepared by the Kent School District (the "District") as the District's facilities planning document, in compliance with the requirements of Washington's Growth Management Act, King County:'Code K.C.C. 21A.43 and Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn and Black Diamond. This annual plan. update was prepared using data available in the spring of 2002 for the 2001-2002 school year. This Plan is consistent with prior long-term capital facilities plans adopted by the Kent School District. This Plan is not intended to be the sole planning document for all of the District's needs. The District may prepare interim and periodic Long Range Capital Facilities Plans consistent with Board Policies, taking into account a longer or shorter time period, other factors and trends in the use of facilities, and other needs of the District as may be required. Prior Capital Facilities Plans of the Kent School District have been adopted by Metropolitan King County Council and Cities of Kent, Covington and Auburn and included in the Capital Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive Plans of each jurisdiction: The first ordinance implementing impact fees for the unincorporated areas was effective September 15, 1993. 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 and Auburn must also adopt this Plan and their own school impact fee ordinances. This Plan has also been submitted to cities of Black Diamond, SeaTac, and Renton. A financing plan is included in Section V I I I which demonstrates the District's ability to implement this Plan. This Capital Facilities Plan establishes the District's "standard of service" in order to ascertain the District's current and future capacity. While the State Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes square footage guidelines for capacity, those guidelines do not account for the local program needs in the District. The Growth Management Act, King County and City codes and ordinances authorize the District to make adjustments to the standard of service based on speck needs of the District. This Plan includes the standard of service as established by Kent School District. The District has identified schools with significant special needs programs as "impact" schools and the standard of service targets a lower class size at those facilities. Relocatables in the capacity calculation use the same standard of service as the permanent facilities. (See section I I I for more specific information) (continued) Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2002 Page 2 Executive Summary (con) The capacities of the schools in the District are calculated based on this standard of service and the existing inventory, which includes some relocatable classrooms. The District's 2001-2002 program capacity of permanent facilities is 24,559 which reflects program changes and the reduction of Gass size to meet the requirements of Student Achievement Initiative 728. Relocatables provide additional transitional capacity until permanent facilities are completed. .Kent School District is the fourth largest district in the state. Enrollment is reported to the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) monthly on Form P223. Enrollment on October 1 is considered to be the enrollment for the year. P223 Headcount for October 1, 2001 was 26,377. PM FTE (Full Time Equivalent) enrollment for October 1, 2001 was 25,332.98 (FTE reports Kindergarten at .5 and excludes Early Childhood Education [ECE] and college -only Running Start students). The actual number of individual students per the October 2001, full head count was 26,683. (Ail students at 1.0 including )6ndergarten, ECE and cortege -only Running Start students.) The District's standard of service, enrollment history and projections, and use of transitional facilities are reviewed in detail in various sections of this Plan. Our plan is to continue to satisfy concurrency requirements through the transitional use of relocatables. Pursuant to the requirements of the Growth Management Act, this Plan will be updated annually, with changes in the fee schedules adjusted accordingly. Kent Sdwd District Six -Year capital FadlObs Plan April 2002 Page 3 I I Six -Year Enrollment Projection For capital facilities planning, growth projections are based on cohort survival and student yield from documented residential construction projected over the next six years. (see rave 2) The student generation factor, as defined on the next page, is the basis for the growth projections from new developments. King County five births and the Districts relational percentage average were used to determine the number of kindergartners entering the system. (see Table t) 8.32% of 21,646'King County live births in 1997 is forecast for 1,800 students expected in Kindergarten for October 1, 2002. Together with proportional growth from new construction, 8.32% of live births is equivalent to the number of students projected to enter kindergarten in the district for the next six-year period. (see Table 2) Early Childhood Education students (sometimes identified by others as 'Preschool Special Education [SE] or handicapped students') are calculated and reported separately on a .5 FTE basis. The first grade population is traditionally 7 - 8% larger than the kindergarten population due to growth and transfers to the District from private kindergartens. Near term projections assume some growth from new developments to be offset by current local economic conditions. With a few notable exceptions, the expectation is that enrollment increases will occur District -wide in the long term. District projections are based on historical growth patterns combined with continuing development of projects in the pipeline dependent on market and growth conditions. The District will continue to track new development activity to determine impact to schools and monitor conditions to reflect adjustments in this assumption. The six-year enrollment projection anticipates moderate enrollment growth from new development ctirrentiy in some phase of planning or construction in the district.. Information on new residential developments and the completion of these proposed developments in all jurisdictions may be considered in the Districts future analysis of growth projections. Within practical limits, the District has kept abreast of proposed developments. The Kent School District serves six permitting jurisdictions: unincorporated King County, the cities of Kent, Covington, and Auburn. The west Lake Sawyer area has been annexed to the City of Black Diamond and Kent Leaming Center is located in the small portion of the City of SeaTac served by Kent School District. Kent Sdwd District Sh-Year capital FaclUtles Plan 3 -- (ConWiued) April 2002 Paye 4 I I Six - Year Enrollment Projection STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR (continued) "Student Factor" is defined by King County code as "the number derived by a school district to describe how many students of each grade span are expected to be generated by a dwelling unit" based on district records of average actual student generated rates for developments completed within the last five years. Following these guidelines, the student generation factor for Kent School District is as follows: Single Family Elementary .504 Junior High .211 Senior High .183 Total .898 Multi -Family Elementary .273 Junior High .114 Senior High .076 Total .463 The student generation factor is based on a survey of 3,352 single family dwelling units and 2,262 multi -family dwelling units with no adjustment for occupancy. Please refer to Appendix E on Page 35 for details of the Student Generation Factor survey. The actual number of students in those residential developments was determined using the District's Education Logistics (EDULOG) Transportation System. In 3,352 single family dwelling units there were 1,691 elementary students, 707 junior high students, and 612 senior high students for a total of 3,010 students. In 2,262 multi -family dwelling units, there were 617 elementary students, 257 junior high students, and 173 senior high students, for a total of 1,047 students. Kent School MMU Six -Year Capital FadNes Plan _3�_= -- April 2002 Paye 5 I[7 CC N \ *A �. p O m- Y) m n O N yo O N m N O '- N •- ( N C.)- r N N r N V N N V O N ft�p0 O+ CD 'mom, .= P m. N a°. N p O O O O O. N O O N m o N m o N •- C%L N m O N m K N C7 O N m N N V) � N OO N 7 C) )j N a co W n O � r a o f O W � m O O O O •- yO O m t^+� P N D7 N N N N N N N N N N O v tCO)h co C4 co ImO `g' N O N N N C4 O N �. N o N C5 Nm,ci m O N Pm ccootD' O0 O N O M O co W m m m at n m C) O r tq Nm N N N N fV N '- r• •- •- 0) W fV ee C4 m n N W W b O m �p 8 co m W m c0 OI t0 O N N ag p CO P m P 1 •- O N m m m � N o N v N m r O m m •-. N N m •. r v m a O m e- 'N m n ' m O O m �O . ' ' C7 N N m W r r W r m r 0 r ym Ol r Go m r 'O m r m N tm0 N C7 r r Np ' I N A p m W P O N m N N bi r m W r P W r r W r 1p W r m P r m n r m m r P O pp N 1�1 r •- N C4 N m 0) m N O N m m N m O m r_ W I� a0 CD N c 1 N Jt 1 m t0 r m t0 O m O N � r � �! N m V Qf r r tmD aD r co m r tO0 m r f r r N 1 �. N m m r SOD v r o `N�, r •- O . W O co m N m O) n V aNO, t0 n N m m O m Ny b Cl) 7 Co V O N M N m m H � o O m N cc O m aa Let m 11 N P � N 'ills cl a N 0 T - „ O � m S s N � � C I m O N W N C p O m o m e a m � s � � I a • N e0 O It m m N O v 0 T - „ S m e p m c m � N m *0� e0 O It m m N O v p m 'Dm P m Co m m m 00 m m .- o a N 433 m o 0 T - KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 SIX -YEAR FTE ENROLLMENT PROJECTION King County Live Births' 21,573 21,646 22,212 21,929 22,487 22,235 22,310 ' Increase/ Decrease -155 73 566 -283 558 -252 15 Kindergarten / Birth % ' 8.41% 8.32% 8.32% 8.32% 8.32% 8.32% 8.32% ' Eary0WWdE&xafon0.6 65 70 71 72 73 74 75 "' Kindergarten FTE Q .5 907 900 942 929 951 940 942 Grade 1 1,935 1,953 1,896 1,963 1,955 1,999 1,975 Grade 2 2,067 1,923 1,984 1,926 2,012 1,983 2,026 Grade 3 2,040 2,069 1,967 2,028 1,968 2,054 2,024 Grade 4 2,166 2,121 2,177 2,070 2,132 2,069 2,157 Grade 5 2,110 2,168 2,180 2,236 2,126 2;188 2,123 Grade 6 2,251 2,135 2,221 2,232 2,288 2,176 2,247 Grade 7 2,123 2,326 2,227 2,315 2,326 2,383 2,266 Grade 8 2,152 2,082 2,308 2,209 2,295 2,305 2,360 Grade 9 5 2,244 2,377 2,322 Grade 9 5 2,572 2,461 2,555 2,566 Grade 10 2,064 2,.119 2,251 2,198 2,432 2,321 2,414 Grade 11 1,835 1,815 1,910 2,027 1,979 2,188 2,092 Grade 12 1,439 1,485 1,537 1,616 1,714 1,672 1,847 Total FTE Enrollment 25,398 25,543 25,993 26,413 26,712 26,913 27,114 ....................................................................:: Full Time E uivalent 25,398 1 25,543 1 25,993 1 26,413 1 26,712 1 26,913 27,114 "Wergarien projection based on King Canty actual We both percentage and propordonal groats from new constuclion. ' Kkmkrgartsn FiE enrollment projection at .5 Is caudated by ushg the Districts percentage of bn9 County We Wrft 5 years rbr campared to actual kinderyadenn 9nMkn6nt in Na prevbus year. ((induces ECE ® .5 - Eady ChWhood Ed) ' eaKhdwgarten W d 0n Is at .5 FTE alMnagh marry sdrools have Ful Day Kindergarten at 1.0 FTE vjM alternative fundbg. 4 Oct 2001 P223 Fbadmunt b 26,377. Ful student headcount trchrdtg 129 PresdW 6 365 Running Slant • 26,653. 5 Grade levet reconfiguration. In 2004, 9th grads mores to the senior high schools. For facilities planning purposes, this six-year enrollment projection anticipates moderate enrollment growth from new development currently in some phase of planning or construction in the district Kent Sdtod DMict SIX -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 2 A{ad 2802 Page 7 -'P--- -- r 313 Yearly Increase 95 145 450 420 299 201 201 Yearly Increase % 0.39% 0.57% 1.76% 1.62% 1.13% 0.75% 0.75% Cumulative Increase 197 342 792 1,212 1,511 1,712 1,913 ....................................................................:: Full Time E uivalent 25,398 1 25,543 1 25,993 1 26,413 1 26,712 1 26,913 27,114 "Wergarien projection based on King Canty actual We both percentage and propordonal groats from new constuclion. ' Kkmkrgartsn FiE enrollment projection at .5 Is caudated by ushg the Districts percentage of bn9 County We Wrft 5 years rbr campared to actual kinderyadenn 9nMkn6nt in Na prevbus year. ((induces ECE ® .5 - Eady ChWhood Ed) ' eaKhdwgarten W d 0n Is at .5 FTE alMnagh marry sdrools have Ful Day Kindergarten at 1.0 FTE vjM alternative fundbg. 4 Oct 2001 P223 Fbadmunt b 26,377. Ful student headcount trchrdtg 129 PresdW 6 365 Running Slant • 26,653. 5 Grade levet reconfiguration. In 2004, 9th grads mores to the senior high schools. For facilities planning purposes, this six-year enrollment projection anticipates moderate enrollment growth from new development currently in some phase of planning or construction in the district Kent Sdtod DMict SIX -Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 2 A{ad 2802 Page 7 -'P--- -- III Current Kent School District "Standard of Service" In order to determine the capacity of the District's facilities, the King County Code refers to a "standard of service" that each school district must establish in order to ascertain its overall capacity. The standard of service identifies the program year, the class size, the number of classrooms, students and programs of special need, and other factors determined by the District which would, in the District's judgment, best serve its student population. This Plan includes the standard of service as established by Kent School District. The District has identified schools with significant special needs programs as "impact" schools and the standard of service targets a lower class size at those facilities. Relocatables included in the capacity calculation use the same standard of service as the permanent facilities. (See Append& A, e a c) The. standard of service defined herein may continue to change in the future. Kent School District is continuing a long-term strategic planning process combined with review of changes to capacity and standard of service adjustments to meet the requirements of Student Achievement Initiative 728. This process will affect various aspects of the District's "standard of service" and future changes will be reflected in future capital facilities plans. Current Standards of Service for Elementary Students Class size for grades K - 3 should not exceed an average of 20 students. Class size for grade 4 at impact schools should not exceed an average of 20 students. Class size for grade 4 at non -impact schools should not exceed an average of 23 students. Class size for grades 5 - 6 should not exceed an average of 29 students. Program capacity for regular education classrooms is calculated at an average of 23 students per classroom because there are five grade levels at K - 4 and fluctuations between primary and intermediate grade levels (i.e. third/fourth or fourth/fifth grade split classes, etc.). Many elementary schools now provide full day kindergarten programs with the second half of the day funded by grants or tuition. Students may have scheduled time In a special computer lab. Students may also be provided music instruction and physical education in a separate classroom or facility. Special Education for students with disabilities may be provided in a self- contained classroom with a capacity of 10-15 depending on the program. (continued) Kent Sdrod District Six -Year capita Fadlities Ran April 2002 Pape 8 '3 -- III Current Kent School District "Standard of Service" (continued) Identified students will also be provided other educational opportunities in classrooms for programs designated as follows: English Language Leamers (E L L) Self-contained Special Education Programs Integrated Programs & Resource Rooms (for special remedial assistance) Education for Disadvantaged Students (Title n Gifted Education Other Remediation Programs Leaming Assisted Program (LAP) School Adjustment Programs for severely behavior -disordered students Hearing Impaired Mild, Moderate and Severe Developmental Disabilities Developmental Kindergarten Early Childhood Education (ECE) (3-4 yr. old students with disabilities) Some of the above special programs require specialized classroom space, as well as music and physical education classrooms, computer labs, etc.; thus, the permanent capacity of some of the buildings housing these programs is reduced. Some students, for example, leave their regular classroom for a short period of time to receive instruction in these special programs and space must be allocated to serve these programs. Some newer buildings have been constructed to accommodate most of these programs; some older buildings have been modified, and in some circumstances, these modifications reduce the classroom capacity of the buildings. When programs change, program capacity fluctuates and is updated annually to reflect the change in program and capacity. Current Standards of Service for Secondary Students The standards of service. outlined below reflect only those programs and educational dpportunities provided to secondary students which directly affect the capacity of the school buildings. Reductions have been made in 7th and 10th grade English classes for Initiative 728. These standards are subject to change pending annual updates based on staff and public review for changes funded by Student Achievement Initiative 728. Class size for grades 7 - 9 should not exceed an average of 29 students. Class size for 7th & 10"' grade English class should not exceed an average of 25 students. Class size for grades 10 -12 should not exceed an average of 31 students. Special Education for students with disabilities may be provided in a self- contained classroom with a capacity of 10-15 depending on the program. (continued) Kent Sdxod District Sb( -Year Caphal Fadtities Plan - April 2602 page 9 III Current Kent School District "Standard of Service" (continued) Identified students will also be provided other education opportunities in classrooms for programs designated as follows: Computer Labs English Language Learners (E L L) Integrated Programs & Resource Rooms (for special remedial assistance) Preschool and Daycare Honors (Gifted) and Advanced Placement Programs Basic Skills Programs Traffic Safety Education JROTC - Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps Variety of Career and Technical Education Programs (Vocational Education) i.e. Home & Family Life (Cooking, Sewing, Child Development, etc.) Business Education (Keyboarding, Accounting, Business Law, Sales & Marketing, eta) Woods, Metals, Welding, Electronics, Manufacturing Technology, Auto Shop, Commercial Foods, Commercial Art, Drafting & Drawing, Electronics, Careers, etc. Many of these programs and others require specialized classroom space which can reduce the permanent capacity of the school buildings. In. addition, an alternative home school assistance, choice and transition program is provided for students in grades K -12 at Kent Learning Center. Space or Classroom Utilization As a result of scheduling conflicts for student programs, the need for specialized rooms for certain programs, and the need for teachers to have a work space during their planning periods, it is not possible to achieve 100% utilization of regular teaching stations. Based on the analysis of actual utilization of classrooms, the District has concluded that the standard utilization rate is 85% ,.for secondary- schools. Program capacity at elementary schools has been. adjusted from 95% utilization in the past to reflect 100% utilization at the elementary level. In the future, the District will continue close analysis of actual utilization. - Kent Sdwd District Six -Year Capital Fadhfts Plan Apri 2002 Page 10 '9-1–. -- I V Inventory and Capacity of Existing Schools Currently, the District has permanent program capacity to house 24,559 students based on the Districts Standard of Service as set forth in Section I I L Included in this Plan is an inventory of the Districts schools by type, address and current capacity. (See Table 3 on Page 12) The. program capacity is perigdically updated for changes in programs and the addition of new schools. It also reflects the Student Achievement Initiative 728 reduction in class size from 22:1 to 20:1 in grades K - 3 and Grade 4 reductions of 20:1 at impact schools or 23:1 for non -impact schools. The class size reduction received voter approval in the Educational Programs and Operations Levy as well as through funding from 1-728. The District will conduct annual public review and update class size recommendations in accordance with the requirements of Student Achievement Initiative 728. Kent Learning Center serves grades Kindergarten through 12 with transition, choice and home school assistance programs. It is located in the former Grandview School in the western part of the District in the city of SeaTac. This school was designed and is currently configured as an elementary school. Calculation of Elementary, Junior High and Senior High School capacities are set forth in Appendices A, B and C. A map of existing schools is included on Page 13. - Kent Sdwd District Sbc•Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2002 Page 11 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT Na 415 INVENTORY and CAPACITY Of EXISTING SCHOOLS •-^ •^ —r raw nal 11UlU at 4WA Street Kant 98031 460 . u kxx'�t.p ' Ylri4v % 1967 [ 27825 -118th Averue SE, Ked 98031 2001-2002 Ridgewood Elementary yew. RW 18030 -162nd Play SQ Rencn 98058 462 SCHOOL Opened ABR ADDRESS Program Scenic Ha se emery 1960 SH 28025 Woodlarhd Wry Spilt, Kent 9803.1 406 Sens Creek Elementary 1971 SC 12651 SE 2181h Placa, Kent 98031 Ca 1 SpnkVW00k Elememary 1969 SB 20035.10Dth Avenue SE, Kent 98031 416 Camaw Crest Elementary 1990 CC 18235-1401h Avenue SE, Renton 98058 470 Cedar Valley Elementary 1971 CV 28500 Tknpplana Way SE, CoWngw 98042 401 CovirOM Elwnatary 1961 CO 17070 BE Wax Road, Covkiglon 98042 492 CreAwood Elemerdwy 1980 CW 25225 -180th Avene SE. CoWglon 98042 437 Daniel Elementary 1992 DE 11310 SE 248th Sh116L Kerd 98031 428 East Ha own""1953 EH 9825 S 240th Street Kent 98031 406 Emerald Park 1999 EP 11800 SE 218th Strep, Kent 98031 460 Fakwood Elementary 1969 FW 18800-148te Avenue SE, Renton 98058 431 Glenldge Elemenrory 1996 GR 19405 -120th Avenue SE, Remon 98058 450 Grass Lake Elementary 1971 GL 28700 -191st Place SE, Kent 98042 480 Horizon Elementary 1990 HE 27541 -14481 Avenue SE, Kent 98042 444 Jenkins Creek Elementary 1987 JC 26915 -186th Avenue SE, Covkgton 98042 434 Kent Elementary 1999 KE 24700 - 64m Avenue Sae% Kent 9!1032 426 Lake Youigs Elementary 1965 LY 19600 -142nd Avenue SE, Kent 98042 539 Markt Sctnn Elementary 1987 MS 12711 SE 248th Street, Kent 98031 440 Meadow Rld" Elementary 1994 MR 27710 - IOM Avenue SE, Kent 98031 418 Merkian Elementary 1939 ME 25821 -140th Avenue SE, Kent 98042 539 LiNaWen Ber emery 2000 AL 11919 SE 270th Seep, Kent 98031 428 Neely-O'BdenDamadary 1990 NO 6300 South 236th Street Kent 98032 403 Panther Lake Elementary 1938 PL 20831 -10681 Avenue SE, Kent 98031 374 •-^ •^ —r raw nal 11UlU at 4WA Street Kant 98031 460 . Pine Tres Ebmenury 1967 PT 27825 -118th Averue SE, Ked 98031 483 Ridgewood Elementary 1987 RW 18030 -162nd Play SQ Rencn 98058 462 Sawyer Woods Elementary 1994 SW 31135.22M Averse SE, Kent 95042 483 Scenic Ha se emery 1960 SH 28025 Woodlarhd Wry Spilt, Kent 9803.1 406 Sens Creek Elementary 1971 SC 12651 SE 2181h Placa, Kent 98031 444 SpnkVW00k Elememary 1969 SB 20035.10Dth Avenue SE, Kent 98031 416 SuMss Elementary - 1992 SR 22300 -132nd Avenue BE, Kart 98042 508 Ebrtengry TOTAL 1965 LC 22420 Maury Road, Des Mo4hea 98198 416 DISTRICT TOTAL 12,528 Cedar =10V Juts High 1993 CH 19640 SE 272 Strep, CwJrV n 98042 949 Kent Juror High 1952- KJ 620 North Central Avenue, Kent 98032 816 Madam ArAw High 1961 MA 16400 SE 251st Street Covirvon 98042 808 Meeker tutor High 1970 ABG 12600 SE 192nd Street Ramon 96056 890 Meretan Junior High- 1958 MJ 23490.129th Avenue BE, Kat 98031 747 Noemood Junior High 1998 NW 17097 SE 184th Step, Ramon 98058 944 Sepucla ,hxdor High 1986 SJ 11000 SE 264thSveeL Kent 98031 B30 Juror HIgh.TOTAI 5,984 Kw*1v%ftw Senior High 1951 KM 10020 SE 258th StrenL Kent 98031 1,417 Kw"e Senior High School 1997 KL 21401 SE 300th Street Kent 98042 1822 Kentr" Senior H9gh 1968 KR 12430 SE M M Strap, Kent 98031 1,301. . Kenpeod Senior High 1981 KW 25808 -184th Avenue SE, CovkVon 98042 1,291 Senior High TOTAL 5,831 Keri Leaning Cater (C MNL -w) a 1965 LC 22420 Maury Road, Des Mo4hea 98198 416 DISTRICT TOTAL 24,559 h Chang" to capacity reflect program dwM and continued reduction In K-3 dans size far 4728 a Ken Loamkig Center serves grades K-12. The bLAft was kxmerly knowln n Grandview Ba Kent School District Six -Year Capital Faciltles Plan _v= . Table 3 Apr! 2002 Page 12 Z� ol b 3, av C� Kent Sd%Plaq t Six-year Capital Facilities Plan April 2002 Page 13 O � Z 7 p 0 c 1o 0 H S2 YCD � C •� D mmo cop) V0 0 0 0 O c`oV �•0 �= uv_0 y U cn U -a._, Z� ol b 3, av C� Kent Sd%Plaq t Six-year Capital Facilities Plan April 2002 Page 13 V Six -Year Planning and Construction Plan At the time of preparation of this Plan in' spring of 2002, the following projects are completed or in the planning phase in the District: • Junior High #8 was previously planned to fill future needs for grades 7 through 9. The plan did not receive voter approval and was changed to add new capacity at the senior high schools and move 0 grade students to the high schools. The Board authorized purchase of a site for Junior High #8 east of 124ei Avenue SE at SE 286"' StraeL That site was determined not to be feasible and the property Is for sale. • Construction funding for additions to three high schools received voter approval. These additions will add capacity for 1,923 students. Construction is expected to be complete by Fall of 2004. • The Board authorized grade jovel reconfiguration to move SP grade students to the high schools and serve 7" and a grade students at the junior highs. Reconfiguration will provide additional capacity at junior high schools. Implementation is expected for 2004. • A site was purchased at 15435 SE 2561h Street in Covington, and remains a part of the site bank for future schools. Other potential future sites and facilities are listed In Table 4 and shown on the site map on page 17. • Some funding is secured for purchase of additional portables and some funding may be provided by impact fees as needed. The sites have not been determined. Elementary schools have a capacity planned for approximately 540 students, depending on placement of special programs. Junior highs are planned for a program capacity of approximately 1,065 students and Kentlake High School (#4) has a current program capacity of 1,622. Additions at high schools will provide capacity for 1,923 students. County and city planners, decision -makers and school districts are encouraged to consider safe walking conditions for all students when reviewing applications and design plans for new roads and developments. This should include sidewalks for pedestrian safety, pull-outs and turn-arounds for school buses. Included in this Plan is an inventory of potential projects and sites identified by the District which are potentially acceptable site alternatives in the future. (see rabo 4) The voter approved bond issue for $105.4 million in 1990 and $130 million in 1994 included funding for the purchase of eleven sites for some of these and future schools, and the sites acquired to date are included in this Plan. Some funding is secured for purchase of additional sites but some may be funded with impact fees as needed. Not all undeveloped properties meet current school construction requirements and some property may be traded or sold to meet future facility needs. 2002 voter approval of $69.5 million bond issue for capital improvement included. construction funding for additions to three high schools which are scheduled to be completed in 2004. Student Achievement Initiative 728 funds are being utilized to reduce class size and provide extended learning opportunities. Based on community input, the Board will continue annual review of standard of service and those decisions will be reflected in the each update of the Capital Facilities Plan. Kent SBwd Disbict Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2002 Pape 14 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 Site Acquisitions and Projects Planned to Provide Additional Capacity Status � I Com*WnProgram I new t � r WFW- ELEMENTARY (Numbers asstyied to Attire schools may not correlate with number of exk6rg schools.) Elementary # 31 '(Unfunded)' To be determined 2 New Plannkg TBD 2 540 75% JUNIOR HIGH T Jurisdiction 4 Grade Level Reconfiguration vn'ti Move 9th grade b Hgh School Program Planning 2004 City of Covkgton 7 provide additional opacity at Junior High schools Elementary King County 5 SENIOR HIGH TBD 2 C@y of CoWoon 3 Classroom additions at Kent-Merlcian Additions Plamkq 2004 26 100% 3 high schools and move Kentridge Additions PWwft 2004 11001 100% 9tin Gracie to high school K !wood Additions Plarstkp 2004 ON 100% TEMPORARY FACILITIES TBD 2 Additional Capaci 12 Reloratables For placement as needed New Plannirg 2002 • 23.31 udi 100% SUPPORT FACILITIES . Bus Facility (Unfunded) I To be determined 2 New Planning; TBD 2 N / A non 2 OTHER SITES ACQUIRED T Jurisdiction 4 COvkgbn area (Near Mattson JH) SE 251 6164 SE, Covtngton 98042 Elementary City of Covkgton 7 Covirom area (Scarsena) SE 290 6156 SE, Kent 98042 Elementary King County 5 Covkgtan area West (Halleson) 15435 SE 256 Sheet CovMgton 90042 TBD 2 C@y of CoWoon 3 Ham Lake area (Ponant) 16820 SE 240, Kent 98042 Elementary King County 8 SE of take Morton area (Wes) SE 332 6 204 SE, Kent 98042 Junior High King County 2 Shady take area (Sowers, eta) 17428 SE 192 Street Renton 96058 Elementary long County 1 So. long Co. Activity Center (Mks site) SE 167 6170 SE, Renton 98058 TBD 2 King Canty - - 12 Former Jr HI #8 site (Plemmons.Yeh.Wr BE 28M Street 6 124th Ave. SE, Kent Site was determkned to be •unbu0dabW for a parlor high and property is now for sale. . Notes: ' Unfunded fadOry needs will be reviewed to the tubae. 2 TBD - To be determined - Some sites are acquired but placement, tknkg angor conflpuretion have not been determined. 3 Numbers correspond to sites on Map on Page to. Other she locations are parcels klent6led In Table 7 on Page 26. Kent Sawa Mbict Six -Year capital Facilities Plan Table 4 AO 2002 Page 15 try 0 N Z O .•� N >` fl. N Q o a om s 02 �N O 3s m gzz S Kent Sdad Disirid Six -Year CapNal Facilities Plan April 2002 Pape 16 VI Relocatable Classrooms For the purpose of clarification, the term "portables" and the more descriptively accurate term, "relocatables" are used interchangeably in this Plan. The Plan also references use of portables or relocatables as interim or transitional capacity/facilities. Currently, the District utilizes 158 total relocatables. Of this total, 74.are utilized to house students in excess of permanent capacity, 78 are used for program purposes at school locations, and six for other purposes. (see Appendkes a e c o) Based on enrollment projections, program capacity and funded permanent facilities, the District anticipates . the need to purchase some additional relocatables during the next six-year period. During the time period covered by this Plan, the District does not anticipate that all of the District's relocatables will be replaced by permanent facilities. During the useful life of some of the relocatables, the school-age population may decline in some communities and increase in others, and these relocatables provide the flexibility to accommodate the immediate needs of the community. Portables, or relocatables, may be used as interim or transitional facilities: 1. To prevent overbuilding or overcrowding. of permanent school facilities. 2. To cover the gap between the time of demand for increased capacity and completion of permanent school facilities to meet that demand. 3. To meet unique program requirements. Portables, or relocatables, currently in use will be evaluated resulting in some being improved and some replaced. Quality concerns will be among those addressed by the next Citizens' Facilities Planning Committee in review of capital facilities needs for the next bond issue. The Plan projects that the District will use relocatables to accommodate interim housing needs for the next six years and beyond. The use of relocatables, their impacts on permanent facilities, life cycle and . operational costs, and the interrelationship, between relocatables, emerging technologies and educational restructuring will continue to be be examined. Kent Sdwd MWd Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2002 Page.17 VII Projected Six -Year Classroom Capacity As stated in Section I V, the program capacity study is periodically updated for changes in special programs and reflects Gass size reduction in Grades K - 4. As shown in the Inventory and Capacity chart in Table 3 on Page 12, the program capacity is also reflected in the capacity and enrollment comparison charts. -(See Tables-5d5A-8-0mpages 19-22) Enrollment is reported to OSPI on Form P-223 on a monthly basis and funding apportionment is based on Agnual Average FTE (AAFTE). The first school day of October is set by OSPI as the enrollment count date for the year. Full Time Equivalent (FTE) student enrollment for October 1, 2001 was 25,332.98 with kindergarten students counted at .5 and excluding Early Childhood Education. students (ECE - preschool special education) and College - only Running Start students. (See Tabbs565A-B-Conpages19-22) Kent School District. continues to be the fourth largest district in the state .of Washington. P223 Headcount for October 1, 2001 was 26,377 with kindergarten students counted at 1.0 and excluding ECE and college -only Running Start students. A headcount of all students enrolled on October 1, 2001 totals 26,683 which includes ECE and college -only Running Start students. Based on the enrollment forecasts, current Inventory and capacity, current standard of service, relocatable capacity, and future planned classroom space, the District anticipates having sufficient capacity to house students over the next six years. (See Table 5 and rales 5 A -a -C on Pages 19 - 22) This does not mean that some schools will not experience overcrowding. There may be significant need for additional portables and/or new schools to accommodate growth within the District and class size reduction mandated under Student Achievement Initiative 728. Some schools, by design, may be opened with. relocatables on site. Boundary changes, limited movement of relocatables, zoning changes, market conditions, and educational restructuring will all play a major role in addressing overcrowding and underutilization of facilities in different parts of the District. Kent SchW Disked Six -Year Capital Faclifts Plan -- " 2002 Page 18 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY .SENIOR HIGH Senior High permanent Program Capacity 5,631 5,631 5,631 5,631 7,554 7,554 7,554 New Pemianent Senior High Construction Additions at three high schools 1,923 Grade level reconfiguration - 9th grade to move to high schools In 2004 SubtoW 5,631 5,631 5,631 7,554 7,554 7,554 7,554 SCHOOL YEAR 2001-2002 2002-2003 I I 2003-2004 2004.2005 1 2005-2009 1 2006.2007 I 2007_2008 Actual P R O J E C T E D Senior High permanent Program Capacity 5,631 5,631 5,631 5,631 7,554 7,554 7,554 New Pemianent Senior High Construction Additions at three high schools 1,923 Grade level reconfiguration - 9th grade to move to high schools In 2004 SubtoW 5,631 5,631 5,631 7,554 7,554 7,554 7,554 Reiocatable Ca ac'i R aired' 0 0 93 868 1,054 1,209 1,395 TOTAL CAPACITY ' 5,631 5,631 5,724 8,422 8,608 8,763 8,949 FTE ENROLLMENT/PROJECTION 2043 5,338 5,419 5,698 8,413 8,586 8,742 8,919 SURPLUS DEFICIT CAPACITY 293 212 26 9 22 21 30 Number of Reloeatables Required 0 0 3 28 34 39 48 ' Capadty is based on standard of service for program capacity and updated periodically to reflect program changes. 2 FTE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment, excluding full time Running Start students. Approximately 150 Junior High students are served all or part of the day at high schools. 3 Grade level reconfiguration - 9th grade will move to the high schools in 2004. Kent sdwd twbld Six -Year capital FaciUtks plan Table 5 C April 2002 Pae 79 „31_ -- KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. -415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY JUNIOR HIGH Junior High Permanent Program Capacity 5,984 5,964 - 5,984 5,984. 5,984 5,984 5,984 Now Ca pad ly from G ;R79 7=f I g7Lnt1 a J I Grade level reconfiguration - 9th grade to move to high schools In 2004 Subtotal 5,984 . . . . . . ................................ .. SCHOOL YEAR -........... 2001-2DO2 2002-2DD3 1 2003-2004 1 2004'2005 1 2005.2008 I 20082007 I 2007-2608 Actual I P R 0 J E C T E D rT� 0 1ReIocatabIeCapa;7R;uIre7d' Junior High Permanent Program Capacity 5,984 5,964 - 5,984 5,984. 5,984 5,984 5,984 Now Ca pad ly from G ;R79 7=f I g7Lnt1 a J I Grade level reconfiguration - 9th grade to move to high schools In 2004 Subtotal 5,984 5,984 5,954 5,994 5,984 0,964 5,954 651 812 899 0 0 0 0 1ReIocatabIeCapa;7R;uIre7d' TOTAL CAPACITY 163 6,535 6,796 6,883 . 5,984 5,984 5,984 5,98=4 I FTE ENROLLMENT/ PROJECTION ' 1 6,519 6,785 6,857 4,524 4,621 4,688 4,626 1 ISURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 1 16 11 26 1,460 1,363 1,296 4,358 Number of Relocatables Required 19 28 31 0 0 a 0 1 Capacity Is based on standard of service forprogram capacity and updated periodically to reflect program changes. 2 FTE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment / Projection Approximately 150+ 9th grade students are served at high schools. 3 Grade level reconfiguration - 9th grade will move to the high schools In 2004. Kent Sdwd District Six -Year capital I Facilities Plan Table 5 B April 2002 Pap 20 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY ELEMENTARY Elementary Permanent PrWwncapad 12,528 12,944 (cent teaming Center - Special Program416 New Pemtanent Element--, Construction Elementary # 31 (Unfunded) 12,944 12,944 12,944 12,944 12,944 540 Submtal 12,944 12,944 12,944 12,944 12,944 12,944 13,484 "" Relocafable Ca a R wired 2 598 414 506 552 575 552 92 TOTAL CAPACITY 2 13,542 13,358 13,450 13,496 13,519 13,496 13,576 FTE ENROLLMENT / PROJECTION 3 13,541 13,339 13,438 13,476 13,505 13,483 13,569 ISURPLUSLEIEFICM CAPACITY 1 19 12 20 14 13 7 Number of Reloatables Required 28 18 22 24 25 24 1 Kent Leaming Center is a special program at Grandview School serving students In Grades K -12. The school was designed and is currently configured as an elementary school. ' Capacity is based on standard of service for program capacity and Is updated periodically to reflect program changes. a FTE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment or Projection (ECE & Kindergarten @.6) Unfunded facility needs are pending review. Ken, cahoot rima sic -rear Capital Facilities Pia„ _ Table 5 A ;s.. -- April 2002 Page 21 SCHOOL YEAR 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005 2008 2003-2007 2007-2008 Actual P R O J E C T E D Elementary Permanent PrWwncapad 12,528 12,944 (cent teaming Center - Special Program416 New Pemtanent Element--, Construction Elementary # 31 (Unfunded) 12,944 12,944 12,944 12,944 12,944 540 Submtal 12,944 12,944 12,944 12,944 12,944 12,944 13,484 "" Relocafable Ca a R wired 2 598 414 506 552 575 552 92 TOTAL CAPACITY 2 13,542 13,358 13,450 13,496 13,519 13,496 13,576 FTE ENROLLMENT / PROJECTION 3 13,541 13,339 13,438 13,476 13,505 13,483 13,569 ISURPLUSLEIEFICM CAPACITY 1 19 12 20 14 13 7 Number of Reloatables Required 28 18 22 24 25 24 1 Kent Leaming Center is a special program at Grandview School serving students In Grades K -12. The school was designed and is currently configured as an elementary school. ' Capacity is based on standard of service for program capacity and Is updated periodically to reflect program changes. a FTE = Approximate Full Time Equivalent Enrollment or Projection (ECE & Kindergarten @.6) Unfunded facility needs are pending review. Ken, cahoot rima sic -rear Capital Facilities Pia„ _ Table 5 A ;s.. -- April 2002 Page 21 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY TOTAL DISTRICT Permanent Program Capacity, 24,559 24,559 24,559 24,559 26,482 26,482 26,482 New Permanent Construction Grade level reconfiguration - 9th grade to move to high schools in 2004 Additions to Senior High schools 1,923 Elementary # 31 (Unfunded) ° 540 I Permanent Program Capacity subtotall 24,559 24,559 24,559 26,482 26,482 26,482 SCHOOL YEAR 2001-2002 2002=2003 20032004 1 2004-2005 1 200552005 1 2006-2007 2007-2005 Actual 1 P R O J E C T E D 414 506 552 575 552 92 Junior tlgtr Reloa capadry Requires 551 Permanent Program Capacity, 24,559 24,559 24,559 24,559 26,482 26,482 26,482 New Permanent Construction Grade level reconfiguration - 9th grade to move to high schools in 2004 Additions to Senior High schools 1,923 Elementary # 31 (Unfunded) ° 540 I Permanent Program Capacity subtotall 24,559 24,559 24,559 26,482 26,482 26,482 27,022 Interim Relocatable Capacity Ekaw tars Raloarawe Capedly Ro*W 598 414 506 552 575 552 92 Junior tlgtr Reloa capadry Requires 551 812 899 0 0 0 0 sadorHigh Rewat a. C"* 0 . 0 93 868 1,054 1,209 1,395 Total Reiocetable Capacity Required 4 1,149 1,226 1,498 1,420 1,629 1,761 1,487 TOTAL CAPACITY 25,708 . 25,785 1 26,057 1 27,902 1 28,111 1 28,243 1 28,509 28 TOTAL FTE ENROLLMENT/ PROJECTIO3 25,398 25,543 25,993 26,413 26,712 26,913 27,114 t Capacity Is based on standard of service for program capacity and updated periodically to reflect program changes. 2 FTE = Full Time Equivalent Enrollment (le. ECE Preschool Handicapped 8112 day I(indergarten student = .5). 7 In 2004, 9th grade will move to the high schools and result in Increased capacity at Junior High level. 4 2001-2002 total classroom reiocatable capacity is 2,051. Unfunded facility needs are pending review. Kent Sdiod District Six-year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 April 2002 Page 22 -- VIII Finance Pian The finance plan shown on Table 6 demonstrates how the Kent School District plans to finance improvements for the years 2002 - 2003 through 2007 —2008. The financing components include secured and unsecured funding and impact fees. The pian is based on voter approval of future bond issues, collection of impact fees under the State Growth Management Act and voluntary mitigation fees paid pursuant to State Environmental Policy Act. Kent Elementary #27a, which opened in January 1999 as a replacement for the original Kent Elementary School, was the last school for which the District received state matching funds under the current state funding formula. The District anticipates receiving state matching funds for the senior high school additions. Millennium Elementary #30 which opened in the fall of 2000 was the last elementary school that has received funding approval from voters. Voters approved'a $69.5 million bond issue for Capital Construction and Improvements in February 2002. This will fund building additions at three high schools which will coincide with moving 9th grade to the senior high in 2004. Some funding is secured for additional portables and some will be funded from impact fees. Unfunded facility needs will be reviewed in the future. For the Six -Year Finance Plan, costs of future schools are based on estimates from Kent School District Facilities Department. Please see page 25 for a summary of the cost basis. Kent Sahod Distrkt Slx-Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2ppp Pepe 23 -5!--- -- §�q 7-1 � � ( � § § ■ - ■ cli � } \°]/ a\ $co k R co ! of 7 \ § .cr! Acli ) \ ! $ ! n\ \ ■ $ 22 ! ! a . § ... a |§ ! a! - } - $ a.! ` ■ 2 ! ■ ) ° ee� =ak \ k ( § � o = \ � 7 2 a| 2 k !! 7-1 � � ( � § VIII Finance Plan - Cost Basis Summary For impact fee calculations, construction costs are based on cost of the last elementary school, with 5% inflation factor, and the projected construction cost of the additions to three high schools. Elementary School Cost Projected Cost Millennium Elements (#30 -open 2000 $12,182,768 Current cost of Elementary #31 with 5% Inflation $13,431,501 Projected cost of Elementary #31 in 2007 with 5% Inflation $9,600,000 $17,142,378 Senior High Schools Projected Cost Total Addition to Kent -Meridian $260,000 Addition to Kentrid a $10,400,000 Addition to Kentwood $9,600,000 . Projected construction cost of additions to 3 High Schools $20,260,000 The site acquisition cost is based on an average cost of sites purchased or built on within the last ten years. Please see Table 7 on page 26 for a list of site acquisition costs and averages. The impact fee calculations on pages 28 and 29 include a "District Adjustment" which is equal to the amount of increase that the impact fee formulas drive out for this year and adjusted for increase in the Consumer Price Index. The reasons for this adjustment include: 1) the districts long-term commitment to keep impact fee increases as minimal as possible, and 2) our communitys overwhelming support of initiative 695. Kent Sdad District Six -Year Capipl FadliOn Plan AprA 2002 Pape 25 41 • • F W app � pp N Clt t0 1ti O i` m O C t�pp��N7 N� �e�pp� INNS co 0 H H H N N N N N N N H o H 699 tD H N H N N pp t�pp N N t0 M S R {? n O S h n t0 m (D O •�" 0 0 i f L m p $ 1: aD aD 01 C t0 Ol e7 m fc h N CT y y Y O N 1 m S S O1 v0] S n N Hk N YY N H H N H H yk SO S f00 1(j S n S "t CR S S n m S Go M V r r r r r r M W N N O V3 M OV CLi O O J N <]Z t1I La .i N d� a Qm !Q W W O g N < W W N i3 N �y W aj jf m m N N QQ W w y' e'% r R g Y i.S iN3 8 t'PI a a A N a S to W N C $r a� x y �r a s� 2� SE cc & m E c fR m i s c= H$ S e m m a d E e Y Y y 8 cc ' s Em E v a o m o 3 3 w 6 a E mIc c � m m m 0 :2 mO Z m c e y U3 co Y Y rR Y i V co N A O� ED � � O � •- 0 � A h K L KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT FACTORS FOR ESTIMATED IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS Student Generation Factors - Single Family Student Generation Factors - Multi -Family Elementary 0.504 Elementary 0.273 Junior High 0.211 Junior High 0.114 Senior High 0.183 Senior High 0.076 Total 0.898 Total 0.463 Projected Student Capacity SPI Square Footage per Student Elementary 540 Elementary 80 Junior High 1,065 _ Junior High 113.33 Senior High 1,923 Senior High 120 Required Site Acreage per Facility Average Site Cost / Acre Elementary (required) 11 Elementary $72,017 Junior High (required) 21 Junior High $0 Senior High (required) 27 Senior High$0 New Facility Construction Cost Elementary $13,431,501 Junior High $0 Senior High $20,260,000 See calculatiam on Pg. 25 Temporary Facility Square Footage 1;542,562 Elementary 86,956 Junior High 26,280 Senior High 21,736 Total 4% 134,972 Permanent Facility Square Footage Temporary Facility Capacity & Cost Elementary ® 23 $88,525 Junior High @ 29 $88,525 Senior High ® 31 $88,525 State Match Credit Current State Match Percentage 54.19% for Senior High Additions Boeckh Index - Cost / Sq. Ft. Current Boeckh Index $110.32 Elementary 1,455,606 Junior High 753,079 District Average Assessed Value Senior High 800,882 Single Family Residence $205,665 Total 96% 3,009,567 Total Facilities Square Footage Elementary 1;542,562 Junior High 779,359 Senior High 822,618 Total 3,144,539 Developer Provided Sites / Facilities Value 0 Dwelling Units 0 Kent Sdwd District Six -Year Capital FacMow Plan vr--- -- District Average Assessed Value Multi -Family Residence $61,255 Capital Levy Tax Rate/$1,000 Current / $1,000 Tax Rate $2.10 General Obligation Bond Interest Rate Current Bond Interest Rate 5.19% April 2002 Page 27 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT IMPACT FEE CALCULATION for SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE Site Acquisition Cost per Single Family Residence Formula: ((Aces x Cost per Ace) / Facility Capacity) x Student Generation Factor Permanent Facility Construction Cost per Single Family Residence Formula: ((Fadliy Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Perms B 1 (Elementary) $13,431,501 B 2 (Junior Hgh) . $0 B 3 (Senior High) $20,260,000 Temporary Facility Cost per Single Family Residence Formula: ((Fadtity, Cost / Fac Ca ad ) x Student Fa Fa�vCoat Fr C 1 (Elementary) $88,525 C 2 (Junior High) $88,525 C 3 (Senior High) $88,525 State Match Credit per Single Family Residence Formula: Boeckh Index x SPI Square Ft / student x Boackh CwVft FL I SPI D 1 (Elernentary) $110.32 D2 (Junior High) $110.32 D 3 (Senior High) $110.32 Tax Credit per Single Family Residence eyCape* I Required Sas Aeresp 1 Average Sits CoWAas I Family Capacity I Student Factor I 0.211 A 1 (Elementary) 11 $7$017 " 540 0.504 $739.37 A 2 (Junior High) 21 $0 1,065 0.211 $0 A 3 (Senior High) 27 $0 1,923 0.183 $0 0.898 A --> $739.37 Permanent Facility Construction Cost per Single Family Residence Formula: ((Fadliy Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Perms B 1 (Elementary) $13,431,501 B 2 (Junior Hgh) . $0 B 3 (Senior High) $20,260,000 Temporary Facility Cost per Single Family Residence Formula: ((Fadtity, Cost / Fac Ca ad ) x Student Fa Fa�vCoat Fr C 1 (Elementary) $88,525 C 2 (Junior High) $88,525 C 3 (Senior High) $88,525 State Match Credit per Single Family Residence Formula: Boeckh Index x SPI Square Ft / student x Boackh CwVft FL I SPI D 1 (Elernentary) $110.32 D2 (Junior High) $110.32 D 3 (Senior High) $110.32 Tax Credit per Single Family Residence eyCape* I Student Factor I 540 0.504 1,065 0.211 1,923 0.183 0.698 r Capacity I ShKW Fedor I 23 0.504 29 0.211 31 0.183 0.898 1. Ft / Stdera I Dlstirl Mak 80 0 413.33 0 120 0.5419 Average SF Residential Assessed Value $205,665 Current Capital Levy Rate/ $1,000 $2.10 Current Bad Interest Rale 5.19% Years Amortized (10 Years) 10 Developer Provided Facility Credit Facility / Site Value D'AFaIgng Units 0 0 Fee Recap A a Site Acquisition per SF Residence B = PmnanentFablity Cost per Residence C = Temporary Facility Cost per Residence Subtotal D = State Match Credit per Residence TC = Tax Credit per Residence Subtotal $739.37 $13.885.52 512428 $14,749.16 $1,312.82 $3,302.68 $4,515.51 0.96 $12,034.62 0.96 $D 0.96 $1,850.90 B—> $13,885.52 0.04 $77.59 0.04 $25.76 0.04 $20.90 C--> $12425 0.504 $0 0.211 $0 0.183 $1,31282 D —> $1,312.82 TC —> $3,30268 FC ^ 0 Total Unfunded Need $10,133.65 Developer Fee Obligation $5,088.63 FC = Facility Credit Of applicable) 0 District Adjustment (See Page 25 for w0watlnn)($919.83) Net Fee Obligation per Single Family Residence L$4,147.00 Kent Scholl District Six•Year Capita( Fadtities Plan AM 2002 Page 28 . '9-- -- KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT IMPACT FEE CALCULATION for MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE Site Acquisition Cost per Muftl-Family Residence Unit Formula: ((Acres x Cost per Acre) / Facility Capady) x S A 1 (Elementary) 11 $72;017 540 A 2 (Junior High) 21 $0 1,065 A 3 (Senior High) 27 $0 1,923 Permanent Fadiity Construction Cost per MuW-Famly Residence Unit Formula:. ((FaWity, Cost / F Capadly) x Student Fedor) x t / Total re F Consbuctlon Coal F-CftQ Pacxy Skdw Faclsr B 1 (Elementary) $13,431,501 540 0273 B 2 (Junior High) $0 . 1,065 0.114 B 3 (Senior High) $20,260,000 1,923 0.076 0.463 Temporary Facility Cost Per Multi -Fainly Residence Unit Formula: ((Facility Cost/ Facility Capady) x Student Fads) x iremmmrenr / Tr&d v, C 1 (ElernenUry) $88.525 C 2 (Junior High) $88,525 C 3 (Senior High) $88,525 Stab Match Credit per Mufti -Family Residence Unit Formula: Boedch Index x SPI Square FL / student x D 1 (Elementary) $110.32 D 2 (Junior High) $110.32 D 3 (Senior High) $110.32 Tax Credit per MuIB-Family Residence Unit 23 0273 29 0.114 31 0.076 0.463 %x 80 0 113.33 0 120 0.5419 Average MF Residential Assessed Value $66,868 Current Capital Levy Rab / $1,000 $2.10 Cuirent Bond Interest Rate. 5.19% YearsAmor6zad (10 Years) 10 Developer Provided Facility Credit F / Site Value Dwephg llnib 0 0 Fee Recap A = Site Acquisition per Mu8-Famiy Unit B = Permanent Faclifty Cost per MF Unit C = Temporary Facility Cost per MF Unit Subtotal D = State Match Credit per MF Unit TC = T3x Credit per MF Unit Su tDW $400.49 $7,287.43 $64.63 $7,752.56 $54522 $1,073.80 21,619.02 Total Unfunded Need $613354 Developer Fee Obligation FC = Facility Credit (if applicable) District Adjustment (See Paps 25 for eplanatlon) Net Fee Obligation per MuIB.FamOy Residence Unit 0.273 5400.49 0.114 50 0.076 S0 0.463 A—> $400.49 0.98' $6,518.76 0.96. $0 0.98 $768.68 B -^> $7.287.43 0.04 542.03 0.04 $13.92 0.04 58.68 C $64.63 0.273 $0 0.114 S0 0.076 $645.22 D–tea $545.22 TC— $1,073.80 FC —> 0 $3,066.77 0 (55� 52.554.00 Kent Sdxnd District Six -Year Capital Facilities plan April 2002 Page 29 IX Summary of Changes to April 2001 Capital Facilities Plan The Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") is updated annually based on previous Plans in effect since 1993. The primary changes from the April 2001 Plan are summarized here. Millennium Elementary #30 opened in August, 2000. Property for Junior High #8 was determined not feasible and is still for sale. An additional site (Halleson) was purchased in the city of Covington and is included in this Plan. Voters approved funding for additions at three high schools to accommodate new growth, moving 9th grade to senior highs, which will provide additional capacity for grade 7-8 at junior high schools in 2004. Changes to capacity continue to reflect reduction in class size for grades K - 4 as well as program changes. Further reduction in class size for Student Achievement Initiative 728 is reflected in this update. Changes in portables or transitional capacity reflect purchase, sale, surplus and/or movement of portables between facilities Student enrollment forecast is updated annually. Permanent facility costs are based on schools built most recently with adjustment for 5% inflation rate. The district expects to receive state matching funds for projects in this Plan and tax credit factors are updated annually. Unfunded facility needs will be reviewed in the future. Impact fee calculations include a "District Adjustment" which is equal to the amount of increase from impact fee formulas and adjusted for increase in the Consumer Price Index See page 25 for further explanation. The biennial student generation factor survey was updated last year to reflect changes. Changes reflected no adjustment for occupancy. Survey data is included as Appendix E. Changes to Impact Fee Calculation Factors include: ITEM P -71111:-1"I Student Generation Factor Elam 0.504 0.504 No change Single Family (SF) _ Jr 0.211 0.211 Updated in 2001 Plan Sr 0.183 0.183 Total 0.898 0.898 Student Generation Factor Elam 0.273 0.273 No change Multi -Family (MF) Jr 0.114 0.114 Updated in 2001 Plan Sr 0.076 0.076 Total 0.483 0.463 State Match Credit 0% 54.19% 1' change since 1999 Plan Boeckh Index (Cost per square foot) $703.34 $110.32 Per SPI Average Assessed Valuation (AV) SF $192,198 $205,665 Per Puget Sound ESD AV - Average of Condominiums 8 Apts. MF 561255 $66,866 Per Puget Sound ESD Debt Service Capital Levy Rate / $1000 $2.32 $2.10 Per King County Assessor General Obligation Bond Interest Rate 5.07% 5.19% Market Rate Impact Fee - Single Family SF $3,782. $4,147 Change to be Impact Fee - Muhl -Family MF $2,329 $2,554 Change to fee Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2002 Page 30 - 7--- -- X Appendixes Appendix A: Calculations of Capacities for Elementary Schools Appendix B: Calculations of Capacities for Junior High Schools Appendix C: Calculations of Capacities for Senior High Schools Appendix D: Use of Relocatables Appendix E: Student Generation Factor Survey Kent School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan April 2002 Page 31 z W z W I.- 2 2 O V V L ^Sae�v888$$8gv8uaa89S,48g8�3gng8g�mx83848x2$'m� �n i v A 3n i n 1111 i n 3 g g g g g n g3 O O O'$ O a 'm O$ O O,$ 9 O O O.Y A 13:$3!s c o p O 2'$3 0 O O O N O v N O N O O N N O O O N - , N, N O O - O, - O ,. N- N N - - r N - " N N N N N - - A 0 N- N O v 0 N N 0 : I 0 o R O$ o O$ O o A R A R? G o 0 0 o R O o O o s R O$ N v T N' N N N 0 N N 0 v W N N M N r N Y Y- N N N N- A &59giIIg911�iIgLgg31:V!ggIgg.ggag R' N 0 R v A e N N N e N N N N A$ R °! N n n N N R N A U8 a o CO, i `' z d a r, __ a X W a � ay r, __ a X W a a W a G N a N! R. i! o m w E ij: O n vS N g g m 0 '!. � O .�� nl �y t0 O .e p ro 0 m �i y a qq o .•• b Ol O O O m O. N• ;:' r m N N m O � y 6i' V O :•: qq V q 'i;: N C 0 Ym Ep w ": •• ad '! 4 i2� m 9@ '� m m A o a w ry a�3 � q� m i� R Y Y al A Z C A W w a U:t.: ... W IL :: w a ci ;: Wa N '� O. p M :ti ep O a 13 `o Al a °� W ��:�: W� .:.;, b O b O b N Y.� N W b m m� N W O � e psC 9 x• �:i �� ::. Y ♦ 16 le .. $Y 5l D Z. lCL L L LYS N Y -sl-=.-— f a:, c LU R t ` ° ' § | ` � ) . $ On _ ( ■ z � } $ ° § & co �7 , ` } ) � @ ■ � F . §. « © o � § k c , 0 2 A 2 k / 2 _ f CL . J _ / -sl-=.-— f a:, c LU R U) a p 3 Z E U p � a U u 51 in .A -- W C z W a r.w ZOO E� Ca YryN����5°�SaS3N�8�.'Zi r N`23b o'd�32fSds o 0 0'0 cooy o d d C c o G d C C 6 C C o d o G o o G O G d G o o e C o Gp C c oi 0 0 LL7 ♦0 G ep 1 pY y� •p pp $ O r 0 O Cl IV tV N lV N N tV N1V lV O r N {p 8 pp pm �N j S r r C o O G O O G O C G O C C o C o G O O G G C C G G G C O O O O 1'1 O •p O o o d o G o d o d o 0 0 o ofdddd3 ai" W dddmd0d0ddd0ndaJ�{°nry`4r, o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o p p o 0 0 0 0 c o 0 0 d0 0.0 0 ry� 'id�, u o 0 0 0 0 o 0 o 0 0 0 o p 3 N � y w o gt m NgnY g ��x�3enSoSon` o Sn {�oo3sli Sn SA b CO Fa ggw x iryA 5� ns q 0 d d 0 0 0.:.00 o e d d o d .= d o G H 0 0 0 d o d o 0 C--4 0 o O fq .�n"��AStvn��m�A�A��A+qOn'-w m n v to r m men 19 o0 R ♦ O m O w N c w c ^ e S$me3a v.nSSn$$Sn��A e $Sn�`:m°d m N CO) i Y N O S s n$ S ai S ie O n - q 33'udi W ui �U�j 7t)S i�t�i .c�@�q��i3u�iw��t) � ��riGic72 uTi33��2 ' C q O �F LL75 w ❑ c r .0LL E y T 3 -- W C z W a r.w ZOO E� P/T#5 2002 Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan A new 2002 Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan outlining the needs for new and improved storm drainage facilities. NOTE: A complete copy of the approved City of Auburn 2002 Comprehensive Drainage Plan consisting of a document entitled "City of Auburn 2002 Comprehensive Drainage Plan - Executive Summary", a separately bound document entitled "City of Auburn 2002 Comprehensive Drainage Plan - Volume of 2 Chapters 1-13" and another separately bound document entitled "City of Auburn 2002 Comprehensive Drainage Plan Volume 2 of 2 Chapters 14-21 & Appendices", is available for public inspection at the Office of the City Clerk, Auburn City Hall 25 West Main Street, Auburn Washington. P/T#6 Auburn Airport Master Plan Update 2001-2020 Update of existing Airport Master Plan Auburn Municipal Airport _Waster Plan Update 2001-2020 Prepared for: Auburn Municipal Airport. City of Auburn, Washington Prepared by. W&H Pacific, Inc. . 3350 Monte Villa Parkway Bothell, Washington 98021 (425) 9514800 In association wit/f.• Dave Eacret, Ph.D. . Economics and Land Use Consultant Real Estate Economics Bothell, Washington Lee Anne Walker Aviation Consultant Kirkland, Washington June 2001 0,9.9Fj. TIT*(,:� Acknowledgements This plan was prepared by W&H Pacific, Inc. for the City of Auburn. Preparation of this document was financed in part through a grant from the Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), under provisions of the Airport and Airways Improvement Act of 1982 as amended. Contents of this report reflect the views of W&H Pacific, Inc., which is responsible for the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policy of the FAA. Acceptance of this report by the FAA does not in any way constitute a commitment on the part of the United States to participate in any development depicted herein, nor does it indicate that the proposed development is environmentally acceptable in accordance with Public Law 91-190, 91-258 and/or 90495. Project team members which to acknowledge the contributions and support of the following individuals in the preparation of this document: City of Auburn John Anderson, Airport Manager Paul Krauss, City Planning Director Jeff Dixon, Planner II Washington State Department of ....................... Stan Allison, Aviation Planner Transportation, Aviation Division Puget Sound Regional Council .......................... Stephen Kiehl Federal Aviation Administration ....................... Cayla Morgan, Environmentalist Master Plan Advisory Board .............................. Stan Brown Joe DeJoie Bud Buchanan Jamelle Garcia W&H Pacific Project Team In association with Rodger Campbell Don Rottle Mark Napier, P.E., Project Manager Lorelei Mesic, E.I.T., Project Engineer, Planner Dave Eacret, Ph.D. Economics and Land Use Consultant Real Estate Economics Lee Anne. Walker Aviation Consultant The project team members would also like to thank those who attended the open houses for lending their guidance and help to develop a successful plan for the future of Auburn Municipal Airport. Aurora State AGport Master Plan Update -June 2001 Table of Contents Chapter 1 Executive Summary Introduction ............ Executive Summary Chapter 2 Inventory Page Introduction............................................................................................:.........2-1 AirportFacilities.............................................................................................. 2-1 .. Airport Design Criteria.................................................................................. 2-6 LandsideFacilities.......................................................................................... 2-11 Surface Access System ........ :................................................. ......... ............... 2-12 Aviation Activity Data................................................................................... 2-12 Population......................................................................................................2-14 Forecasting Methodology .............................................. :................................. 3-5 ForecastModels LandUse........................................................................................................2-14 ............................................................................................... Chapter 3 Forecasts Introduction...................................................................................................... 3-1 Market Forces Affecting Aviation Activity ..................................................... 3-1 National Liability Limits and Tort Reform ...................................................... 3-2 New Aircraft Certification............................................................................... 3-3 National Demand for Professional Pilots......................................................... 3-3 Global Positioning System (GPS).................................................................... 3-4 Airport Master Planning Forecasting............................................................... 3-4 Forecasting Methodology .............................................. :................................. 3-5 ForecastModels 3-5 ............................................................................................... Preferred Based Aircraft Forecast 3-7 .................................................................... General Aviation Based Aircraft Fleet Mix ..................................................... 3-7 General Aviation Forecast of Operations........................................................ 3-8 Ratio of Operations to Based Aircraft.............................................................. 3-9 Preferred GA Operations Forecast................................................................. 3-11 Local and Itinerant Operations Forecast........................................................ 3-11 PeakingCharacteristics.................................................................................. 3-12 CriticalAircraft .............................................................................................. 3-13 Auburn Municipal Airport MasterPlan Update—June2001 1. weaec%.JMIAWosnw.11r 74._ro.csa Table of Contents -i W&H Pacific, Ina Table of Contents Chapter 4 Facility Requirements Introduction......................................................................................................4-1 Airfield.............................................................................................................4-1 AirportFacilities.............................................................................................. 4-8 AirportAccess............................................................................................... 4-14 Utilities........................................................................................................... 4-14 PropertyAcquisition...................................................................................... 4-14 Chapter 5 Aviation -Dependent Development Alternatives Page Purpose........................................ _................................................................... 5-1 CityPolicies..................................................................................................... 5-1 Aviation -Dependent Uses................................................................................ 5-2 CompetitiveSupply........................................................................................ 5-2 OfficeMarket................................................................................................... 5-3 IndustrialMarket.............................................................................................. 5-3 AirportTenant Demand................................................................................... 5-4., Development Alternative Recommendations.................................................. 5-5 Chapter 6 Land Use Compatibility AirportLayout Plan.........................................................................................6-1 Part 77 Imaginary Surfaces Airspace Plan ....................................................... 6-2 Part 77 Inner Approach Surfaces..................................................................... 6-3 LandUse Plan .................................................................................................. 6-3 Chapter 7 Financial Plan Capital Improvement Plan ............................................................................... 7-1 FinancialPlan ................................................:.................................................. 7-3 Appendix A Wetland Delineation Report B Air Conformity Analysis C Acronyms and Definitions D References Aarora State Airport - Matter Plan Update—June 2001 Table of Contents Figure Title 2-1 Location Map .............................. 2-2 Existing Facilities ....................... 2-3 Airport Pavement Cross -Sections 2-4 Airport Traffic Pattern ................ 2-5 Part 77 Surfaces .......................... 2-6 Land Zone Map ........................... Master Plan Drawings 1 Cover Sheet .............................................. 2 Airport Layout Plan ................................., 3 Part 77 Imaginary Surfaces Airspace Plan 4 Part 77 Inner Approach Surfaces ............... 5 Land Use Plan ........................................... Capital Improvement Plan ........................ Financial Forecast ..................................... Table 2-1 2-2 2-3 2-4 2-5 2-6 2-7 2-8 2-9 3-1 3-2 3-3 3-4 3-5 3-6 4-1 4-2 4-3 Title General Airport Data Runway Data ............ ...............................................6 ...............................................6 ....................................................7 Page ... 2-2 ...2-2 Parking and Storage Capacity .......................................................................... 2-4 Airport Reference Code................................................................................... 2-6 Existing Critical Aircraft ..................................................................................,2-7 DesignStandards............................................................................................. 2-8 BasedAircraft............................................................... .. . 2-13 Operations Activity ....................................:......................... PopulationData...................................................................... Demand Forecasts and Facility Impacts ............................... Comparison of Based Aircraft Forecasts .............................. Based Aircraft Fleet Mix Forecast ........................................ GA Operations Forecasts ..................... ..................... 2-13 ..................... 2-14 ....................... 3-5 ...................................................................... Combined Operations Forecasts........................................................... Peak. Demand Forecasts........................................................................ DeclaredDistances................................................................................ ..3-7 ..3-8 3-11 3-12 3-13 ..4-3 HangarDemand........................................................................ 4-9 Tiedown Demand........................................................................................... 4-11 Aurora State Alport Master Plan Update—June 200/ F. VRQI£[Te,,WI11WOROWmp/ . nn� reLde� Tabre of Contents- til W&H Pacific. Inc. Chapter I Executive Summary Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 1 Master Plan Update Executive Summary Introduction Since the construction of Auburn Municipal Airport in 1969, it has served the aviation community of the Puget Sound Region as a general aviation airport. The airport is a self-funded enterprise, supporting maintenance, and growth through airport revenues. The last airport master plan for Auburn Municipal Airport began development in 1993 and was completed by 1996. By the year 2000, Auburn Municipal Airport found it had achieved many of the goals of the previous master plan. As a result, this master plan update was initiated in the -fall of 2000. The following master plan document is a compilation of draft master plan chapters and comments from the City of Auburn Airport Advisory Board, City and airport staff the FAA, the Puget Sound Regional Council, and the WSDOT Aviation Division during the course of the master plan's development. During the course of the study, public newsletters were sent to airport tenants, the City Council and community members explaining the masterplan process and the progress being made. Three open houses were held at City Hall and at the airport to present master plan information to the public. The Master Plan provides information on the existing airport facilities, based aircraft and operations forecasts, development alternatives and plans, and a financial plan for the airport. Master plan drawings were developed, including an airport layout plan, Part 77 airspace drawings and a land use plan. Also included in this Master Plan is a wetland delineation report for the property on the west side of the airport and an air conformity analysis. Inventory Auburn Municipal Airport is located just north of downtown Auburn, east of Interstate 5 and Highway 167, and North of Highway 18. The airport is, owned and operated by the City of Auburn as an enterprise fund from airport revenues. The airport was constructed in 1969 as a Basic Utility General Aviation Airport. It was later expanded with a runway extension, new tie - downs, and property development on the east side of the runway and re-classified as a General Aviation Reliever Airport. Auburn Municipal Airport serves a unique role as the only pure general aviation airport, in an urban area, remaining in this region. The airport has one 3,400 feet long by 75 feet wide runway, Runway 16-34. The runway surface is asphalt concrete with a pavement strength for light aircraft weighing up to 12,500 lbs. The runway is equipped with Medium Intensity Runway Lighting (MIRL). There are two 20 -foot wide, asphalt concrete, parallel taxiways at the airport on the east side of the runway. The sway configuration does not meet the required separation dimension from the runway of 225 feet, or the standard B -I width of 25 -feet. The airport has several apron areas on the east side of Auburn —October Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 1 Master Pian Update Introduction and Summary the airport, with a total of 214 tiedowns. There are two primary hangar areas on the east side of the airport, one at the north end and one in the central flightline. The hangars to the north consist of two buildings with 40 individual hangar units. These hangars have enclosed doors and were constructed in 2000. The hangars in the center portion of the airport are a mix off open hangars and canvas doors, with a total of 105 units in seven buildings. Auburn Municipal Airport is equipped with a rotating beacon, a SuperUnicom system, and a segmented circle with a lighted wind tee and wind cone (which is currently de -activated). .The runway is also equipped with Runway End Identifier Lights (REILs) and Visual Approach Slope Indicators (VASIs). The Airport Reference Code for Auburn Municipal Airport is a B -I small. The airport currently has 276 based aircraft and 141,000 yearly operations. Forecasts The forecast for Auburn Municipal Airport is for a twenty-year period, from 2001 to 2020. Forecast activity for the five-year period ending 2005, the ten-year Period ending 2010 and the twenty-year period ending 2020 are presented in this chapter. It must be remembered that forecasting is an attempt to estimate future activity and should be used as a guideline. The activity in the near term can be estimated with a fair degree of accuracy, however, as the forecast horizon's extended, unforeseen factors may influence actual activity. While every effort is made to consider relevant events and trends when preparing these forecasts, an unexpected future event may have a significant impact on the actual activity experienced during the forecast period, even within the short term. The forecast for the Auburn Airport was developed sequehtially by analyzing the relationships between area population, number of based aircraft, and levels of operations (takeoffs and landings.) Subsequently, these relationships were reviewed in light of demographic trends within the local area, availability of services at other airports within the area, consumer preferences, local business trends and trends within the aviation industry. Five models were used to forecast based aircraft at Auburn Municipal Airport: FAA Forecast of growth in General Aviation Aircraft, 1993 Washington State Continuous Airport System Plan, 100% Occupancy of New Hangar Development, Population Ratio, and the previous Master Plan Forecast. The New Hangar forecast which incorporates a one percent growth rate has been selected. as the preferred based aircraft forecast. This forecast assumes the construction and rental of 20 additional hangar spaces in 2001 and again in 2002. This will bring the number of hangar spaces available at Auburn Airport to 185 with an additional 214 tiedown spaces. This Ina Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 1 Master Plan Update Introduction and Summary forecast incorporates the regional general aviation trends of continued growth in both number of aircraft and number ofpilots, as well as reflecting the scarcity and expense of aircraft storage in the Puget Sound area. This forecast results in a projection of 377 based aircraft at Auburn by 2020. As part of this forecast, the existing operations at Auburn Municipal Airport were revisited and concluded to be 141,000 operation per year. Five different models were used for the forecast operations: the 1993 Master Plan, the Terminal Area Forecast, the 1993• Washington State Continuous Airport System Plan, Operation to Based Aircraft Ratio -Static, and Operations to Based Aircraft Ratio -Growth . The chosen method was -the Static Ratio of Operations to Based Aircraft forecast. This forecast presents a steady increase in the total operations, and represents the busy, active nature of this airport. The airport operations are forecasted to reach 193,189 by 2020, which is 84 percent of the theoretical airport capacity as defined by FAA. Facility Requirements The facility requirements portion of the master plan evaluates the current airfield and landside facilities in reference to the needs set forth by the airport operations and based aircraft forecasts. A combination of anticipated growth, maintenance and upgrades to standards calls for a variety of improvements on the airport. Facility improvements identified through the review of the facility requirements include: • Reconstruction of the parallel taxiway system to meet FAA standards • Runway 16 threshold displacement to clear approach of obstructions • Runway pavement rehabilitation • Airfield lighting and signing reconstruction • Overlay and pavement maintenance work for taxilane and apron areas • Construction of a partial parallel taxiway and taxilanes to facilitate west side development • Construction of additional runway pavement for increased accelerate -to -stop distance • Property acquisition • Fencing Improvements • Hangar Construction Aviation -Dependent Development Alternatives Aviation -dependent development alternatives were reviewed for the 23 -acre site on the west side Of the airport and the 3.5 -acre site on the east side of the airport. By evaluating alternatives that Jam' - Anburn Munktpal,firporr Marler Plmr-October 2001 enb and SertingalDOmAilLoca! SerrtrtgslTemporary lakrnef Flks10LK21ALmpinchprl.DOG 1-3 Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update Chapter 1 Introduction and Sum are market supportable and will assist the airport in maintaining its financially self-sufficient status, a picture of the recommended used for these sites was developed The 3.5 -acre site was determined to be best suited for FBO development because of its off -airport visibility.and convenient location. Development of the site according to these recommendations is currently underway by a private developer. The 23 -acre site is recommended for the construction of hangars to meet the demand for aircraft hangars at the airport. Remaining areas of the 23 -acre site can be used for aviation -dependent businesses as demand dictates. Airport Pians The airport Plans consist of five sheets: a cover sheet, an Airport Layout Plan, a Part 77 Imaginary Surfaces -Airport Airspace drawing, a Part 77 -Inner Portion of the Approach Surface, and a Land Use Plan. The airport layout plan shows the existing airport along with the ultimate improvements as proposed by this master plan. The Part 77 Imaginary Surface=Airport Airspace. Drawing shows the airport's ultimate imaginary surfaces and the obstructions to those surfaces. The Inner Portion of the Approach Surface drawing gives a picture of the same surfaces, but focuses on the area within 2,000 feet of each threshold and the runway protection zones (RPZs). The final sheet is the Land Use Plan, which shows the approximate standard air traffic pattern, zoning around the airport, land lease areas and the noise contours. The land use in the vicinity of the airport is evaluated based on three criteria: the noise contours, the runway protection zones (RPZs) and the Part 77 surfaces. It is concluded that the zoning around the airport is suitable. Any development in the RPZs should be reviewed to maintain compatible uses in this area. Financial Plan FAA Compliance Rates and charges were reviewed and minimum standards were developed during this master plan process. They will remain as separate reports from the master plan, but are summarized in this document. Rates and Charges The purpose of a Rates and Charges Survey is to provide information to assist the airport operator in establishing appropriate fees for services and facilities provided by the airport. Any airport that accepts AIP (Airport Improvement Program) Funds from the FAA is required to charge fair market value for their facilities and services. Fair market value is generally established by comparison to other comparable facility's rates. In the case of airports in the I=. Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 1 Master Plan Update .Introduction and Summary Puget Sound region, the identification of comparable airports is very difficult due to the array of services. The comparison used for airports was determined by drawing a 60 -mile radius around Auburn Municipal Airport. Airports that do not offer services to the General Aviation community (Le., hangar or tiedown space, fuel or land leases), such as Seattle -Tacoma International Airport or private airfields, have been excluded as not comparable. Fuel flowage charges, daily tiedown charges, monthly hangar and tiedown rental charges and land lease rates were then compared in tabular form. An additional comparison of the rates and charges was made by evaluating other factors such as local population, distance from a major population center, runway characteristics, and availability of instrument navaids and air traffic control facilities. It was determined that Auburn's rates and charges are currently fair and reasonable. Minimum Standards The development and implementation of Minimum Standards for aeronautical services by the airport sponsor is recommended, although not required, by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The FAA requires that the owner of a public airport that has been developed or improved with the assistance of federal funds is obliged to make the airport's facilities available on "fair and reasonable terms without unjust discrimination." Minimum Standards are established by the airport sponsor to provide these basic terms and entry requirements for individuals and businesses who wish to provide aeronautical services to the public. These standards are designed to protect both consumers and those who engage in aeronautical commerce from unfair or irresponsible competition. The Minimum Standards are intended to assure that those who offer these products and services at Auburn Municipal Airport have obtained the proper licenses, training, certification and insurance. The development of the Minimum Standards for the Auburn Airport have taken into consideration the aviation role of the airport, facilities currently existing and services currently provided on the airport as well as future development and aviation services planned for the Airport. The Minimum Standards define the minimum levels of service, insurance, and compliance with requirements that must be met.by a prospective service provider. The uniform and equitable enforcement .of these standards is designed primarily to protect the Airport, the airport patrons and the established aeronautical activities by mandating insurance coverage levels, certification, and state and local business registration. h' —October 200! Auburn Munic7pa irf A port ,.......w Master Pim Chapter 2 Inventory Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 2 Master Plan Update Inventory Airport Introduction Airport Location, Geography and Climate Auburn Municipal Airport is located just north of downtown Auburn, east of Interstate 5 and Highway 167, and north of Highway 18. The airport is located in the Green River Valley, having a local flat topography bordered by the Cascade Mountain Range. The airport is approximately 26 miles south of Seattle and 13 miles northeast of Tacoma, Washington (see Figure 2.1, Location Map). The climate in the area is .temperate, with an average of approximately 34 inches of rain per year. Snow is rare in the vicinity of the airport. Airport History and Development The Auburn Municipal Airport is owned and operated by the City of Auburn, Washington. The airport operates as an enterprise fund off of airport revenues. The airport was constructed in the fall of 1969, as a Basic Utility General Aviation airport. It was then expanded to the role of a General Aviation Reliever Airport, which resulted in extension of the runway, new tie -downs, and other property development on the east side of the runway. Airport's Role within the Community and Region The airport has been a consistent presence in the City of Auburn community. The airport's role is that of a base for many local aircraft, as a reliever for Sea -Tac Airport, and as a training facility for many new pilots. The airport is also used as a Medivacs facility, transferring patients from helicopters to ambulances. The airport is home to many local pilots who store their planes in the airport's hangars and tiedowns. Auburn Flight Service/Northwest Aviation College operates an accredited college flight school, charter service, aircraft rentals and maintenance. In addition to the role the airport has within the community, Auburn Municipal Airport is the only pure General Aviation airport, in an urban area, remaining in this region. Therefore, it provides a unique and necessary component to aviation in its region. Airport Facilities Airfield A summary of airport data is shown in Table 2-1, General Airport Data. A layout of the existing airport facilities can be found in Figure 2.2, Existing Facilities. Also, a summary of the existing pavement on the airport, developed by Pavement Consultants Inc., is attached as Figure 2.3. Auburn Municipal Airport Mater Plan —June 7001 I:IPROJEC71012300101WORDIMstrplnchpt2.DOC 2.1 W&H Pacific, Inc. Auburn Municipal Airport I Chapter 2 ' Master Plan Update Inventory Table 2-1 GENERAL AIRPORT DATA 1 1 Airport Elevation 63.0 feet , Mean/Maximum Monthly Temperature 78.8 a F ' Airport Reference Point Latitude 470 19'41.4" Longitude 1220 13' 35.4" Unicom Frequency 122.8 MHz Source: Airport Facility Directory, 1996 Master Plan Update and W&H Pacific, Inc., September 2000. Runway Auburn Municipal Airport has one runway, Runway 16-34. The runway is aligned in a north - south direction. A runway data summary is given in Table 2-2, Runway Data. Table 2-2 RUNWAY DATA Runway Length Runway Width Runway Surfacing Runway Pavement Strength Effective Gradient Runway Lighting Landing Aids Wind Coverage (All Weather) Source: 1996 Master Plan Update and W&H Pacific, Inc., September 2000. 3400 feet 75 feet Asphalt Concrete Single -Wheel Landing Gear 12,500 lbs. 0.194% VASI, REILs 98.9%(12mph) Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update — June 1001 1:IPROJEC21021300141 WORDIMs1rp1nchp12.DOC 2-2 WWhN Pacific, Inc 1 I I Victoria, 3 A NO ] U A 1\:—' ca.W A J �wauaw+n L ' I Oak Hartrc.r - PROJECT N0. 03.0223.0014 I IH_L♦( ••� r� LLU✓IIIIr c s a -ate... rr.. • r �'�• I 'Vm r( P'.L[�fl Nrl$ d � Al \` d .—� �• .��h.ir1•Nm A,•,q� \L �1 klT�1 i _les L,f Du IM'` IW '�kllrktl JYa I �j^ j y I sriry ._� ' 71i'Z ray ! t 1 al' Arr[,h[[,n n(x ',({`tf/a3{Y II 'a[IIN ra ( �"gin •.. $IM1Rb1 as. '. Make 5- .m —biJo J. a. A S h 1 OF m6h wood C, l r _„F, `.aro, '� �y. ! r v--Ed[,:a1ds la A Morroe r-�7 \ ram•: - t'1' S A P 'Nil Not• Y` Aa _Y. [ liedf?O�1 �+p^1� ' � ti• .: - r,: t�'tnsbwl, c'' . r \_ t ( � i n z a c ellevue c..,:. L Bfemeriory ,L SEAQ , I •1I^4RPORFuk,.l `e Fenton •,t 7 �� pxAbr ' Maines° ICCnr I ra MY .. , .. 'rN c"n' Gi� Harbor ;'&A Au m - k N In AUBURN Gmaiad� MUIIIICIP a / I. r i•a Sht�II � / 1�� uadaW � �z^ b Hakr.• 1\ tFaaxOT �� o- allup aro 1 �r 1 Lr _3 •_ w r BUk r[R4 V Giri T I A• A 5. �! aa. � aAYa lr _ • .S -y1 .. 6 J,f1Y Pert 1. � V � "`` [ s rs..N G... un[ doeys 3 � rac . t' } (•e[� [aa .. �r ( . (1 ism,-. �_\. ., sl •`. I utaed F`.. I 5t f. P I E R C E� l% .o ormdA <D 1' I D Wim` -ne V ,1`,. I ❑uS [ 'ra't .1 _,J I � Fatcmik ` I '? CSn: lanmc LC., I _; R S T O w w�. Y wacbe 706 GrM[ � cn a. �-- --'. � -_. hl r •k .::.ZZs - ... r Centralia I, kkew 1W • •,hiG - i .:� S r nn5 newr�l r ., k [I :uinN :. °' - ., v•,.. � �'�,:. i _ tr lam. blear •. L '�� _ [ac ? r P--.' [' "'", �_ IJ LAD CHEDKED BY: DRALAST EDIT FAT rY. RAT o Lor oa E. I a!C Yob .Wa�..IM�gr /NCrt a. a r a ......_ CITY OF AUBURN AUBURN MUNICIPAL AIRPORT LOCATION MAP AUBURN WASMINDTD)I DAZE BY REV��RENSIDN CK� SCALE: i"=1' PROJECT N0. 03.0223.0014 DRAWING FILE NAME: FIGURE21 SHEET FIGURE 2.1 34d �� I I I 0 T--- s F t Oiy E 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I.r nl �h I 1 1 I I F r :IR I 1 1 1 �A�t II 1 I I hl. I � tl III r:l j J @ I I I i i i� p C b ypyp� 1 r 1 _ 1 , II E : 0 0 ° � I I I '1 1 I 94 I"+I I 1a1aTiT1� a - FI I Rj�T � I 4 1 .1 ' RIL g� +e � II• Ta t(. ...: a C. N N ^.�^+; _ .'• 0 0 _ _ILS 34d �� I I Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 2 Master Plan Update Inventory Taxiways The airport has two parallel taxiways on the east side of the runway. Both taxiways run the entire length of the runway. The taxiways are one -directional, with one for northbound traffic and one for southbound traffic. The traffic flow is maintained with destination -type signing. The taxiways have a width of 20 feet, with a 50 -foot separation from centerline of taxiway to centerline of taxiway. There is a distance of 207.5 feet from the centerline of the western -most taxiway to the centerline of the runway. The surface of the taxiways is asphalt concrete. Aprons, Hangars and Tiedowns All aircraft storage capability is currently on the east side of the runway. There are four apron areas on the airport. An apron, approximately 285 feet by 290 feet, with 45 tiedowns for based aircraft is on the south side of the airport office. To the immediate north of the airport office are the transient tiedowns. The area for these tiedowns is approximately 225 feet by 300 feet, with 25 tiedowns. There are 21 tiedowns used by Auburn Flight Services/Northwest Aviation College located around the perimeter and in front of their main building. On the far south end of the airport is another apron of based aircraft tiedowns in an area 330 feet by 505 feet, with 62 tiedowns. Four of these 62 tiedowns are designated for transient aircraft and are located next to a gate that provides pedestrian access to the nearby restaurants and hotels. Another 27 based aircraft tiedowns are located just south of the south end hangars. North of the based tiedown apron is an apron of tiedowns leased by Auburn Flight Service/Northwest Aviation College, an area 280 feet by 435 feet, with 34 tiedowns. There are two primary areas on the airport with aircraft storage hangars. In the area between the two FBO buildings, there are 7 hangar buildings. Some of the hangars have canvas doors, but most are without doors. On the north end of the airport, there are two new T -hangar buildings with solid locking doors. Two more buildings (housing 20 T -hangars each) will be constructed south of the existing hangar buildings, along with approximately seven larger, corporate -style hangars. Refer to Table 2-3, Parking and Storage Capacity, for quantity of tiedown and hangar spaces. Master Plan Update — June 2001 2-3 WW@H Pacific, Inc. Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 2 Master Plan Update Inventory Table 2-3 PARKING AND STORAGE CAPACITY Tiedowns: Based 130 spaces Transient 29 spaces FBO/Leased 55 spaces Total Tiedowns 214 spaces Hangars: Hangars w/out Doors 91 spaces Canvas Doors 14 spaces Solid Locking Doors 40 spaces Total Hangars 145 spaces Soumc: W&H Pacific, September 2000 Lighting and NAVAIDS Runway 16-34 is lighted with Medium Intensity Runway Lighting (MIRL) and Runway End Identifier Lights (REILs) on each end. The runway lights are activated by a photoelectric cell and the REILs are radio controlled. A segmented circle with a lighted wind tee and lighted wind cone, is located on the west side of the runway and a rotating beacon is 1,340 feet west of the runway centerline, adjacent to B Street. The four box Visual Approach Slope Indicators (VASIs) are located at either end of the runway, on the west side. The VASIs are always lit. The primary parallel and connector taxiways have edge MITI, lighting. All lighting and Navaids are airport - owned, with the exception of the VASIs, which are owned and maintained by the FAA. The airport recently installed a SuperUnicom system, which provides current temperature, wind force and velocity, and altimeter readings for pilots through radio control. Fueling Facilities The fueling facility is located southwest of the airport office, adjacent to the parallel taxiways. The tank holds 12,000 gallons of 100 low lead Avgas. This facility was originally comprised of underground fuel tanks, and was replaced by the new facility in 1998. The fuel is self-service Auburn Municipal Alrport Master Plan Update — June 2001 /:IPROJEG71022300141WORDWstrpinchpt2.DOC 2 - 4 WW&H Paciylc, Ina I I I I I L 1 1 Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 2 Master Plan Update Inventory and is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Purchases may be made by credit card, cash or check. Purchases.by cash or check_may only be made between 8am and 5pm. Ninety percent - of the pilots use the credit card method of payment. Signing and Marking Signing at the airport consists of inbound and outbound destination signing for the taxiways with informational signs for the two ends of the runway. Runway marking is visual. Internal Circulation and Access Access to the airport can be gained through a number of gates on the east side of the airport and one gate off 30' Street NE. The airport also owns an access easement from B Street to the west side of the airport. The internal circulation for aircraft consists of the two parallel one-way taxiways and associated taxilanes. Security Fencing and Gates The security fencing encompasses the airport property on the north, south and east sides, and half of the west side. The entire security fence is 6 -foot chain link, with the exception of the fence on the south side of the airport under the approach surface. This fence is 4 feet in height to avoid encroaching into the approach surface. There are three pedestrian access gates: one by the airport office, one next to the Auburn Flight Service/Northwest Aviation College main building, and one next to the Auburn Flight Service/Northwest Aviation College maintenance building at the south end of the airport. There are five vehicle access gates: four along the east side of the airport, and one at the north end. Three of the vehicle gates - the one next to the airport office, one next to the main Auburn Flight Service/Northwest Aviation College building, and the one by the north T -Hangars - are key card access, with free exit. The two remaining gates are located at either end of the group of seven hangar buildings. The gate on the north end of the buildings has a key card access, but no exit capabilities, while the gate at the south end only allows exiting. Customs Gate Auburn is an entry point from Canada, where customs is run through a General Aviation Telephonic Entry System. The customs gate is located adjacent to the transient tiedown apron. Auburn Municipal Airport MasterPlan Update—June 1001 1:IPRaIEC71011300141WORDIMstrpinchpt2.DOC 2-5 WW&H Pack, Inc. Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 2 Master Plan Update Inventory Airport Design Criteria Airport Reference Code The airport reference code is a criterion that defines critical airport dimensions by the characteristics of the aircraft that are operating at the airport. This code is defined specifically by the approach category and design group of the aircraft. The approach category of the aircraft is determined by 1.3 times the stall speed of the aircraft in its landing configuration at its maximum landing weight and is represented by a letter A, B, C, D or E. The design group of the aircraft is based on the wingspan of the aircraft and is designated by a roman numeral I, II, III, IV, V, or VI. The requirements for each approach category and design group are listed in Table 24, Airport Reference Code. Table 2-4 AIRPORT REFERENCE CODE Approach Category Approach Speed A less than 91 knots B equal to or greater than 91 knots, but less than 121 knots C equal to or greater than 121 knots, but less than 141 knots D equal to or greater than 141 knots, but less than 166 knots E equal to or greater than 166 knots Design Group Wingspan I less than 49 feet II equal to or greater than 49 feet, but less than 79 feet III equal to or greater than 79 feet, but less than 118 feet IV equal to or greater than 118 feet, but less than 171 feet V equal to or greater than 171 feet, but less than 214 feet VI equal to or greater than 214 feet, but less than 262 feet Soume: FAA AC 150/5300-13, Change 6 Critical Aircraft The critical aircraft for the airport is chosen by selecting the most restrictive aircraft, or a combination of the most restrictive characteristics of the various aircraft, that operate at the Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update —June 1001 I:IPROJECnO22300141WORDUIstrpinchpt2.DOC 1-6 WW&H Pack, Inc. Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 2 Master Plan Update Inventory airport. The aircraft must also perform a minimum of 500 itinerant operations per year at the airport. Auburn Municipal Airport serves primarily small, general aviation aircraft. The critical aircraft has remained the same since the previous master plan (1996), a B -I class aircraft, such as the Cessna 340A (see ARC design characteristics in Table 2-5, Existing Critical Aircraft). Table 2-5 EXISTING CRITICAL AIRCRAFT (CESSNA 340A) Airport Reference Code (ARC) B -I Approach Speed 94.4 knots Wingspan 37.7 feet Maximum Takeoff 5,990 lbs. source: FAA Advisory Circular AC 15015300-13, Change 6 Note: Critical aircraft will be reviewed in alternatives analysis and forecasting. Design Standards/Modification to Standards The ARC of B -I and the visual approach runway define the standards for the airport. Table 2-6, Design Standards, summarizes existing and current standards for the airport. Auburn Munielpal Airport Mosier plan Update— June 1001 1.,IPROJECr1021300141WORDIMsirpinchpt2.DOC 1-7 WW&H PactJie Inc Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 2 Master Plan Update Inventory Table 2-6 DESIGN STANDARDS Auburn Municipal Airport Mwuue Plan Update—June 200/ I:IPROJEC21022300141WORDLNatrpinchpt2.DOC 2-8 WW&H Pacific, Inc. Existing B -I stds. Figure2.2 Dimensions ID Letter Runway centerline to taxiway centerline 207.5ft 225ft a Runway centerline to aircraft parking area 307.5ft 200ft b Taxiway centerline to parallel taxiway centerline 50ft 69ft c Taxiway centerline to fixed/movable object 50ft 44.5ft d Runway width 75ft 60ft e Runway shoulder width Oft loft n/a Runway safety area width 120ft 120ft f Runway safety area length beyond 240ft 240ft g runway end Runway object free area width 400ft 4008 It Runway object free area length beyond 240ft 240ft i runway end Taxiway width 20ft 25ft j Taxiway shoulder width Oft 1 Oft n/a Taxiway safety area width Soft 49ft not shown Taxiway object free area width 100ft 89ft not shown Note: All dimensions in bold do not meet the B -I standards. source: 1996 Muter Plan Update FAA Advisory Circular AC 15015300-13. Change 4 Auburn Municipal Airport Mwuue Plan Update—June 200/ I:IPROJEC21022300141WORDLNatrpinchpt2.DOC 2-8 WW&H Pacific, Inc. Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 2 Master Plan Update Inventory The current design standards for the airport are based on an ARC of B -I. Prior to development of this master plan, the ultimate configuration -for the airport was to meet the requirements for an ARC of B -II. It has since been recommended by the FAA Airports District Office to keep the standards at B -I, because of pavement strength and other limitations at the airport that will prevent it from serving 500 itinerant B-H aircraft a year. Therefore, the modifications to standards were originally based on a combination of B -I and B -II standards and are as follows: 1) Separation between Runway 16-34 and the westernmost parallel taxiway is currently 207.5ft. The B-H standard is 240ft. (Mod. To Stds. approved per 1.996 Master Plan.) 2) Existing hangar buildings are 50 feet from the easternmost parallel taxiway centerline, but this distance should be 65.5ft for B -II standards. (Mod. To Stds. approved per 1996 Master Plan.) 3) The parallel taxiways only have a 5011 separation, but to meet B-H standards, this dimension should be 105ft. (Mod. To Stds. approved per 1996 Master Plan.) 4) The parallel taxiways are 2011 wide, whereas they should be 35ft wide for B-H standards. (Mod. To Stds. approved per 1996 Master Plan.) 5) The southernmost taxilane, in the north T -hangar area has 35.5ft from the taxilane centerline to the hangar, while the B -I standard is 39.5ft. (Mod. To Stds. approved per letter of request, July 28, 2000.) Runway Protection Zones The Runway Protection Zone has a trapezoidal shape that begins 200 feet beyond the end of the runway and is centered on the runway centerline. The approach category and visibility minimums determine the dimensions for the trapezoid for each end of the runway. The RPZ is the same for both ends of Runway 16-34, with a starting width of 250 feet and an ending width of 450 feet, over a length of 1000 feet. These dimensions correspond to a visual approach and not lower than a mile visibility minimums, for small aircraft. Airport Traffic Patterns The Auburn Municipal Airport Runway 16-34 utilizes a "racetrack" pattern. A left-hand traffic pattern is used when Runway 34 is the active runway and a right-hand traffic pattern is used when Runway 16 is the active runway. The altitude of the traffic pattern is 800 feet above the airport elevation (857 feet above mean sea level). The traffic pattern is shown in Figure 2.4, Airport Traffic Pattern. Auburn Municoat Airport Master Plan Update — June 2001 1.IPROJEC71022300141WORDIMstrpinchpi2.DOC 2-9 WW&H Pacific, Inc. Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 2 Master Plan Update Inventory Part 77 Surfaces The Part 77 Surfaces consists of multiple imaginary surfaces defined by the approach types for each end of the runway. The culmination of these surfaces designates the three-dimensional protected airspace around the airport. These surfaces are used as guideline for all development and construction in the airspace around the airport. Any penetration into these surfaces is classified as an obstruction. The five surfaces that define this three-dimensional airspace are as follows: 1. Primary Surface: A rectangular surface with a width of 250 feet (centered on the runway centerline) and a length that extends 200 feet beyond each end of the runway. The elevation of the primary surface corresponds to the elevation of the nearest point of the runway centerline. 2. Approach Surface: A surface centered on the extended runway centerline, starting at each end of the primary surface, 200 feet beyond each end of the runway at a width of 250 feet and an elevation equal to that of the end of the runway; extending a horizontal distance of 5,000 feet to a width of 1,250 feet, at a slope of 20:1. 3. Transitional Surface: A sloping 7:1 surface that extends outward and upward at right angles to the runway centerline from the sides of the primary surface and the approach surfaces. 4. Horizontal Surface: An elliptical surface at an elevation 150 feet above the established airport elevation created by swinging 5,000 -foot radius arcs from the center of each end of the primary surface. Tangent lines then connect these arcs. 5. Conical Surface: A surface extending outward and upward from the horizontal surface at a slope of 20:1 for a horizontal distance of 4,000 feet. The Part 77 surfaces for Auburn Municipal Airport can be seen in Figure 2.5, Part 77 Surfaces. Any obstructions to this surface are discussed in Chapter 6, Airport Plans. Approach Procedures Runway 16-34 has no instrument approach procedures. The airport has submitted a request to FAA Flight Standards for a GPS approach to Runway 16, but the approach has not yet been established. Obstruction Clearance Approaches There are two existing obstructions to the approaches - one building at the north end of the runway (which is marked with an obstruction light), and the park and ride at the south end. These obstructions will be addressed in Chapter 6, Airport Plans. Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update — June 2001 CIPRO/ECnO22300141WOAD UIstrpinchpt2.DOC 2-10 WW&H Pacific. Inc. I I I 1 w U) Q m ■ FINAL 2 O DOWNWIND Z O 6 c; U RUNWAY O O ENTER PATTERN IN LEVEL FLIGHT AT THE MIDPOINT OF THE RUNWAY, AT THE TRAFFIC PATTERN ALTITUDE 857' MSL. MAINTAIN PATTERN ALTITUDE UNTIL ADJACENT TO THE APPROACH END OF THE LANDING RUNWAY, ON THE DOWNWIND LEG. COMPLETE TURN TO FINAL AT LEAST 1/4 MILE FROM THE RUNWAY. CONTINUE STRAIGHT AHEAD UNTIL BEYOND DEPARTURE END OF RUNWAY. IF REMAINING IN THE TRAFFIC PATTERN, COMMENCE TURN TO CROSSWIND LEG BEYOND THE DEPARTURE END OF THE RUNWAY, WITHIN 300 FEET OF PATTERN ALTITUDE. IF DEPARTING THE TRAFFIC PATTERN, CONTINUE STRAIGHT OUT, OR EXIT WITH A 45 DEGREE LEFT TURN BEYOND THE DEPARTURE END OF THE RUNWAY, AFTER REACHING PATTERN ALTITUDE. NOTE: THE STANDARD TRAFFIC PATTERN IS A "RACETRACK" PATTERN. RUNWAY 34 - STANDARD LEFT-HAND PATTERN. RUNWAY 16 - HAS A RIGHT HAND PATTERN - ALL TURNS ARE TO THE RIGHT ZPACIFIC Airport Traffic Pattern Figure Auburn Municipal Airport 2.4 Master Plan Update ACAD FILE: FIGURE24.DWG Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan U Landside Facilities Fixed Base Operators Chapter 2 Inventory There is one fixed base operator currently on the airport, Auburn Flight Service/Northwest Aviation College. Auburn Flight Service/Northwest Aviation College does maintenance and repair in a building at the south end of the airport and in one end of a hangar building, and the main office and pilot training are in the building closest to the airport office (see Figure 2.2, Existing Facilities Map). Aircraft rental is also available through Auburn Flight Service/Northwest Aviation College. They recently purchased a former FBO on the airport, Sky Services. Their buildings are leased for a 30 -year lease period. An aircraft broker, and former FBO on the airport, recently relocated to Boeing Field. This move was necessary because Auburn Airport could not support the size of aircraft that they wished to sell. Auburn Flight Service/Northwest Aviation College took over the building lease that formerly belonged to TAS. Airport Office and Pilot Lounge The airport office is centrally located on the east side of the airport. The office is a three-room building consisting of a reception area, airport manager's office and a pilot lounge. The pilot lounge has vending machines. All visitors must check in at the airport office before going onto the airport. Support Facilities Utilities City of Auburn supplies sewer and water service for the airport. Telephone service is provided by US West. Power is supplied by Puget Sound Energy. The new hangars on the north end of the airport have accessed their sewer, water, power and telephone service from 30' Street NE. Fire Fighting Services Auburn Airport is not required to have on -airport Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF). The airport emergency services are provided by the City of Auburn Fire Department, which is located less than a half a mile from the airport. Auburn Municipal Airport Mater Plan Update- June 2001 I.IPRQIEC71022300I41WORDIMurpinchpl2.DOC 2-11 WW&HPacjc, Inc. Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 2 Master Plan Update Inventory Airport Maintenance Facilities The airport maintenance facilities operated by the airport staff are located at the ends of three of the hangars at the south end of the airport. Storm Drainage and Water Quality Features Storm drainage is conveyed at the airport by a combination of catchbasins and pipe throughout the airport. A series of four detention cells were built in 1999 at the north end and northwest side of the runway for storm drainage detention. These cells are outfitted with floats and netting to prevent waterfowl attraction. Surface Access System Existing Parking Facilities Auto parking at parking lots in flying. I 1 I I I I I the airport is limited to seven parking spots next to the airport office and the ' front of the FBO buildings. Tenants park in their aircraft storage areas while Internal Circulation Roadways and Access Roads There are no designated internal access roads on the airport. The common access to the airport is from 15' Street NE (a main road just south of the airport), to D Street NE, which turns into E Street NE, which runs along the eastern boundary of the airport. You can also gain access to the airport from Auburn Way to 22nd Street NE to D Street NE or at 30' Street NE. Aviation Activity Data Based Aircraft The airport currently has 275 based aircraft, the majority of which are single engine aircraft, and one based helicopter. The mix of based aircraft has been very consistent over the past ten years, and the number of based aircraft has remained in the mid -200s. Based aircraft numbers have increased significantly from 1999 to 2000 because of the new hangars at the north end of the airport. With the proposed T -hangars, the number of based aircraft should continue to increase at a significant rate. The types of based aircraft are summarized in Table 2-7, Based Aircraft. Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update - June 2001 /:IPROJECn022300101WORDL4rtrpinchpt2.DOC 2-12 WW&H PadJk. Inc. Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 2 Master Plan Update Inventory Table 2-7 BASED AIRCRAFT Year Single Engine Multi Engine Jet Helicopters Gliders Military Ultra -light Total 2000 263 12 0 1 0 0 0 276 1999 220 9 0 1 0 0 0 230 1996 220 9 0 1 0 0 0 230 1995 231 10 0 1 0 0 0 242 1994 225 10 0 1 0 0 0 236 1993 223 13 0 0 0 0 0 236 1992 259 11 0 0 0 0 0 270 1991 259 11 0 0 0 0 0 270 Note: Data not available for 1997 and 1998 source: 5010 Airport Master Records, Airport Management Estimates and 1996 Master Plan Update Operations volumes were previously determined based on an average of the operations numbers given by an acoustical counter and the operations shown in the 5010 forms. An operations count has not been done since the early 1990s; therefore, Table 2-8, Operations Activity, represents the best estimates available as to the operations activity at the airport. As a portion of this master plan (see Chapter 3, Forecasts) the current operations numbers at the airport were reviewed and a new estimate for current operations was developed, resulting in 141,000 operations for 2000. Table 2-8 OPERATIONS ACTIVITY Year Air Carrier Commuter Air Taxi GA Local GA Itinerant Military Total 2001 Master Plan Update 141,000 2000 0 0 7,996 65,565 98,339 100 172,000 1994 0 0 7,996 65,565 98,339 100 172,000 1992 0 0 7,996 65,565 86,256 100 159,917 1991 0 0 9,000 75,000 100,000 100 184,100 source: 5010 Airport Master Records and Airport Management Estirtutes Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update — June 2001 I:IPROJEC71022300141WORDIMstrplncbpt2.DOC 2.13 WW&H PaciJtc. Inc. Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 2 Master Plan Update Inventory Population The population in Auburn continues to grow at a steady rate. Population rates over the past 10 years are found in Table 2-9, Population Data. Population data is also given for King County, in which the City of Auburn is located, and Pierce County, the county just south of the Auburn City limits. Population continues to grow in all areas of the Puget Sound Region, but the population in Auburn has been increasing at a faster rate than King or Pierce Counties. The population growth rate in Auburn from 1999 to 2000 was approximately 6.5 percent, while King County was approximately 0.5 percent, and Pierce County was approximately 0.8 percent. Table 2-9 POPULATION DATA 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 City of Auburn 36,130 36,720 37,440 38,980 41,670 City of Seattle 534,700 536,600 539,700 540,500 540,900 King County 1,628,800 1,646,200 1,665,800 1,677,000 1,685,600 Pierce County 665,200 674,300 686,800 700,000 706,000 Source: Office of financial Management, Forecasting Division, State of Washington, April 1,2000. Land Use On -Airport Property Use All developed property at the airport is used for aviation -dependent facilities or directly related to the function of the airport. There are two undeveloped parcels of land - one 23 -acre parcel on the west side of the airport, and a 3.5 -acre parcel on the east side of the airport, just north of the transient tiedown apron. These two parcels are being studied, as part of this Master Plan to determine what type of aviation -dependent facilities should be placed on these properties. Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update — June 1001 1:IPROJEC710113001e1 W0RDIblsrrp1nchp12.D0C 1-14 WW&1l Pact& lac. I 1 I I �J Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 2 Master Plan Update Inventory Off -Airport Land.Use.. Land use off airport property, but adjacent to the airport, is a mix of commercial and industrial uses. South of the airport are numerous fast food restaurants, hotels, a casino, a park & ride, and a strip mall with a grocery store, drug store and other businesses. The west side of the airport has a number of commerciallindustrial buildings, the Burlington Northern Railroad, and Emerald Downs Racetrack. North and east of the airport one finds more small businesses, both commercial and industrial, and a number of restaurants. The park & ride on the south side of the airport may potentially be relocated, because of the new transit center in downtown Auburn. If the park & ride is relocated, the airport would like to -acquire the parcel for runway protection. The parcel sits in the runway protection zone (RPZ). Zoning around the airport is a mixture of light and heavy industrial, light and heavy commercial, with some residential areas to the east, northeast and southeast, and institutional zoning for the hospital to the north. See Figure 2.6, Land Zone Map, for zoning regulations on and around the airport. The City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan maintains the current zoning for the areas adjacent to the airport. The growth trends seen around the airport include re -development of existing businesses and development of open land for industrial/commercial buildings. The development of open land is slowing down, and undeveloped/buildable land is becoming harder to find in the City of Auburn. The development trend will likely shift to more re -development of existing buildings and facilities. The zoning laws govern land use regulations in the area around the airport. The noise sensitive locations around the airport are the hospital to the south and some residential neighborhoods to the east. Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update— June 1001 1: IPROJEC71011300141WORDWstrpinchp IDOC 1-15 WW&H Pacific. Inc. Chapter 3 Forecasts Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 3 Master Plan Update Forecasts Introduction The purpose of the forecast chapter is to estimate future levels of aviation activity for the airport. This forecast of future activity then provides the basis to evaluate future demands on existing facilities and estimate what new facilities will be needed. Multiple forecasts of activity at Auburn Municipal Airport will be prepared using different approaches, and from these, a most likely forecast will be selected. The existing constraints on. the airport, as documented and identified in the Inventory chapter, are taken into account when selecting the most likely forecast for the airport. The existing facilities are then analyzed in terms of meeting the projected future activity, as identified in the selected forecast, and used as the basis for the planning of cost effective improvements to meet this activity. This forecast is for a twenty-year period, from 2001 to 2020. Forecast activity for the five-year period ending 2005, the ten-year period ending 2010 and the twenty-year period ending 2020 are presented in this chapter. It must be remembered that forecasting is an attempt to estimate future activity and should be used as a guideline. The activity in the next few years can be estimated with a fair degree of accuracy; however, as the forecast horizon gets further from the current time, unforeseen factors may influence actual activity. While every effort is made to consider relevant events and trends when preparing these forecasts, an unexpected future event may have a significant impact on the actual activity experienced during the forecast period, even within the short term. Examples of unexpected future events that could have a significant impact on aviation activity might be an overall downturn in the regional or national economy, such as occurred in the Seattle area in the early 1970s when Boeing experienced extensive layoffs. The addition of another FBO at the airport is another example of an unforeseen event that would significantly impact future aviation activity at the airport. The forecast for the Auburn Airport was developed sequentially by analyzing the relationships between area population, number of based aircraft, and levels of operations (takeoffs and landings.) Subsequently, these relationships were reviewed in light of demographic trends within the local area, availability of services at other airports within the area, consumer preferences, local business trends and trends within the aviation industry. Market Forces Affecting Aviation Activity Any discussion of aviation forecasts should begin with an overview of the market forces that influence aviation and may have an impact on activity at the Auburn Municipal Airport. These forces include: Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan —June 2001 1: IPROJEC71022300141WOR DWsrrpIncbp13.D0C 3-1 W&A Pacific. Inc Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 3 Master Plan Update Forecasts ➢ Numbers of active and student pilots; ➢ Cost of new or used general aviation aircraft and avionics compared to the consumer price index; ➢ Costs associated with owning and operating a general aviation or business aircraft; ➢ Changes in local and national economies; ➢ Changes in the tax and/or regulatory environment for the aviation industry; and ➢ Technological advances in aircraft and navigation systems. During the last decade, three changes in the legal and technological environment surrounding the aviation community have had a significant and long lasting impact on general aviation nationally and at the Auburn Airport. These changes are: Passage of the General Aviation Revitalization Act of 1994 by Congress; ➢ Increasing demand for air carrier, regional airline and corporate pilots; and ➢ Widespread use of the Global Positioning System (GPS) for enroute and terminal air navigation. The impacts created by these changes deserve consideration within the context of this Master Plan and the forecasts. The following paragraphs discuss these changes and their effect on aviation in the United States. National Liability Limits and Tort Reform From about 1978 until 1994, when the General Aviation Revitalization ;Act was passed and signed into law, the cost of purchasing, operating and maintaining general aviation aircraft steadily and significantly increased. Operating costs in constant dollars actually declined over this period. However, the cost to both manufacturers and operators to insure aircraft not only offset this decline, but was the most significant factor contributing to the skyrocketing costs of purchasing and operating general aviation aircraft. Annual claims by manufacturers during this period increased from $24 million to $210 million, with no limits in sight. The increased product liability costs and resulting increased liability insurance premiums had to be incorporated into the cost of new (and to some degree, used) aircraft. Since increasing liability expenses drove the cost of new aircraft outside the range of affordability for most of the general aviation market, production declined and in some cases ceased altogether. This then created an increased demand for used aircraft and increased the price for them as well. While relative operating and maintenance costs for general aviation aircraft declined during this period, the increasing costs of insuring and purchasing aircraft had to be incorporated into the cost of general aviation flying. For both airplane owners and renters, this increased the cost of Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan -June 7001 I.IPROJECn0273001IIWORDUfstrplnchpt3.DOC 3-2 WQH Padfwe Inc I I I I 1 1 1 1 Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 3 Master Plan Update Forecasts recreational and business flights, and particularly caused a decline in the number of people and hours flown for recreation. New Aircraft Certification Prior to 1994, aircraft manufacturers were subject to product liability for the entire life of the aircraft, regardless of maintenance and upkeep throughout its life. The General Aviation Liability Act limited the product liability of manufacturers of general aviation aircraft to 18 years. When an aircraft reaches 18 years of age, lawsuits can no longer be brought against the manufacturer of that aircraft. After the passage of these liability limits, aircraft manufacturers restarted production of existing models of light general aviation aircraft and began to develop new aircraft. According to the 2000 FAA Aviation Forecast Executive Summary, annual shipments of piston powered general aviation light aircraft have increased from 436 aircraft in 1993 to 1,534 aircraft in 1998 and 1,164 aircraft during the first three quarters of 1999. It is also interesting to note that the number of kit or home -built aircraft has shown steady and significant increases. In 1993, when the FAA began keeping statistics on the number of certificated, active experimental aircraft, there were 6,171 amateur built aircraft. By 1996, this number had grown to 11,231 active aircraft. Manufacturers of kit aircraft are constantly exploring new ways to streamline and lessen construction time to help encourage the growth in this area. Although home built aircraft comprise a small percentage of the active general aviation fleet, they provide a significant addition to the total overall number. National Demand for Professional Pilots The number of FAA -certified pilots has also declined during this period from a high of approximately 827,000 in 1980 to a low of about 616,000 in 1997. Within this number of total pilots are the classifications of student, private, commercial and airline transport pilot. Until 1998, the number of student, private and commercial pilots steadily declined while the number of airline transport pilots steadily increased. In 1998, the number of certified pilots showed a small increase and in 1999 this increase continued to grow. The FAA is forecasting that the number of pilots will continue to increase and estimates that by 2011 there will be approximately 824,500 active pilots. Several factors influence the increasing demand for professional pilots. The number of people traveling by air is expected to continue to increase, creating the need for more airplanes and more pilots. The Future Airline Pilots of America (FAPA) organization is forecasting that a large number of pilots will be retiring from the airlines over the next ten years. In addition, the military, which provided many pilots for the airline industry during the 1960s and '70s are 7001 -3 Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 3 Master Plan Update Forecasts training fewer pilots and working to retain the pilots they have. FAPA estimates that up to 62,000 new pilots will be needed to fill these new and existing pilot positions. This impact of these forces at the local airport is expected to be seen in increased amounts of training, from the entry level recreational pilot through advanced airline transport pilots. This should result in increased student pilot starts and increased training activity as the market responds to fill the growing need for professional pilots. Global Positioning System(GPS) One of the most exciting changes in navigation technology in recent years has been the development of the Global Positioning System, or GPS. This navigation system uses a mobile receiver to track signals from a system of satellites in Earth orbit. By triangulating the signal from these satellites, a pilot can determine his longitude, latitude, altitude and speed. Development of the GPS system allows for "area" navigation, or direct travel between two points. Currently, using ground based VOR navigation, the pilot must plot his course using the signal from one VOR to the next. Significant economies are achieved with the direct point to point navigation available through the GPS navigation system. In addition, GPS technology is being introduced for use in instrument approaches. By using GPS technology, it may be possible to design curved approach and missed approach flight paths. This would allow approaches to be designed for airports with terrain features that made instrument approaches impossible using non -GPS technology. Several airports have a GPS approach to be used in conjunction with the "conventional" instrument approach (VOR, NDB, etc.) The aviation community expects to see "stand-alone" GPS instrument approaches in the future. Airport Master Planning Forecasting Demand forecasts for Auburn Municipal Airport have been developed in three categories: ➢ Based Aircraft ➢ Operations ➢ Critical Aircraft Based Aircraft is the number of aircraft housed (either hangared or tied down) on the airport. Operations refer to the number of takeoffs and landings over a specified period with one operation defined as either one take off or one landing. Critical Aircraft is the specific type or family of aircraft that is the most demanding of the facilities from a size, weight or speed standpoint. In addition, the designated critical aircraft must commonly and frequently use the Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan -June 1001 1. MaIEC71011300111W0RDIMs1rp1nchp13.D0C 3-I W&H Pacific. Inc I 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 3 Master Plan Update Forecasts airport. The critical aircraft must have at least 500 documented itinerant operations.per. year. These demand categories and their corresponding impact on the facilities are listed in table 3-1. Table 3-1 DEMAND FORECASTS AND FACILITY IMPACTS DEMAND FORECAST FACILITY IMPACTS Based Aircraft The number of aircraft by type determines aircraft - Annual Based Aircraft hangar and apron space requirements, as well as - Fleet Mix auto parking needs Operations The number of operations by type of aircraft and - Annual Operations time of day, month and year help determine - Peaking Characteristics runway, taxiway, airspace and navigation aid - Type of Operations requirements. - Operations by Aircraft Type Critical Aircraft The critical aircraft determines runway and taxiway design requirements such as pavement strength, runway length and clearance requirements between runways and taxiways, etc. Source: W&H Pacific Forecasting Methodology The forecast for Auburn Municipal Airport was prepared using a multi -step process. The first step was to develop a forecast of based aircraft for the airport. Then, a forecast of operations was prepared using the forecast of based aircraft. Finally, an analysis and forecast of the types of aircraft that use and will use the airport was completed to determine critical aircraft. Forecast Models Five models were used to forecast based aircraft at Aubum Municipal Airport. These models are: Aubum Municipal Airport ' Matter Plan -fury 1001 I: VROJECr1011300101WORDIMatrp1=hp13.DOC 3-3 W&H Paetfle, Inc Auburn Municipal Airport I Chapter 3 ' Master Plan Update Forecasts ➢ FAA forecast of growth in General Aviation Aircraft — The 2000 FAA Aviation Forecast Executive Summary predicts a 0.9 percent annual growth in active general aviation aircraft over the twelve-year period (1999 to 2011) covered by this forecast. This growth rate was applied to the existing number of based aircraft at Auburn Airport as documented in the Inventory chapter. The assumption is made that this growth rate will continue for the period covered by this forecast. ➢ 1993 Washington State Continuous Airport System Plan — The forecast from the 1993 WSCASP was extrapolated to 2020. The 1993 WSCASP predicted that Auburn would have a based aircraft population of 300 in 2000,. instead of the actual count of 275 based aircraft for 2000 as documented in the Inventory chapter of this Master Plan Update. The 1993 WSCASP used the 1990 estimate of based aircraft as the basis for the forecast, which covered 1995, 2000 and 2005. In order to maintain consistency, the 2000 estimate of 300 based aircraft is used for the extrapolation. ➢ 100% Occupancy of New Hangar Development — Auburn Airport has indicated that it intends to construct additional hangars over the next two years. During the next two years, forty new hangar spaces will be built, and airport management has already pre -leased the first twenty. Given the extreme scarcity of hangar space in the Puget Sound area, the assumption is made that the additional hangars will be fully leased upon completion. In addition, a one percent growth rate in based aircraft is assumed from population growth -for the King and Pierce County areas and the scarcity of available, affordable storage space for aircraft in the Puget Sound area. ➢ Population Ratio — For this model, the ratio of King plus Pierce County populations to Auburn Municipal Airport's based aircraft was calculated. This ratio was 9032:1 for 2000. Based on projected population growth for King and Pierce Counties, and assuming construction of 20 additional hangar spaces, fully occupied, per year for the next two years, this ratio is 8513:1 for 2001 and 8060:1 for 2002. For this model, the ratio of 8060:1 was applied through the year 2020. Previous Master Plan Forecast — The previous Master Plan update for Auburn Municipal Airport was completed in 1993. The number of based aircraft at Auburn in 1993 was 236 and forecast to grow to 309 by 2003. This growth rate was extrapolated to 2020. The results of these five forecasts are presented in Table 3.2, below. Auburn Municipal Airport Mower Plan ohne 2001 1.•LDROJECr1022300141WORDLWsirpinehpi3.DOC 3-6 W&H Padfle, Inc I I L 1 I 1 1 1 1 Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 3 Master Plan Update Forecasts Table 3-2 COMPARISON OF BASED AIRCRAFT FORECASTS Source: La Anne Walker, Aviation Consultant, extrapolation of 1993 Master Plan and WSCASP, and 2000 FAA Aviation Forecast *Based aircraft taken from previous forecasts. Preferred Based Aircraft Forecast The New Hangar forecast which incorporates a one percent growth rate has been selected as the preferred based aircraft forecast. This forecast assumes the construction and rental of 20 additional hangar spaces in 2001 and again in 2002. This will bring the number of hangar spaces available at Auburn Airport to 185 with an additional 214 tiedown spaces. This forecast incorporates the regional general aviation trends of continued growth in both number of aircraft and number of pilots, as well as reflecting the scarcity and expense of aircraft storage in the Puget Sound area General Aviation Based Aircraft Fleet Mix The increasing role of business use of general aviation aircraft is expected to continue and to be reflected in the composition of the general aviation fleet. The more complex and sophisticated turbine -powered segment of the fleet is projected to grow at four times the rate of the piston engine segment. Turbine powered fixed wing aircraft are expected to increase its share of the general aviation fleet from 6.1 percent in 1999 to 8.0 percent in 2011. Rotorcraft are expected to increase from 3.7 percent of the fleet in 1999 to 3.9 percent in 2011. These shifts in the national general aviation fleet are expected to impact the fleet mix at Auburn Municipal Airport to some degree. While the majority of the aircraft based at Auburn will remain single and multi engine piston fixed wing aircraft, the local fleet is forecast to include the addition of turbo prop and rotor aircraft by 2010. These additions are in response to the continued growth and industrial development of the Kent -Auburn Valley. The forecast of based aircraft fleet mix is shown in Table 3-3. Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan —June 2001 /:IPROJECnO223001IIWORDIMarrpinchps3.DOC 3-7 W&H Pacifte. Inc 2000 2005 2010 2020 FAA Forecast 275 288 301 329 1993 WSCASP 300* 313 326 353 New hangars 275 325 341 377 Population Ratio 275 326 344 381 1993 Master Plan 310* 328 346 384 Source: La Anne Walker, Aviation Consultant, extrapolation of 1993 Master Plan and WSCASP, and 2000 FAA Aviation Forecast *Based aircraft taken from previous forecasts. Preferred Based Aircraft Forecast The New Hangar forecast which incorporates a one percent growth rate has been selected as the preferred based aircraft forecast. This forecast assumes the construction and rental of 20 additional hangar spaces in 2001 and again in 2002. This will bring the number of hangar spaces available at Auburn Airport to 185 with an additional 214 tiedown spaces. This forecast incorporates the regional general aviation trends of continued growth in both number of aircraft and number of pilots, as well as reflecting the scarcity and expense of aircraft storage in the Puget Sound area General Aviation Based Aircraft Fleet Mix The increasing role of business use of general aviation aircraft is expected to continue and to be reflected in the composition of the general aviation fleet. The more complex and sophisticated turbine -powered segment of the fleet is projected to grow at four times the rate of the piston engine segment. Turbine powered fixed wing aircraft are expected to increase its share of the general aviation fleet from 6.1 percent in 1999 to 8.0 percent in 2011. Rotorcraft are expected to increase from 3.7 percent of the fleet in 1999 to 3.9 percent in 2011. These shifts in the national general aviation fleet are expected to impact the fleet mix at Auburn Municipal Airport to some degree. While the majority of the aircraft based at Auburn will remain single and multi engine piston fixed wing aircraft, the local fleet is forecast to include the addition of turbo prop and rotor aircraft by 2010. These additions are in response to the continued growth and industrial development of the Kent -Auburn Valley. The forecast of based aircraft fleet mix is shown in Table 3-3. Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan —June 2001 /:IPROJECnO223001IIWORDIMarrpinchps3.DOC 3-7 W&H Pacifte. Inc Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 3 Master Plan Update Forecasts Table 3-3 BASED AIRCRAFT FLEET MIX FORECAST Aircraft Type 2000 2005 2010 2020 Single-engine Piston 263 310 324 357 Multi -engine Piston 12 14 15 17 Turbo -prop 0 0 1 1 Rotorcraft 1 1 1 2 Other 0 0 0 0 Total 276 325 341 377 Source: Lee Anne Welker, Aviation Consultant_ General Aviation Forecast of Operations In addition to the five forecasts of operations that were evaluated in order to determine the best estimate of future operations at Auburn Municipal Airport, some consideration was given to the estimated number of annual operations currently recorded on the 5010 form for that airport. The estimated 172,000 annual operations breaks down to approximately 471 operations every day and about 20 operations every hour, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. If it is assumed that 75 percent of the daily operations occur during daylight hours, and 12 hours of daylight are available 365 days a year, that works out to approximately 29 operations each daylight hour, or approximately 3 planes in the pattem, each doing 5 touch and goes per hour, 12 hours a day, 365 days per year. As a comparison, annual activity counts from Renton and Tacoma Narrows were obtained. These airports have control towers that count each operation at that airport. For the twelve months from October 1999 to September 2000, Renton tower recorded 131,274 operations. For calendar year 1999, Tacoma Narrows tower recorded 91,145 operations. Because Auburn Airport does not have a tower, the best estimate of annual operations at the airport is found in the 5010 form. This source indicates that the annual operations have remained constant from 1994 to 2000 at 172,000. This figure was used as the basis for developing the operations forecasts below. An explanation of the method used for each of these forecasts follows. Straight Line Trend Approach A typical model for forecasting general aviation operations is a historical straight line growth trend applied through the planning period. Since the annual operations at Auburn have been reported at 172,000 in 1994 and in 2000, this indicates an average annual growth rate of 0.0 Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan —Ane 2001 1:IPROJECr102230011IWORDV4strpbmhpt3.DOC 3.8 W&H Pac(fic, Inc I I I E E I Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 3 Master Plan Update Forecasts _. percent. This is not deemed either reasonable or realistic and is, therefore, not considered in this analysis. Previous Master Plan Forecast The previous master plan was completed in 1993 and forecast 176,900 operations in 1998. While this number is higher than that recorded on the 5010 form, it is within a reasonable range. By extrapolating the forecasts from the 1993 Master Plan update through the current forecast period, a forecast of operations for the airport was developed. FAA Terminal Area Forecast The FAA has prepared a Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) for the Auburn Airport, forecasting annual operations from 1998 through 2015. The TAF projected 168,014 annual operation in 2000 and 178,043 operations in 2005. This forecast was extended to the end of the forecast period. 1993 WSCASP The 1993 WSCASP Forecast projected 168,038 annual operations at Auburn Airport in 2000 and 175,320 operations in 2005. This trend was extended over the planning period and projects 199,350 annual operations in 2020. Ratio of Operations to Based Aircraft A standard tool in forecasting general aviation operations is calculating the ratio between annual operations and based aircraft. A given number of operations per based aircraft is calculated and applied to the forecast of based aircraft. It should be remembered that this is an average number of operations per based aircraft, and that one of the factors in the equation is an estimate. Each based aircraft is not expected to achieve the derived number of annual operations. As part of this Master Plan Update process, the estimated number of annual operations at Auburn Airport was reviewed with the Airport management. The annual number of operations recorded on the 5010 was considered to be somewhat high, and another method of estimating annual operations was sought. After much discussion, an estimate was agreed on which was based on several factors including estimated number of days of good weather, number of planes in the pattern, hours of daylight and number of touch and goes per hour. This revised estimate of Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan —June 2001 1: IPROJEC71022300141 WORDIMs7rpinchpt3.DOC 3-9 W&H Pacific, Inc Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 3 Master Plan Update Forecasts 141,000 annual operations was used as a basis for forecasting estimated operations using a ratio of operations to based aircraft. The calculation of this estimate is detailed below: Estimate of Annual Operations: Operations estimate for March through November: Number of days of Good Weather: Average number of planes in the pattern: Average number of hours of daylight Average number of touch and goes/plane/hour: Total Operations: (120 x3 x 10 x 10 x 2) Number of days of Moderate Weather: - Average number of planes in the pattern: Average number of hours of daylight Average number of touch and goes/plane/hour: Total Operations: (155 x 2 x 8 x 9 x 2) Operations estimate for December through February: Number of days of Winter Weather: Average number of planes in the pattern: Average number of hours of daylight Average number of touch and goes/plane/hour: Total Operations: (90 x l x 8 x 8 x 2) Total Estimated Daylight Operations: Add 10% for night operations: Total estimated annual operations: 120 3 10 10 72,000 155 2 8 9 44,640 90 11,520 128,160 12,816 140,976 Typically, three different forecasts are developed for this model: a Static number of operations per based aircraft, an Average number of based operations per based aircraft and a Growth number of operations per based aircraft. The Static forecast applies the 2000 actual operations per based aircraft to the forecast of based aircraft to develop a forecast of operations. Using the above estimate of annual operations for 2000, there were 275 based aircraft and 141,000 annual operations, or 513 operations per based aircraft. The Average model takes the historical average of operations per based aircraft and applies it to the forecast of based aircraft. In the case of Auburn, the number of based aircraft has been increasing, but the number of annual operations has remained constant. This results in a decreasing number of average operations per based aircraft. Observations by airport personnel indicate that this is unlikely, therefore this model will not be considered. Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Mune 2001 i:IPRo/ECr1022300141WORDWitrpinchpt3.DOC 3-10 W&H Pad&Ine I I I 1 1 1 I Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 3 Master Plan Update Forecasts The Growth. model assumesan increasing. number of operations per based aircraft during the, planning period and applies these estimates to the forecast based aircraft. Table 3.4 summarizes the operations forecasts discussed above. Source: Lee Anne Walker, Aviation consultant. •Estimates prepared using the revised Annual Operations Estimate Preferred GA Operations Forecast The preferred forecast is the Static Ratio of Operations to Based Aircraft forecast which produced the most feasible numbers for the 5-, 10-, and 20 -year forecast periods. This forecast presents a steady increase in total operations, and represents the busy, active nature of this airport. According to AC 15015060-5 "Airport Capacity and Delay," an airport with a single runway, serving light general aviation aircraft under VFR conditions has an annual service volume of 230,000 annual operations. Under this forecast, by 2020 Auburn will be at 84 percent of that capacity. Considering the constraints on this facility in terms of runway and airspace, it is unlikely it will exceed these service volume levels without a significant capital improvement program that, at this time, is not feasible. Local and Itinerant Operations Forecast A local operation is defined as one that is "performed by aircraft that: 1) operate within the local traffic pattern or within sight of the airport; 2) are known to be departing for, or arriving from, flights in local practice areas located within a 20 -mile radius of the airport; or 3) execute simulated instrument approaches or low passes at the airport. Itinerant operations are all operations other than local." Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan —June 1001 L•IPROJEC71011300141WORDIMstrpbxhpa.DOC 3.11 W&A Pacific, Ix Table 3-4 GA OPERATIONS FORECASTS 2000 2005 2010 2020 1993 Master Plan 177,608 183,704 188,812 195,906 Terminal Area Forecast 168,014 178,043 188,071 208,057 1993 WSCASP 168,038 175,320 182,990 199,350 Ops/Based —Static* 141,000 166,403 174,891 193,189 OpsBased-Growth* 141,000 174,891 193,189 235,727 Source: Lee Anne Walker, Aviation consultant. •Estimates prepared using the revised Annual Operations Estimate Preferred GA Operations Forecast The preferred forecast is the Static Ratio of Operations to Based Aircraft forecast which produced the most feasible numbers for the 5-, 10-, and 20 -year forecast periods. This forecast presents a steady increase in total operations, and represents the busy, active nature of this airport. According to AC 15015060-5 "Airport Capacity and Delay," an airport with a single runway, serving light general aviation aircraft under VFR conditions has an annual service volume of 230,000 annual operations. Under this forecast, by 2020 Auburn will be at 84 percent of that capacity. Considering the constraints on this facility in terms of runway and airspace, it is unlikely it will exceed these service volume levels without a significant capital improvement program that, at this time, is not feasible. Local and Itinerant Operations Forecast A local operation is defined as one that is "performed by aircraft that: 1) operate within the local traffic pattern or within sight of the airport; 2) are known to be departing for, or arriving from, flights in local practice areas located within a 20 -mile radius of the airport; or 3) execute simulated instrument approaches or low passes at the airport. Itinerant operations are all operations other than local." Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan —June 1001 L•IPROJEC71011300141WORDIMstrpbxhpa.DOC 3.11 W&A Pacific, Ix I Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 3 ' Master Plan Update Forecasts , Table 3-5 shows local and itinerant operations forecasts for general aviation activity at Auburn , Municipal Airport. These figures are based on estimates from airport management. Table 3-5 , COMBINED OPERATIONS FORECASTS ' Operations 2000 2005 2010 2020 Itinerant 87,420 103,170 108,433 119,777 ' Local 53,580 63,233- 66,459 73,412 ' Total 141,000 166,403 174,891 193,189 Source: Lee Anne Walker, Aviation Consultant. ' Peaking Characteristics ' Activity during peak periods relates directly to many of the airport's facility needs. The periods ' used to help determine these facility needs are defined below. Peak Month — The calendar month when peak aircraft operations occur. ' Design Day — The average day in the peak month. This indicator is derived by dividing the peak month operations by the number of days in the month. ' ➢ Design Hour — The peak hour within the design day. This is used specifically in airfield demand/capacity analysis, as well as in determining terminal building and access road ' requirements. Peak demand figures can be derived from the forecasts of operations. Table 3-6 illustrates the ' peak demand characteristics for Auburn Municipal Airport. Auburn Municipal ALpor1 Master Plan -June 2001 1: WROJECr10223001AWORDWivivinc*3.DOC 3-12 W@N PaclJlq lm ' Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 3 Master Plan Update Forecasts Sours: l.ee Anne Walker, Aviation Consultant Critical Aircraft The dimensions of the airport runway and taxiways, their strength, dimensions between runways and taxiways and other design criteria are determined from the "critical aircraft" chosen for the airport. The FAA defines this as the aircraft or family of aircraft which places the most demands on the facility that is expected to perform 500 transient operations a year. In Chapter 2, Inventory, the runway configuration at Auburn Airport was identified as a single runway which provides service to small, single and twin engine, general aviation aircraft. The critical aircraft currently using the airport consists of ARC B -I type aircraft, aircraft with an approach speed equal to or greater than 91 knots, but less than 121 knots and a wingspan less than 49 feet. It is forecast that the critical aircraft will not change during the planning period. Auburn Municipal Airport Mauer Plan dune 5001 1:IPROJEO71011300141WORDIMatrpbwhpt3.DOC 3-13 W&H Pacific, Inc Table 3-6 PEAK DEMAND FORECASTS Operations Category 2000 2005 2010 2020 Annual Operations 141,000 166,403 174,891 193,189 Peak Mo.(10% of An Ops) 14,100 16,640 17,489 19,319 Des Day (Peak Mo/31 Days) 455 537 564 623 Des Hour (11 % of Des Day) 50 59 62 68 Sours: l.ee Anne Walker, Aviation Consultant Critical Aircraft The dimensions of the airport runway and taxiways, their strength, dimensions between runways and taxiways and other design criteria are determined from the "critical aircraft" chosen for the airport. The FAA defines this as the aircraft or family of aircraft which places the most demands on the facility that is expected to perform 500 transient operations a year. In Chapter 2, Inventory, the runway configuration at Auburn Airport was identified as a single runway which provides service to small, single and twin engine, general aviation aircraft. The critical aircraft currently using the airport consists of ARC B -I type aircraft, aircraft with an approach speed equal to or greater than 91 knots, but less than 121 knots and a wingspan less than 49 feet. It is forecast that the critical aircraft will not change during the planning period. Auburn Municipal Airport Mauer Plan dune 5001 1:IPROJEO71011300141WORDIMatrpbwhpt3.DOC 3-13 W&H Pacific, Inc Chapter- 4 Facility Requirements Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update Introduction Facil Chapter 4 Requirements The facility requirements portion of the Master Plan evaluates the current airfield and landside facilities in reference to the needs set forth by the airport operations and based aircraft forecasts. A combination of the anticipated growth, maintenance, and upgrades to standards calls for a variety improvements on the airport. Auburn Municipal Airport is expected to maintain its role as a general aviation airport, while increasing the amount of aircraft it serves. Airfield Runway Capacity Runway capacity has been determined based on the criteria laid out in the Federal Aviation Administration's AC 150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay. The capacity of the airport runway is related to runway configuration, percent of arrivals, percent of touch-and-go's, aircraft mix, and exits from the runway. To determine the capacity, arrivals were set equal to departures and touch-and-go's were assumed to be 25 percent (based on the significant amount of training flights at Auburn Municipal Airport). The runway capacity is 118 operations per hour, and by multiplying the typical ratios of annual demand to average daily demand, and average daily demand to peak hour demand, the result is 231,000 annual operations. By 2020, the forecasted number of operations is 193,189 - well below the maximum capacity of the airport runway. According to FAA Order 5090.3C, when airport operations have reached 60 to 75 percent of the maximum capacity, the airport should start planning accordingly for an additional runway. Auburn Municipal Airport reaches this point at 138,600 to 173,250 operations, a spread into which even the current operations fall. Due to the development around the airport there is no possibility of building a second runway; therefore, no options are available to prevent the airport from eventually reaching its maximum runway capacity and being unable to serve all potential users. Maximum capacity will not be reached during this 20 -year planning period. Length and Width The current runway, Runway 16-34, is 3,400 feet in length and 75 feet wide. Using the FAA's AC 150/5325-4A, Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design and the associated program, Airport Design, Version 4.21), the runway length needs were determined. The criteria for mor 4 - I Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 4 ' Master Plan Update Facility Requirements determining runway length are the airport elevation, mean daily maximum temperature, and the ' maximum difference in runway centerline elevation. It is assumed that the runway is dry for the length determinations. For small aircraft (aircraft weighing 12,500 lbs. or less) with less than 10 ' passenger seats, 2,410 feet in length is needed to accommodate 75 percent of these aircraft, 2,960 feet for 95 percent and 3,500 feet for 100 percent. For small aircraft with 10 or more passenger seats the runway length necessary is 4080 feet. The current runway length of 3400 feet provides the length recommended for 95 percent of the small aircraft that are generally served by Auburn Municipal Airport. To meet the needs of 100 percent of the aircraft that the airport typically serves, the runway ' needs to be 3,500 feet in length, which would require 100 additional feet of length from the existing runway. During the development of the master plan, additional runway pavement was ' discussed to accommodate larger aircraft. It was determined that larger aircraft would, in almost all cases, need runway pavement strength above 12,500 lbs. Since, the majority of the aircraft needing additional runway length would also need more pavement strength, and the numbers of ' operations would not reach 500 itinerant operations (categorizing the aircraft as a critical aircraft for airport design), there was no justification for extending the runway and increasing the pavement strength. The City of Auburn and the airport users felt that it would still be beneficial ' to have additional runway pavement to provide a useable surface in the case of an emergency. The desire for this additional safety margin was heightened by the fact that many of the pilots at the airport are in training. For these reasons, the decision was made to still include the additional ' runway pavement on the ALP so that they are a possibility in the future. This decision was made, being aware of the fact that the FAA would not fund this type of project at Auburn ' Airport. The additional runway pavement lengths were determined based on the maximum length of ' extension considered possible in relation to property limitations. 285 feet was added to Runway 16, to the point where the runway OFA and RSA are at the airport fence and property line. Further additional pavement to the north is restricted by 301h Street NE. The additional runway ' pavement to the south was based on acquiring the park & ride property and the hotel property (just east of the park & ride). A significant length of additional runway pavement was only available if at least a portion of the hotel property was purchased, and it was determined that if ' you take a portion of the hotel property, you would likely have take all of it. The south end additional pavement length of 268 feet was then based on the runway OFA and RSA getting up to the edge of the hotel property. The City of Auburn felt that the sale of the hotel property in the ' future was a significant possibility. Other existing property ownerships limit further additional runway pavement to the south. The southern runway additional pavement length would have to be modified if certain properties on the south end were unable to be acquired. t Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update — June 200/ I..-"OJEC71022300I4IW0RDWs1rp1nchpt4.D0C I-2 W&H Paco?c. Inc. t Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 4 Master Plan Update Facility Requirements The runway additional pavement results in a significant number of obstructions to, the, Part 77 surfaces. Therefore, the runway would need displaced thresholds on both ends of the runway. The threshold for Runway 34 would remain in its current location, and the threshold for Runway 16 would be 40 feet south of its existing location to create a clear 20:1 obsruction approach. By extending both ends of the runway and displacing the thresholds, the declared distances shown in Table 4-1 become necessary. Table 4-1 DECLARED LDA 3628 feet 3685 feet ASDA 3953 feet 3953 feet TORA 3685 feet 3628 feet TODA 3685 feet 3628 feet Landing Distance Available (LDA) - "7he runway length declared available and suitable for a landing airplane" Accelerate stop Distance Available (ASDA) - "77te runway plus stopway length declared available and suitable for the acceleration and deceleration of an airplane aborting takeoff. " Takeoff Run Available (TORA) - "The runway length declared available and suitable for the ground run of an airplane taking off. " Takeoff Distance Available (TODA) - "7he TORR plus the length of any remaining runway or clearway beyond the far end of the 70RA. " The current runway width of 75 feet is adequate for existing and future B-H ARC standards and is not in need of expansion. Taxiways and Taxilanes As noted in Chapter 2, Inventory, Table 2-6, the current dual -parallel taxiway layout does not meet the B -I standards in a number of ways: The taxiways do not meet the required 225 -foot separation standard from the runway. ➢ They are not of the necessary 25 -foot width. They do not meet the required 69 -foot taxiway centerline to taxiway centerline distance. The existing taxiways currently have received modifications to standards from the FAA for these sub -standard dimensions (though they were based on B-H standards). All B -I dimensional Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update -June 1001 I:IPRO/EC71011300141WORDIMsirpinchpl4.DOC 4.3 W&H Pacific. Inc. I Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 4 ' Master Plan Update Facility Requirements , standards can be achieved by removing the existing taxiways and constructing a single standard , 25 -foot -wide parallel taxiway. Combining the two existing parallel taxiways into one taxiway will resolve the issue of sub- ' standard dimensions, but it is a possibility that this action may also create some congestion. With the current taxiway layout, the more skilled pilots, with smaller planes, can pass other small ' planes simultaneously, one northbound and one southbound. This type of movement requires a number of circumstances to work together and there are many pilots in training at the airport, which makes the frequency of this occurrence minimal. Therefore, it is recommended hold ' aprons be added along the taxiway to alleviate the possible congestion of having only one taxiway. Also, to allow for additional apron area and ease of congestion, it is recommended that the apron to the east of the future taxiway, be expanded up to the taxiway edge. ' One issue at the airport is the time that aircraft spend on the runway. FAA AC 150/5300-13 states that when the design operations per hour is 30 or less, a right-angled exit taxiway achieves ' an efficient flow of traffic. Chapter 3, Forecasts, explains that currently there are 50 design operations per hour.. Also, as the operations increase at Auburn Municipal Airport this issue will become more pronounced. A factor that increases the prominence of this issue is that pilots in ' training can take more time to get off the runway, staying on until the last connector taxiway. One option reviewed during the master plan process to help ease this congestion was to build ' high-speed exit taxiways. This option was beneficial from the standpoint of a faster access off of the taxiway, but presented problems for traffic control at the airport. The relatively small ' separation between the runway and the parallel taxiway, a separation which is defined by B -I standards, would create an unsafe situation. Aircraft taxiing at a high speed off of the runway would have very little time to get off of the runway, past the hold line and slow down before ' reaching the parallel taxiway(s). This would create an increased chance of collision between aircrfat on the parallel taxiway and aircraft coming off of the high speed exit taxiway. For this reason, the FAA recommended that the high speed exit taxiways not be pursued at Auburn ' Municipal Airport. It was decided that though the congestion was an issue, the existing connector taxiways serve the ground traffic in the best way possible for the airport. Pavement ' Runway ' There are two sections of runway pavement: the original 2,860 -foot asphalt concrete section constructed in 1969, and the 500 -foot asphalt concrete extension constructed in 1983 on the ' south end of the runway (the pavement sections are shown in Chapter 2, Figure 2.2a). A crack and slurry seal was placed on the runway in 1988. The original pavement section has far 1 Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update — June 2001 IAPROJECn022J00J41WORDWsttpincbptl.DOC I -I W&H Pacific. Inc. ' Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 4 Master Plan Update Facility Requirements exceeded .its_design life -of 20. years, and.the slurry seal life of 5. years. Also, the -pavement on the original section of the runway has a significant amount of cracking, which needs repair in the near future. The extension section of the runway, which is in very good condition, should last until approximately 2008. A longitudinal dip in the runway pavement is a concern. The dip is located where the original pavement section and the extension section meet. It is recommended that the dip be repaired in the next couple of years to prevent further wear of the aircraft tires and landing gear, and relieve any safety concerns. The cracking runway pavement should be sealed and the runway overlaid simultaneously with repair of the dip in the runway. The pavement design strength of 12,500 lbs. for single -wheel landing gear is sufficient to meet the needs of the forecasted single -wheel landing gear aircraft of 12,500 pounds or less. Taxiways and Taxilanes The parallel taxiways were built in two phases in conjunction with the runway. Both sections have the same pavement sections as the runway: 18 -inch of base and 2 inches of asphalt concrete on the larger portion built in 1969 and 13 inches of subbase, 3 inches of base and 2 inches of asphalt concrete constructed in 1986 for the southern portion. The connector taxiways were built with the same pavement sections also in conjunction with the original runway construction, with the exception of the southernmost connector taxiway, which was built with the parallel taxiway extension in 1986. The parallel and connector taxiways were all crack and slurry sealed in 1988. The original pavement has surpassed its design life (though it remains in good condition), and the newer pavement at the south end will have met its design life in 2008. It is recommended that the new single parallel taxiway be constructed around the time that the newer pavement has met its design life. Until the parallel taxiways are replaced, Pavement Consultants Inc., in their statewide evaluation of airport pavements, recommended that the parallel taxiways be slung sealed in 2002 to maintain their integrity. The taxilanes at the northeast end of the airport were constructed with asphalt concrete in 1999. This pavement is in excellent condition and will not need any major improvements for 15 to 20 years. It is recommended (per Pavement Consultants, Inc.) that this pavement be fog sealed in 2006 for maintenance. Due to pavement construction and condition relative to apron pavement, additional airport taxilanes are addressed in the next section. Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update — June 200/ I:IPROJEC71022300IIIWORDWsirplnchpt4.DOC 4.5 W&H Pacific. Inc. Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 4 Master Plan Update Facility Requirements Aprons The aprons on the airport, like the rest of the airports' pavement, are in good condition. The apron pavements on the airport have been built at various times (see Chapter 2, Inventory, Figure 2.2a for the pavement sections). All of the aprons will have reached or exceeded their design life by 2006. It is recommended that the aprons and taxilanes in the existing hangar area at the center of the airfield (from, but not including the leased tiedown area up to the airport office, though excluding the northern based aircraft tiedown apron) be crack sealed and overlaid in the next few years. The pavement was original constructed in 1972, and is in need of an overlay. Per recommendations based on Pavement Consultants Inc.'s evaluation of the pavement, the southern based aircraft apron should be slurry sealed in about five years, and the northern based aircraft apron and transient apron should be slurry sealed in two years. These pavements were constructed in the 1980's or later, so they are in better condition than the apron and taxilanes to be overlaid. If the airport office were to be relocated (discussed later in the chapter), it would allow for expansion of the current transient tiedown apron, joining it with the based aircraft tiedown apron. The expansion possibilities are shown in Figure 4.3, in conjunction with the improvements to the adjacent 3.5 -acre parcel. The current location of the airport office is an inefficient use of this area of the airport, which could accommodate a large apron area, in exchange for removing a small building. This apron expansion would allow for the construction of tiedowns for larger aircraft or additional fueling facilities. Hold Aprons As the airport operations continue to increase, hold aprons also need to be reviewed. There are three hold aprons on the airport - one at the north and two at the south end, each of which can hold one airplane. The based aircraft are forecasted to increase from 276 to 377 by 2020, an increase of 37 percent. Assuming the same percentage of increase applies to hold aprons, roughly one additional hold apron is needed. The standard hold apron size is 100 feet in length by 40 to 60 feet in width. Additional hold apron pavement is recommended for the south end of the airfield, adding space of one hold apron to an existing hold apron. The other existing hold aprons need to be maintained. Navaids The existing Navaids at Auburn Municipal Airport consist of a rotating beacon, located 1,340 feet west of the runway, radio controlled Runway End Identifier Lights (REILs) on each runway end, a segmented circle with a lighted wind tee and VASIs. The existing Navaids are in good condition and serve the immediate needs of the aircraft using the airport. Auburn Munidpal Airport Mnster Plan Update —June 5001 I,IPROJEC71012300141WORD IMstrpinchpN.DOC 4-6 W HPaclJlq Ina I 1 I I 1 Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 4 Master Plan Update Facility Requirements Auburn Municipal Airport has.applied_(to the FAA) for a GPS approach to Runway 16 to offer an improved navigational approach system at the airport. It was determined by the FAA that a GPS circling approach with greater than a mile visibility minimums could be provided to Runway 16, though the approach would still be categorized as visual. Markings and Lighting The current visual runway markings are appropriate for a visual, GPS circling approach, with the exception that runway threshold markings would need to be added. The threshold markings for Runway 16 could be added when the threshold is displaced. Other striping improvements would only be necessary as standard maintenance and re -striping after an overlay. The markings on the taxiways, taxilanes and aprons only need to be restriped when the pavement in these areas is re- constructed and/or when the layouts change with improvements. The runway currently has Medium Intensity Lighting (MIRL), and the taxiways have uni- directional lighting. The lighting system was installed in 1992 and will have reached its service life in 2012. Since improvement projects are recommended on the runway, connector taxiway and parallel taxiways, it is suggested that the lighting system by reconstructed in conjunction with those projects. Signing Signing at the airport provides the directional guidance for the airfield and airport facilities. The signing was installed in 1992, with the airport lighting. Signing reconstruction is recommended to coincide with adjacent pavement projects, at the same time as the lighting systems are reconstructed. Modification of the existing signing for the noise abatement procedure is recommended. There is an existing sign, externally lighted at the north end of the airport, adjacent to Runway 16, which describes the procedure, along with some airport information. Once the noise abatement procedure was put in place and the sign installed, it was found that the flight pattern associated with the procedure caused conflicts between approaching and departing aircraft. In response to this issue, the noise abatement procedure portion of the sign was temporarily covered, yet there were no noise complaints as result of this change. The existing sign should be replaced with a sign that gives airport frequency and other airport information and the noise abatement procedure be abandoned. Runway Approaches The approaches on either end of Runway 16-34 do not meet the standard 20:1 visual approach slope because of obstructions. The 34 approach is limited because of the existing park & ride lot. Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update— June 7001 I:IPROJEC710273001I1WORDI4,fstrpinchpt4.DOC 4-7 W&H Pacific. Inc. Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 4 Master Plan Update Facility Requirements If this park and ride is removed, there will be a clear 20:1 approach surface. The Runway 16 approach is 18:1 due to a warehouse building north of the airport. The threshold at 16 should be displaced a distance of 40 feet to bring the approach to a 20:1 slope. The GPS approach that the airport has applied for is based on a 20:1 approach slope on Runway 16. Auburn Municipal Airport's GPS approach possibilities for Runway 16 were reviewed with the FAA. The best approach that can be reached with this GPS system, while meeting the minimum required standards, is a visual, circling approach with greater than 1 -mile statute visibility minimums and a 700 foot height above touchdown. Obtaining this instrument approach procedure is subject to FAA Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) Paragraph 251. To obtain visibility minimums lower than 1 -mile, or have a straight -in approach, an approach lighting system would be needed and the approach dimensions could no longer be based on visual requirements. There are two major problems associated with those changes. One is that an inner approach OFZ is required when you add approach lights. The inner approach OFZ (Obstacle Free Zone) extends at a 50:1 slope from 200 feet beyond the runway threshold to the last approach light. This OFZ slope cannot be met without significant impact and cost due to obstructions in this 50:1 slope. The second issue is if the approach dimensions can no longer be per a visual approach, the dimensions would increase to the dimensions required by a non - precision approach. These dimensions would introduce a number of new, fixed obstructions to the approach. Since, the GPS approach cannot have obstructions this is not a feasible option. Aircraft Traffic Pattern The airport is in the process of requesting an amendment to the traffic pattern. The request is to raise the pattern from the current 857 feet, to 1000 feet above the airport elevation. This change would conform the airport traffic pattern to the recommendations in the Aeronautical Information Manual. Airport Facilities Hangars There are currently 145 hangar units at Auburn Municipal Airport. Two additional hangar buildings, with 20 -units each, are planned for construction this year at the north end hangar area. There is a tremendous need for hangars at the airport, exemplified by the 104 people currently on the waiting list for hangars. Currently, 52.5 percent of the based aircraft are in hangars. A number of those on the waiting list for hangars are based aircraft in tiedowns at the airport. Of the 104 aircraft owners on the waiting list, 40 of them are either in between aircraft ownership or cannot be reached currently. Assuming half of these 40 will choose not to rent a hangar when one becomes available, that leaves 84 aircraft owners waiting for a hangar. A number of those Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update — June 7001 IAPROJECM22300141W0RDUl5trP1nchp14.D0C I-8 W&H PactJic. Inc. Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 4 Master Plan Update Facility Requirements on the waiting list are .people,who da.not.currently have an aircraft at the airport. Approximating half of these 84 aircraft is new to the airport; the additional 42 aircraft would bring the total based aircraft up to 318. If all of the remaining 84 aircraft owners received hangars, then roughly 70 percent of the based aircraft would be in hangars. This percentage is multiplied by the forecasted number of based aircraft to determine the future demand for hangars (see Table 4-2). Table 4-2 HANGAR DEMAND Year Based AircraftNumber of Hangars Needed 2000 276 193 2005 325 228 2010 341 239 2015 377 264 With the construction of the two new 20 -unit hangars, which will bring the number of hangars on the airport up to 185 units, the current demand for hangars will still not be met. By 2020, 79 additional hangars will be needed at the airport. Three alternatives were reviewed for new hangar sites at the airport. The alternatives were: (a) 4 hangars with 24 units each on the 23 -acre parcel on the west side of the airport; (b) 3 hangars with 12 units each on the 3.5 acres parcel on the east side of the airport; and, (c) 4 hangars with 20 -units each at the south apron. Placing hangars on the 3.5 -acre parcel would fall short of meeting the demand for hangars, and having such a convenient location relative to the street is better suited for an FBO or airport office facility: Also, in the process of the master plan development this property was leased by a private developer to build aviation -dependent business buildings. Turning the south apron into hangars would come close to meeting the hangar demand, but would eliminate 70 tiedowns. This option would necessitate relocating Auburn Flight Services to the 3.5 -acre site, which is no longer an option. Also, for hangars to be built on the south apron the existing apron pavement would have to be purchased, at a depreciated rate, from the FAA, since the tiedown apron was built with FAA grant money. The development of hangars on the west side would create 96 new hangar units (or more if deemed necessary in the future), meeting the demand for hangars through 2020, and beyond. This location is the most ideal for hangars because the demand for hangars could be met in one location instead of splitting hangar development into various locations and because roadside view of the parcel is blocked by existing buildings, offering more security for the aircraft in the hangars. Auburn Municipal Airport Maier Plan Update—June 2001 !.•IPROJECn022300141WORDIMalrplnchpt4.DOC 4-9 Why Pacific Inc I Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 4 ' Master Plan Update Facility Requirements , One important point to address is the issue of continued growth in operations at the airport. As ' previously discussed, the airport is reaching capacity, with no foreseeable options to alleviate congestion. The airport is not obligated to meet unconstrained demand, by building more hangar and other facilities. It is likely that congestion itself will eventually limit the demand at Auburn ' Municipal Airport. Tiedowns ' There are currently 214 tiedowns at the airport, 29 of which are transient tiedowns. Of the 276 based aircraft at the airport at this time, 131 aircraft are using tiedowns (47.5 percent). The t number of tiedowns at the airport currently far exceeds the demand. With an increasing number of operations at Auburn Municipal Airport, we need to -forecast the number of tiedowns that will be needed in the future to decide the best use of current apron areas. The number of tiedowns needed at the airport is determined by taking the number of based aircraft, subtracting the amount of aircraft forecasted for hangars (70 percent of based aircraft) and adding the number of tiedowns needed for transient aircraft. To determine the number of transient aircraft we make ' assumptions based on the number of transient operations at the airport following the formula shown below: ' Transient tiedowns needed = 455 (peak operations for design day) x .72 (approx. 72 percent of total operations are ' itinerant) x ,4 (assuming 60 percent of the itinerant operations are from based aircraft) x (to account for the fact the each itinerant operation has one take -off and one landing) Y ,5 ,4 (assuming only 40 percent of the transient aircraft will be at the airport at one time) _ ' 27 aircraft The results of these calculations are shown in Table 4-3, which follows. ' Table 4-3 ' TIEDOWN DEMAND Year Based Aircraft Tiedowns Transient Aircraft Tiedowns Total ' 2000 131 27 158 2005 97 31 128 ' 2010 102 33 135 ' 2020 113 36 149 Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update — June 1001 I.IPRQ/EC71011300/IIWORDUfitrpinchpt4.DOC 4-10 WQH Pacific, Inc ' Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 4 Master Plan Update Facility Requirements The reduction of tiedown demand from 2000 to 2005 is due to the number of based tiedown aircraft currently on the waiting list for hangars that will transfer their aircraft into hangars. If the tiedowns are left in their current configuration (185 based, 29 transient), there will eventually be some tiedowns that will need to be changed from based to transient, but the capacity will still exceed the demand. Any development that will change the tiedown layout significantly, such as developing hangars on the south apron, would need to relocate a majority of the tiedowns to continue to meet the demand for tiedowns. The airport layout plan in Chapter 6, Airport Plans, shows a new tiedown configuration based on the expansion of the existing transient apron. The configuration would allow for a number of larger aircraft tiedowns, while only minimally reducing the total number of tiedowns. With an over -abundance of tiedowns, it is beneficial to consider changing the tiedown layouts to offer tiedowns for larger aircraft and/or replacing some of the tiedowns with uses that would increase the revenue capabilities of the airport, such as hangars and FBO or aviation -dependant development/expansion. Fencing The existing airport fencing, with the exception of a small portion on the south side of the airport (to meet FAR Part 77 requirements), is the standard 6 -foot height with three strands of barbwire. It encompasses the entire north, south and east sides, and about one-third of the west side of the airport. Fencing should be completed on the west side of the property, and the substandard fence on the south side of the airport should be replaced and relocated when the grass portion of the park & ride property is purchased. Any additional fencing improvements necessary would be related to new property acquisition. ARFF The airport currently has no firefighting facilities on the airport property. They are served by the nearby City of Auburn Fire Department, which is approximately half a mile from the airport. There is no commercial service forecasted for Auburn Municipal Airport; therefore, there will be no need in the future for on -airport firefighting facilities. Fueling Facilities The above ground 12,000 -gallon Avgas tank was constructed in 1998 and currently serves the airport fueling needs. There is no foreseeable need to expand the Avgas fueling facilities during this twenty-year planning period because increased demand for this type of fuel could be addressed by more frequent filling of the tank. The airport does not have a source of Jet A fuel, a fuel which is used by not only jets, but also turbine aircraft. Though the airport does not plan to be a provider for this type of fuel, it would be willing negotiate with a private party for construction of such a facility as necessary. Auburn Municipal Airport Marter Plan Update — June 2001 IAPROJECT1012300141 WORDIMrtrp1nchpt4.DOC 4.11 W&H Pacific, Inc. I Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 4 ' Master Plan Update Facility Requirements ' Fixed Base Operators/Aviation-Dependent Development As part of the alternatives review, various sites were reviewed for aviation -dependent business development (see related chapter in this master plan). This included looking at alternatives for ' new FBO or business development and for the existing FBO. Auburn Flight Services/Northwest Aviation College is the only FBO on the airport at this time. ' They are based in two buildings on the airport and the end of a hangar building. Alternatives reviewed for Auburn Flight Services/Northwest Aviation College were to relocate to the 3.5 ' acres, expand their existing building at the south end of the airfield, or just remain in their current locations and configurations. Due to the lease of the 3.5 acres, the relocation is no longer an option. It is a possibility in the future that Auburn Flight Services building at the south end may be expanded. FBO and aviation -dependent development is ideal for the 3.5 -acre parcel of land on the east side of the airport because of its accessibility, visibility from the road, and proximity to fueling facilities. This land has now been leased to Aviation Properties, Inc., who will be construction aviation -dependent business buildings. ' Since the hangar demand is met by developing only a portion of the 23 -acre parcel on the west side of the airport, the remaining portion would be fitted to aviation -dependent development. ' This location would be best fitted for a use that does not necessitate road -front exposure since the off -airport view of the parcel is blocked by existing buildings. Also, the access to the parcel, though available, is not entirely convenient. Examples of possible uses fitted to this parcel I would be an aircraft re -upholstery shop, paint shop or pilot supply shop. It must be recognized that there are a significant amount of wetlands on this parcel. These wetlands will need to be mitigated for when this area is developed. The City of Aubum owns land nearby the airport, ' called the Goedecke Property, which is being used as a wetland mitigation area for other City projects and would provide a likely location for mitigation of the airport's 23 -acre parcel I wetlands. Still, some of the wetland on the north side of the parcel appears to be high quality wetland, which is more expensive to mitigate. It is possible that the costs to mitigate some of this wetland may prevent development of portions of this parcel. Airport Office and Maintenance Facilities The current airport office consists of a small reception area, an airport manager's office and a pilot lounge. This office facility is small for the three airport employees and does not offer a view of the airport from the pilot's lounge. The existing taxiway, taxilanes and aprons restrict expansion of the existing building. The airport maintenance facilities currently reside in three hangar ends. The space for maintenance is limited and also spread out through the three different locations, making for a less than ideal situation. Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update - June 200/ /.•IPROJEC71022300141WORDIMstrp1nchp14.DOC I-12 W&H Pacifu. in. ' Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update racil Chapter 4 uirements Improvements to or relocation of the airport office, pilot lounge and maintenance. facilities would provide significant assets to the airport. A couple of options were discussed for airport office relocation. The options were to relocate to a portion of the 3.5 -acre parcel or to the Auburn Flight Services/Northwest Aviation College building just south of the airport office. These locations were chosen based on their central locations on the airport, the proximity of the fueling facility and their existing or potential for vehicle parking. Due to the recent lease of the 3.5 acres, neither option is feasible. Another possible location would be the building on the Pacific Concrete property, to the north of the 3.5 -acre parcel, which the airport would like to acquire. There is an existing building on the property, which would be suitable for an office, a lounge and the maintenance facilities. Auto Vehicle Parking Auto vehicle parking has continually fallen short of the needs at Auburn Municipal Airport. There are currently 81 parking spots available at the airport, 74 of which are associated with the FBO buildings and 7 spots for the airport office. Though additional auto parking is needed, the locations where it is needed, mainly by the hangars and FBO facilities, have no room for expanding auto -parking facilities. To help to alleviate this issue, additional auto parking will be a consideration of any new development on the airport. Any new FBO or aviation -dependent building constructed would be required to build auto parking to accommodate the needs of their facilities. Airport Access The current airport access along the east side of the airport (see Chapter 2, Inventory) provides sufficient and convenient access to the airport. This access serves the needs of the current airport layout. The only limitation to access on the east side of the airport is the large amount of vehicles that park along E Street NE. The parked cars make it more difficult and inconvenient to drive down the street. The recommended solution to this issue is to restrict street parking with no parking signs, and develop a new parking area to accommodate the cars that are no longer allowed to park on the street. When the 23 -acre parcel on the west side of the airport is developed, an access road will be necessary off of B Street to serve the new development. The airport has an east -west access easement from B Street to this property, which will provide the space necessary to build the access road. The urban location of the airport, though a challenge when expanding the airport, makes the airport very accessible and attractive for many users. Marren Plan I -r3 I Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 4 ' Master Plan Update Facility Requirements , Utilities ' The airport currently has,power; sewer, water, and telephone on-site. The only new utilities necessary for the airport will be as a direct result of new development. Utilities will need to be modified or extended for new development on the 3.5 -acre and 23 -acre parcels, but those utilities are easily accessible from E Street and B Street. Property Acquisition ' The previous master plan recommended property acquisition for the Object Free Area on the west side of the airport. The airport has since purchased this property. It was also recommended that a 150 -foot by 155 -foot parcel be purchased just north of the 3.5 -acre parcel, and that the grass area of the Park & Ride be purchased. The 150 by 155 -foot parcel was not purchased by ' the airport, and is now home to a new building and industrial business. The purchase of the original proposed Park & Ride property (the grass area adjacent to the parking lot) is expected to occur. In addition, it is likely that the entire Park & Ride will no longer be needed because of a 1 new transit center being built in downtown Auburn, which makes this Park & Ride obsolete. If available, the airport plans to purchase that property. ' The Pacific Concrete property, adjacent to the airport, just north of 26th Street NE (see the ALP in the Airport Plan chapter) has recently been placed on the market. This parcel has roadside ' access and is adjacent to current the airport property and parallel taxiway. The building on the parcel would provide a new location for the airport office, the pilot lounge and the maintenance facilities, with minimal improvements. This would allow the maintenance facilities to be in one location, and provide a more adequate airport office and pilot lounge space. This would be an ideal purchase for the airport to make. It is a possibility in the future that the hotel property just south of the end of Runway 34 will be ' for sale. A portion of this property is in the RPZ; therefore it would be in the best interest of the airport to purchase the land if it becomes available. This purchase would also allow for ' additional runway pavement at the south end of the runway. Due to the continued encroachment on the expansion capabilities of the airport by new ' development and the planned build -out of the remaining pieces of. airport property, it is recommended that the airport acquire any property adjacent to the airport that allows for ' development and expansion of the existing airport airfield and facilities. 1 Auburn Municipal Airport Matter Plan Update— June 2001 PIPROJECr1022300141MAD LWtrpincltptl.DOC 4-14 W&H Paclfc, lnc I Chapter S Aviation -Dependent Development Alternatives Chapter 5 Auburn Municipal Airport Aviation -Dependent Master Plan Update Development Alternatives Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to explore aviation -dependent development alternatives for the Auburn Municipal Airport master plan update. This analysis focuses on the market feasibility and revenue potentials for developing aviation -dependent land uses for two vacant parcels of airport -owned land. The smallest parcel is 3.5 acres. Located just north of the Airport office, it offers good eastside access. The larger parcel is 23 acres on the west side of the airport. This land has several major development constraints; i.e.,- wetlands, poor visual exposure and vehicular access. City Policies Two key factors drive aviation -dependent development decisions for theses two vacant airport parcels: ➢ It is the policy of the City of Auburn that Auburn Municipal Airport be economically self-sufficient, since the Airport is an "enterprise fund". ➢ The FAA requires that the above two vacant parcels only be developed as aviation - dependent uses. The City of Auburn policy is to continue owning all land within the existing boundaries of the Airport. This includes the 23 acres of vacant land on the west side of the Airport, which is being held for long-term aviation -dependent uses. This 23 -acre land assemblage and the 3.5 -acre parcel on the eastside of the airport are the only two vacant land parcels available. It is important to recognize that buildable industrial land in the Green River Valley is in very short supply. This problem will only get worse. An increasingly strong market demand will occur in the future if the City of Auburn ever chooses to exercise this disposition opportunity. Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan — June 1001 I.- LPROJECn011300 /41 WORD IMttrpInc pts. W C 5.1 W&H Pacific, Inc. I Chapter 5 ' Auburn Municipal Airport Aviation -Dependent ' Master Plan Update Development Alternatives Aviation -Dependent Uses ; This analysis focuses on highest and best uses (most profitable) that are aviation-dependent.i Examples of possible aviation -dependent uses include: ' ➢ Pilot training ➢ Pilot supplies t ➢ Aircraft maintenance ➢ Aircraft repair ➢ Aircraft upholstery (dual use) t ➢ Paint shop (dual use) ➢ Propeller balancing ➢ Avionics , ➢ Small Aircraft Reproduction ➢ Aircraft rental & sales ➢ Aerial surveying , ➢ Aerial photography ➢ Air freight ' Thus, development alternatives for the two vacant airport parcels must necessarily be the highest uses consistent with the aviation -dependent limitation requirement. In other words, the underlying goal here is to recommend permissible development alternatives that are financially ' best for the Airport's long-term future. Competitive Supply ' It is important to understand which competitive real estate land uses in the private marketplace ' might potentially compete with possible aviation -dependent use recommendations at Auburn Municipal Airport. Essentially, only two types of buildings are potentially developable on the Airport that could - in some cases - compete for aviation -dependent tenants with the surrounding ' Auburn area private real estate marketplace: (1) office buildings and, (2) light industrial 1 1 Highest and best use is defined as: The reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved ' property, which is physically possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible, and that results in the highest value. Auburn Municipal Airport Mauer Pian -June 2001 1:IP E 0 2300141W sire nc pi5. 5.2 W&W Pacific, nc. ' Chapter 5 Auburn Municipal Airport Aviation -Dependent Master Plan Update Development Alternatives buildings 2 Therefore, marketplace conditions in the Southend for each of these uses are now characterized. Office Market In general, the Southend office space market is soft relative to the rest of the Puget Sound urban area.3 Of the total of 8.3 million square feet of net rentable office space in the Southend, nearly 12 percent is vacant. Most of this office space is concentrated in Renton and in Kent. The average annual lease rate for Class A office space in the Southend currently averages $20.00 per square foot (full service) of net rentable area. Auburn is not viewed by developers as a key Southend office location. Accordingly, it only contains approximately two percent of the Southend's total space. Therefore, the City of Auburn needs to be cautious in considering the development of office space at the Airport. This is particularly true on airport property because leasehold tenants must be aviation -dependent space users. Moreover, buildings constructed by developers must be sited on long-term ground leases; and the reversionary interest in such buildings will flow back to the City of Auburn at the end of their ground leases. Industrial Market The Southend industrial building marketplace is very large and active. Currently, over 90 million square feet of industrial building space exists in the Green River Valley. This total comprises 45 percent of all such space in the greater Seattle urbanized area. Only two percent of this industrial space is categorized as "high tech". Green River Valley vacancy rates for industrial buildings are very low. They have been steadily dropping mainly since 1994. Currently, they are running at about 4.0 percent throughout the Green River Valley. Industrial net absorption of industrial space in the Green River Valley was exceedingly high in the year 2000, running at over a 5.9 million square foot annual rate. This compares to a more normal annual average absorption rate of about 2.0 million square feet in recent prior years. Although the market has eased somewhat, it is healthy and balanced. 2 Obviously, specialized aircraft hangar buildings only relate to airport locations where runway access is available. ' The Southend geographically encompasses Auburn, Kent, Renton, Sea -Tac, South Seattle and Tukwila. Auburn Municipal Airport MasterPlan —June 2001 I. IPROJECn022300111W0 IMstrp1nchpt3. DOC J-3 W&H Pacific, Inc. Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update Chapter 5 Aviation -Dependent Development Alternatives Green River Valley industrial. landlords are typically asking the following lease rates for their buildings. Monthly building lease rates for new industrial "shell' and "office" space in the Green River Valley are running $0.29 - $0.40 and $0.65 - $0.75 per square foot, respectively. Monthly operating expenses are running $0.07 - $0.14 per square foot. Industrial land values in the Green River Valley currently fall in the $4.50 to $8.00 per square foot range. Typical warehouse buildings cost between $43 to $74 per square foot to construct. Airport Tenant Demand This section sets forth potential market-driven land uses that are aviation -dependent for the vacant 23 -acre airport property on the Westside, and the vacant 3.5 -acre parcel on the Eastside. Market Supportable Uses It would be very difficult to find enough leasehold only tenants engaged in aviation -dependent activities to occupy industrial -type buildings on buildable portions of the 23 -acre site. This is true even though the overall Southend industrial space market is very healthy. The difficulty in developing this site for the City of Auburn and the Airport as industrial buildings can be clarified as follows. Due to wetlands, it is estimated that only a portion of the 23 acres is suitable for construction of industrial buildings. For example, assume that development of single -story light industrial buildings can occur on only 10 acres. Given an estimated ground coverage ratio of about one-third, approximately 150,000 square feet of new industrial building space could be developed by the City on this land. It is believed that the City would incur a high degree of market risk in developing (or in working with the.private sector to develop) this industrial space. It is highly unlikely that approximately 150,000 square feet of space could be absorbed for aviation -dependent uses. This would equate to between 100-300 workers on the Westside of the Airport, all working in airport dependent activities. Because the current and future market is too thin, it is reasonable to conclude, therefore, that high vacancies would occur if this industrial building space is only marketed to prospective aviation -dependent tenants. Auburn Municipal Airport Mmuer Plan — lune 2001 1: 1PROJECT1022300141 WORD IMstrpincbpt5.DOC 5.4 W&H Pacific, Inc. I I I I Chapter 5 Auburn Municipal Airport Aviation -Dependent Master Plan Update Development Alternatives Development Alternative Recommendations Aviation -dependent development alternatives are now presented. These appear to have long- term market support on one (or both) of the two vacant Airport parcels. Alternative 1 - T -Hangars On Both Sites Good market support exists at Auburn Municipal Airport for the development of T -hangars on both the 3.5 -acre vacant Eastside site and on buildable portions of the 23 -acre Westside site. This viable development alternative fully meets the requirement for aviation -dependent development. The City of Auburn could pursue developing the 23 -acre Westside site exclusively for T -hangars in the future. This area can be viewed by the City as along -term land bank or reserve. Due to front-end infrastructure cost, westside development probably should only be implemented after appropriate T -hangar development possibilities on the cast side of the Airport have been exhausted. However, it is important to consider the actual amount of buildable land that is available now. This is currently being accomplished through wetland assessments and other physical determinations of the 23 acres. Several key reasons underpin this recommendation to reserve the vacant land on the west side of the Airport exclusively for the eventual development of T -hangars. Typically, access by T - hangar tenants does not occur on a daily or a consistently recurring basis. Rather, T -hangar use for most lessees is on an occasional basis. Weekends are particularly busy. Thus, the poor access to these hangars is not a major site location constraint. Neither is the poor visibility from B Street NW. In fact, the latter may be a security benefit helping to better insulate the aircraft from passing outsiders. Also, as market demand pressures increase in the future for aircraft storage space, the west side land will allow re -use of certain east side airport property for more productive and profitable uses. Presently, there is substantial pent-up demand for new hangar space on the east side of the Airport. Over 100 persons are currently on the waiting list for hangars. It is reasonable to assume that at least 85 of these are solid prospects. This demand for hangar space will only increase in the future as Boeing Field and Renton Municipal Airport continue to face aircraft storage facility shortages. Auburn Municipal Airport is the next logical storage location to the south in the Seattle urbanized area. At build -out and full absorption, it is estimated that the west side of Auburn Municipal Airport can accommodate many T -hangars. The number depends upon the amount of buildable land after wetland issues are mitigated. For example, it is estimated that on 10 acres of buildable area, Auburn Municipal Airport _ Master plan —June 2001 I Chapter 5 ' Auburn Municipal Airport Aviation -Dependent , Master Plan Update Development Alternatives the site could accommodate -four hangar buildings containing'24 T -hangars each - or 96 new T - hangars. At current rental rates of $335 per month, annual hangar leasehold revenues of nearly $386,000 (year 2001 dollars) could be generated for the City. As an interim land use on the west side, aircraft tiedown areas could be developed. At present, the average annual rate for a tiedown space at the Airport is $648 (or $54 per month). t It is concluded that the highest and best use for the buildable portion of the 23 acres of west side Airport land is for T- hangars. However, the City could also encourage development of light t industrial buildings, if market support for aviation -dependent tenants is proven. Also, under aviation -dependent Alternative 1, an estimated 36 T -hangars could be developed on ' the vacant 3.5 -acre parcel on the east side of the Airport. The site would accommodate three buildings, each containing 12 aircraft. If developed, the estimated annual revenues flowing to the City as T -hangars is estimated to be nearly $145,000. However, as described in Alternative ' 2, a higher use of the site would be the development of an FBO. Alternative 2 - FBO and T -Hangars Mix ' Alternative 2 calls for developing an FBO operation on the vacant 3.5 acres on the Airport's east ' side. This site could effectively function as the gateway to Auburn Municipal Airport. An appropriate corresponding "entry statement" would help set off this gateway planning element. Also, it is likely that under Alternative 2, the above prescribed use of T -hangars on the west side ' of the airport would remain the same. If a new FBO operation is developed at the Airport, the vacant 3.5 -acre east side parcel could ' accommodate an estimated 40,000 to 50,000 square feet of single -story building space (if fully developed). This estimated building space range assumes approximate building ground coverage ratios of 25 and 33 percent, respectively. Both office and light industrial building types would be ' constructed on the site. The office space may be used for such activities as Airport office, pilot lounge and flight training. It is estimated that approximately one fourth of the building space would be developed as Class A office space with 100 percent drop ceilings and full finishes, full ' band -width telecommunications capabilities and higher capacity electrical and mechanical systems. Parking requirements would be 4 to 5 stalls per 1,000 square feet of building area. The remaining building space would be comprised of light industrial buildings, containing ' approximately 25 percent office space with the remainder as shell space. These buildings type would typically have large grade -level doors to accommodate such aviation -dependent uses as ' aircraft repair, painting, upholstery, air freight, etc. These buildings normally require from 2.5 to 4.0 parking stalls per 1,000 square feet. Approximately three quarters of the total building space Auburn Municipal Airport Mmier Plan — June 2001 7 WR 5-7-E622300141WORD IMUrp nchpiS.D OC 5-6 W aci ic, Ina ' Chapter 5 Auburn Municipal Airport Aviation -Dependent Master Plan Update Development Alternatives on the 3.5 -acre parcel would be developed as light industrial buildings, designed for the aviation - dependent activities of a FBO. It is recommended that the 3.5 -acre eastside site be developed as an FBO. This appears to be the highest and best use of this excellent site. Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan -June 2001 Chapter 6 Airport Plans Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 6 Master Plan Update Airport Plans The Airport Plans consist of four plan sheets: the Airport Layout Plan, the Part 77 Imaginary Surfaces Airspace Plan the Part 77 Inner Approach Surfaces plan, and the Land Use Plan. These plans represent the culmination of the 20 -year master planning process for the Auburn Municipal Airport. Airport Layout Plan - Sheet 2 The airport layout plan depicts the current airport layout and the proposed improvements to the airport for the 20 -year planning period. The airport improvements shown on the airport layout plan were developed based on airport needs resulting from growth and potential growth and input received through the master planning process. Possible alternatives were developed as a part of the facility requirements and were reviewed by the Master Plan Advisory Board, Airport Management and the FAA. The decisions based on these reviews were the basis for the airport improvements shown on the airport layout plan. The goals of the airport over the next twenty years have been more clearly defined as a result of this master planning process. Auburn Municipal Airport will continue to be a strong general aviation airport. As other nearby airports continue to grow, phasing out the smaller aircraft in exchange for the larger aircraft and business jets, the general aviation community needs airports like Auburn, who will continue to serve their needs. As a result, the airport layout plan reflects maintenance and enhancement of the existing airfield and landside facilities, along with growth to bring more revenue to this self-supporting airport and to better serve the general aviation community. The improvements for Auburn Municipal Airport focus intitially, in the years 2001-2005, on maintenance and enhancement of the airfield, many of which improvements do not show up specifically on the airport layout plan, but are reflected in the Capital Improvement Plan for the airport, presented and discussed in Chapter 9, Financial Plan. These improvements include completion of airport security fencing, slurry seal of the existing parallel taxiways and transient and based aircraft aprons and displacement of the threshold for Runway 16 to allow for an obstruction free approach to accommodate a circling, visual GPS approach. The runway will also be rehabilitated (to correct settlement in the runway pavement) and overlayed, the hangar taxilanes and one adjacent apron at the center of the airfield will be overlayed, and the runway and connector taxiways will be overlayed and the lighting system removed and replaced with a new system. Also during this time period, private developers will be building hangars and aviation -dependent business buildings and property adjacent to the airport and in the RPZ's will continued to be acquired by the airport. Auburn W&H 2001 I Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 6 ' Master Plan Update Airport Plans ' During the years 2006- to. 2010, the parallel. taxiways willbe replaced with one 25 foot -width ' parallel taxiway, bringing the parallel taxiway system up to standard for B -I aircraft. Taxiway ' lighting and signing will be reconstructed simultaneuosly, along with hold aprons to accommodate aircraft pulling off of the taxiway and additional apron pavement to the east of the parallel taxiway which will help facilitate movement and continuity in this system. Construction ' of the 23 acres on the west side of the airport will also begin at this time. This construction includes a new parallel taxiway, taxilanes, access road , parking and hangar construction. For the remaining ten years, 2011-2020, it is planned to relocated the airport office to a larger and more adequate facility, which allows for reconfiguration of the aprons adjacent to the airports office to provide more continuity and a few tiedowns for larger aircraft when necessary. ' The airport would also like to add additional pavement to both ends of the runway during this period. Though this additional runway pavement would not be supported by the FAA, since they are not necessary to accommodate aircraft, they allow for an additional safety margin on landing ' and take -offs, which is preferred by the airport owners and users. This is an even more important consideration because the airport is used by many pilots -in -training. ' Part 77 Imaginary Surfaces Airspace Plan - Sheet 3 ' This plan shows the Part 77 Imaginary Surfaces for the future layout of Auburn Municipal Airport with a USGS map as the background. Airport imaginary surfaces consist of five ' different types of surfaces. The surfaces for Auburn Municipal Airport are as follows: 1. Primary Surface: A rectangular surface with a width of 250 feet (centered on the runway I centerline) and a length that extends 200 feet beyond each end of the runway. The elevation of the primary surface corresponds to the elevation of the nearest point of the runway centerline. ' 2. Approach Surface: A surface centered on the extended runway centerline, starting at each end of the primary surface, 200 feet beyond each end of the runway at a width of 250 feet and an elevation equal to that of the end of the runway; extending a horizontal ' distance of 5,000 feet to a width of 1,250 feet, at a slope of 20:1. 3. Transitional Surface: A sloping 7:1 surface that extends outward and upward at right ' angles to the runway centerline from the sides of the primary surface and the approach surfaces. 4. Horizontal Surface: An elliptical surface at an elevation 150 feet above the established ' airport elevation created by swinging 5,000 -foot radius arcs from the center of each end of the primary surface. Tangent lines then connect these arcs. Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update —June 1001 1."OJEC1O22300111WORDWstrpinchpt6.DOC 6-2 W&HPaclfic ' Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 6 Master Plan Update Airport Plans 5. Conical Surface: A surface extending outward and upward from the horizontal.surface.at. a slope of 20:1 for a horizontal distance of 4,000 feet. It is ideal to keep these surfaces clear of obstructions whenever possible. The Part 77 surfaces are the basis for protection of the airspace around the airport. Obstructions to these surfaces are identified in the Obstruction Data Tables (on sheets 3 and 4), along with the plan to address the described obstructions. Part 77 Inner Approach Surfaces — Sheet 4 The Part 77 Inner Approach Surfaces plan shows the same information as the Part 77 Imaginary Surfaces Airport Airspace Plan, but at a smaller scale, which better identifies the obstructions closer to the airport. This plan specifically addresses the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) and any obstructions to the approach surfaces within two thousand feet of the ends of the runway. The inner approach surfaces are shown in their existing layout and their future layout after the runway extensions. In the existing runway layout there are two obstructions to the approach surfaces, the building off of the end of Runway 16 and the park & ride off of the end of Runway 34. The building obstruction is being addressed by displacing the Runway 16 threshold to create a clear 20:1 obstruction clearance slope. The park & ride is expected to be removed in the near future, addressing the obstruction to Runway 34. With the construction of the additional runway pavement, the Part 77 approach surfaces move out to 200 feet beyond the new end of the runway pavement. This change introduces a number of obstructions to the approach surfaces. These obstruction have been presented in the obstruction tables, though these tables represent only the current controlling obstructions and some of the obstructions closer to the end of the runway. The information shown in the obstruction table is not based off of survey information and therefore, should be used for planning purposes only. These obstructions are addressed with displaced thresholds at both ends of the runway, which maintain 20:1 obstruction clearance approaches per the existing conditions, as mentioned in the previous paragraph. Land Use Plan — Sheet 5 The land use plan addresses the land use in the vicinity of the airport. Three criteria were looked at to help evaluate the suitability of the land use and zoning around the airport: Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update— June 1001 I.IPROJECn011300141WORDUfstrpinchpt6.DOC 6-3 W&HPaMJtc Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 6 Master Plan Update Airport Plans 1. noise (65 DNL noise contour and traffic patterns) , 2. the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ), and 3. Airport Airspace Obstruction Protection (Part 77 and Obstacle Clearance Approach). The 65 DNL noise contour used as a reference was developed in 1992 for the previous master plan. In developing the scope of the Master Plan Update, it was determined that the noise contours were representative for this study period provided there were not significant changes to the fleet mix. An aerial photo taken of the airport in August 2000 is used as the basemap for this land use plan. Noise The 65 DNL noise contour incorporates a variety of zoning areas around the airport. Light and heavy industrial, light and heavy commercial and public use (park & ride lot). Light industrial (Ml) typically consists of daytime businesses involved in electronics or software manufacture or assembly or warehouse and shipping applications. They are not typically noise sensitive and generate some low-level ambient noise. Heavy industrial (M2) is typically heavy manufacturing and is often a noise generator. Heavy industrial zoning is often situated around airports because they both generate noise. Light commercial (C1) is generally smaller retail or office uses, which can be somewhat noise I 1 11 1 I 1 1 1 sensitive. In this case, the businesses in the light commercial zoning area just south of the airport ' are larger businesses: fast food restaurants, a grocery store, and a home improvement store. Also, these businesses are on the edge of the 65 DNL noise contour and a main arterial (15' Street NE), which typically generates noise levels at or above those equivalent to the 65 DNL ' noise contour. Heavy commercial (0) is characterized by more intensive or larger retail businesses, which generate a relatively high level of ambient sound themselves, thus likely masking the noise from the airport. The airport does not conflict with the site zoned for public ' use because it is a park & ride site, for which noise is not a concern. In the vicinity of the airport, there are a number of other contributors of ambient noise: the thoroughbred horse racetrack, the railroad, the SR167 highway, and two larger arterial roadways (Auburn Way North and 15'" ' Street NE). Taking into account the other surrounding contributors to noise and the zoning types around the airport, the current zoning criteria around the airport is suitable. The current air traffic pattern keeps traffic on the west side of the airport. The zoning underlying this traffic pattern consists of light and heavy commercial, and light and heavy industrial. This I west side pattern keeps the traffic over the other noise generating uses in the area; i.e., the railroad, the racetrack and the highway. This is preferable to a traffic pattern on the east side of Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update - June 2001 /:IPROJECnG22300/IIWORDIMstrylnchpt6.DOC 6-I W&M Pac1Jic Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update Chapter 6 )ort Plans the airport, which would be on the edge of all types of residential zoning. Helicopter traffic flying to the east of the airport has received some noise complaints. A former noise concern was the aircraft flying over the hospital to the south of the airport. A noise abatement policy was put into effect, requiring aircraft to tum before reaching the hospital when taking off on Runway 34. This noise abatement was abandoned on a trial basis, and there have been no further noise complaints. There is still a sign at the north end of the runway explaining this noise abatement procedure that is planned to be removed in the near future. Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) The runway protection zone (RPZ) is a trapezoidal shape, 200 feet beyond each runway end. At Auburn Airport, the RPZ starts with a width of 250 feet and increases to a width of 450 feet over a distance of 1,000 feet. The airport owns only a portion of the land in the RPZs for the airport. The RPZ at Runway 34 overlaps a portion of the park & ride lot, 15' Street NE, fast food restaurants and some commercial buildings. The RPZ at Runway 16 overlaps 30' Street NE, and industrial buildings. Ideally, the entire RPZ on both ends of the runway would have been purchased by the airport and be clear of any uses or obstructions. The FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13 explains, "The RPZ's function is to enhance the protection of people and property on the ground. This is achieved through airport control over RPZs". The airport currently has avigation easements in the RPZs, with the exception of the public roadways. These easements allow the airport to restrict the establishment of future obstructions, provides the authority to move existing obstructions, and acknowledges the noise and vibration caused by aircraft that fly over the area. The RPZ shall remain in the existing location at the south end of the runway because the threshold will not move. The RPZ at the north end of the runway will shift 40 feet to the south, due to the 40 -foot threshold shift (see sheets 2 and 4) to avoid obstructions to the approach surface. The avigation easements will need to be modified in this area to correspond with the new location. In the future, it is recommended that serious consideration be given to purchasing the property's in the RPZs, if they become available. If purchase is not a financially feasible option, the City and the airport should carefully evaluate any future proposed construction on these parcels to enhance the safety of the RPZ areas. This evaluation of land use compatible with the RPZ should be in accordance with the criteria described in the FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13, Change 6, Section 212. 2001 6-5 I Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 6 ' Master Plan Update Airport Plans ' Part 77 Approach Surfaces I Land uses and development in the approach surfaces of the runway should be restricted to elevations that do not penetrate the 20:1 approach surface. The approach surfaces begin 200 feet ' beyond the runway ends at an elevation equal to that of the end of the runway. These approach surfaces start at a width of 250 feet and increase to a width of 1,250 feet at a distance of 5,000 feet. The approach surface has a slope of 20 feet horizontal to 1 -foot vertical. The existing approach surface for Runway 16 has one obstruction, which is a building. The threshold is to be displaced 40 feet to the south to make a clear 20:1 approach surface. There is also one ' obstruction to the approach at the south end of the airport, which is the vehicles in the park & ride lot (based on assumed vehicle height per the FAA Part 77, Object Affecting Navigable Airspace). It is anticipated that the lot will be removed and the associated land purchased by the ' airport. This would leave the 20:1 obstruction clearance slopes at either end of the runway clear of obstructions. The new Part 77 surfaces, as outlined per the ultimate runway additional pavement, should be the I basis for protection for any new development. Though the obstruction clearance approaches, as defined by the displaced thresholds, will be clear, all future construction shall be guided by the ' ultimate Part 77 approach surfaces, which begin 200 feet beyond the ultimate end of pavement. Land Lease Areas t Ultimate land lease areas are identified on the land use plan. These areas are a portion of the 23 acres on the west side of the airport, the three vacant hangar areas in the north hangar area, and ' the Pacific Concrete property (if acquired) on the east side of the airport, just north of 26'" Street NE. During the development of this master plan, the 3.5 acre site just north of the transient apron, a property once considered an ultimate land lease area, was leased to Aviation Properties, Inc.. ' Over the course of the next three years this area will be developed into spaces for aviation dependant businesses. This is in accordance with the recommendations of this master plan. Auburn Municipal Airport Mosier Plan Chapter 7 Financial Plan Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update Chapter 7 Financial Plan Through the evaluation of the facility requirements and the development of the airport layout plan, the improvements needed at the Auburn Municipal Airport over the 20 -year planning period from 2001 to 2020 have been determined. This chapter of the master plan puts these improvements into a capital improvement plan and financial plan for the airport to follow over the next 20 years. Capital Improvement Plan The capital improvement plan develops both the timeline for the airport improvements and the estimated costs for those improvements. The plan is divided up into three phases: Phase 12001- 2005, Phase 11 2006-2010, and Phase III 2011-2020. Each project has been given a total cost, which is then applied by percentage to its funding sources. Projects which are FAA eligible are supported by a 90°/0/10% shared funding, where 90% of the total cost is covered by an FAA grant and 10% is covered by the Auburn Municipal Airport. Though projects are FAA eligible, this does not insure that funds will be available or granted to the project by the FAA. The Washington State Department of Transportation will provide grants, generally on 50% state, 50% airport basis for pavement maintenance, such as fog and slurry sealing, and for fencing. For projects that may be funded by the state, 50% of the cost of the project is covered by the state and 50% is covered by the City. This is also applicable to projects that may also be funded by the FAA. In the instance that grants from the FAA and the state fund a project, 90% of the project cost is covered by the FAA grant, 5% of the cost is covered bythe state and 5% is covered by the City. Costs for projects that are not eligible for FAA or state funding are applied to private developers (as applicable) or to the City. Projects which are not available for FAA funding include fog seal, hangar construction and rehabilitation, airport office relocation, private hangar and building development, and in this case, the runway extensions. The FAA will not support the runway extensions because they are not required to accommodate the critical aircraft at the airport. State funding covers items as noted previously. Phase I (2001-2005) This phase focuses on maintenance and rehabilitation of the existing airfield, security fencing and property acquisition for future improvements and runway protection in the RPZ. Property acquisition of the grass portion of the park & ride lot, the Pacific Concrete site on the east side of the airport and a portion of property on the west side of the airport to accommodate the future taxiway object free area are included in the first year of projects due to current availability and increased costs with delay of purchase. These purchases are part of the continuing effort to purchase property in the RPZ when available and provide accommodations for future Auburn Municipal Airport Marten Plan dune 2001 /:IPROJEC71022300/IIWORDIMsirpinchpl7.doc 7-/ WdHPacific Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 7 ' Master Plan Update Financial Plan ' development. Also in 2001, the threshold for Runway 16 will be displaced to create an ' unobstructed_approach.surface for the.. GPS approach. 2001 will likely be the time for hangar development on the two of the three remaining hangar sites in the north hangar area. These two ' sites, which will be for general aviation aircraft storage, are expected to be built by Hangars Unlimited. In 2002, airport security fencing is planned to complete the fencing around the airport, thus ' increasing safety and security. The airport fence just south of Runway 34, is substandard and ' will be replaced and the nearby ground surface regraded after the park & ride grass is purchased. Parallel taxiways and the connector taxiway between the two parallel taxiways are planned to be slurry sealed as recommended by Pavement Consultants, Inc. as a result of their statewide ' pavement inventory process. Construction of a private hangar on the southernmost hangar site in the north hangar area could also be possible in 2002 Also in 2002, the first phase of ' development on the 3.5 -acre site is anticipated to begin. In 2003, it is planned to rehabilitate and overlay the runway, replace the runway and connector ' taxiway lighting system, overlay the connector taxiways and hold aprons, and overlay the hangar taxilanes (in the central portion of the airfield) and the adjacent apron areas. This series of projects will provide improvement to the existing pavements at the airport. Also, though not in , need of an overlay because the pavement is newer, Pavement Consultants Inc. recommended, and has been included in the CIP, slung sealing the transient apron (north of the airport office) ' and the based aircraft apron just south of the airport office. Development of the 3.5 -acre site is expected to be continue in 2003. ' Property acquisition of the park & ride, located in the airport RPZ, and an obstruction to the Runway 34 approach is planned for 2004. Security fencing at the airport would be adjusted to ' enclose this new parcel of land. It has been discussed in the development of this master plan that access to the airport on the east side is hampered by too many parked cars on the roadway. This resulted in a suggestion to sign E Street NE as no parking. This signing, along with parking lot development to accommodate airport users, is included in the plan for 2004. For 2005, wetland mitigation would be performed to prepare for the development of the 23 acres on the west side of ' the airport (see Appendix A for the Wetland Delineation Report). Also in 2005, it is planned to fog seal the taxilanes in the north hangar area and slurry seal the south apron, as recommended by Pavement Consultants, Inc. ' t Auburn Municipal Airport Matter Plan Vpdofe— June 200/ kIPROJEC71022300141 WORDW1trp/nc11p17.doc 7-.2 WEA Pactjc ' Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 7 Master Plan Update Financial Plan Phase 11(2006-2010) Capital improvement projects planned for Phase II incorporate the new development at Auburn Airport needed to bring the airport parallel taxiways up to standards and accommodate the growing demand for hangar space at the airport. The parallel taxiway construction and improvements include removing the existing set of parallel taxiways and replacing them with one standard width taxiway with a standard separation from the runway and additional apron to the west. Taxiway lighting and signing will be reconstructed simultaneously, along with construction of a hold apron on the south end of the airfield. Following this construction, the development of the west side of the airport is planned. This involves construction of a new parallel taxiway, taxilanes, an access road, and hangar building construction. Phase 111(2011-2020) This third phase consists of projects in the long-range plan for airport maintenance and development. These projects include relocating the airport office, reconfiguring the transient apron (this is dependent upon relocation of the airport office), acquisition of the hotel property to the south of the runway, construction of additional runway pavement on both runway ends and reconstruction of the existing hangars in the center portion of the airfield. Financial Plan In order to assist the airport in providing for these improvements, a forecast of future operating revenues and expenses was completed. Forecasts are estimates and predictions of future activities and operating results. As the forecast gets further away from the present time, the predicted results and outcomes become increasingly uncertain. While forecasts are based on existing conditions and the best information available about anticipated future events and trends, they are an estimate and should be used as a guideline. Events and activities within the next few years can usually be estimated with a fair degree of accuracy, however sudden changes within the community or in the aviation industry can cause significant deviations from the forecasted activity, even in the short term. This forecast is based on previous year's financial information for the airport. To complete this forecast, certain assumptions were made. Given that the economy may possibly experience some potentially volatile periods, such as experienced in the early 1980's when interest rates were routinely in the double digits, these assumptions may become less accurate with the passage of 3 7 Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 7 ' Master Plan Update Financial Plan ' time. However, the purpose of this analysis is to provide the airport sponsor with a tool to help ' plan for anticipated expenditures. For this analysis, salary and wage expenses were assumed to increase by 3.5 percent annually. No additional staff was included, as the airport was assumed to ' be fully staffed. Payroll benefits were calculated at 25 percent of gross salary and wages and therefore increased as wages increased. Supplies, communications, professional services and ' operating leases were assumed to increase at an annual rate of 2 percent. Utilities were forecast to increase at 4.5 percent annually. Repairs and maintenance were forecast to increase at 3 percent. Insurance was assumed to increase by 2 percent every other year. And for simplicity, ' the indebtedness assumed by the City for the construction of the new hangar facility was included at $1,000,000 payable over 20 years at 9.7 percent interest. While these assumptions may not be accurate to the penny, they represent the approximate financial position of the airport ' over the next 20 years. This forecast is included at the end of this chapter. A frequently used financial planning tool is to forecast anticipated expenses and then adjust revenues to cover these expenses and any required additional amounts needed for capital projects. In developing this forecast, the existing and potential revenue sources for the airport ' were evaluated. The two primary and significant sources of income for the Auburn Airport are fuel sales, and rents and leases. While fuel sales proceeds were projected to increase at 2.5 ' percent annually, the nature of this revenue stream does not lend itself to sharp increases. Fuel is readily available in the Puget Sound area, so a significantly higher price would not bring in increased revenues. Pilots would simply refuel at another airport before returning to Auburn. t The only other significant source of revenue for the airport is from the rents and leases of airport property and hangars. The other significant source of revenue for the airport comes from the hangar rentals and land ' leases. As an enterprise fund, the airport must be financially self-sufficient. Given the limited ' ability for development on the airport, this source must be viewed as the primary resource for funding the proposed capital improvements. The Capital Improvement Plan proposes $5.3 ' million in local (airport) funds for improvements in the next 20 years. In order to generate the required capital to complete the proposed portion of the CIP that the airport is responsible for, it would be necessary to increase both leases and hangar rentals by 2.25 percent per year and adjust ' the "fair market value" every 5 years by 12 percent. While hangar storage in the Puget Sound area is at a premium, it is doubtful that the airport would be successful imposing these increases ' for aircraft storage. 1 Auburn Municipal Airport Maurer Plan Update— June 7001 1: IMalEC7102230014IWORDIMiirpinchpt7.doc 7.4 W&XPacific ' Auburn Municipal Airport Chapter 7 Master Plan Update Financial Plan As an alternative, if other funding could be obtained for certain projects, these increases could be reduced to a more manageable level. As an example, if construction of the proposed hangars in Phase II were to be funded through indebtedness secured by the revenues generated from these hangars, that would reduce the required capital improvement funding by more than half. In addition, if projects which are the sole financial responsibility of the airport such as the runway and taxiway extension, and the relocation of the airport office could be funded from sources other than operations, the requirement of increased lease and rental rates would be reduced to more acceptable levels. If the airport were to develop outside funding for the hangar construction and runway extension, the increases needed in ]eases and hangar rentals are reduced to approximately one half percent per year and a 5 percent "fair market value" adjustment every 5 years. 7- mea m ek§Mf;k§ ui § M`N;mnA;G©qa#§mma ki%KF§$®RkkK@ $ N k` k^ k- mS(© N k¢ ^■§;§; 2■ -�§ -�!�%@gmaa m �m�n�i;;nsa� ^ % L6 le§edC6 �a■ � °- �k`■© K , ,. �- ® � ,I ■ d ! 72 �|!f§�.;§ � % §.)■ � £ ` {k /§ !2ƒ)tl I2|I2| k �!|1k! �a!! a22!!�/!! o ! « 22 z m O m — M n M O O N O Y O S O Np� W np Op Y N N m N e m r e M 0 m Y m A r ea aD M Y O S N W N S O p pp (p f 8 S co N m S N N 1+1 O! 1n m Ol f 8 O N A oM'1 a f0 N N N A W o M ��M3p �p 8 N m m m m N P) CWD A Imo N N N m W m m fp C O O p S N PWi N CD pNl, W A O N S S Oo V 100 fmp Ip S N O W O Sp S h 88 .N.pr� n• W N N IMff M N r N O ti pmmN�l pp mN N S W� � S� o Qmm��d`$NTim W d 06 C6 MN� M' N. m Nmm' e A nNprm p N� m A m Y m O m W S ip p tm�l. N f0 W r mmM N N Pmt N S COD. O S S O N CR S Imp N O n A N S 0 N 10p O S ee o c 8 m Poi N 8 Amy S -i aO O N OC Cl m (G aD O e G O t2 O uN� PYj IMp p ON 08 Pol Y r W Y A Ip iD m m � teal prf 3 O a W 1� f0 Pf ^ (V T N Pf O N th N N N N O n 0; Q 10 N pGO N Ip � Opl aMD, � p! S A � OOl {Mp p T fmV tlNtppp, oS pS W A W m O m n O m 8 N IG m f oS COO tNOp tImOp oNo aCNpp emp {p f Y tG N O m G N 8 O m e m Y YYff O MY f0 Y1 M N SS S tp (p MTIIq O aG m S N PWi N IIPi p0 m N W S S S N {1Np0 pS pN mmN {Ap N Ipp p_Y $O IPpl AA Ip O SoN Op S o W A N m Am N S C S S M3 m O (D N m p N f0 ' N m ' ONY e IY9 m tp p N m N M O (O f0 h 17 Pf m rp 1N IMOp N pGGGG rD N N O r m 1p N mm N f0 W r v O p S N N a0 N POf S O S OmD (mp pp m 1p M f0 W O O m S O N 10p S pNi M A N N N Q 8 S m m r W m m m m 1� O �OMpI�p m P) P) h .- mmp !C Ip N 10f1 8 c m N W N N yyO CAD P1 M O' M Cmp N Pi .M- MNvi_ CCDJ_ CD N e O e O - fD N N W N N O ras e tp Pf 1�f m N 10 YI M IAS yy� "Q N � N�pp N A S O 8 Np mNNYMm AOWNMCSMYDf yt0NO' S1bp m APlN0N WmO AI OgA WENWO9! tA9 7 A'ASe OS Nve MtIf{Opp�p S m w CpfQr NNN S p pSp m Q$ pNC t0 m1N-. amma 'pqpBI IR li R8o 8SS P� `ppr��� WA �vryi is Y'o' m e8 So' ICn o 888n �pc} m O N N f0 OAl m 1p CD n N fp P OS V wi N PIVf O O n N O O A 1f1 N S N P) O< m PI N u N CD N N W r' . m N ^ m O t0 aCDD Gq� 1� N O n0 n n S S S y e M N A yNj a i Y N W So S pCAppDp t00 S S m m p S p ep � Ae} S O Q S O r A p N Pel pm ( my O pml N S S Ip m16 O P) OI A e O M a Ip m A O M t7 In 1p lV A m O O Y O O N S M M O' POI m N m M CmD N IN(I N m N N W A m O 0 N h IAS M M m A W eMNN.-�8S0 ^l �neo_�AY,Pmi,��880 "' mS8 (n mA Y pry Y� 1. Ym A N S pp pp1 W ^ p Qml 8 1. O p m N Ip Yl MW m e A N Lq !� P) O Oml N < S O W 1q P) N p N l� N m m m Nm MAI N poW n m M ly N N N 1� N N N oaf m C o O. mU a S F OI Z N d y m Vl N •V G J 9 CC N O N R NNN W ¢go $ C p � LL m�< FL 0 loom 12m z .co V . tOt10Vy. . th ��Spp .1ST pS t7 N YI N aD r tm+i S I��, R S S N n S 8S N O N O m C9 ONI O 4D m I� fD S ( Np I� any O N !Q 99 A N t0 6 m O a t0 ��np w 4y n 1A l7 A V A A e N N 40 Of N m at N a7 O : O N^ r m N lh n 8 0 M 880 m 0< O Ol m O S S m p Nr- wi 0oi ri H O ��pp 88 vi p Cp n CCp C N N M N O wi O S N 4A�1 h 88 tw4+i1 S T N, S O O N^ m cm0 Q N m m l'1 Cq r tD O V A O O 0 0 m wi 06 S fA0 IA fm0 47 N EO m O m n N � N n n m IT n 3 P S 8 0 rN. n n m a un S g m my 8 8 pN p� p� pO N p O n O P. A m 4wp In A {p fNOm COf N 4�4y� M S Y n P 8 O N 1m0 G N � fpN l�f O m N w1 S ' V H Inp N r m m' h r m H N INff 1 pp {� �p fV A 0 0 N$ ( epp m S H 8 S S wm1. C- N 9 ♦ N. m m �2 h 9 88 p8 p P A 8 S Y f O Im Y 0 0 N^ fD n A A 0 i0 Of m fN0 r S 1n O ' 4 4 LQ N O 17 tD m n A m O O n EO A `d 4 N mNl vioc�Na o m mac e6m' vi� w ^$^a Ol 8 m N N N 8 H 8 4q0 N W 1A m CN'1 h 8 H m 882 p �S'mpq�4n'l�l�i$l�io m r e$$vOo1��YimAm $ ui N c O N< 17 Ol O� fC N A N m t7 O m m N m N t7 S A Ol O r N moi of m o^�4ri vi �e emn4 °D aro ui vii ro . . . p� p M N p A N m (mp 8 S S m pp M� �m np � p 8 O 8S O ESO, 10{ � b A b Yef N N �p( S4 8S O fN0 8 8 H O 1^[ WO ln�l Ih N O m IA S 1' (O N t 1: P � m m N a ��p m p O A Q N (8p Opl til Ol yy^ ^^N 10 p t f F P N N N m m m p m m Oi m N N c p8ppp C OC 888 0 0 1G� SQ p^� O t"l O p O S 1W pO �Sp S VC m Y 01 8 Am ^ m Im. `QOM .�- m O A m m N 9 ui � N 4�f � m Ifgf m O SO A N m Ol Ol ^ m 1A t'1 A 1011 N m N m IA ^ m M OI N O ClN 4r :8 888 4NWoBW��1m�ry8$^<f 8$: W m O A 8 8 M `ci O N a n Ol r n S 8 r n wi N Y1 1�f ^ m N N m N O p �1'p1 O vl A n Q6 (p < ty ♦N O m m of m M m NH 10.1 A mm ' IA Ol S Ol IlI Ol < lV ��00 �4�(mpp 1yy0 NImp, N S M Imo C4 0 6-69 6 1m0 4 m p pm�Q fp 1p0 88 O mA Oml S N 8 0 N OI A X1. O N T m$ N N m O W O m r p n yn m m n of .f 4.1 m ry n O N N vi m < 1'nf (ANy m 10 n N' N N R A N m w m m am m yay1�FLa �ma'1 d'"�mo M a _C �LL E.V 04.1�,SQZz�0O4�_8ul J-) III O1�-i E b F C r e Q IL d m Z §14 AU 14 9 A || HI||| ■ ,l|\!Z|§ !! 1116■■�| ,■,■■ n || | ! ! � 2- / �M q| ! |� / 1 -d | Illf I|!f i |! II III | | ! & !| �■ ■ ■ | | � � | | | | | [ Appendix A Wetland Delineation Report Wetland Delineation of the Auburn Airport Parcel Prepared for. W&H Pacific 3$50 Monte VOIa Parkway Bbtheil, Washington 98021 Prepared by: Marc E. Bouin and John Gordon _ Shapiro and Associates, Inc. 101 Yesier Way, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104 SHAPIRO Project Number: 1005020 October 15, 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. INTRODUCTION 2. SITE DESCRIPTION L4 3. BACKGROUND RESEARCH ............................................................: 3 4. METHODS .................................................................:........ ............... .............................................. 6 5. RESULTS ............................................................................................................................................. 8 5.1 Welland A .............................................................................................. 10 5.2 Wetland B ................................................................................................ 10 5.3Wetland C ....... ..................................... .........................................._...................................... 10 5.4 Wetland D ...............................................................................................................................11 5.5 Wetland B .... ......................................................................................... .................................. 11 6. CONCLUSIONS...__ . ............................................................_.......................................................... . 11 7. REFERENCES ....._....................................................................................................................12 List of Tables it Table 1: Wetland Indicator Categories............................................................. _. ............................... 7 Table 2: Depth to Free-standing Water in Hydrology Test Bores.._......................................................... 10 Table 3: Summary of Airport Parcel Potential Wetland Areas................................................................. 11 List of Fieures Figure1: Vicinity Map .... :...... ......................................................._................. ..... 2 . ._. ...................................... Figure 2: NWI Map..................................................................._........................................................._......... 4 Figure3: Soils Map ............. ........................................................................................................................ 5 Figure 4: Wetland Delineation Map ...........................................: Photoeranha Amendia Data Sheets EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Shapiro and Associates, Inc. (SHAPIRO) conducted a wetland delineation for a 23 -acre parcel on the western edge of Auburn Municipal Airport in southern King County, Washington. The delineation indicates that five areas, 11.01 acres of the site, are potentially jurisdictional wetlands. This conclusion is based on the presence of hydric soils, wetland hydrologic conditions, and hydrophytic vegetation. 1. INTRODUCTION At the request of the Auburn Municipal Airport, SHAPIRO conducted a wetland delineation for property on the western edge of the airport. The delineation was conducted to help develop the Airport's Master Plan. This report provides a description of the site, the background materials used, SHAPIRO's methods, and the results of the delineation. 2. SITE DESCRIPTION The subject property is a rectangular 23 -acre site on the western edge of the Auburn Airport in Auburn, Washington, southern King County (Figure 0. The parcel is approximately 1,425 feet long and 675 feet wide. The legal location of the parcel is NE 1/4 of Section 12, Township 21 North,Ran a 04 East It is east of B Street NW and immediately west of the airport runway between 16 Street NE and 30* Street NE. No structures are on the property. The elevation of the site varies from 52 to 57 feet above sea level. The site is nearly level and has very little relief. In the southern two-thirds of the site, elevation change between the highest and lowest spots is generally less than 2 feet Slopes are very gentle, estimated at 2% or less. Surface flow on the site, if any, would likely be to the north or northeast Two ponded areas are present in the northeastern part of the site. One is a steep -sided, apparently excavated, depression approximately 75 feet wide and 150 feet long, on the northern boundary of the parcel. The second is a long oval pond, approximately 150 feet wide and 600 feet long, along the northern end of the eastern edge of the parcel. This pond has very gradually sloping margins. Grassland covers most of the southern two-thirds of the parcel. Small clusters of shrubs are interspersed in this grassland (Photograph 1). The northern third of the parcel supports a dense shrub community and a small amount of forested area. At the time of the delineation, trees (black cottonwood, Populus balsamifera) were being cut Woody debris along the western margin of the large pond indicated that a forested area had existed there and had been recently removed. Conversation with an airport employee confirmed that trees had been removed in 2000. The grassland appears to have been relatively undisturbed (not plowed or disced) for several years. The distribution of grass species indicates that any planting of grasses for pasture or hay production was discontinued long enough ago that natural characteristics on the site have sorted the grasses into identifiable communities. Wetland Delineation of the Aabarn Airport Parcel October 15, 2001 It Soares: Thom sGulds20W USGS7.51x15' "3 ®soon Appy Wmo "M Fed AUBURN MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PIAN Worhkvkn Quodnmgls 1983 � AREA OF DRAII WASHINGTON FIGURE 1 VICINITY MAP SHAPIRO 3. BACKGROUND RESEARCH SHAPIRO reviewed existing literature and data for the site, including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory (NWI) * maps, U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 -minute topographic quadrangle maps, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service (now known as the Natural Resource Conservation Service) soil survey for King County, and site- specific aerial photographs. From these background sources, SHAPIRO developed a preliminary indication of the location of potential wetlands onsite, and of existing soil, hydrologic, and vegetation conditions that might affect the onsite delineation. The National Wetland Inventory mapped one palustrine scrub -shrub wetland on the study area. (Figure 2). NWI also mapped a palustrine aquatic bed wetland north of the site; this wetland was a wastewater treatment site that was developed for other use after the NWI mapping. A third location of interest, a small paluWine emergent wetland, was mapped near the site, off the southern end of the eastern boundary. Two soil types are mapped on the study parcel. Renton silt loam (map unit Re) is mapped on all of the site except a narrow strip along the northern end of the eastern side of the site, where Briscot silt loam is mapped. (Snyder et al. 1973) (Figure 3). Both of the soils are listed hydric soils (National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils 1991). Soil descriptions below are taken from Snyder et al. (1973) and include Munsell colors for moist soil only. Renton silt loam is a somewhat poorly drained soil that formed in alluvium in river valleys. Slopes are 0% to 1%, with a gently undulating surface. It is classified as a coarse -loamy over sand or sandy skeletal, mixed, nonacid, mesic Mollic Fluvaquent. In a representative profile the AP horizon is 6 inches to 8 inches thick, very dark grayish -brown (IOYR3/2) silt loam with an abrupt, wavy boundary. The B21 horizon is 3 inches to 12 inches thick, dark grayish -brown (2.5Y4/2) very fine sandy loam with many medium prominent dark -brown (7.5YR4/4) mottles, with a clear, wavy boundary. The B22 horizon is 3 inches to 12 inches thick, dark grayish -brown (2.5Y4/2) fine sandy loam with thin lenses of fine sand. Many medium, prominent, dark -brown (7.5YR4/4) mottles are present. Briscoat silt loam is a moderately permeable somewhat poorly drained soil with slopes of less than 2/0. Runoff is slow and frequent but brief flooding from stream overflow is a moderate hazard. It is classified as a coarse -loamy, mixed, nonacid, mesic Typic Fluvaquent. In atypical profile the Ap horizon is 8 inches to 10 inches, dark grayish -brown (IOYR4/2) silt loam with an abrupt, smooth boundary. The B21g horizon is 7 inches to 9 inches thick, grayish — brown (2.5Y5/2) silt loam with many large prominent dark—brown (7.SYR4/4 and 3/4) mottles, and an abrupt wavy boundary. Weland Delineation of the Auburn Airport Parcel October 15, 2001 PEMCb 29fhStmdNW ! i ls� i 'o -MAC Ksc - r -------- PAW,. --- i -PAW,. I 1 ar I I i rssc� /\►ter: ! C 0 FRI Psscx J I ,Sd, Saaeil -�� Seurea: TAenxn Gulde Y000,' USflHs Nafknal W.dandr MvmbryAu6um Ghadangl. 1988; USGs7.S'x15' Au6um, Woi61n8M GModron8l, 1983 PAWCrx PdodrYr, ogmk bed, a hgio * flood. orhfMA a&*ale, omwaW FIGURE 2 PEW pawrw^ mw"*, so=wxjr I I PssA Omkkm+mlb-1 I Vw lyNoded ® me O"'" k a�• mw—l' &.&J N%M MAP Appo4ras sed. in Pear n,$Cx PAmrum —ub-x ummaj flooded, w� AUBURN MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER PIAN = S H A P I R O 1. bmmlww� A Aii001AT"IN. °r Nisw'&6= FIGURE 3 Or O"o Alt bam 0RGRw4on A ban X800 So &mh mmhA6= SOILS MAP ApproximoN Scab w Fae Ur Ur6 n bnd AUBURN MUNrJPAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN SHAPIRO 4. METHODS Wetlands on the site were delineated using methods described in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), which is commonly referred to as the 1987 Manual and the Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual (Ecology 1994). Soil series for the property were identified using the Soil Survey King County Area, Washington (Snyder et al. 1973). The 1987 Manual provides technical guidelines for determining whether or not an area is a wetland that falls under the jurisdiction of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. This section of the act authorizes the Secretary of the Army to issue permits for the discharge of dredged or fill material into the waters of the United States, including wetlands. Wetlands are defined by the 1987 Manual as "those areas inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support and under normal circumstances do support a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions." Based on this definition, the 1987 Manual identifies three diagnostic characteristics of wetlands that must be present before a site can be considered wetland under federal or state jurisdiction. Under normal circumstances, these characteristics are the presence of hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and wetland hydrologic conditions. When a site has been sufficiently disturbed by natural or human causes to prevent determination of one of these criteria, alternative methods must be. used to make a wetland determination. The wetland delineation was accomplished on two site visits, using a combination of the 1987 ManuaManual's "Routine Onsite Inspection" methods for sites both less than, and greater t� 5 acres. l's performed an initial assessment of the entire site in August 2000. At that time hydrophytic plant communities were identified on the site, and hydric soil conditions were verified Indicators of hydrologic conditions were too ambiguous to complete the delineation, however. The lack of water due to the season was problematic because secondary indicators were not enough in evidence to accurately determine the extent of wetland hydrology. The delineation was therefore delayed until such time as primary indicators would be present. The delineation on the southern two-thirds of the site was completed on April 4 and 5, 2001. The delineation on the northern third was completed on April 25, 2001. On April 4 and 5, shallow surface water was present in localized low spots, and groundwater was evident. A variation of the delineation method for sites larger than 5 acres was used to determine the extent of wetland hydrologic conditions. Twenty-nine test bores were excavated to a depth of 16 inches to 18 inches. Ten bores were placed along an east -west transect in the southern quarter of the site. Four bores were located generally along a transect near the southern end of the site. Eight bores were placed along two transects north of the original transect. Seven additional bores were scattered on the site. The location of each bore was selected to assess the hydrologic conditions in a specific plant association. The test bores were allowed to stand overnight. The level of water in the test bores was recorded Variations in the grassland community at each bore were observed The species assemblages and hydrology at the test bores indicated a correlation between hydrologic conditions and identifiable plant communities. This correlation was then used to Wetland Delineation ofthe Auburn Airport Parcel 6 October l5, 2001 establish the wetland boundary. Several hydrologic test bores were used as the loci for wetland sample plots. Data were collected in the field and subsequently transferred to standard wetland delineation data sheets. Copies of these data sheets can be found in the appendix. The boundaries of potentially jurisdictional wetlands were marked with surveyor's flagging or pin flags. Wetland Criteria Hydrologic Conditions The 1987 Manual defines wetland hydrologic conditions as saturation within a major portion of the root zone (usually above 12 inches) for a sufficient duration during the growing season to support hydrophytic vegetation. Generally, if a site's root zone is saturated for at least 12.5% of the growing season, the site is considered a wetland. In some situations, however, the hydrology indicator can be met if saturation endures for 5% of the growing season and the plant community is strongly hydrophytic. Wetland hydrologic condition field indicators were recorded for each excavated soil pit. Typical indicators of hydrologic conditions include observations of standing water, standing water in the pit, soil saturation in the pit, water marks on trees, sediment lines, and drainage patterns. Other secondary indicators include oxidized root channels, water -stained leaves, and local soil survey data. Any indications of disturbed hydrology were also recorded. Hvdroohvtic Vegetation HYdrophytic vegetation consists of those plant species that have adapted to growing in saturated conditions of sufficient duration to cause anaerobic soil conditions. Plant species are divided into five wetland indicator categories (Table 1) based on their likelihood of occurrence in wetlands. . Table 1: Wetland Indicator Categories Plants that occur almost always (estimated Probability>99%) in well under natural conditions, but which may also occur rarely (esdmatcd Plants that occurusually (estimated probability>67'/o to ox in both wedaads and nonwetiandsrouabutty 3390 to 67%) t t occur sometimes (estimated probability 1% to 436/*) in but occur more often (estimated probability 67% to 9911. in Plants (UPL) Pburts that occur A visual estimate of the dominant species' percent -cover within the plant community was Performed for each of the data plots. Dominant tree and shrub species were evaluated in a 30 - foot radius, and dominant herb and woody vine species were evaluated in a 10 -foot radius using soil pits as a center of reference. Dominance of plant species was determined by estimating their Percent areal cover per stratum (e.g., woody vine, herbaceous, shrub, and tree). Species from each stratum were listed together in descending order of percent -cover. Dominance of wetland Wetland Delineation ojthe Auburn AhlvrlPareel October l A,1001 species was made using the 50-20 method, that is, dominant species are the most abundant plant species per stratum (when ranked in descending order of abundance and cumulatively totaled) that immediately exceed 50% cover, plus any species comprising 20% cover or more (Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation 1989). If no species in a given stratum had more than 20% cumulative cover, the species with the greatest areal extent was chosen as the dominant. If more than 50% of the dominant species included by the 50-20 method have a wetland indicator status of FAC or wetter, the vegetation community is considered hydrophytic. The FAC -neutral test was also used as a test for areas with a marginally hydrophytic plant community. Hydric Soils Hydric soils are those that have formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough to support hydrophytic vegetation (due to anaerobic conditions in the upper soil horizon). Soil pits were excavated to evaluate the potential presence of hydric soils on the site. Each pit was dug to a depth of 18 inches or more in selected locations inside and outside mapped hydric soil areas. Soil pits were dug with a narrow -bladed shovel. Soil profiles were examined for hydric soil indicators, such as reducing soil conditions, gleyed or low-chroma matrix colors, mottling, concretions, and sulfidic odor. 5. RESULTS SHAPIRO's delineation indicates that about 11 acres of the site is potentially jurisdictional wetland (Figure 4). The jurisdictional areas include two ponds (Wetlands A and B) and three palustrine emergent/scrub-shrub wetlands (Wetlands C, D, and E). Positive indicators of hydric soil were confirmed in all soil samples observed on the site. Soil samples were generally consistent in color, texture, and structure with the soils mapped on the site. Locations of the hydrologic test holes are illustrated in Figure 4. Results of the hydrologic test holes are listed in Table 2. Wetland hydrologic conditions were not immediately apparent at all of the test bores. Some of the test bores that did not demonstrate wetland hydrologic conditions when they were excavated were found to have water within 12 inches of the surface after being allowed to stand overnight. The grassland on the site is composed of two identifiable and significant species associations: One community is composed of up to six species in various combinations. The most common and widespread species in this community is common velvet grass. (Holcus lanatus, FAC). Velvet grass is absent only from the wettest low spots, from localized monocultures of reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea, FAC), and from areas of dense shrub growth. Colonial bentgrass (Agrostis tenuis, FAC) is also widespread on the site. Tufted hairgrass (Deschampsia cespitosa, FACW) is present on the site in small localized areas. Soft rush (Juncus eJfusas, OBL) grows primarily in the wettest, low spots. Slender rush (Juncus tenuls, FACW-) is found scattered on the site. These species form a community that is closely associated with parts of the site that had a water table within 12 inches of the surface at the time of the delineation. Wedard Deltneatton ofthe Auburn Abport.Pame1 October 15, 2001 AI Table 2: .Depth to Free-standing Water in Hydrology Test Bores Test Bore Depth to Free-standing Water (inches) Test Bore Depth to Free-standing Water (inches) 1 13 16 g 2 12 17 >18 3 3.5 18 9 4 9.5 19 10 5 2 20 11 6 9.5 21 13 7 >16 22 9 8 >16 23 >16 9 5 24 9 10 • 9.5 25 >18 11 13 26 9 12 7 27 >18 13 >16 28 9 14 >16 29 10.5 15 >16 The second grassland community has fewer species. Orchard grass (Dactylic glomerata, FACU) and tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea, FAC-) growing with common velvet grass forms a community that is strongly associated with higher spots on the site. These locations demonstrated upland hydrologic conditions, as at test bores 17, 23, and 25 (sample plots 13, 9, and 10, respectively). , 5.1 Wetland A Wetland A is a small (0.27 acre) pond with steep sides (Photograph 2). At the time of the April 2001 site visits, vegetation was not observed growing in the .water, so the classification is uncertain. It is probably palustrine. aquatic bed but may be palustrine emergent. The area surrounding the pond lacks wetland hydrology. 5.2 • Wetland B Wetland B is a large (2.74 acre) ponded palustrine emergent wetland with gradually sloping sides (Photograph 3). Saturated soil and hydric vegetation extend some distance away from the surface water. Woody vegetation was cleared from the western margin of this wetland during the 2000 season. Emergent vegetation was just starting to return to the area in April 2001. 5.3 Wetland C Wetland C is a small (0.04 acre) palustrine emergent wetland in the southeastern comer of the site. It is in the bottom of a shallow low spot. We[axdDellneadonojthe Auburn Airport Parcel 10 October 13, 2001 5.4 Wetland D Wetland D is a 0.66 acre palustrine emergent wetland in the southeastern comer of the site. It is separated from Wetland C by somewhat higher ground that supports the upland grass community described above. 5.5 Wetland E Wetland E is a large (7.3 acre) wetland that includes most of the grassland on the site. It also has clumps of shrubs interspersed in the wettest, low spots (Photograph 4). It has two major lobes, one on the north end and one on the south end. The lobes are separated by higher ground thatjuts into the wetland from the east. The northern edge of the wetland is roughly congruent with the northern edge of the grassland community. North of the boundary is a dense growth of shrubs. Wetland hydrology is not present in this area. Willows and Douglas spiraea were visible and are typical of the shrubs on the site. Most of the dead grass in the area is common velvet grass. Soft rush and a small amount of sedge were also visible. Similar conditions exist in Wetlands.0 and D. 6. CONCLUSIONS SHAPIRO found five separate potentially jurisdictional wetlands on the airport parcel. Delineation of these wetlands was based on the presence of hydric soils, wetland hydrology, and hydrophytic vegetation. Table 3 summarizes the delineated wetlands, their approximate size and classification. Wetland categories are from Washington State Wetlands Rating System: Western Washington (Ecology 1993). The classification is based on Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al. 1979). Table 3: Summary of Airport parcel Potential Wetland Areas Wetland Size (acres) Category Classification A 0.27 2.74 IV Palustrine Emergent/Palustrine Aquatic C C 0.04 III III Palustrine Emergent D 0.66 III Palustrine Emergent Palustrine Emergent Wedand Delineation of Ac Auburn Airport Parcel Il October I5,1001 7. REFERENCES Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRue. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Washington, D.C. Ecology, Washington Department of. 1993. Washington State wetlands rating system: Western Washington. Second Edition. Publication #93-74.60 pages. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation. 1989, Federal..manual for identifying and delineatingjurisdictional wetlands. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection?,gency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and USDA Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. Cooperative technical publication. 138 pp. National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. 1991. Hydric Soils of the United States. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. Snyder, D. E., S. G. Philip, and R F. Pringle. 1973. Soil survey of King County area, Washington. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. Wetland 1hllne a= ofae Avbwn Abpon Pastel 11 October 13,1001 Appendix B Air Conformity Analysis f Auburn Municipal Airport Airport Master Plan Update Clean Air Act Conformity Evaluation Prepared for. W&H Pacific Prepared by. Synergy Consultants, Inc. In association with BrldgeNet International October 2, 2001 Auburn Mimicipal Airport Air Conformity Evaluation — Master Plan Update CLEAN AIR ACT GENERAL CONFORMITY EVALUATION Because City of Auburn is seeking Airport Layout Plan (ALP) approval for the Airport Master Plan recommendations, this federal approval must be preceded by a Clean Air Act general conformity evaluation. To identify potential air emissions from the Master Plan recommendations, an emissions inventory was prepared and contrasted with the de-minimis levels for a maintenance area (the designation achieved by Puget Sound Region in 1996) for carbon monoxide and ozone precursor pollutants. This analysis shows that the emissions from the Master Plan recommendations are below the Clean Air Act defined de-minimis thresholds, and thus indicate that the planned improvements are presumed to conform. scarcer sauces mr4d dyed and Bdsed aniUbm from on and art-atpat sources. Regulatory Framework The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 require Federal agencies to ensure that their actions conform to the appropriate State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP is a plan that provides for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS), and includes emission limitations and control measures to attain and maintain the AAQS. Conformity is defined as demonstrating that a project conforms to the SIP's purpose of eliminating or reducing the severity and number of violations of the ambient air quality standards and achieving expeditious attainment of such standards. The Puget Sound Air Quality Maintenance Area, including. Auburn Municipal Airport, was re -designated from non -attainment for Carbon Monoxide (CO) and Ozone (03) in the fail of 1996 to maintenance; thus, the maintenance plan serves as an amendment to the State Implementation Plan. The evaluation of conformity for actions or projects at Auburn Municipal Airport is governed by the following maintenance (CO and Ozone) principle: i • That the project will not cause or contribute to any new violations of any of the ambient air quality standards (AAQS) in the project area or the metropolitan area Federally funded and approved actions or projects are subject to the 'General Conformity' regulations (40 CFR Part 93, Subpart B). General Conformity applies to Federal actions occurring in non -attainment and maintenance areas for any of the criteria pollutants. In accordance with the Clean Air Act amendment requirements, this conformity analysis focuses on CO, and the Ozone precursors (NOx-Nitrogen Oxides, and VOCs -Volatile Organic Compounds). -I- Table 1 Total Project Related Impacts Year CO NOx VOC Year 2001-2005 12.3 20.5 2.1 Year 2006.2010 28.8 32.5 5.0 Year 2011-2020 25.5 26.0 4.7 De-minimis (maintenance am) 100 100 100 scarcer sauces mr4d dyed and Bdsed aniUbm from on and art-atpat sources. Regulatory Framework The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 require Federal agencies to ensure that their actions conform to the appropriate State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP is a plan that provides for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS), and includes emission limitations and control measures to attain and maintain the AAQS. Conformity is defined as demonstrating that a project conforms to the SIP's purpose of eliminating or reducing the severity and number of violations of the ambient air quality standards and achieving expeditious attainment of such standards. The Puget Sound Air Quality Maintenance Area, including. Auburn Municipal Airport, was re -designated from non -attainment for Carbon Monoxide (CO) and Ozone (03) in the fail of 1996 to maintenance; thus, the maintenance plan serves as an amendment to the State Implementation Plan. The evaluation of conformity for actions or projects at Auburn Municipal Airport is governed by the following maintenance (CO and Ozone) principle: i • That the project will not cause or contribute to any new violations of any of the ambient air quality standards (AAQS) in the project area or the metropolitan area Federally funded and approved actions or projects are subject to the 'General Conformity' regulations (40 CFR Part 93, Subpart B). General Conformity applies to Federal actions occurring in non -attainment and maintenance areas for any of the criteria pollutants. In accordance with the Clean Air Act amendment requirements, this conformity analysis focuses on CO, and the Ozone precursors (NOx-Nitrogen Oxides, and VOCs -Volatile Organic Compounds). -I- Aub um Municipal Airport Air Conformity Evaluation - Master Plan Update A conformity determination is required for a project proposed to be located in a maintenance area/non-attainment area if the project's total direct or indirect emissions would equal or exceed the annual de-minimis emissions levels in 40 CFR 93.153. Because the Puget Sound Region is a maintenance area for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO), the applicable de-minimis emission levels are 100 tons per year each for CO, Nitrogen Oxides (NOJ, and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC). 140 CFR 93.153(b)(2)] The Proposed Federal Action As noted earlier, the City of Auburn will be submitting an Airport Layout Plan to the FAA for review and approval that reflects the recommendations of the 2001 Master Plan for Auburn Municipal Airport. Recommendations of the Master Plan include allocations of land within the airport property to more efficiently accommodate the general aviation users of the airport. In the long-term the plan includes an extension of the runway by 553 feet. The breadth of recommendations, by timeframe, include: 2001-2005 • Completion of airport security fencing - replacing substandard fence on south side and new fence on west side. • Slurry seal of existing parallel taxiway and transient /based aircraft aprons • Displacement of the threshold for Runway 16 by 40 feet • Rehabilitate Runway 16/34 (including removal of the dip in the runway) and overlay of hangar twolanres, connector taxiways and hold aprons • Replace runway righting system • Acquire lands in RPZ of Runway 34 • Acquire land north of 26' Street NE (about 1.47 acres - Pacific Concrete property) • Development of additional stormwater detention basins on west side of runway 2006-2010 • Replace two existing 20 -foot wide parallel taxiways with one 25 feet in width • Reconstruct parallel taxiway righting and airport signage • Construction two additional taxiway hold aprons along the parallel taxiway at south end and north end of airfield • Construction within 23 acre west side including a new partial parallel taxiway, taxilanes, access road from B Street NE, parking and hangars (four buildings with 24 hangars each) • Development of additional stormwater detention basins 2011-2020 • Relocate airport office to a larger facility and includes maintenance facilities • Reconfiguration of apron near existing airport office for ease In flow and additional tiedowms • Extend runway on both ends to a total runway length of 3,9534eet from 3,400 feet (Runway 16 would be extended 285 feet, while Runway 34 would be extended 266 feet - the landing threshold for 16 would remain where it is after 2006 and threshold for Runway 34 would remain at its current location - such that both runway ends would be displaced) • Reconstruction of existing hangars. At this time it is not possible to evaluate the surface transportation changes that would arise from .the development of the 23 -acre west -side lands. However, for purposes of this evaluation an emissions estimate was prepared based on an anticipated change in vehicle miles traveled associated with the full build -out of.the site with 4 hanger buildings (96 hangars). The primary remaining effects of the proposed Master Plan would be changes in . aircraft taxi movement due to the additional aircraft parking positions/hangars, as well as extension of the runway. Finally construction emissions were also evaluated to estimate construction during each of the five-year phases. -2- Auburn Municipal Airport Air Conformity Evaluation — Master Plan Update Analysis Years Conformity requires the consideration of the following (40 CFR 93.183): (1) The year mandated by the Clean Air Act amendments for attainment by the region or the farthest year for which emissions are projected in the maintenance plan - The analysis years of the maintenance plan are 1996 through 2010. (2) The year in which the total direct and indirect emissions from the project are greatest - In general, in examining emissions from ongoing operations, the time period in which the activity levels are the greatest typically produce the greatest emissions. Therefore, emissions in 2020 were evaluated as activity was projected by the Master Plan for that period. Relative to this evaluation, direct emissions are those associated with ongoing operation of the facility. as aircraft and point source emissions. Indirect emissions are construction related. No other direct or indirect emissions are expected from the project. (3) Any year for which the applicable SIP specifies an emissions budget - The maintenance plan reflects two primary surface transportation actions: continuation of the existing vehicle inspection/maintenance program and VOC maximum achievable control technologies. These actions have been reflected in the emission rates used for this analysis. The analysis in the following sections reflects the years required by the conformity regulation. Emissions Inventory As described in the preceding section, the Master Plan recommendations will likely affect aircraft taxi -related emissions, a slight reduction in surface travel distance from development of airport lands, as well as construction related emissions. Therefore, to quantify the emissions associated with the Runway Safety Area and Runway Protection Zone (primarily due to the Runway extensions), the emissions associated with airexaft operations were quantified with the existing fa0T111 and then upon completion of these projects. As was noted earlier, the growth in demand for facilities aYthe>Airport is expected to occur regardless of the implementation of the Master Plan recommendations. Asa result, the recommendations will not result in additional aircraft operations. Finally, the types of consVu a on equipment that would be used during construction were identified, and emissions were estimated. Aircraft Operations Emissions - Table 2 lists the emissions associated with aircraft taxi distance changes due to the extensions of the runway. To compute the emissions from aircraft requires knowledge concerning the number of aircraft operations, by aircraft type, performing in each of the four operating modes. Because the Master Plan recommendations will only affect aircraft operations during the taxi/idle/delay (TID) mode, emissions during the three other modes (takeoff, approach and landing) would be the same with and without the Master Plan. Default time in mode as defined in AP -42 was used for the 'No Build' condition. It is anticipated that the runway extensions will increase taxi distances translating to about 1 more minute taxiing per aircraft. Table 2 summarizes aircraft emissions. -3- Auburn Municipal Airport Air Conformity Evaluation — Master Plan Update Table 2 Tons per Year of Aircraft Emissions Source &agwx t CarsWW SW*W. September 2001. The primary change in aircraft emissions would occur due to the runway extensions. This would result in an increase in CO of 2.9 ton, less than 0.1 ton of NOx, and 0.2 tons Of VOC. Surface Traffic Chanaes = Completion of the Master Pian recommendations would result in a slight change in surface traffic conditions associated with aircraft operators that would today travel to hangars located on the east side of the airfield. With the proposed action, it is estimated that about 100 surface vehicles would travel to the west side of the airfield, traveling about 2 mile more than would be traveled today. Therefore on an annual basis, surface travel would increase by about 73,000 miles annually. Using the Mobile5b emission factor for a light duty gasoline vehicle during the summer months traveling at 30 mph, emissions associated with the additional travel were estimated at 7.8 tons of CO, 1.1 tons of NOx and 1.4 tons of VOC per year assuming full build -out of the site with 96- hangars. Construction Emissions - Construction emissions were calculated using the EPA's `Non -road Engine and Vehicle Emission Study' and estimates of the equipment that would likely be used in building the Master Plan recommendations. The analysis of construction emissions reflects construction of the projects, transportation of construction -related materials, construction employee travel, site preparation (including apron paving), and general construction support activity. As is shown below, a worst- case estimate of construction emissions are expected, which would produce 19 tons of CO, 31.4 tons of NOx, and 3.6 tons of VOCs. Table 3 Tons per year of Construction Emissions Construction Activtty CO NOx VOCs E1ds8ng 438.3 1.8 9.8 Future 2011-2020 14.8 25.0 3.1 Wdhout Master Plan 605.9 2.4 14.7 With Master Plan Recommendations 608.8 24 14.9 Source &agwx t CarsWW SW*W. September 2001. The primary change in aircraft emissions would occur due to the runway extensions. This would result in an increase in CO of 2.9 ton, less than 0.1 ton of NOx, and 0.2 tons Of VOC. Surface Traffic Chanaes = Completion of the Master Pian recommendations would result in a slight change in surface traffic conditions associated with aircraft operators that would today travel to hangars located on the east side of the airfield. With the proposed action, it is estimated that about 100 surface vehicles would travel to the west side of the airfield, traveling about 2 mile more than would be traveled today. Therefore on an annual basis, surface travel would increase by about 73,000 miles annually. Using the Mobile5b emission factor for a light duty gasoline vehicle during the summer months traveling at 30 mph, emissions associated with the additional travel were estimated at 7.8 tons of CO, 1.1 tons of NOx and 1.4 tons of VOC per year assuming full build -out of the site with 96- hangars. Construction Emissions - Construction emissions were calculated using the EPA's `Non -road Engine and Vehicle Emission Study' and estimates of the equipment that would likely be used in building the Master Plan recommendations. The analysis of construction emissions reflects construction of the projects, transportation of construction -related materials, construction employee travel, site preparation (including apron paving), and general construction support activity. As is shown below, a worst- case estimate of construction emissions are expected, which would produce 19 tons of CO, 31.4 tons of NOx, and 3.6 tons of VOCs. Table 3 Tons per year of Construction Emissions Construction Activtty CO NOx VOCs 2001-2005 12.3 20.5 2.5 2006-2010 19.0 31.4 3.6 2011-2020 14.8 25.0 3.1 Source: Synergy Consultmb. October 2001 NNqqee 2001-2006 assures 1 each: 9enaratar. Panp, sweeper. roper. Poring equip, drK ercaeator, come saw, criishkg equip. ad alba equip; 2 eadr: o0ra material handing. surface equipmerrb t veCpach: dampers, and four canard mbm. 2006-2010 assures 1 each: generator, pump, sweeper, drip, amaratar, canueb sax, cnrshkg equip, and Wer equip: 2 eadk cora materiel h&Wft pacing, surface- equipmnt, ethree dumpers, ropers, and Wier equipment tar oemad micas. 2011-2020 assanes 1 each: garer2W. pump, sweeper, rope, dril, comate saw, aushkg equip, and other equip, 2 each: Odw material handing. Paukrg, surface equOnlerd, macavatas, three dwnpers, and oUw equipment four cement mixers. -4- Auburn Municipal Airport Air Conformity Evaluation - Master plan Update The majority of emissions associated with the project would Therefore, it should be noted that these emissions would construction. TOTAL PROJECT EMISSIONS occur during construction. cease upon completion of Table 4 summarizes the emissions associated with the Master Plan recommendations for each of the analysis years, reflecting the total direct and indirect emissions. To identify the air pollution effect of the project, the emissions associated with the 'Without Master Plan' are subtracted from the emissions associated with the With Master Plan". Table 4 Auburn Municipal Airport Master Plan Update Recommendations (project related emissions - tpy) CONFORMITY CONCLUSION As is shown, the Master Plan recommendations for Auburn Municipal Airport have been demonstrated by this document to conform to the Washington State Implementation Plan (SIP). As the analysis reflected in Table 1 shows, the project will not result in emissions that would equal or exceed the applicable de-minimis threshold rates, not will it be considered 'regionally significant' with regard to air pollution emissions. EPA's rules and guidance are clear that where the net emissions increase resulting from the project do not exceed the applicable threshold rates, there are no further obligations with regard to the conformity rules. Thus, the proposed airport improvements are consistent with the SIP. -5- Appendix C Acronyms and Definitions ' Appendix G Acronyms and Definitions ' Acronyms AC ........................................................... Advisory Circular ADG........................................................ Airplane Design Group ADO ........................................................ Airport District Office AGL........................................................ Above Ground Level ' AIM ......................................................... Aeronautical Information Manual AIP.......................................................... Airport Improvement Program ALP ......................................................... Airport Layout Plan ANM....................................................... Northwest Mountain Region ARC ........................................................ Airport Reference Code ARFF ...................................................... Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting ARP ......................................................... Airport Reference Point ARTCC ................................................... Air Route Traffic Control Center ASDA...................................................... Accelerate -Stop Distance Available ASV......................................................... Annual Service Volume ATC ......................................................... Air Traffic Control ATCT ...................................................... Air Traffic Control Tower AVGAS................................................... Aviation Gasoline AWOS..................................................... Automated Weather Observing System CFR ......................................................... Code of Federal Regulations CIP.......................................................... Capital Investment Plan CWY....................................................... Clearway dB............................................................ Decibel dBA......................................................... A -weighted Decibels DH........................................................... Decision Height DME ..................................................... Distance Measuring Equipment ' DOT ........................................................ Department of Transportation EA ......... :................................................ Environmental Assessment F EIS........................................................... Environmental Impact Statement- FAA tatementFAA......................................................... Federal Aviation Administration ' FAA Part 77 ............................................ Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace FAR ......................................................... Federal Aviation Regulations Auburn Munidpa/Abpart Martyr Plan Update -June 2001 Appendix C Acronyms and Definitions FBO......................................................... Fixed Based Operator GA ........................................................... General Aviation ' GPS ......................................................... Global Positioning System IFR .......................................................... Instrument Flight Rules ' INM......................................................... Integrated Noise Model LDA ........................................................ Landing Distance Available ' LDA ........................................................ Landing Distance Available MIRL....................................................... Medium Intensity Runway Lights . MSL ............................................... Mean Sea Level NAVAIDS............................................... Navigational Aids NDB ........................................................ Non -Directional Beacon ' NEPA...................................................... National Environmental Policy Act OFA ......................................................... Object Free Area ' OFZ......................................................... Obstacle Free Zone RPZ......................................................... Runway Protection Zone ' RSA ......................................................... Runway SafetyArea RW.......................................................... Runway ' SEPA....................................................... State Environmental Protection Act SWY........................................................ Stopway TH........................................................... Threshold TL............................................................ Taxilane TODA..................................................... Take -Off Distance Available 1 TORA...................................................... Take-OffRun Available TSA ......................................................... Taxiway Safety Area TW.................................:........................ Taxiway VASI....................................................... Visual Approach Slope Indicator VFR......................................................... Visual Flight Rules WSCASP.............................................. Washington State Continuous Airgort System Plan WSDOT...................I.............................. Washington State Department of Transportation Auburn Munieod krpm _ Autw Plan Updntn- Jona 2001 I ' Appendix C Acronyms and Definitions ' Definitions ' Aeronautical Activity .................. Any activity commonly performed at airports involving, required for, or permitting the operation of aircraft, or required for or contributing to the safety of aircraft operations. ' Aeronautical activities include, but are not limited to: pilot training, aircraft rental, air taxi, charter operations, sightseeing, air carrier operations, aircraft repair and ' maintenance, sale of aircraft parts, sale of aviation fuels and petroleum products, air cargo, aerial crop applications, aerial photography, aerial surveying, aerial advertising, aircraft ' sAles, aircraft storage, ultralight operations, skydiving, and power assisted hang gliding or parasailing. Aeronautical Service ................... Any service involving, required for or permitting the operation of aircraft or required for or contributing to the safety of aircraft operations. These services are commonly conducted on the airport by persons or businesses who lease facilities or have permission from the airport operator to provide such services. Air Taxi ....................................... An air carrier certificated in accordance with FAR Part 135 and authorized to provide, on demand, public transportation of persons and property by aircraft. Air taxi operators generally operate small aircraft "for hire" for specific trips. Aircraft Approach Category ....... A grouping of aircraft based on a speed of 1.3 times the stall speed in the landing configuration at maximum gross landing weight. The aircraft approach categories are: Category A - Speed less than 91 knots; Category B- Speed 91 knots or more but less than 121 knots; Category C - Speed 121 knots or more but less than 141 knots; Category D - Speed 141 knots or more but less that 166 knots; and = Category E - Speed 166 knots or more. Aircraft Mix ................................ The classification of aircraft into groups which are similar in size, noise, and operational characteristics. (Also see Fleet Mix.) AuMtrn Mvnlelpd Afrporr Master Plan Update- lane 2001 Appendix C Acronyms and Definitions Aircraft Operations ..................... The airborne movement of aircraft. There are two types of operations: local and itinerant, defined as follows: 1. Local Operations are performed by aircraft which: a. operate in the local traffic pattern or within sight of the airport; b. are known to be departing for or arriving from a local practice area. 2. Itinerant operations are all others. Airfield ........................................ A defined area on land or water including any buildings, installations, and equipment intended to be used either wholly or in part for the arrival, departure, or movement of aircraft. Airplane Design Group ............... A grouping of airplanes based on wingspan. The groups are as follows: Group I: Up to but not including 49 feet (15 m). Group 11: 49 feet (15 m) up to but not including 79 feet (24 m). Group III: 79 feet (24 m) up to but not including 118 feet (36 m). Group IV: 118 feet (36 m) up to but not including 171 feet (52 m). Group V: 171 feet (52 m) up to but not including 214 feet (65 m). Group VI: 214 feet (65 m) up to but not including 262 feet (80 m). Airport ........................................ The Auburn Municipal Airport and all of the property, buildings, facilities and improvements within the property boundaries of the airport as it now exists or will exist in the future. This area is defined on the Airport Layout Plan or Exhibit A. Airport Ell vation ........................ The highest point on an airport's usable Mnway expressed in feet above mean sea level (MSL). Airport Layout Plan (ALP) ......... The plan of an airport showing the layout of existing and proposed airport facilities. Auburn MuddparA4pon Matter Plan Update -June 2001 Appendix C Acronyms and Definitions Airport Owner ............................. The City of Auburn and/or its designee who is charged with the operation and administration of the airport. Airport Reference Point (ARP) ... The latitude and longitude of the approximate center of the airport. Airside ......................................... The runways, taxiways, aprons, ramps, buildings and facilities located inside the security fencing. Airspace ...................................... The area above the ground in which aircraft travel. It is divided into corridors, routes, and restricted zones for the control and safety of aircraft. Ambient Noise Level .................. Background noise level, exclusive of the contribution made by aircraft. Annual Service Volume .............. A reasonable estimate of an airport's annual capacity. It accounts for differences in runway use, aircraft mix, -weather conditions, etc., that would be encountered over a year's time. Approach End of Runway ........... The near end of the runway as viewed from the cockpit of a landing aircraft Approach Surface ........................ An imaginary surface longitudinally centered on the extended runway centerline and extending outward and upward from each end of the primary surface. An approach surface is applied to each end of the runway based upon the planned approach. The inner edge of the approach surface is the same . width as the primary surface and expands uniformly, depending upon the planned approach. Approved Instrument Approach . Instrument approach meeting the design requirement, equipment specifications, and accuracies, as determined by periodic FAA flight checks, and which are approved for general use and publication by the FAA. Apron .......................................... A defined area where aircraft are maneuvered and parked, and where activities associated with the handling of flights can be carried out. Matter Pfan Update —June 7001 Appendix C Acronyms and Definitions Automated Weather Observing An automatic recording instrument for measuring cloud ' System (AWOS) ......................... height, visibility, wind speed and direction, temperature, and dew point. ' Aviation Gasoline (AVGAS) ...... Fuel used in reciprocating (piston) aircraft engines. Avgas is manufactured in the following grades: 80/87; 100LL; 1.00/130; and 115/145. Avigation Easement ................... A form of limited property right purchase that establishes legal land -use control prohibiting incompatible development of areas required for airports or aviation -related purposes. Based Aircraft ............................. Aircraft stationed at an airport on an annual basis. Circling Approach ....................... An instrument approach procedure in which an aircraft executes the published instrument approach to one runway, then maneuvers visually to land on a different runway. Circling approaches are also used at airports that have published instrument approaches with a final approach course that is not aligned within 30 degrees of any runway. Clear Zone ................................... See Runway Protection Zone. Clearway ..................................... A clearway is an area available for the continuation of the take -off operation which is above as clearly defined area connected to and extending beyond the end of the runway. The area over which the clearway lies need not be suitable for stopping aircraft in the event of an aborted take -off. Clearways are applicable only in the take -off operations of turbine -engined aircraft. Commercial Service or Activity .. Any commerce, trade or business involved in the exchange of goods, property or services of any land. Conical Surface ........................... A surface extending outward and upward from the horizontal surface at a slope of 20:1 for a horizonfal distance of 4,000 feet. Controlled Airspace .................... Airspace designated as continental control area, control area, control zone, or transition area within which some or all aircraft may be subject to air traffic control. Auburn Munklpal Airport Matte, Plan Update—June 2001 �Ndl«w/w...Vxarfero77wolAMonawmplMppxl cax Appe is C - 4 WARTacirle. lne. Appendix C Acronyms and Definitions Critical Aircraft ........................... The aircraft which controls one or more design items based on wingspan, approach speed and/or maximum certificated take- off weight. The same aircraft may not be critical to all design items. Cross wind .................................. When used concerning wind conditions, the word means a wind not parallel to the runway or the path of an aircraft. dBA............................................. Decibels measured on the A -weighted scale to factor out anomalies. Decibel (dB) ................................ The standard unit of noise measurement relating to a logarithm scale in which 10 units represents a doubling of acoustic energy. Displaced Threshold ................... Actual touchdown point on specific runway designated due to obstructions which make it impossible to use the actual physical runway end. Effective Runway Gradient ......... The maximum difference between . runway centerline elevations divided by the runway length, expressed as a percentage. Environmental Assessment A report prepared under the National Environmental Policy (EA) ............................................. Act (NEPA) analyzing the potential environmental impacts of a federally funded project. Environmental Impact A report prepared under NEPA fully analyzin& the potential Statement (EIS) ........................... significant environmental impacts of a federally -funded project FAR;Part 77 ...................:............ Federal Aviation Regulations which establish standards for determining obstructions in navigable airspace. Federal Aviation A branch of the US Department of Transportation responsible Administrdtion (FAA) ................. for the regulation of all civil aviation activities. Final Approach ............................ The flight path of an aircraft which is inbound to the airport on an approved final instrument approach course, beginning at the point of interception of that course and extending to the airport or the point where circling for landing or missed approach is executed. Auburn Munk4wl Alrport _ Mtmer Plan Update- June 2001 Appendix C Acronyms and Definitions Fixed Base Operation (FBO) ...... An individual or business property licensed and authorized by written agreement with the airport owner to provide specified aeronautical services at the airport, and who rents or leases facilities on the airport to conduct .these services. These operators commonly occupy an office, hangar or shop on the airport, and are required to comply with the written agreements and referenced rules and regulations. Fixed Wing .................................. For the purposes of this report, any aircraft not considered rotorcraft. Flying Club ................................. A non-commercial organization established to promote flying. Activities include, but are not limited to, development of aeronautical skills such as pilotage, navigation, airmanship, and the awareness and appreciation of aviation requirements and techniques. Fuel ............................................. Aviation gasoline, jet fuel, automotive fuel or diesel. Full Service FBO ........................ A fixed base operator who provides a full range of services. This range of services generally includes aircraft rental, flight instruction, aircraft maintenance and repair, and pilot supplies. General Aviation ......................... All civil aviation operations other than scheduled air services and non-scheduled air transport operations for remuneration or hire. Global Positioning System A system of US satellites orbiting the earth which is used to (GPS) ........................................... instantly and accurately determine the navigational position of users on or above the earth's surface. Hazard to Air Navigation-............ An object which, as a result of an aeronautical study, the FAA determines will have a substantial adverse effect upon the safe and efficient use of a navigable airspace by aircraft, operation of air navigation facilities, or existing or potential airport capacity. -, Horizontal Surface ...................... An elliptical surface at an elevation 150 feet above the established airport elevation created by swinging 5,000 -foot radius arcs from the center of each end of the primary surface. Tangent lines then connect these arcs. Auburn Muelclpd Airport Master Plan Update - June 100/ lea.twwNatuecno 2imlAwontnwa,k4a.,r .Dw Appendu C - 8 W&W Pd i c. nc. Appendix C Acronyms and Definitions Independent Flight Instructor ...... A single individual, working alone and without employees, partners, or facilities on the airport who provides professional, licensed/certified flight instruction. Independent Mechanic ................ A single individual, working alone and without employees, partners, or facilities on the airport who provides professional, certificated repair and/or maintenance services for aircraft or aeronautical components. Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) ..... Instrument Flight Rules governing the procedures for conducting instrument flight. Pilots are required to follow these rules when operating in controlled airspace with visibility of less than three miles and/or ceiling lower than 1,000 feet. Itinerant Operation All aircraft operations at an airport other than local. Landside...................................... All buildings and surfaces on the airport used by pedestrian or surface vehicular traffic located outsidethe airportsecurity fence. The entire Auburn airport is fenced, so this designation is not applicable here. Large Airplane ............................ An airplane of more than 12,500 pounds (5,700 kg) maximum certificated takeoff weight. Limited Service FBO .................. A fixed base operator whose services are confined to less than full service. Examples of Limited Service include FBOs who provide specialty services such as aircraft sales, painting or ' upholstery, avionics repair, or other specialty services, or who provide only aviation fuel, or only aircraft maintenance -and repair, or only aircraft rental and charter. Local Operation .......................... Aircraft operation in the traffic pattern or within sight of the tower, or aircraft known to be departing or arriving from flight in local practice areas, or aircraft executing practice instrument approaches at the airport. Minimum Standards .................... Standards established by the airport owner as the minimum requirements to be met as a condition for the right to provide commercial services on the airport. Auburn Muntelpal Airport M"ter Plan Update- June 1001 w.a wtwwvMvaeaa=uanwoaquuyt..an..w.CsoC Appendu C • 9 W&H Padta rte. Appendix C Acronyms and Definitions Navigational Aid (NAVAID) ..... Any visual or electronic device airborne or on the surface which provides point-to-point guidance information or position data to aircraft in flight. Non -Aeronautical Service ........... Any service conducted on the airport that provides products or services that are not associated with aviation. These services are provided by persons or businesses who lease facilities or have permission from the airport operator to provide such services on the airport. Non -Directional Beacon (NDB).. Non -Directional Beacon which transmits a signal on which a pilot may "home" using equipment installed in the aircraft. Object .......................................... Includes, but is not limited to above ground structures, NAVAIDs, people, equipment, vehicles, natural growth, terrain, and parked aircraft. Object Free Area (OFA) ............. An area on the ground centered on a runway, taxiway, or taxilane centerline provided to enhance the safety of aircraft operations by having the area free of objects, except for objects that need to be located in the OFA for air navigation or aircraft ground maneuvering purposes. Obstacle Free Zone (OFZ) .......... The OFZ is the airspace below 150 feet (45 m) above the established airport elevation and along the runway and extended runway centerline that is required to be clear of all objects, except for frangible visual NAVAIDs that need to be located in the OFZ because of their function, in -order to provide clearance protection for aircraft landing or taking off from the runway, and for missed approaches. The OFZ is subdivided as follows: Runway OFZ - The airspace above a surface centered on the runway centerline. Inner -approach OFZ - The airspace above a surface centered on the extended runway centirline. It applies to runways with an approach lighting system. Inner -transitional OPZ - The airspace above the surfaces located on the outer edges of the runway OFZ and the inner -approach OFZ. It applies to runways with approach visibility minimums lower than'/. -statute mile (1,200 m). Auburn MnaiclpalAbpo4 __ - Mann Plan Update -hat 2001 Appendix C Acronyms and Definitions Obstruction to Air Navigation .... An object of greater height than any of the heights or surfaces ' presented in Subpart C of the Code of Federal Regulation (14 CFR), Part 77. (Obstructions to air navigation are presumed to be hazards to air navigation until an FAA study has ' determined otherwise). Primary Surface .......................... A rectangular surface with a width of 250 feet (centered on the runway centerline) and a length that extends 200 feet beyond each end of the runway. The elevation of the primary surface corresponds to the elevation of the nearest point of the ' runway centerline. Rotorcraft (Helicopter) ................ A heavier-than-air aircraft supported in flight by the reactions ' of the air on one or more power -driven rotors on substantially vertical axis. Runway (RW) ............................. A defined rectangular surface on an airport prepared or suitable for the landing or takeoff of airplanes. Runway Blast Pad ....................... A surface adjacent to the ends of runways provided to reduce the erosive effect of jet blast and propeller wash. Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) .. An area off the runway end to enhance the protection of people and property on the ground. Runway Safety Area (RSA) ........ A defined surface surrounding the • runway prepared or suitable for reducing the risk of damage to airplanes in the event of an undershoot, overshoot, or excursion from the runway. Segmented Circle ........................ A system of visual indicators designed to provide traffic pattern information at airports without operating control towers. Self -Fueling Operator ................. A person who dispenses aviation fuel to aircraft owned by that W person, or leased from others and operatefty that person. AfMW flan Update- June 2001 i i Appendix C Acronyms and Definitions Shoulder ...................................... An area adjacent to the edge of paved runways,. taxiways, or aprons providing a transition between the pavement and the adjacent surface; support of aircraft running off the pavement; enhanced drainage; and blast protection. Small Airplane ............................ An airplane of 12,500 pounds (5,700 kg) or less maximum certificated takeoff weight. ' Stopway (SWY) .......................... A defined rectangular surface beyond the end of a runway prepared or suitable for use in lieu of runway to support an ' airplane, without causing structural damage to the airplane, during an aborted takeoff. ' Taxilane (TL) .............................. The portion of the aircraft parking area used for access between taxiways and aircraft parking positions. ' Taxiway (TW) ............................. A defined path established for the taxiing of aircraft from one part of an airport to another. Taxiway Safety Area (TSA) ....... A defined surface alongside the taxiway prepared or suitable for reducing the risk of damage to an airplane unintentionally departing the taxiway. Threshold (TH) ........................... The beginning of that portion of the runway available for landing. In some instances, the landing threshold may be displaced. Touch and Go Operation ............. Practice flight performed by a landing touch >down and continuous take -off without stopping or exiting the runway. Transitional Surface .................... A sloping 7:1 surface that extends outward and upward at right angles to the runway centerline from the sides of the primary surface and the approach surfaces. Ultralight..................................... An aeronautical vehicle operated for sport or recreational purposes which does not require FA0y registration, an airworthiness certificate, nor pilot certification. They are primarily single occupant vehicles, although some two -place vehicles are authorized for training purposes. Utility Runway ............................ A runway that is constructed for, and intended to be used by, aircraft of 12,500 pounds maximum gross weight and less. Marr Plan Uadare-June 2001 ' Appendix C Acronyms and Definitions Visual Approach Slope See definition of PAPI. ' Indicator (VASI) ......................... Visual Flight Rules (VFR) .......... Visual Flight Rules by which aircraft are operated by visual reference to the ground. Weather conditions for flying under these rules must include a ceiling greater than 1,000 feet, three miles visibility, and standard cloud clearance. Visual Runway ............................ A runway without an existing or planned straight -in instrument approach procedure. Wind Coverage ........................... Wind coverage is the percent of time for which aeronautical operations are considered safe due to acceptable crosswind ' components. Wind Rose ................................... A scaled graphical presentation of wind information. e Auburn ManlNpnl dlrpart Malta Plan Update -June 2001 Appendix D References L u u u U u a o n tl H"1,4 N QyO 3 $ q • a i` O O w m w �39` E5• pwa_z_. ' �in3o"`IQ a3 �c d.130130130 ❑❑❑❑❑ �IIII,IIIIII' S � O ti a C H s a W � LV Pl Y N tD f: m W U a E" _ M y :3 1 I l} ; e ~ S m 1 .» ' a y Z�L 1 1 1 ' � I.. oo � Q OSH < �' a ay. C. • m Z 1 .J ..p �� � e! w > .W L' m�.. w o 1 O p'E d'�a .we .2w °ass m i 1 �''• pg 551 ww<QZ 9 x ¢131300 S.3 m a y qa= 4 v • 4 � Y i Q1 �IIII,IIIIII' S � O ti a C H s a W � LV Pl Y N tD f: m W U a E" _ M y :3 1 I l} ; e ~ S m 1 0 w88 ay. C. F O Ta Q .•3 O W U F as m S a c v o T � a O t -ii b ❑❑ m pg 551 m ` 9 c tl 4' m a y qa= 4 v • 4 � Y i Q1 E •� B @ 1 m m m ¢ Q !1! z 1313, S A I I Am cul ao nt mm Iw U❑ F T C V aQ I I I ad 3 2 ait a i eN J nN' aa`I I Io33m< 3 waT "v x13❑13❑ x¢ �IIII,IIIIII' S � O ti a C H s a W � LV Pl Y N tD f: m W w a y E 0 J 00 w U F O Ta Q .•3 O W U F as m S a c v o T � a � m m m ` c c tl 4' m a y qa= 4 v • 4 � Y i Q1 E •� B @ 1 m m m �IIII,IIIIII' S � O ti a C H s a W � LV Pl Y N tD f: m W ec m V Q1 t a o� rqY� i mm Iw '.I aQ x ¢ 2 1 u Id � F .I 0 x a _ � a T J m S w m a 3 m=4 m9 O `L+ m m _ E •m Mc O T¢�NGp S N m m N . m Zo �-5� V `co w3dro o03ja0 X[3110000 1[30011 4 - . � 1 1 1 g_g L I 1 1 1 I 1 1 m a' 5 m a� 1 O F m � • N c o m a (�• 2 . J. 5 E O c o m 1 1 b Q3C a i a � 5 $ � � N y Z 0,522 4 T S 1 o ow -00z 9 _ ¢111111❑ 2 i ff z. I •v'I � F .I 0 } T O E •m Mc O N . a 4 - . � mQ 1 m a' it a� M O F 8r • N c o m a (�• 2 ppE a � 5 $ � � N y Z • �.--a o > ei of a ui lu .6 mi of LU Z Wa x Z c j^ a v 04 o/ 0 1 i > ^mm a. a' Q c O U M p m N u b u w u �7 p EZ .) i w i P �ryy> 1 1 �Cq} l/ 3 frs Ea3 0 1 i cx ❑PJ ❑ 0 1 1 1 1 Z 1 � Q. 1 O m yye Y U3 Z 1Z 13 1 O Sr oz, 130 It J PL Igo` e N. a V 3 m ES:in Lu c jm F w it I I I I a x i0 � 6i oil N ¢��N`�� A.IaYg ,gip F- a O'er i O000 x'¢ 13 Fii¢ gw. ��I I I I. I I I I I •v'I � F .I a 4 - . � mQ 1 m a' it a� M W �, 8r • N � T 2 U< a � 5 $ � � N y Z • �.--a > ei of a ui lu .6 mi of a O Z Wa x Z c j^ v 04 'JLQ_�L Q IY. 17 R n n n 11 M -M 11 n n -R R -R R IAM g Iftl L3, r 1 O � 1 1 1 o ? Z J'c AS As Lsm (3 •3 m 10 1'.y < N C a ; ] ty Cl w' N tp n m W 0a) W . mo 17 pp q p =¢ o. !• q ttl fi tl ■r o otl tl a Y k�l Ida Lr i1 LJ L! jY 1 C Z N 7 1 F I W 1 C gp > O 22i 777 ` �•. �•o Sa iT:ra a..y.¢,•S N :y'� .... -;': g.. %B•a•. :.•_ ... 0��.� � 1 .q ❑ 0 m ' _ 3_rx3oN3 c�o3�LLo a❑❑❑❑❑❑ y❑❑❑❑❑ -3 1 1 }lie> .� J. 03� ¢ !m IZ o o® ul .W a n. '. i.y ,. ; 2a� p fi� 3 a > ;O m3� C { 2 a.0 dr O O y ;� �m O �. SI I I•.1 I N y W a6N 9=�5'55 1 n - o. 11. Ogoy rb W N< O Z W n 6 n e f I m x x s❑❑❑❑ Zn'cc i. Lit iwf�� aa�l I IY3311 1 Ym x0000 xIc 13 x32¢ 16 .. ZO �� � '�.\ \ .`. ^.may .{. r �~' .1•r Q= 1 C4 rLL- is 061 a o < c 1 0 V~ a Ir LU m c E LL - _ X m w� s naCall n 3 € E �a a 1 LU m Uo U a m; O Q d n C m p 10 Zy L $ Nc 1 U' u LL C cc `fes i < G U y S m m ;> N tillO IfN tp 1� Ol O' a CO - > W � h x1C �nflflflft��� �fl �1�fl:fln,n� o Acc d 1 I OZ w N s 1 c 90 m 1 2 a - 17 O• g �E Y _O�.$ 1. m m� N�� Y 1 m 53 o d 'T g CN- 1 C O d 077 T 1 55 1 .� 1 ¢0 13 =ta3oIS c°1o3 <0 � r j w d.❑❑❑O❑❑ WOO❑O❑ s c 1 t - l 1 p a �y � 2 Z 811 y 1 4(3 ,. �+ /^gy1l 1 tPc13. zL to N 13 11 l,, E3o 13 16 aa. 8 N d E ' :•.hl..Ho`� e� F3 �o �.o � m o ¢ a O n if �' < m NIL fmA �= m (R i � a T w I. I I I I U , a` i Z> is S m m O. O Y 1 C E- _I N e N 1 >m �d C m s a �p nC+ I� 7o CO ti- G U m NC 1a 2ppx�Y 1 } W N O Z IJII 61 6 o iO qt o a. u• O P 1J Q g �gS 'S ¢O❑❑❑ It000m 3 ¢ IN as I I R�RuS- . x ❑O�p x¢ 13 xix¢ a z C 1 - F p 5 1 0 - `O.w.. m e O IL I a- m ti ?Ul 'may L v L¢ V L s v y c m m i mLL o O S? a. > m o m m w Z ' Q d 6 5 0 U til S a m: j . N Pi Y 0 m ri (D Oi a 0 S¢ .. .- nnn nn Rnnn.n _Finr-.nnpnu m 1�1 1v1 Iq p 1�i d it it Y ii ii V V ills l.i ij u U j� N •� � 7 Ir i I `Z a N3a 1 F 2 S° m i m mO'tl a •- - z� 8 3 r m G e O> ¢ 1 U �a. y O n mom. YU 30 °5 1 m bh E sCtrB �N I °� g O'q 8a. g v Tj F• 5 .1 m �w ^ . 1 Cc rw'30N°O UO 3Iai0 3 a❑❑❑❑❑❑ IWa❑❑❑❑❑ 29 ZO 1 L3 - e 0 4 N. fliag W O'0may ,,, fi' I• r I W_°1=io` Zqo _w i� I I' F IO 83z ay I.c.�g. 4 89 2Z 9''.5'55 1� �m o a 01.211 r8- 5 L N nnv _ 1— d•- O 1 _yI ¢ _ ¢❑❑❑❑ r,aGD 3 ¢ iNO3yF aaJ J I to 3vi<>, :LU ..._ xOOOO x¢ 13x3x¢ N t7 Q N m ri tC O) N I 1 Z^ b Z o ^ m' } r 1 b a [A F C ^. I C m 1 m E � y 1 a c U m 1 C a O O U3 F A rz m 4f 1 E cm o mJ 0 a LU6 ao = ¢ 1 g (3 $ a to i m 0°Z rjm m i m G O U fA p 1 W r al , > N t7 Q N m ri tC O) 17i�nr��R N Z^ b Z o ^ m' } r b a [A F C a c U m C a O O U3 � r ' m" o mJ 0 a LU6 ao = ¢ 17i�nr��R -m NOW Sa, v go -Z m gt 1 c a i O y 8 w q•. Si , �o iE �`c5oO`¢ U mF N88m , 8 ..:'�. •'$,'il0.�wd$..N' 174, ¢s �a m3 E g 3 yoN Zw u.i 1300. i N3 p NO ❑❑❑❑❑ N❑❑❑❑❑ 1 U S 1 ! i Z 2 z 1 mc 0 E3 7 GO pe • �,�S m•o 'o .P3 .a $'Z. mea UJ I Io� �¢ Q:�sa EoaV ,N g z S 'wa ;,.� cc 3 0'8 S o....gai S¢❑❑❑❑ � co n 8 3 ¢ iw a aJ� I I p 3 < o ¢ N � W � �O❑❑ x 13 3SQ -... `I.•j•fF: :.}•`; �,^f't [•1P�t':Y'^.�i4?Xb w'`^�I'..� .`\., .l Y♦ ^, ... .�'•_� 2 ma ,rfy2(1 O Z 00 m m m "1 � m`< i yNz ' ^��d W yid W 'l:T. iY > W Y L r Y m a r( nx N O Y < L cc cu o a0 =¢ 4 c m m o n m w! a 0 c � Q e m I ,rfy2(1 cl i O Z m m m "1 � m`< F m v o L r m a r( nx N O Y < L cc cu o a0 =¢ cl i .. .. •• IW Y u LJ ij Lj (y .¢ ' .:' S+. r m :' g 3 1•' � .. I qw n a .0 9C rs 6r 00131 .10 0 4000pp❑ �OOO.00 $o s 1 1 1 1 .'� ... I Z cF 2Z iAC s�?I 1 L rha.e ; o , yO❑ If f='n ��.�ae''_' 1¢O- ` i a ` � • < 3 m _m � Z 1 u o Q Ir1F' ' I U 'E3 j� .e J W �J i\•1 I Otu ¢ �• 1 v T C !. fu a, W 51 I Z 5 e 1~ � e i4'�d I .I ! I' a s ;a > 0 y`• 3 1 to 1 EL Q-Goao seas` 3 a�i"I I o�2� g a u r Oppp r¢ 13 =3£e ,:iyC ..f:f??ix<[a4->j::?iX.,�jt: AeCie: x''v,,jGt:: .•";\::<[:?... __ .�_� ,- �: -' g 1 rl 1 I ` � I 1 O O E •E � i . � 4 U R m m 1 S w c 5 m 4.-s T, � 13 :.°."•1 E cw o i z ELL m -Sy m O a i' U y m 1 O o o a w — g m I F o o 1Z-- $ ft 'iCc a a 5 U N g �^ m �> .: of ci a mi lcnoi oio mm ?W'? a 0 r ¢ � a 2 1 o c 0 N 3 0 N G 0 3 LL 0 i g 3 1 a❑❑❑O❑❑ m❑❑❑❑❑ .r • I 1 1 0 O m - S 5 S 1 1 I= ; m lo u �n c i. Z�a rw NOOK❑ +� IF ao ¢ moi l I I 02-M, N 0 ¢ Hu m OJ s pIy W., 2 < ale a'- i W.v O Q a. Cy y. N NW- S }m Cm �N C a Ei2'`�=s } WN<OZ WX r. a IJ QUI m ¢ _ ¢00130 L 3 ¢ iwMNrm as }33mg p �3i3= 13 E3 x¢ g. 2 0 g mU! 1 C m � m H � 1 NS'•co_ 1 i EbCLL A. 1 U Co U J (( L W p _ O.'R _¢ h 1 1 ' 1 1 I I I I I N 1 ■ e 1 r Q •' a v t m A 9 e 1 E 1 m 1 to a 1 m C o Z m m I m o WW D U N. O � � 1� ^ N t7 O N tp 14 m m 0 m " P! !1 1t w aI w M w w .. . .. = .. ... ,. m mU! C m � m H � NS'•co_ . i EbCLL A. 1 U Co U J p�Y I L W p _ O.'R _¢ h " P! !1 1t w aI w M w w .. . .. = .. ... ,. Ll Li m s 1 C} � 2 S z 2 1 • 0 m RE 1 N 2m jr .13 11 Y y y%m • e is 2 1 U Za 1-� S �2R '` 1 ��..// ... � j .g �. �V.o •z�:� I •!r GD � Ndr btU � 40 •• Ji.'r '.`•�£:i;•. p.�d._ 54,_�, -•m 1 � oa, .� 9.Es , } 130131 1 ILL000000 awi001311❑ i yyg v z i. v 6 1 - a iii m 1 3 t :oe .... ._I•..�.. ; .a ~ate ¢ i<:= ...a �„ 1 U {II V C OZ • R' , la Q 1 I I I • 1 Z LL e J O'�g mwt o3 .o 1 ma vl W 5 3 5 r IW v ,•, a.:_' < ..: m N LL .N LT T fI1 , m a W. 0 S LLy. l O > p 6 �¢¢•.Rt C''�S�'O •;N 'Cm O J S. I I Iril alg �y 1 51=j��ycc pal.? c x ¢000 I�don 3 ¢ im'�%�•- .i �J�l I Ii33Png 5u$i X111 `�o =�13O❑ ° z . G O `v z r� ^r t V t t LL E ? -•-0j 1 o. c m O o 1 a to a N ma` i m E > 1 m LL 1 i0 = ¢ IIT Inl i R - 9-6 !T. ITB R i 1 } 1 i (7 O `v z r� ^r y m LL E ? -•-0j o. c m O o ma a to a N ma` m E > m LL o i0 = ¢ IIT Inl R R - 9-6 !T. ITB R 1 4'y?�„�.&•@7,.,`V. p As a n S G e GA •• T r'i p I• LL' rT 'i 1', ry r 1 ri b m j ` o.x I CLL ..m 0 1 10 Q O o f/ F o Y TT LLi C S 0< u4 i0 o mw U > r ci v ni u n 'd ai a O S OC .= •• T r'i p I• LL' rT 'i 1', ry r 1 ri ° 2 g; €m I O N D 1 'a V- 1 N � � .• � 1 m� �C q S ./1 1 a 1 + LAE t 1 � I I 1 mma cozi�$ I I I 11013 El Ia Q IE jj i ma.� w 3. o 11 LU . d I� CO X Ir Q IJ 10 WN a R II OYiw '.' 1w Im f r M J x'OO❑0 s¢ i3 i3 a� 1 -lil y � 1 ti m L 1 J a' I _ a m i � n k m a S Q C'C.1 c LL o g 1 2 o `o j y m 10 m ? $ = 1, Om H O 4 a l> 1 O A m JUA-"-"".111111 F114RR-_pl14-wwP.wx 0 L- �a a' _ $ ml c � n k m a S U c LL m o `o j of m oU 5,Y g 1 0-0 =¢ W JUA-"-"".111111 F114RR-_pl14-wwP.wx 1 mF y Z� 1 � d a y 333jjj � S N I a I C O o O d m S 1 T I Vi w. a 1 O ICi 0❑C3,9 n I 1 yym zz N 1 z a,c 302 z Io -e _ m oo I I 'm0000�p� - a } I= e C mEA a U n o Iw _a- d z m w o 2p T wI I I I.I m'e o C a.. fR< Y m 7m LL. w O a W 7 MnA ¢aJ� I I I> 3ia90g m o f xpO❑❑ ¢ F i3 i3x¢ =171 i 6 r: ed 1 wva r 0 - Y Z Y �T Y: m � r v mx rn J B m �A y m �LL j Y C. x cc 0 v n w • u �'i U 1-a IL 'w c E it �a T I I 6 G r m 1 w o' 9 o m O U co i 6 r: ed 1 wva r 0 - m � r v mx rn a c B m �A a �LL j J x cc a LLt y O 2 Z -f0, E - U ' � I I I mp 1 H„:3� 1 O 1 1 I � qF4 1 m' (n r 1 p 1 U � 143 1 D O _ i •� ti F7 U It `oUir 0. Y C T 1 1 ! 3 c E 1 0 U m 1 4 1 i m O C b d 1 i � 1 w Y ^. n i U w u 10 z m o m Z m m l m O y O E - U � I EZ H„:3� O I � r 143 _ `oUir ,�• Y 131303 ! 3 1� f% YS w Y 1 1 z aas z in ti Z m 00130 tz- 1 UW 0EC 0 c 81 5�3 °tq o m3 ¢E I I I>�iY55N i In o. C 'I x000❑ x¢ i3 si=¢ y O aLL 143 `oUir ,�• Y 4LL O Q ^ lV l'l O Iq m riCdO 0 m W ' 1� f% I Q �fl�f�4�l��lAn-n--nrn ..--- ®m ¢„ EZ>> a 1 1 g Z 1 �+ 1 C ^m , ,� O • i 1+ , fi • o r a i w .O m �_ i 3 O 2 a 0.2 z jai �jw i 'c2 + N L W Q 1 U m 0 W 3: > Hie tagy ° ao a� •' .mxQ 11 E013001308aoaoaa s 1 • ; I I z 1 we c � � 6�n 1 i I I I' I �8 � � � rrr • 10 1. g 130[313 $1 a3sa o ' oZP ¢ I 13 0 1� do p '� v ¢¢ a 3 c` �J j ES: H p $ 'a I W OJC <'Zai 'U .2 ¢m a IF e�•a gg ''U ILL M tg �i X08 r x i•tp .�w '� wI I I I IUa.d �0 gs _ ¢ 02 wit �J o= a U a9 �axQ ❑OpQ WaoS 3 ¢ iw��t0 an'n�' I=4w Eu$a7 �t$53 ❑0[313 x¢ 13 2 ¢ 2 $ 2 1 1 1 1 , 0 f ; m ' 1 N I F.{ E a f i P E 1 IaL n ax a` m m 31 v gi0 H m C7 o a4 m m$ o 1 a Q c m s m o I W ° U y ° O N; '! N Pl f N m O 5. W �7 a 0m = 2 w. .A u u iy 11 [7 [7 m A O��DI Q D �S 9 S m j >u3a lZ W < a �- ` 0 � LL W w • ti`o�S a ° J .55S. m a aoo fir a S z 02 >0 S.¢❑❑❑❑ am w. .A u u iy 11 [7 [7 m A O��DI Cc D �S 9 Cc d j >u3a lZ W < a �- ` 0 � LL W w • f p �� Z ° J .55S. m a aoo 3 � w. .A u u iy 11 [7 [7 I m A e m IEZo o N, F o `$' f p �� Z N��� N a - T Q C V t, � o �� v v Ow 0130; I � s m N, N��� 0 1313 o �� �. zl I I _I�I Ow r` m 9 °i3wg 4 LLE =0000 iu$i =x P 1= I I p = m �a a �LL m V 00 -d fG ri tG a a cc O = S .:n In .n 17 fl n m N��� o �� v mm r` m a ¢ m $ z P 1= 5 a � � U m • i v m • � , I p = m �a a �LL m V 00 -d fG ri tG a a cc O = S .:n In .n 17 fl n r W m oQ. . q S S 3 lie s��S3m�lno 8�3��0 a0000Q0 X00000 g g° . • � m Fs� O�S� r 1`C PZ - :...':Q.cc i . w'o`w Y"01 _ ¢0��❑ IL O O O 3 R ED i I E 2 m:3 I u N tl N3 'i• 1 q i cT uO 3. . 1 m m ei y ;•'• Z mff i o a- s C Om 8 �� Do13s 1 � i oz 1 m ' 1 1 ' 1 v oz aas ,:130 013 a isOf r I o- Iwi� ma N W 8 z m i" Z�FF Q J � O IW P,yY '10 �._ m� LLIll I I> siN IA �,J 'v! SOpp❑ 2¢ 13 2.2T Cr ".i i� Fa 3 U 1 V U n• D fib n n n" n" w w 1 0 1 , me 1 I I fq 1 U = 1 Q C i 0 1 t\ m x ' m �.ti 1 i 017 s rN v m m^ IZ 1'- o`. q E R m 03 0 o � 8' ccU ' m o_ U. a 10 a 2 $ CLL o¢ N S'W N 1? N (� O N tC t: m Oi c; m m T W aO = cc 1 V U n• D fib n n n" n" w w Appendix D References 1. USDOT FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13, Change 6, Airport Design. 2. USDOT FAA Advisory circular 150/5325-4A, Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design. 3. USDOT FAA Order 5090.3C. 4. Washington State Aviation Pavement Management Program, Volume 1, Auburn Municipal Airport, Pavement Consultants, Inc. Aubua Mnaie/pat Airport - Master Plan Update–June 200/ 14PR0t6Ct ''IWIAWOenW'WMPpy AnOC Appendix D - / Wd R Pati tr —Ina P/T#7 Amendments to Chapters 1, 2 and 3 to support the designation of a City of Auburn urban center designation per the King County Countywide Planning Policies Also includes a new Map 3.3A identifying the urban center boundary. CHAPTER 1 PLAN BACKGROUND Introduction Auburn's Comprehensive Plan unfolds as several layers of background, data, policies and plans set the direction to the future. While the Growth Management Act, Vision 2020, and the King and Pierce County Planning Policies provide an overall framework for the plan; the foundation of the Plan exists in the aspirations of the people whom it will affect. The people of Auburn and its history make Auburn unique. History From its beginnings, Auburn was a crossroads. Tribal groups such as the Skopamish, Smalhkamish, and Stkamish lived along the Green and White/Stuck Rivers. They forged trails over the Cascade Mountains, traded with tribes living east of the mountains and canoed down river to gather shellfish and trade with coastal tribes. The 1800s In the mid -1800's, the first pioneers arrived in the White River Valley lured by the free and fertile land. In 1856 and 1857, a series of clashes occurred between the Indians who had long inhabited the area and the newly arrived settlers. The Point Elliott and Medicine Creek Treaties were signed which resulted in the establishment of the Muckleshoot Reservation and recognized the Tribe's rights to off -reservation resources. Railroads reached the area in the 1880's and brought adventurers from the East and Midwest United States, as well as Europe and Asia. Early fanners, many emigrants from Europe and Japan, tilled the rich soil and planted hops and other crops. The harvests were abundant and soon the White River Valley became one of the. prime agricultural centers in the region. In 1891, the future City of Auburn incorporated as the Town of Slaughter, named in honor of Lieutenant Slaughter who was killed in the Indian Wars. The name did not remain for long. The State legislature passed a bill on February 21, 1893, which changed the town's name to Auburn. A number of stories exist as to the name's origin with the most romantic concerning a reference to the first line of Oliver Goldsmith's 1770 poem, The Deserted Village: "Sweet Auburn! Loveliest village of the plain." In 1895, Auburn's population was approximately 300 people. Chapter I The early 1900s As the area became more populated, the annual flooding of the rivers that provided the area with its fertile soils began to create problems. The White River had a particularly broad floodplain and flood waters would spread over a large portion of the valley. During floods, debris would often choke the river and water would be diverted to the Stuck River. A record flood in 1906 resulted in a decision to permanently seal off the White River channel and to divert all water into the Stuck River. The diversion dam was built in 1913 and over the ensuing years, the former channel of the White River has been filled in and developed. Flooding remained an issue in the valley, however. To resolve these continuing problems, the Mud Mountain Dam was completed in 1950 on the upper White River and the Howard Hanson Dam was completed in 1962 on the Upper Green River. Auburn's central location between Seattle and Tacoma has been a key factor in the rapid growth of the area. A powerhouse built in 1911 on the upper White River served Auburn and the cities of Seattle and Tacoma. This facility also served the legendary Interurban Railway. In 1910 the Northern Pacific Railroad selected the town as the site of its western freight terminal. When scores of permanent rail workers arrived and needed housing, Auburn experienced its first population boom. Between 1910 and 1920, the City's population expanded from 960 to 3,160 people, an increase of almost 230 percent. The mid 1900s World War II saw the second transformation of Auburn. The most dramatic change, however, affected the local Japanese American community. When the federal government relocated the residents of Japanese ancestry to distant internment camps for the duration of the war, many families lost businesses, homes and farms. Most of these families never returned. Although Auburn remained a strong agricultural community for some time, the city became more industrialized in the years following the War. The Boeing Company opened an aircraft plant in Auburn in the 1960's and by the 1980s employed over 10,000 people at its Auburn plant. Other large employers moved into the area including the Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) and the General Services Administration (GSA). Auburn General Hospital has increased in size and provides health care to the South King County region. Numerous other businesses moved to Auburn as the availability of high quality industrial land with good access to transportation and relatively low cost lured them to the area. In 1994, over 26,000 people worked within the City of Auburn. With the increase in the number of jobs came a rapid increase in the number of residents. By 1970, the population of the City reached over Plan Background 21,000 people and by 1994 approximately 36,000 people. This growth is expected continue well into the next century. As Auburn grew, its role within the Puget Sound region has evolved. Historically, Auburn has been treated as a relatively minor player in the region. Its relatively small population and perceived isolation in South King County led to its being overshadowed in the region by the larger and more centrally located cities further north. By the 1980s, this relationship began to change and should continue to evolve in the future. The present and future The groundbreaking for the SuperMall signaled the beginning of a new era of Auburn's evolution. Auburn shoppers will no longer need to travel to regional malls outside of the community for most purchases. More importantly, consumers throughout the region will come to Auburn to do their shopping and Auburn will become a major player in regional retailing. The potential construction of the Auburn Thoroughbred Racetrack (still pending at the time of this writing), increased development on the Muckleshoot Reservation and the potential for a station on the regional Commuter Rail system will greatly increase Auburn's significance in the region. Although real estate prices have increased throughout the County, Auburn's real estate costs have remained relatively affordable resulting in significant growth in the area. As industrial and residential development moves southward down the Green River Valley, Auburn is now poised to accommodate as many as 7,000 new households and 11,000 new jobs over the next twenty years. When Auburn's projected growth is considered in conjunction with the projected growth in Kent, Pacific, Algona and Federal Way, there will be an increase in the strength of South King County jurisdictions. With this growth, Auburn and South King County will play an increasingly important role in regional affairs. Page 1-3 Community Profile Demographics Auburn is different from the typical King County community. Auburn residents have a unique set of circumstances, history, goals and vision for the future. This unique perspective provides the foundation for this Comprehensive Plan. This section provides a community profile of Auburn. It statistically Portrays the "character" of Auburn. Character involves the attributes or features of Auburn that distinguish it from other communities. It refers to the main or essential nature of the town. Demographic data from the 1990 Census will be used to formulate this community profile. Census data tends to put the features and attributes of a community into prescribed groups of information. Grouping the data into prescribed categories enables the comparison of one community to another. It helps identify averages and trends. Since the information pertains primarily to average tendencies, a lot of individual exceptions are likely to exist. Nonetheless, from these average tendencies a common character begins to emerge.I Population Characteristics Auburn ranks as the 17th most populated city within the State of Washington. It is located in the most populous county in the state and, among the 31 cities in King County, it ranks as the eighth largest city (see Figure 1.1). Figure 1.2 illustrates Auburn's population from its incorporation to the year 1994. 1 Due to a mapping error by the Bureau of the Census, the total population reported in this document (33,102 persons) and the total number of housing units (13,977 units) are less than the actual total. The Census Bureau later verified that in 1990 the actual total population for the City of Auburn was 33,650 persons and the actual housing unit total was 14,156 units. However, since no other data was revised by the Census Bureau, the originally reported total population (33,102 persons) and housing count (13,977 units) are employed throughout this document in order to compare other related population and household data. Page 1-4 Plan Background Figure 1.2 Population of Auburn 1£ a& a 'a_ 9 9 c 1 9 A Since the 1950's, Auburn's population has steadily increased, though the rate of increase has begun to taper off. Between 1960 to 1980, Auburn's population increased an average of 8% per year. From 1980 to 1993, Auburn's population growth slowed to approximately 2.7% per year. Approximately 90% of Auburn's population are white and 10% are people of color. Figure 1.3 compares the relative proportion of Auburn's population of people of color to King County averages. hispanic otter asian native black Total Figure 1.3 Population by Race {People of Color Only} 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% Percentage of Total Population Page 1-5 Figure 1.1 Population of King Co Cities 1990 ReekPopulafion 1 Serrate 516,259 2 mi. 86,874 3 Federal We, 67,304 4 Renton 41,688 5 KALI 40,052 6 Kent 37,90 7 Rcimond 35,800 8 Auburn 33,102 9 SUTec 22,694 10 Meter leland 20,816 other Cifies 91,472 Uni-w rated Amy 513,298 Tool: King Ca. 1,507,319 Plan Background Figure 1.2 Population of Auburn 1£ a& a 'a_ 9 9 c 1 9 A Since the 1950's, Auburn's population has steadily increased, though the rate of increase has begun to taper off. Between 1960 to 1980, Auburn's population increased an average of 8% per year. From 1980 to 1993, Auburn's population growth slowed to approximately 2.7% per year. Approximately 90% of Auburn's population are white and 10% are people of color. Figure 1.3 compares the relative proportion of Auburn's population of people of color to King County averages. hispanic otter asian native black Total Figure 1.3 Population by Race {People of Color Only} 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% Percentage of Total Population Page 1-5 Like most of King County, Auburn is a family-oriented community. The definition of a family used by the Census Bureau is a household which contains two or more persons related by birth, marriage or adoption. Nearly two thirds of all Auburn households satisfy this definition of family. However, what makes Auburn unique are the many households which contain children. Over half (54%) of Auburn's family households include children; whereas less than half (47%) of the total family households in King County contain children. Auburn appears to be a child -oriented community. Among Auburn's family households with children, approximately 65% of them are married couples and 35% are single parent families. Although a large majority of Auburn families are married couples, the percentage of single parent families (35%) is significantly higher than the King County average proportion (22%) of single parent families. Figure 1.4 and 1.5 illustrate the relative proportions of Auburn's married and single parent families in 1980 and 1990. In 1980 single parent families represented 24% of the total number of families in Auburn. By 1990 the number of single parent families increased to 35% of total Auburn families. Figure 1.4 Figure 1.5 Families w/ Children Families w/ Children 1980 1990 3% M ❑ Mamed Female Male ❑ Martied Pemale Male Cwpla househWda homeholda Couples houuholda householder Page 1-6 Plan Background Auburn's large population of families with children causes it to have a relatively larger population of school age children (Figure 1.6). Since 1980, Auburn's population of school age children has increased more than any other age group. Figure 1.7 illustrates the population change in Auburn relative to specific age categories. It shows the net migration of each age group. Net migration for the decade was determined by comparing the number of people in a specific age group in 1980 with the number of people in its corresponding age group ten years later in 1990. A positive net increase indicates that, in addition to those residing in Auburn ten years ago, several more members of that particular age group moved into Auburn. 25% 20% Figure 1.6 Age Distribution 1990 5% 0% <5 5-18 21.29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70+ age group Page 1-7 Figure 1.7 Net Migration (by age group) 1,200 60% 1,000 50% 800 ao% 600 30% 400 20% 200 ]0% 0 0% -200 -10% 80: 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 90: 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 This infusion of young people into Auburn tends to keep Auburn young. The median age of Auburn residents is 30 years whereas the median age of other King County residents is 34 years. Figure 1.8 compares the age characteristics of Auburn to the rest of King County. Figure 1.8 Age Distribution Auburn vs King Co 50% 45% 00% 35% M. 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% W. Page 1-8 5-19 19-20 21-30 31-34 35-39 4049 50-59 60-69 70h age categories Plan Background In addition to championship sports and various examples of academic and civic success, Auburn's children provide it several other unique characteristics. For instance, two out of ten children under the age of 5 years live in poverty. Poverty creates risk factors for any age group. It undoubtedly contributes to several other .dispositive findings among Auburn's youth. Outside of the City of Seattle, the Auburn public health service area has one of the highest teen pregnancy rates within King County. Approximately 25 school age girls between the ages of 10 to 17 bear children each year. The Auburn public health service area has one of the highest rates of hospitalization among schoolage children for substance abuse in the suburban communities. Over the past ten years, several types of social and support services were initiated in Auburn to reduce the above risk factors. Progress has been made in reducing teen pregnancies and high school dropouts. Compared to other King County communities, the incidences of youth violence are relatively low. The number of Auburn youth at -risk of developing aberrant and/or anti -social behaviors is a small percentage of the total youth population. The vast majority of Auburn youth are typical, average youngsters living in homes with loving parents. Auburn youth remain a very important and proud component of Auburn's character. Income Characteristics Since its population boom during the construction of the railroad freight terminals at the start of the 20th Century; Auburn has remained a blue collar community. The term -- blue collar-- refers to communities where a large number of its residents earn their livelihoods by wearing work clothes (i.e. blue denim overalls) or protective clothing. Figure 1.9 compares the composition of Auburn's resident labor force to King County. Gov/Edao Services FIR Isu,RE. Retail Wholoaelc ComMUdl Tsvu Manu Constr Aa/Mim Figure 1.9 Employed Persons by Industry in 1990 {Auburn residents only) 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Percentage of Total Resident Labor Force In 1990 over one-fourth of Auburn's resident labor force earned its living from jobs in manufacturing industries. Figure 1.10 shows the distribution of new jobs relative to five general occupational categories. Between 1980 to 1990, the number of manufacturing jobs in Auburn increased approximately 33%. Figure 1.10 Auburn's Labor Force2 (both Auburn & non -Auburn residents) Year Factory Wholesale Retail Services Gvmt Total Trans, Util Trade Educ 1990 13,724 1,438 3,795 4,615 2,322 25,894 difference 2,412 572 1,229 2,498 512 7,223 %total 33% 8% 17% 35% 7% 100% Since the average manufacturing job pays more than most jobs, an increase of manufacturing jobs should represent an increase in the community's income base. However, in Auburn's case the number of households who cam less than the average King County household actually increased. From 1980 to 1990 the gap in median incomes 2 Puget Sound Regional Council, "Puget Sound Subarea Forecasts", April, 1992 Page 1-10 Plan Background between Auburn and the rest of King County became worse. Figure 1.11 compares the median incomes of Auburn to King County for both 1980 and 1990. Figure 1.11 Median Household Incomes 40000 T $36,179 35000 30000 M., C. -- �sa6,177 luwme cep $30,007 25000 $20,717 i 20000_ Aubere 15000 $18,482 10000 5000 0 1980 1990 Figure 1.12 compares the number of residents working in Auburn versus outside of Auburn. Out of 7,233 new jobs in Auburn, only approximately 280 went to Auburn residents. The number of Auburn's resident labor force which works in Auburn remained relatively unchanged between 1980 and 1990; whereas, the number of Auburn's resident labor which worked outside of Auburn increased significantly. Figure 1.12 Employed Persons Living in Auburn {16+ years of Age} The employment acquired by Auburn's additional labor force occurred mostly in lower paying jobs. Figure 1.13 represents the additional residents by type of employment. While the average wage for non- manufacturing employment ranks higher than retail and service jobs, they tend to pay approximately two-thirds of the average wage paid for manufacturing employment. The average wage for retail employment in Actual Percent Total Working.......... 1980 1990 Change Change .....in Auburn: 5549 5829 280 7% ..... outside of Auburn: 7000 10927 3927 93% total 12549 16756 4207 100% The employment acquired by Auburn's additional labor force occurred mostly in lower paying jobs. Figure 1.13 represents the additional residents by type of employment. While the average wage for non- manufacturing employment ranks higher than retail and service jobs, they tend to pay approximately two-thirds of the average wage paid for manufacturing employment. The average wage for retail employment in Chapter 1990 ($15,360) ranks considerably less than the average state wage ($25,959) and the average manufacturing wage ($38,133). Figure 1.13 Employed Persons by Industry (Auburn's Resident Labor Force) Actual Percent Persons Living in Auburn 1980 1990 Change Change Total Employed Persons 12,549 16,756 4,207 100% 16+ years old working in... 1989 1989 Difference Difference • Retail trade 1,913 2,796 883 21% • Manufacturing: durable goods 3,378 3,920 542 13% • Professional services: other 397 884 487 12% • Manufacturing: nondurable goods 420 843 423 10% • Construction 907 1,276 369 9% • Transportation 641 969 328 8% • Finance, insurance and real estate 608 918 310 7% While the industry on the west side of Auburn appears to become more prosperous, many residents on the east side of Auburn found despair. In 1980 approximately 44% of Auburn's households were characterized as low income in 1980. By 1990, 48% of Auburn's households were low income. Approximately 29% of Auburn's households are very low income and one in ten Auburn residents live in poverty. The difference in per capita income perhaps best represents the disparity between King County and Auburn residents. In 1990 the per capita income of an Auburn resident was approximately 25% less than the average per capita income of King County residents. In terms of actual dollars, the per capita income of Caucasian residents was worse than any other racial group. However, the per capita incomes of all groups tend to be significantly less in Auburn than elsewhere in King County. Figure 1.14 Per Capita Income in 1989 by Race Auburn vs. King County Page 1-12 King Auburn County Actual Percent 1989 1989 Difference Difference Total persons: $13,866 $18,587 ($4,721) -25% White $14,214 $19,713 ($5,499) -28% . Dlack $12,190 $11,277 $913 8% . American Indian, Eskimo &Aleut $8,060 $11,353 ($3,293) -29% . Asian& Pacific Islander $10,138 $13,106 ($2,968) .23% Other $9,482 $11,185 (81,703) -15% . Hispanic Origin (all races) $9,185 $13,304 ($4,119) -31% Page 1-12 Plan Background Approximately one out of ten adults and approximately two out of ten children under 10 years of age live in poverty. The poverty status of persons is determined by comparing a household's income with the poverty threshold (determined by HUD) for that household with respect to the number of persons within that household. As an example, since the poverty threshold for a family of three in 1989 was $9,885, a family of three with an income of $9,000 in 1989 would be considered as three persons in poverty according to this methodology. Figure 1.15 compares the number of Auburn residents living in poverty to the total population within their particular age group. Figure 1.15 Poverty Status by Age 1989 As the above section indicates, the income characteristics of Auburn's residents does not accurately portray the characteristics of Auburn's economic base. On one hand, Auburn's economy appears to be booming. The number of jobs offered by Auburn businesses substantially increased. Approximately 33% of these new jobs were in the high paying, manufacturing industries. However, very few Auburn residents apparently acquired these jobs. Instead, many of Auburn's resident labor force acquired lower paying jobs found in other communities. One factor which probably both causes and will continue to contribute to the problem is the comparatively lower educational attainment of Auburn's adult population. In 1980, approximately 24% of Auburn's adult population did not have a high school degree. Through the commendable efforts of both teachers and students, by 1990 the number of Auburn's adult population which did not have a degree was reduced to 18%. However, this figure is still comparatively higher than the County average. Percent Percent of Total of Total Persons in 1989 Persons Age Group Total Persons (1990): 33,102 100.0% 100.0% - Total in Poverty: 3,573 10.8% 10.8% * <18 years old: 1,237 3.7% 14.6% * <5 538 1.6% 19.5% * 5-11 463 1.4% 15.0% * 12-17 236 0.7% 9.0% * 18-44 1,627 4.9% 10.6% * 45-64 412 1.2% 7.1% * 65+ 297 0.9% 8.4% As the above section indicates, the income characteristics of Auburn's residents does not accurately portray the characteristics of Auburn's economic base. On one hand, Auburn's economy appears to be booming. The number of jobs offered by Auburn businesses substantially increased. Approximately 33% of these new jobs were in the high paying, manufacturing industries. However, very few Auburn residents apparently acquired these jobs. Instead, many of Auburn's resident labor force acquired lower paying jobs found in other communities. One factor which probably both causes and will continue to contribute to the problem is the comparatively lower educational attainment of Auburn's adult population. In 1980, approximately 24% of Auburn's adult population did not have a high school degree. Through the commendable efforts of both teachers and students, by 1990 the number of Auburn's adult population which did not have a degree was reduced to 18%. However, this figure is still comparatively higher than the County average. Chapter 1 Figure 1.16 compares the educational attainment of Auburn's adult population to King County. Figure 1.16 Educational Attainment of Persons Ages 25+ years Advanced Professional Degree Baccalaureate Degree Associate Degree Some College, no degree High School Graduate No H.S. Degree 4% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% Percentage of Total Adult Population No simple, or at least concise, reason can be offered to explain why so few of Auburn's new jobs found their way to Auburn residents. Auburnfaces an interesting and challenging paradox. It must try to discern why residents on the east side of town have such difficulty acquiring jobs on the west side of town; and it must figure out why new employees who take jobs in Auburn decide to live elsewhere. Like most paradoxes, it probably does not have a solution; for decisions on who to hire or where to live depend on a wide number of factors. However, during the process of trying to solve it, activities and events will likely occur which will enhance the quality of life of existing and future generations of both Auburn and non -Auburn residents. Housing Characteristics Most of Auburn's housing stock is less than 20 years old. Figure 1.17 illustrates the relative age of Auburn's housing stock. Page 1-14 Plan Background Figure 1.17 Age of Auburn Housing: 1990 Apparently, once a family finds a suitable residence in Auburn, they tend to stay in that residence for a very long time. Figure 1.18 illustrates the tenure of Auburn householders in their residence at the time of the 1990 Census. Over 60% of the households surveyed indicated they had lived in their residences for well over ten years. At the same time, approximately 24% of Auburn's households had lived in their residences for less than two years. Most of these households with less than five years of tenure in their residence are newcomers to Auburn. The 1990 Census indicates that 58% of them relocated to Auburn from other King County communities, 20% of them relocated from within the State of Washington, 15% relocated from a different western state, 3% relocated from south and midwestern states, and I% relocated from a northeastern state. Figure 1.18 Years Household Lived in Unit )5% RX 30•. A F 25% 24X 2/X `0 M m .`S IS•. I/X c I W. iU a SX 6% 1% M t2 r Years of occupancy r, Page 1-15 Chapter 1 Figure 1.19 indicates the changes in Auburn's housing stock between the years 1980 and 1990. During this period, the construction of multi -family units greatly exceeded the construction of detached, single family housing units. Over this ten year span, 52% of the new units built were multifamily housing units, 36% were manufactured homes and 12% were single family residences. Figure 1.19 Housing Units by Type 1980 vs 1990 While multifamily housing units can be owner -occupied {i.e., condominiums, town houses}, such housing units are very rare in Auburn. The increase in multifamily housing units between 1980 and 1990 changed the balance between owner occupied and rental housing units. Prior to 1990 the majority of housing units were owner occupied (53%). After 1990 the majority were rental units (51%) and less than half were owner occupied (49%). Since 1990 the rate of construction between single family and multifamily units are nearly the same. Newly constructed single family and multifamily units respectively account for 43% and 41% of all the new housing units added since 1990. Manufactured housing accounts for 15% of the newly constructed homes since 1990. Figure 1.20 represents the actual count of housing units since 1990. Page 1-16 1980 Percent 1990 Percent Percent % of Housing Units: Total Total Total Total Change New H.U. Total: 11,333 Single-family 5,622 10 u 500/. 5,938 o 42% agar 6% 12% Multi -family 4,533 40% 5,898 42% 30% 52% - 2 units 562 5% 781 6% 39% 8% - 3 to 4 units 842 7% 1,366 10% 62% 20% - 5 to 9 units 589 5% 991 7% 68% 15% - 10 to 49 units 2,038 18% 2,434 17% 19% 15% - 50 units or more 502 4% 326 2% -35% -7% Man/MobHom 1,180 10% 2,141 15% 81% 36% While multifamily housing units can be owner -occupied {i.e., condominiums, town houses}, such housing units are very rare in Auburn. The increase in multifamily housing units between 1980 and 1990 changed the balance between owner occupied and rental housing units. Prior to 1990 the majority of housing units were owner occupied (53%). After 1990 the majority were rental units (51%) and less than half were owner occupied (49%). Since 1990 the rate of construction between single family and multifamily units are nearly the same. Newly constructed single family and multifamily units respectively account for 43% and 41% of all the new housing units added since 1990. Manufactured housing accounts for 15% of the newly constructed homes since 1990. Figure 1.20 represents the actual count of housing units since 1990. Page 1-16 Figure 1.20 Auburn's Supply of Housing Units Plan Background Percent Actual Total Housing Units 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Change Change -- Single Family 6,117 6,002 6,247 6,268 -- Duplex 781 785 799 813 813 0 5% 32 -- 3 & 4 Units 1,366 1,369 1,389 1,439 1,485 10% 119 --5+Units 3,751 3,751 3,887 3,916 3,916 26% 165 MH/Tr** 2,041 2,048 2,057 2,091 2,106 14% 65 — Other *•* 100 too 100 100 100 1% 0 Total HU 14,156 14,055 14,479 14,627 14,786 1008/0 630 * * MH/rr = manufactured homes & trailers *** Other= group homes s ec City of Aubum Dept. of Planning & Community Dovnlopment, April, 1994 Profile Profile of a TypicalAuburn Household Based on the averages and trends indicated in the 1990 Census, the typical or average Auburn household would likely be a young, Caucasian family with children. The family would consist of a married couple with at least one school age child. The parents would be in their late 20's or early 30's and the child would be approximately 10 years old. The parents are probably high school graduates with some college but no degree. They both work in jobs located outside of Auburn. Their combined incomes would be approximately 80% of the King County median income. Various government agencies would classify them as a low income household. They probably live in a rental housing unit. If they moved to Auburn within the last ten years, they likely live in a multifamily unit. Within their neighborhood, approximately one out three families are single parent households and approximately two out of ten children under 12 years live in poverty. Once they acquire a home of their own, and if that home is in Auburn; then they will likely reside in that home for the next twenty years. Chapter i Planning Process Through a comprehensive planning process a community seeks to under- stand itself, its problems and potentials, and the forces which will shape its future. On the basis of this understanding a city develops a response which can shape and prepare the community for the future. This plan culminates this process and states the City's policy to guide its way into the future. Initial development of this plan in 1986 involved a range of diverse activities organized into four general steps. Step 1: Issue Identification Planning Department staff completed a series of discussion papers which assessed various aspects of the community. These papers were prepared in close consultation with the City Planning Commission and the City Council Committee on Planning and Community Development to assure relevance of those studies to the concerns of the City's policy officials. (See the Appendix for a description of these studies.) Step 2: Public Input A key component of the process was to actively solicit and encourage general public comment regarding the community and the public's view of its future. A series of neighborhood meetings were held between April and June of 1985 to gain citizen input to the planning process and to ensure that the City officials had a good understanding of citizen views as they established the goals and policies of the Plan. Step 3: Policy Development The information gathered and obtained regarding the community and the views of its people became the basis for the Plan's policies. These policies were developed through an analysis of the issues that were raised by the first two steps. Staff then prepared recommendations regarding policy alternatives. The Planning Commission spent approximately 6 months reviewing these recommendations. Step 4: Adoption The "Staff Draft and Recommendations" for the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan was submitted to the Planning Commission in January, 1986. The Planning Commission reviewed and refined the Draft Plan during several regular and special meetings during the next four Page LT Amendments for GMA Compliance Public Participation Plan Background months, assisted by public input received at two public hearings held during that period. On May 6, 1986 the Planning Commission completed its review and formulated its recommendation to the City Council to adopt the "Staff Draft and Recommendations" as revised by 31 specific modifications. Following receipt of the Planning Commission's recommendation, the City Council held a public hearing and referred the proposed Comprehensive Plan to its Committee on Planning and Community Development (PCDC). The Committee completed its review in July and forwarded its recommendations to the full Council. The Comprehensive Plan was formally adopted by the City Council on August 18, 1986. The passage of the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) in 1990 (see below) necessitated an update of this Comprehensive Plan. The update occurred in phases based upon the deadlines for compliance which were included in the Act. In 1991, the City revised its Urban Growth and Expansion Element. The following year, Auburn amended this plan and its development regulations to ensure that critical lands such as wetlands, aquifer recharge areas, steep slopes and floodplains were identified and protected. In 1995, additional amendments were adopted to bring this plan into compliance with the Act. As with the initial adoption of this plan, the public played a key role in amending it for growth management compliance. To ensure that the widest range of the public was involved, Auburn used a multifaceted approach toward public involvement as shown below: Neighborhood Meetings: Seven neighborhood meetings were held during the Summer of 1992 throughout the community to provide for both formal and informal interaction between citizens and planning staff members. Information was disseminated concerning planning and Growth Management, written surveys distributed and oral comments were taken. These meetings did not exclusively focus on planning to attract a wider spectrum of the public -- those interested in health and safety issues, crime, recreation, or community facilities and services -- in addition to those interested in planning issues. A total of over 150 residents attended these meetings. Page 1-19 Chapter 1 Speaker Availability Numerous presentations were made to organizations, neighborhood groups and other groups of individuals who desired more information regarding growth management or planning issues. These informal talks were typically held in settings that the group felt most comfortable in, and during the regularly scheduled meeting time of the groups. These meetings were held throughout the planning process. Articles in the AUBURN UPDATE Community Newsletter Easy to understand articles provided the public with information regarding growth management issues, Growth Management contacts, and the availability of speakers. The Auburn Update is distributed to all postal customers -- both residential and commercial -- within the two zip codes that cover the Auburn area. News Releases The media was provided with updates regarding neighborhood meetings, planning issues, and growth management contacts. Planning Commission Workshops From April to July 1994, the Planning Commission held a series of workshops to review the draft amendments to the comprehensive plan. All of these meetings were open to the public. These drafts were made available prior to the meeting and public comment was encouraged on the drafts at any time. Open Houses In September and October 1994, three open houses were held to gain public comment on the Draft Amended Plan. Over 100 residents attended these informal meetings. Public Hearings In addition to these opportunities for informal input, the formal adoption process included the required public hearings in front of both the Planning Commission and the City Council. The Planning Commission held hearings in October, November and December, 1994. At the December 6, 1994, hearing the Commission voted unanimously to forward the Plan to the City Council (as modified by an addendum) with a recommendation Page 1-20 Plan Background for adoption. Final Council adoption of the amendments occurred after public hearing on April 17, 1995. Washington State's GMA The Washington State Growth Management Act During the 1980's, Auburn, King County and the entire Puget Sound region experienced an extremely rapid rate of growth in both population and employment. This rapid growth brought with it increased traffic congestion, air and water pollution, increased housing costs and the loss of acres of natural areas and resource lands. In response to these problems, the State Legislature passed HB 2929, the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) in 1990 and amendments in each of the following years. The GMA requires that Auburn, King County and all jurisdictions within the county develop comprehensive plans which meet statewide goals. The GMA contains the following 13 statewide planning goals which must be considered as local jurisdictions develop and adopt comprehensive plans. GOAL 1 Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities exist or can be provided in an efficient manner. GOAL 2 Reduce the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development. GOAL 3 Encourage efficient multi -modal transportation systems that are based on regional priorities and coordinated with county and city comprehensive plans. GOAL 4 Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all segments of the population, promote a variety of residential densities and housing types, and encourage preservation of existing housing stock. GOAL 5 Encourage economic development throughout the state that is consistent with adopted comprehensive plans, promote economic opportunity for all citizens of this state, especially for unemployed and for disadvantaged persons, and encourage growth in areas experiencing insufficient economic growth, all within the capacities of the state's natural resources, public services, and public facilities. GOAL 6 Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation having been made. The property rights of landowners shall be protected from arbitrary and discriminatory actions. Page 1-21 Chapter 1 GOAL 7 Applications for both state and local government permits should be processed in a timely and fair manner to ensure predictability. GOAL 8 Maintain and enhance natural resource based industries, including productive timber, agricultural, and fisheries industries. Encourage the conservation of productive forest lands and productive agricultural lands, and discourage incompatible uses. GOAL 9 Encourage the retention of open space and development of recreational opportunities, conserve fish and wildlife habitat, increase access to natural resource lands and water, and develop parks. GOAL 10 Protect the environment and enhance the state's high quality of life, including air and water quality, and the availability of water. GOAL 11 Encourage the involvement of citizens in the planning process and ensure coordination between communities and jurisdictions to reconcile conflicts. GOAL 12 Ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development of the time the development is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards. GOAL 13 Identify and encourage the preservation of lands, sites, and structures that have historical or archaeological significance. The basic objective of the GMA is to give guidance and encouragement to all jurisdictions planning under the Act as they develop their vision in accordance with state-wide goals. While meeting these goals required a significant rewrite of the existing comprehensive plans for some jurisdictions, Auburn's comprehensive plan was adopted in 1986 and included many of the goals and provisions of the Act. Even taking this into account however, Auburn undertook a number of activities to make its comprehensive plan consistent with the requirements of the Act. These activities included the following: • Designation of, in conjunction with King and Pierce Counties, an urban growth area sufficient to accommodate population growth to 2012. Page 1-22 Plan Background • Designation of, in conjunction with King and Pierce Counties and adjacent jurisdictions, a potential annexation area for the City of Auburn. (The Comprehensive Plan was amended in 1991 to designate an interim boundary and manage growth in these areas). • Development of, in conjunction with King, Pierce, Snohomish and Kitsap Counties and the jurisdictions within them, a multi -county planning framework (see below Multi -county Planning Policies: Vision 2020) which serves to guide the development of comprehensive plans within these counties and ensure consistency of those plans. • Development of, in conjunction with King and Pierce Counties and the jurisdictions within them, a county -wide planning framework (see below Countywide Policies) which serves to guide the development of comprehensive plans within the counties and ensure consistency of those plans. • Designation and protection of resource lands (forest, agricultural and mineral) and critical areas (wetlands, geologically hazardous areas, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, aquifer recharge areas, and frequently flooded areas). (The Comprehensive Plan was amended in 1992 to designate and protect these areas.) • Provision of separate plan elements, including land use, housing, utilities, transportation and capital facilities. These elements require substantial inventorying and data collection, maps and descriptive text, and analysis. In addition, these elements must be consistent and coordinated. • Adoption of a comprehensive plan in compliance with the Act. • Adoption of development regulations which implement the plan. Multi -County Policies Vision 2020 The GMA specifically required the development of multi -county planning policies for Snohomish, Pierce and King Counties. Vision 2020 was adopted in October 1990 by the General Assembly of the Puget Sound Council of Governments (of which Auburn was a member). It was reaffirmed as the adopted regional growth management strategy in the interlocal agreements signed when the Puget Sound Regional Council was formed in 1991. Vision 2020 was amended in 1993 by the Regional Council and adopted as the required Multi -County Policies under GMA. VISION 2020 was developed cooperatively by the local governments in the central Puget Sound region. The vision is for diverse, economically Chapter 1 healthy, and environmentally sensitive communities connected and served by a high-quality transportation system that emphasizes the movement of people. VISION 2020 supports the development of more compact, people -oriented living and working places, thereby reversing trends that have created increased numbers of low-density, auto -dependent communities. It limits the expansion of the urban area and focuses a significant amount of new employment and housing into approximately 15 mixed-use centers that are served by an efficient, transit -oriented, multimodal transportation system. VISION 2020 represents a public policy commitment to both the land use patterns that can achieve a compact centers concept, and a reordering of transportation investment priorities to emphasize transit, ride -sharing, efficiency, demand management and the maintenance of current facilities. It results in accommodating growth in regional travel demand through greater commitment to, and investment in, public transit. It addresses the increases in congestion by offering to the public more efficient travel options that are of sufficient scale and availability to sustain the area's livability. For more details on Vision 2020, see Vision 2020: Growth Strategy and Transportation Plan for the Central Puget Sound Region (amended) by the Puget Sound Regional Council. County -Wide Planning Policies King County Planning Policies The Growth Management Act requires representatives of the county and each of its municipalities to establish county -wide planning policies. These policies are intended to (1) provide processes for coordinating planning activities in the region; (2) obtain consistency between state, regional, and local jurisdictions; and (3) provide a policy framework for the development and adoption of coordinated and consistent comprehensive land use plans throughout the county. The county -wide planning policies cover the establishment of urban growth areas, the provision of urban services, the siting of essential public facilities, economic development, transportation and affordable housing. The Countywide Planning Policies are a framework to guide the development of the comprehensive plans for King County and each city within the county. The Countywide Planning Policies do not dictate the way each jurisdiction will handle its share of growth or which city will Page1-24 Plan Background choose to have one or more Urban Centers. Rather, the policies set up criteria and allow local decisions. The Countywide Planning Policies' Vision As adopted in 1992, the Countywide Planning Policies are a vision statement of how King County should grow over the next 20 years. Amendments to these policies were adopted in 1994. The policies established an Urban Growth Area within the western one-third of the county where most future growth and development would occur in order to reduce urban sprawl, enhance open space, protect rural areas and more efficiently use social services, transportation and utilities. Urban Centers were designated within existing cities which serve as areas of concentrated employment and housing and a wide variety of land uses, including retail, recreational, cultural and public facilities, parks and open spaces, with direct service by high-capacity transit. Emphasizing growth in the urban centers will contribute to achieving the GMA goal of concentrating infrastructure investments and preventing further urban sprawl. Some Urban Centers include the downtowns of Bellevue, Seattle, Renton, Federal Way, SeaTac, Kent and Redmond. Auburn's approach to planning for its Downtown is consistent with the urban centers concept and submittal of a request for an urban center designation is anticipated in 2003. The policies also call for designation of Manufacturing/Industrial Centers, recognizing that these sites are key components of a strong regional economy. These centers would be zoned to preserve and encourage industrial growth. Examples include the Duwamish River industrial area and Kent. Even with the Urban Centers, it is expected that 60 to 75 percent of the residential growth will occur in other portions of the urban area. Like today, these areas will form the bulk of the Urban Growth Area and will be home to the largest portion of the county's population. With the initial adoption of the policies in 1992, there was surprisingly little emphasis placed on these areas which would accommodate such a large portion of the County's residential growth. The 1994 amendments placed an increased emphasis on Activity Areas. Activity areas are locations that contain a mix of uses and function as a significant focal point of the local community. These areas will typically have a pedestrian -oriented environment and be served by a high level of peak hour transit service. , 15th Street SW and 15th Street NW clearly fit this designation. Chapter 1 The Countywide Planning Policies contain growth targets for each jurisdiction. It is important to note that these are not necessarily forecasts, but indicate commitments by jurisdictions to provide sufficient land and infrastructure to accommodate these targets. Auburn has a residential target range of 6,500 to 9,600 new households and an employment target range of 9,000 to 13,200 new jobs. These targets must be accommodated within the current city limits. One of the critical issues facing the region as it grows is the provision of affordable housing. In the Puget Sound Region, housing prices have skyrocketed over the past ten years. Policies which limit the supply of available land will increase the upward pressure on housing costs. The County -wide policies recognize housing affordability as a regional issue and seek to encourage that all jurisdictions accept their fair share of affordable housing. Auburn has historically had a positive response to providing a range of housing opportunities to all groups. The City has demonstrated a willingness to accept its "fair share" of these units on a regional basis (some would say more than its fair share). Auburn is willing to continue to meet regional housing goals, however, this willingness will only be the case if it can be demonstrated that there is a regional effort to spread these units and their related costs on an equitable basis throughout all of the communities in the region. By promoting growth in existing urban areas, it is anticipated that an increasing share of all growth will be in cities. Under the countywide policies, each jurisdiction retains the authority to make decisions regarding its local character and density. However, each jurisdiction is expected to develop its comprehensive plan consistent with the countywide policies so that countywide problems that transcend jurisdictional boundaries are addressed and solved. Pierce County Countywide Planning Policies The Southern portion of Auburn's urban growth area (potential annexation area) lies within Pierce County. (see map 3.1) It is necessary that this plan, as it applies in that area, be consistent with the Pierce County Countywide Policies. Portions of this area overlap with the urban growth areas of Pacific and Sumner. Responsibility for final designation of urban growth areas within Pierce County lie with the County, though the countywide policies establish a process which includes City participation. Page 1-26 Plao Background As with the King County Countywide Policies, the Pierce County policies establish guidelines and a framework from which county and municipal comprehensive plans are to be developed and adopted. The framework is intended to ensure that plans throughout the county are consistent or, at least, compatible. While the Growth Management Act requires the policies to cover eight general areas, the Pierce County Policies address a total of eleven including: affordable housing; agricultural lands; economic development; education; historic, archaeological and cultural preservation; natural resources; open space and protection of environmentally sensitive lands; siting of public capital facilities of countywide or statewide nature; transportation facilities and strategies; urban growth areas; amendments and transition. The development of the Countywide Planning Policies involved a significant level of coordination and cooperation between the county and the incorporated Cities and towns within it. The Countywide Planning Policies were adopted in June 1992 by the Pierce County Council and ratified by the cities and towns. For more detailed information, see the Countywide Planning Policies for Pierce County. CITY OF AUBURN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS This comprehensive plan is based upon 22 goals which were developed in response to the wide range of issues identified by the public involvement process. These 22 goals form the framework for all of the policies contained in this comprehensive plan. To achieve balance in the City's development, these goals must be viewed as a whole without pursuing one to the exclusion of the others. When viewed in total, these goals form the Community's vision for the City of Auburn and its surrounding areas. Following each goal there is a brief discussion of the intent of that goal. In addition, there is a listing of the chapters of this comprehensive plan which contain references to that goal. The policies which implement the goal follow that discussion and analysis in the individual chapters. Chapter 1 GOAL 1. PLANNING APPROACH To manage growth in a manner which enhances, rather than detracts from community quality and values by actively coordinating land use type and intensity with City facility and service provision and development. Discussion: The City of Auburn will change and evolve as approximately 7,000 new households, 11,000 new jobs and new public and private developments are constructed or move into the City over the next 20 years. By planning for and managing this growth and recognizing the crucial link between public service and facility provision and land use, Auburn can ensure that this new development will further the community goals and aspirations outlined in this plan rather than degrading the high quality of life that its residents currently enjoy. A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter 2: General Approach to Planning, and Chapter S: Capital Facilities. GOAL 2. FLEXIBILITY To provide predictability in the regulation of land use and development, especially where residential uses are affected, but to also provide flexibility for development through performance standards that allow development to occur while still protecting and enhancing natural resources, cultural resources and critical lands and in overall compliance with this Comprehensive Plan. Discussion: Predictability of land development regulation is important to both existing and future property owners and to new development. It assures property owners that adjacent properties will develop in a consistent manner and it helps new development to plan for their development based on knowing what is allowed and what is not. Since all parcels are not identical, however, it is helpful to have some flexibility in land development regulation. While a variance can sometimes resolve some of these issues, regulations which provide some flexibility in the form of performance standards can help to provide development which better meets the goals and policies of this Comprehensive Plan rather than strict adherence to a set standard established in the zoning ordinance. Page 1-28 Plan Background A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter 2: General Approach to Planning. GOAL 3. REGIONAL COORDINATION To work together with both local and regional agencies and jurisdictions to promote coordinated regional growth, recognizing Auburn's intended regional role as an urban center, while maintaining local self- determination. Discussion: Auburn is firm in its commitment to work with other jurisdictions and agencies throughout the region to address regional issues and opportunities. Auburn's intent to be designated as an urban center reflects its commitment to the region's planning strategy. Auburn is just as strongly committed, however, to local self determination and the ability of local jurisdictions to determine what is in its best self interest. These two commitments are not necessarily in conflict and can and will be balanced to assure that both the City and the region benefit from these efforts. A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter 2: General Approach to Planning. GOAL 4 COMMUNITY CHARACTER To maintain and enhance Auburn's character as a family oriented commu- nity while managing potential economic opportunities in a manner that provides necessary employment and fiscal support for needed services, and while recognizing the need to provide social services and opportunities for housing to a wide array of household types and sizes. Discussion: Auburn is a that prides itself on its small city atmosphere. This is a character that the residents of Auburn wish to maintain while recognizing that economic development opportunities provide tax revenue, important services and employment opportunities to the community and the region. Auburn has always recognized that there is a wide array of household types and sizes throughout the region and reaffirms its commitment to allow for the development Page 1-29 Chapter 1 of a variety of housing types to meet the diverse needs of these groups. A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter 2: General Approach to Planning. GOAL 5. CITY EXPANSION AND ANNEXATION To ensure the orderly development and annexation of the City's potential annexation areas in a manner that provides for the adequate and cost- effective provision of required urban services and facilities, reduces sprawl, implements the goals, objectives and policies of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan, and protects designated rural areas. Discussion: While development on the unincorporated lands surrounding the City can have significant impacts on the City itself, including, but not limited to, traffic, parks and city utilities, the city can exert limited control over the development which takes place in these areas. For these reasons, Auburn has a vested interest in seeing that the City increases its ability to manage development in these areas through conditional provision of utilities and, ultimately, annexation. A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter 3: Land Use and Chapter 13: Development in the Unincorporated Areas and Annexation. GOAL 6. URBAN FORM To establish an orderly urban form which separates uses on the basis of their functional relationship to the community, and which reinforces the identity of the community. Discussion: City form can be described as the general shape of the community and how its individual parts relate to one another. The overall shape of Auburn is heavily influenced by its location in a deep river valley surrounded by relatively steep hillsides. In the past, there were land use conflicts as a result of the city's limited topography with incompatible uses locating near one another. To resolve these problems, City policy on the "urban form" of Auburn has been to separate uses based on their relationship to the Page 1-30 Plan Background community. This plan separates the City into three areas: the region serving area (western Auburn) which is a concentration of the employment base with sufficient existing and potential jobs to be of regional significance; the community serving area (eastern Auburn) which contains the majority of residential areas and locally oriented businesses; and the downtown which uniquely serves both the region and the local community. A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter 3: Land Use. GOAL 7. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT To emphasize housing development at single family densities, in order to reestablish a mix of housing types appropriate for a family oriented community, while recognizing the need and desire for both rural density and moderate density housing appropriately located, to meet the housing needs of all members of the community. Discussion: Over the past several years, much of the residential development which has occurred in Auburn has been in the form of multi -family housing. This has had a significant impact on community character as the percentage of multifamily housing has increased markedly. While Auburn recognizes that many households cannot afford or do not desire single family detached housing and therefore allows a wide range of housing types within the community, the development of new single family detached housing is a priority of the City in order to maintain its traditional community character. A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter 3: Land Use and Chapter 4: Housing and Social Services. Page 1-31 Chapter 1 GOAL 8. NEIGHBORHOOD QUALITY To maintain and protect all viable and stable residential neighborhoods. Discussion: Stable residential neighborhoods are a key component of the Auburn Community. Auburn values its residential neighborhoods and seeks to maintain and protect those that are viable and stable. A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter 3: Land Use and Chapter 4: Housing and Social Services. GOAL 9. COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT To maintain and establish a variety of commercial environments which provide the full range of commercial services to the community and region in a manner which reduces conflicts between different types of commercial services and other uses. Discussion: Commercial uses range from a small corner store providing service primarily to the neighborhood around it to a large shopping mall which serves the entire region. Auburn contains both of these types of commercial uses and recognizes their importance in providing service to both Auburn and regional residents. The City will provide opportunities for the full range of commercial uses while insuring that their impacts on each other and on other uses are minimized. A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter 3: Land Use. GOAL 10. DOWNTOWN To encourage development and redevelopment within Downtown Auburn which reflects its unique character as the community's historic center, that is consistent with the Auburn Downtown Plan's vision for Downtown Auburn as an urban center within Kinn County and the Pueet Sound region Discussion: Downtown Auburn plays a unique role within the city as it serves as both a regional and a local center. It is a key component of Auburn's identity and therefore the City is Page 1-32 Plan Background committed to its revitalization and stability as the city's cultural and governmental center. A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter 3: Land Use. GOAL 11. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT To provide for, establish and maintain a balance of industrial uses that respond to local and regional needs and enhance the City's image through optimal siting and location. Discussion: The Auburn area has historically been a good location for industrial uses due to the ease of access provided by the railroads and by its location near several major highways. Auburn recognizes the important role industry plays in providing tax revenue and employment opportunities to the residents of Auburn and the region. The City seeks to diversify the types of businesses and industries located here to ensure that the local economy is independent of the ups and downs of any given industry. Further, since much of the City's industrial land is located in highly visible areas, it is extremely crucial that these facilities be well designed and sited. For many, these facilities provide a first impression of Auburn as they pass through the area. A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter 3: Land Use. GOAL 12. URBAN REDEVELOPMENT To encourage redevelopment of underutilized areas to reduce sprawl and take full advantage of the City's investment in existing infrastructure. Discussion: There is already a large area served by a comprehensive network of infrastructure both within and adjacent to the City limits. The provision of this network has required a significant investment of money and resources. Within this area, there is significant acreage of underutilized land. The City seeks to encourage development and redevelopment of these parcels, particularly in the downtown area to fully utilize this investment. Page 1-33 Chapter I A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter 3: Land Use and Chapter 4: Housing and Social Services. GOAL 13. CITY UTILITIES To protect the public health and safety by providing efficient and cost- effective water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage and solid waste services to the community. Ensure that development will only occur if the urban services necessary to support the development will be available at the time of development. Discussion: The provision of urban services to its residents and its utility customers is a critical role played by the city of Auburn. Auburn is committed to providing these services in the most efficient and cost effective manner. As rapid growth occurs it can become difficult to provide these services to support the new development. Auburn will only permit development if adequate public utilities are, or can be guaranteed to be, available to support new development. 1 A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter S: Capital Facilities. GOAL 14. PUBLIC BUILDINGS To maximize public access and provide for the appropriate location and development of public and quasi -public facilities that serve the cultural, educational, recreational, religious and public service needs of the community. Discussion: Buildings which house City departments or other agencies which provide services to the general public should be sited in areas which are accessible to all segments of the population. A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter S: Capital Facilities. Page 1-34 Plan Background GOAL 15. PRIVATE UTILITIES To ensure safe, efficient provision of private utilities to serve all segments and activities of the community. Discussion: Some private utility companies provide services, such as cable television and natural gas, within the City of Auburn. Auburn is committed to ensuring that the companies that provide these services provide them to all segments of the City's population and are integrated, where appropriate, into the City's development process. A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter 6: Private Utilities. GOAL 16. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM Auburn will plan, expand, and improve its transportation system in cooperation and coordination with adjacent and regional jurisdictions to ensure concurrency compliance with the Growth Management Act, and to provide a safe and efficient multimodal system that meets the community needs and facilitates the land use plan. Discussion: The increase in traffic congestion in the region is probably the most apparent indicator that the growth occurring in the region is outstripping the ability of the area's infrastructure to support it. The City of Auburn recognizes that the high cost and difficulty of continually expanding the City's road network to meet the increased demand, and the lowering of the region's air quality, have placed an emphasis on encouraging modes other than the automobile (mulfimodalism), decreasing the demand for travel (TDM - transportation demand management) and most fully utilizing its existing network (TSM -transportation system management). The encouragement and support of multimodalism, TDM and TSM are key components of the City's approach to addressing its transportation needs. Further, Auburn recognizes that if it is to address its transportation problems, it must work together with others in the region to address these issues. To ensure that new development does not outstrip the ability of the city's transportation system to serve it, Auburn will only permit development if adequate transportation facilities are, or can be guaranteed to be, available to support new development. Page 1-35 Chapter 1 A discussion of issues and .policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter 7: Transportation. GOAL 17. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT To ensure the long term economic health of the City and the region through a diversified economic base which supports a wide range of employment opportunities for Auburn's residents and those of the region and through the promotion of quality industrial and commercial development which matches the aspirations of the community. Discussion: Auburn strongly supports economic development within the City as it provides tax revenue, important services and employment to the residents of both Auburn and the entire region. The City seeks to diversify its economic base to ensure long term economic stability independent of the up and down cycles of individual businesses and industries. Economic development will not be pursued blindly, however, and any potential development will be reviewed in relation to the goals and policies of this comprehensive plan. A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter 8: Economic Development. GOAL 18. ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES To maintain and promote a safe and healthy environment, preserve the quality of life, and to protect the area's most unique, sensitive and productive natural resources. To encourage natural resource industries within the City to operate in a manner which enhances, rather than detracts from, the orderly development of the City. Discussion: Thick forests, wildlife habitats, and river shorelines are but some of the attractions of Auburn and its surrounding areas. As development occurs however, some of these features, which serve to make the area attractive are being lost. Auburn is committed to the maintenance, enhancement and preservation of these features in recognition of the important role they play in Auburn and the region's high quality of life. Page t-36 Plan Background A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter 9: The Environment. GOAL 19. HAZARDS To minimize the tisk from environmental and manmade hazards to present and future residents of the community. Discussion: Natural and manmade hazards exist in the Auburn area which can threaten the health, safety and property of Auburn residents and businesses. Some of these hazards include flooding, landslides, earthquakes, volcanic activity and waste materials. The City will seek to limit the exposure of the residents and businesses of this community to these hazards. A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter 9: The Environment. Goal 20. HISTORIC PRESERVATION To maintain, preserve and enhance the City's historic, cultural and archaeological resources to provide a sense of local identity and history to the residents and visitors of the community. Discussion: Unlike many cities within the Puget Sound Region, Auburn has a long and established history. Auburn has been a vibrant and freestanding community for over 100 years. In the past several decades, the region has experienced significant population growth. Due to the nature of this growth, the differences between one community and another have blurred and communities are becoming more and more alike. If Auburn is to retain its identity as a unique community, it must seek to emphasize its differences and celebrate them. Auburn's history is a part of its identity that is unique to Auburn. Through the recognition and preservation of its past, Auburn can ensure its uniqueness and strengthen its identity as it moves into the future. A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter 10: Historic Preservation. Page 1-37 GOAL 21. PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE To provide and maintain a comprehensive system of parks and open spaces that responds to the recreational, cultural, environmental and aesthetic needs and desires of the City's residents. Discussion: The availability of parks and open spaces to the residents of Auburn play a key role in the resident's high quality of life. As more development occurs in this area, the importance of these places increase. Auburn is committed to expanding and maintaining the City's park and open space system to ensure that its residents are adequately served by this vital community service. A discussion of issues and polices related to this goal can be found in Chapter 11: Parks, Recreation and Open Space. GOAL 22. URBAN DESIGN AND VISUAL QUALITY To ensure a high quality visual environment through appropriate design standards and procedures which encourage high quality architectural and landscape design in all development and through the placement of artwork in public places. The City recognizes the linkages between transportation, land use and site design and encourage development which eases access by pedestrians, bicyclists and transit users. Discussion: As urban areas develop, and particularly as densities increase, the quality of development plays a major factor in maintaining the quality of life for the area's residents and employees. Auburn places a high value on good design, visual quality and landscaping in all development - new and old. Auburn will seek to develop standards and programs to ensure that all development is of high quality and is visually appealing. A discussion of issues and policies related to this goal can be found in Chapter 4: Housing and Social Services and Chapter 12: Urban Design. Page 1-38 CHAPTER 2 GENERAL APPROACH TO PLANNING Introduction Planning infers the development of a strategy or program to reach a desired outcome. The nature of planning can vary considerably in focus, substance and style depending on the type of community or area being planned. Plans are developed at the statewide level for the development of state transportation systems; at the regional level for the development of a regional sewer system; at the municipal level for the arrangement of land uses and the local facilities to serve them; and at the neighborhood level to address the amount of traffic using local streets or a lack of local parks. At each of these levels, there can be a significant range of styles and approaches to planning. At the municipal level one can clearly see that planning in Auburn will be quite different from planning in Seattle. A framework is provided for these jurisdictions through the Growth Management Act, the Multi -County Policies or the County -wide Policies, but the issues facing each jurisdiction are different and each jurisdiction will address them in its own way. How Auburn addresses these issues is dependent upon its general approach to planning. The policies in this section provide the framework for how Auburn will address future development and growth, work with other jurisdictions within the region and shape the development and character of the City and the region. Issues and Background Planning Approach The development of this Comprehensive Plan involves preparing the City for addressing future development so that the end result moves the City closer to accomplishing its goals. Several approaches or "styles" of planning can be used to accomplish this : Page 2-1 Chapter 2 reactive - accent flexibility in responding to changing conditions and to individual situations problems and issues as they arise; 2. predictive - anticipate future needs and plan to meet them; or 3. proactive - seek to influence future events to achieve community objectives. The approach used establishes a key element of the City's basic philosophy regarding land use management and planning. The proactive approach blended with the predictive approach will assure that basic community values and aspirations are reflected in the City's planning program as the City responds to existing and future pressure for growth and change. Growth The City of Auburn faces the potential for significant growth in the upcoming decades with as many as 7,000 new households and 11,000 new jobs locating in the City over the next 20 years. Much of this growth is due to basic factors beyond the City's control. Analysis of the existing conditions and trends within the City reveal some imbalances in the character of the community created by recent growth; e.g. high proportion of low income groups; and a low proportion of single family homes (especially in recent construction). Through the implementation of strong policies to influence patterns of future growth, these conditions and trends can be reversed. GOAL 1. PLANNING APPROACH To manage growth in a manner which enhances, rather than detracts from community quality and values by actively coordinating land use type and intensity with City facility and service provision and development. Policies: GP -1 The City should strive to assure that basic community values and aspirations are reflected in all City plans and programs, while recognizing the rights of individuals to use and develop private property in a manner that is consistent with City codes and regulations. GP -2 The City should develop its plans and programs after thorough analysis of community problems, potentials and needs. GP -3 The Planning Department will develop an annual work program that includes work elements directed toward studying basic community needs, policy development, and code administration. Page 2-2 General Approach Objective 1.1 To provide a policy framework to support growth management. Policies: GP -4 The City shall seek to influence both rates and patterns of future growth to achieve the goals of the Comprehensive Plan in all of its land use and facility and service decisions. GP -5 The City shall resist growth pressures which could adversely affect community values and amenities, but will seek and support development when it will further the goals of the community. Objective 1.2 To establish a procedure to_ assess the growth impacts of major development proposals. Policies: GP -6 The growth impacts of major private or public development which place significant service demands on community facilities, amenities and services, and impacts on the City's general quality of life shall be carefully studied under the provisions of SEPA prior to development approval. Siting of any major development (including public facilities such as, but not limited to, solid waste processing facilities and landfills) shall be carefully and thoroughly evaluated through provisions of SEPA prior to project approval, conditional approval, or denial. Appropriate mitigating measures to ensure conformance with this Plan shall be required. GP -7 Regional scale development shall be encouraged to provide a balance between regional service demands and impacts placed on the City's quality of life versus the local benefits derived from such development. Objective 1.3. To establish and support an effective regional system of growth management, based on an efficient system of urban service delivery and appropriate development of unincorporated areas. Policies: Chapter 2 GP -8 Auburn designates , 15th Street NW and 15 Street SW as activity areas as defined in the King County Countywide Planning Policies. GP -8A Auburn designates downtown Auburnas defined in the Auburn Downtown Plan, as an urban center in accordance with the King County Countywide Planning Policies. GP -9 Provision of urban level services by the City of Auburn or a special district and an agreement for future annexation should be a prerequisite for development within Auburn's potential annexation area. Development should look to Auburn as the ultimate service provider. GP -10 The cities and counties in the region should coordinate planning and infrastructure development to meet regional goals and policies as outlined in the King and Pierce County Countywide Planning Policies and in the Multi -county Policies. Predictability and Flexibility: Predictability in land use regulation fosters confidence in land and improvement investments (both private development and public facilities), and can have a positive effect on long term property values. It also fosters fairness and consistency, and eases administration. It has the disadvantage of not dealing well with changing conditions (e.g. new manufacturing technologies), unique circumstances or when someone simply comes forward with a "better" idea. Flexible regulations can deal with such conditions and circumstances, but may require a large commitment of time, expertise and other resources to manage. Auburn's policy will be mixed; stressing predictability in single family neighborhoods, while allowing flexibility in areas committed to industrial or commercial uses where performance standards are usually more important than specific use restrictions. GOAL 2. FLEXIBILITY To provide predictability in the regulation of land use and development, especially where residential uses are affected, but to also provide flexibility for development through performance standards that allow development to occur while still protecting and enhancing natural resources and critical lands in overall compliance with this comprehensive plan. Objective 2.1. To provide assurance that residential areas will be protected from intrusions by incompatible land uses. Page 2-4 General Approach Policies: GP -11 Ordinance provisions designed to protect residential areas shall give priority to providing predictability and stability to the neighborhood. GP -12 Adequate buffering shall be required whenever new commercial or industrial uses abut areas designated for residential uses. Objective 2.2. To provide flexibility for major new commercial or industrial developments to respond to changing market conditions without threatening the purposes of this Comprehensive Plan. Policies: GP -13 Ordinances regulating developing commercial or industrial areas should be based on performance standards which provide flexibility to respond to market conditions while ensuring compatibility with the Comprehensive Plan, and with present and potential adjacent uses. GP -14 Review procedures for all new development should be integrated or coordinated with SEPA as much as possible. GP -15 In interpreting plan provisions or in considering a plan amendment, plan designations in the Region Serving Area should be treated in a more flexible manner than in the Community Serving Area (see Map 3.2.). Objective 2.3. To provide flexibility in areas where a transition from existing uses to planned uses is appropriate. Policies: GP -16 Contract zoning can be used to manage the transition between existing uses and future uses. Contract zoning allows new uses to be conditioned in a manner which controls potential conflicts during such transition. Contract zoning may be particularly useful as a timing device to ensure that the necessary public facilities are available to support new development. GP -17 Spot zoning may be appropriate to facilitate the transition from an existing zone and use to a planned use. This is only appropriate where the proposed (spot) zone is in clear and full compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Objective 2.4. To provide for the development of innovative land management techniques to implement this Comprehensive Plan. Policies: GP -18 Flexible land development techniques including, but not limited to, clustering and planned unit developments (PUDs) for the development of residential, commercial, and industrial properties shall be considered to implement this comprehensive plan. GP -19 Flexibility should be provided to encourage compact urban development, to protect critical areas and resource lands, to facilitate the use of transit or non -motorized transportation, and to encourage the redevelopment of underutilized or deteriorated property. GP -20 Any flexibility should be easy to administer and should provide the community with an adequate level of predictability. GP -21 Within single family neighborhoods, flexibility should be limited to ensure that the neighborhood retains a conventional single family character. GP -22 Flexibility to allow the maintenance, expansion, or redevelopment of historic structures or features should also be considered. The goal of this flexibility should be to retain the historic character of the structure, feature, or property while at the same time ensuring protection of the public health and safety. GP -23 Innovative techniques that lead to the development of multifamily housing that is sensitive to the needs of children and seniors shall be considered to implement this comprehensive plan. Techniques that consider recreation, safety, aesthetic, privacy, and transportation needs should be emphasized. Jurisdictional Coordination While most aspects of land use and community development are managed locally (by the City), other important aspects of community development are significantly influenced or even controlled by other governmental Page 2-6 General Approach entities (regional, state, federal, and tribal). It is therefore important that the City monitor and, when necessary, influence the decisions of those governmental bodies. To this end, the City should actively develop working relationships with these units of government and, whenever possible, be directly represented in their decision making process. Auburn's Regional Role Auburn has historically been a treated as relatively minor player in the Puget Sound region. Its relatively small population and perceived isolation in South King County led to its being overshadowed in the region by the larger and more centrally located cities further north. Recent years have seen a marked shift in Auburn's role in the region. A number of facilities of regional significance have located in the area (Green River Community College, Auburn General Hospital, Auburn Municipal Airport; or Ail! sometime :n the near f A (the SuperMall of the Great Northwest, the Auburn Thoroughbred Racetrack) —stilt pending at the """ nf''-i" writing). In addition, Auburn is a prepose stop on the regional Commuter Rail system. Taken as a whole, these facilities greatly increase Auburn's significance in the region. As real estate prices have increased throughout the County, Auburn's prices have remained relatively affordable and have resulted in significant growth in the area. Further, as industrial and residential development moves southward down the Green River Valley, Auburn is now poised to accommodate as many as 7,000 new households and 11,000 new jobs over the next twenty years. This new growth on top of its already fairly large household and employment base (13,300 households and 29,000 jobs) will significantly increase Auburn's size and relative prominence in the region. The City of Auburn has chosen to designate its Downtown Area as net Pursue t f an "urban center" as defined by the King County Countywide Planning Policies. The densities r-equired to ment t •. 15th Street SW and 15th Street NW meet the criteria for designation as activity areas under the County wide policies. Activity areas will serve as a focus for new transit investments. The po"c?�, „ solidifies this designation. _ Mr As it relates to urban centers the King County Countywide Planning Policies (CPP's) envision urban centers as areas of concentrated employment and housing with direct service by high capacity transit and a range of land uses such as retail recreational public facilities parks and op�n space. Urban centers are intended to strengthen existing communities by promoting housing opportunities close to employment supporting the development of an extensive transportation system to reduce dependency on automobiles, consume less land with urban development and maximize the benefit of public investments in infrastructure and services The King County CWPP's generally define urban centers as concentrated mixed-use areas with a maximum size of 960 acres and oriented around a high capacity transit station. The urban center concept is part of a larger regional growth management strategy. Vision 2020, subsequently amended by Destination 2030 envisions a multi -county (Pierce Snohomish Kitsap and King) growth management strategy comprised of a hierarchy of "centers" connected by a multi -modal transportation system These centers are areas intended to accommodate a significant portion of additional new development the Puget Sound region. In ME 2001, the City of Auburn City Council adopted the Auburn Downtown Plan. The Auburn Downtown Plan is a long-range redevelopment plan for the Auburn downtown that sets forth a series of policies and strategies intended to revitalize development in the Downtown. The Plan is supported by an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that includes environmental review intended to expedite future permitting. Overall, the Downtown Plan sees the Auburn Downtown as a central gathering place for the community. High quality design is expected of all development including streets buildings and landscaping In addition to general services to draw people from outside of the region such as retail and office uses, the Auburn Downtown is also a principal commercial center providing local goods and services to surrounding neighborhoods and to residents and employees within the downtown area This vision is consistent with regional planning efforts that seek to establish high density areas connected by a multi -modal transportation system. In implementing this vision the Auburn Downtown Plan includes a policy that states Page 2-S General Approach "Policy 3-3 Urban Center The City shall seek and amendment to Kine County and Puget Sound Regional Council plans and policies to have Auburn's downtown designated as an urban center." To this end, the Auburn Downtown Plan specifically addresses the principles, criteria and incentives required of urban centers pursuant to the King County Countywide Planning Policies The urban centers concept is evolving, and it is in the City's interest to stay engaged in efforts that affect the regional growth management strategy. GOAL 3. COORDINATION To work together with both local and regional agencies and jurisdictions to promote coordinated regional _growth, recognizing Auburn's intended regional role as an urban center, while maintaining local self determination. Objective 3.1. To ensure that the concerns of the City are reflected in the affairs of other agencies whose decisions and activities affect the development of the Auburn community and its environs. Policies: GP -24 The City should continue its participation in various State and Federal agencies and organizations concerned with land use planning and development and the protection of natural and cultural resources and critical areas. GP -24A Coordinate with the Puget Sound Regional Council King County, other counties and other cities as refinements to the urban center concept and regional planning strategies are considered. GP -25 The City should maintain an active role in regional planning agencies and organizations. GP -26 The City should support intedurisdictional programs to address problems or issues that affect the City and larger geographic areas. GP -27 The City shall seek to be involved in county land use planning programs. Chapter 2 GP -28 The City should seek, where appropriate, to coordinate its planning with the Muckleshoot Tribe, King and Pierce Counties, Federal Way, Kent and other adjacent jurisdictions. Character of the Community Communities are often associated with a particular character. This character should not only be reflected in the comprehensive plan but the plan can also aid in the development or reinforcement of desirable characteristics. A distinct character for a community also aids in establishing the community's identity both to itself and its region. Auburn's flavor and values as a family community should be protected and enhanced. This should be the priority basis of City policy. A community, however, does not consist solely of residential neighborhoods. A healthy community needs expanding employment, convenient shopping areas and a strong fiscal base to support the services needed by growing families. Consequently, a balanced policy which appropriately nurtures and manages all these roles is needed. GOAL 4. COMMUNITY CHARACTER To maintain and enhance Auburn's character as a family community, while managing potential economic opportunities in a manner that provides necessary employment and fiscal support for needed services, and while recognizing the need to provide social services and opportunities for housing to a wide array of household types and sizes. Objective 4.1. To strike a balance between the need to protect Auburn's residential qualities and the need to ensure an adequate economy for the area. Policies: GP -29 Auburn's character as a "family" community will be a priority consideration in the City's land use management decisions. This priority must be balanced however with the following: a. City policy will address various related community needs. This includes nurturing and managing the other roles necessary for both maintaining a healthy community and responding to regional needs. Such roles include ensuring the expansion of employment opportunities, providing a full range of commercial, retail and service opportunities, providing recreational and cultural Page 2-10 General Approach opportunities, managing traffic and maintaining a balance with the natural environment. b. The City needs to develop a strong fiscal base to support the services required for a growing community of maturing lower and middle income families, while coping with regional problems. c. The City should also respond to the needs of a relatively high share of the community's families and single residents who cannot afford, or do not choose to live in traditional single family structures. GP -30 Within areas designated for economic development the City shall actively promote desired types of development to assure an expanding range Qf employment opportunities and to build the City's fiscal base. GP -31 The City should seek to establish and maintain an -image appropriate for the community to assist in most effectively attracting the types of economic activities which best meet the needs and desires of the community. Page 2-11 CHAPTER 3 LAND USE Introduction Land use planning involves the allocation of different uses and intensities of development throughout an area to achieve particular benefits or goals. For example, locating industry and residences in separate areas, one can isolate homes from the noise and pollutants emitted by industrial uses. Further, the amount of land designated for single or multi -family residential densities will ultimately shape the basic nature of the community's housing stock. Land use planning can result in land being dedicated as a park or as open space. It can ensure that an entire transportation system or a segment of that system will not be overwhelmed by too much use by limiting the intensity of development in a given area. Land use planning will enable Auburn to meet the changing needs of its growing population by ensuring that growth occurs when and where it is most appropriate. Land use decisions affect all of the vital functions of a community, from the creation of jobs to the variety of housing, from recreational opportunities to the vitality and stability of neighborhoods, from efficient transportation to environmental quality. Because of these wide ranging impacts, land use planning serves as the glue which binds together all of the seemingly diverse goals of this comprehensive plan. Land Use Inventory and Analysis The City of Auburn conducted a land use inventory in the Spring of 1994 to gain a clearer picture of the land uses and patterns that exist in Auburn today. The inventory was updated in June 1996 by supplementing the 1994 survey with all permit activity in the City since that time. Analysis of this information makes it possible to calculate Auburn's future development potential or capacity. By making some assumptions concerning the lands found to be vacant or underutilized, it is possible to calculate Auburn's building capacity in terms of future dwelling units and square footage of industrial and commercial space. This capacity can then be compared to growth forecasts to ensure that Auburn has sufficient capacity to meet them. Auburn Today Figure 3.1 provides an overview of the zoned acreage within the city. Land uses were divided into six major categories based upon the types of zoning districts. The labels for most of the categories describe the zoned land use with the exception of "unclassified" land uses which are regulated as if they were zoned for single family residential development. Figure 3.1 provides information concerning the total acreage zoned for each type of land use and the percentage of the total land within the city that it represents. It distinguishes the acreage developed and the percentage of that particular type of zoning that the developed land represents. Out of the city's total 13,112 acres, developed land uses represent approximately 74% of Auburn's total acreage. It is important to note that developed industrially zoned land does not necessarily mean that the land is being used for industrial uses. In some instances, the development may be residential. Figure 3.1 Acreage of Land Zoned & Developed for Different Uses I and Use Acres % of lot acres sDeveloped Acres % Devel by type Cmercial om 1277 9.7% 1043 81.7% IPO.$4141; 3295 25.1% 2412 73.2% 9 dent4d 6373 48.6% 4300 67.5% 417 3.2% 291 69.8% Eubllc 1212 9.2% 1173 96.71% IJ$'IassiGed 538 4.1% 420 77.9% Totals 13112 1 100% 9639 73.5% Land zoned for residential uses clearly predominate, comprising approximately 6,373 acres or 49% of the city. Industrially zoned land is the second most common, representing 25% of the city's total. Page 3-2 Land Use Development Capacity An approximation of the city's development potential or capacity can be made through an analysis of all of the vacant and underutilized land within the city. Vacant land is defined as any parcel with no structures. Underutilized land is defined as a parcel with potential for infill or redevelopment. Underutilized parcels met one of the following conditions: a single family residence on commercially or industrially zoned property; and/or a single family residence on a parcel of land that is at least three times the minimum lot size for that zoning district. In these situations, the land is typically more valuable than the structure and redevelopment of these parcels is likely over the long term. The amount of developable land can be estimated by deducting from the total amount of vacant and underutilized land the area that will need to be dedicated for streets, roads, parks and critical areas, such as steep slopes or wetlands. Deductions for critical areas will be monitored and revised as new data becomes available. Deductions for wetlands are particularly prone to change due to environmental and technological developments. Figure 3.3 indicates the amount of developable land per zoning district that is either vacant or underutilized after deductions have been made for right-of-ways and critical lands. Applying the allowable densities {allowable densities measured as dwelling units(d.u.)) according to the zoning ordinance for that specific residential district results in the available capacity in dwelling units. For commercial and industrial districts, the densities {density measured as floor area ratios (FAR)) applied are based upon surveys of actual development in Auburn over the last several years. Applying these floor area ratio figures to the developable land results in the available capacity of commercial and industrial land in square feet of floor space. Figure 3.3 indicates that Auburn has the capacity to accommodate approximately 8,000 additional dwelling units and over 3,278,000 square feet of commercial and industrial space. Figure 3.3 Available Land Capacity ZoningDisttict RR KS R1 vacant fAcfeSi 319 39 365 ' Underut (acres) 54 4 113 .25 Dlrisity.7'33;712)R 1.24 5.45 ffN/A 343 118 7.26 7 29 12.45 80 R4 31 45 18.15 1 1,173 1N/A 55 8 5.45 337 N/A Kl 27 6 8.38 269 N/A lYI1 255 34 .11 N/A 1,385,000 1H2' 47 4.5 .08 N/A 180,000 (111 6 1 .12 N/A 37,000 G1 16 3.6 .27 N/A 231,00 C2 1 4.5 .58 N/A 139,000 C3 104 40 .18 N/A 1,129,000 RO .5 23 .16 N/A 164,000 RO-H 0 1 .28 N/A 12,000 Totals 1,615 488 1/A 8,016 3,278,000 It is important to note some of the limitations of this analysis. Commercial and industrial development densities are based upon past trends. It is reasonable to assume that as land becomes more scarce, and hence, more valuable, these densities will increase, resulting in more efficient utilization of these parcels and higher overall development potential. It also does not take into account mixed use development as both residential and commercial development are permitted in some of the districts. (For a more detailed analysis of Auburn's land capacity, see: Land Capacity Analysis, February 27, 1997. Projected Demand Industrial/Commercial Demand The total projected jobs for Auburn (within the current city limits), for the years 1992-2012, based upon Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) forecasts and the SuperMall of the Great Northwest EIS, is 11,465 new jobs. This falls within the employment target range for Auburn provided for in the King County Countywide Planning Policies. Land Use Outside the city limits, but within Auburn's potential annexation area, there is little land zoned for commercial or industrial uses and therefore employment projections have not been made for these areas. It is estimated that at completion of all phases of the SuperMall that approximately 4,200 jobs will be located at the SuperMall site. Since the SuperMall was not counted as either vacant or underutilized land; and these 4,200 jobs will all be located at the SuperMall, only the remaining jobs (7,265) must be accommodated by the vacant and underutilized land within Auburn. The demand for industrial/commercial land is shown in Figure 3.4. The PSRC forecast is broken down into five different job categories. Multiplying these jobs by the space required per job results in a demand for 2,488,100 square feet of building space necessary to accommodate 7,248 new jobs. Figure 3.4 Projected Space Requirements for Additional Auburn Jobs Manufactor)WWrrens/Ut Retail Trade Services Gvmt Total �UUILIVIIUJJVUN w ou Supermall 14 909 1,795 4,026 504 7,248 Space Requirements per Employee x 500 sf x 500 sf x 400 sf x 300 sf x 200 sf Projected Space Requirements 7,000 454,500 718,000 1,207,800 100,800 2,488,100 Residential Demand PSRC projections for household growth within the current Auburn city limits indicate that approximately 6,149 new households will locate within Auburn between 1992 and 2012. However, PSRC's 1992 projections did not take into account the impacts of the SuperMall of the Great Northwest. The degree to which the SuperMall will impact housing demand is debatable. Some argue that the SuperMall will have little or no impact. They contend the SuperMall will provide lower paying retail jobs that will be filled predominantly by secondary income earners. These secondary income earners will come either from the ranks of the structurally unemployed, underemployed or first-time entrants into the work force. Therefore, from a regional perspective, the SuperMall will likely have only a marginal impact on regional job growth. Consequently, these jobs would not, by themselves, cause a worker to relocate from their current residence. On the other hand, some argue that the secondary incomes provided by the SuperMall will enable tenants to purchase their own homes. One can assume that a higher percentage of these employees will be attracted to the lower housing costs of Auburn. This assumption results in a higher estimate of new households represented in Figure 3.5. Since the choice of where to live is dependent upon several factors, these numbers are difficult to predict. For the purposes of this analysis we will assume that the actual number will be somewhere between the two estimates or approximately 7,030 households. This estimate is based predominantly on current trends since 1990. It falls within the range for housing growth in Auburn provided for in the King County Countywide Planning Policies. Figure 3.5 Projected Household Growth 1992 to 2012 Preliminary forecasts for the potential annexation areas, based upon current land use plans and regulations and a household size of 2.5 people per household are approximately 2,900 households in the Lea Hill Section, 1,000 in the West Hills section and 3,600 in the Pierce County section. The numbers for the King County areas will be revised in cooperation with adjacent jurisdictions when official growth targets are adopted by the county for the unincorporated areas. Pierce County projections are based upon the Proposed Lakeland Hills South Mining and Reclamation Plan and Planned Community Development: Final Environmental Impact Statement. Demand -Capacity Comparison Figure 3.6 compares the projected demand for residential, industrial and commercial land to the capacity as calculated in figure 3.3. For all three of these uses, there appears to be sufficient capacity to meet future needs Page 3-6 Additional HU Total Additional HU Estimate w/out SuperMall 6,149 6,149 Impact of SuperMall - Current Trends: 881 7,030 Higher Estimate 3,428 9,577 Preliminary forecasts for the potential annexation areas, based upon current land use plans and regulations and a household size of 2.5 people per household are approximately 2,900 households in the Lea Hill Section, 1,000 in the West Hills section and 3,600 in the Pierce County section. The numbers for the King County areas will be revised in cooperation with adjacent jurisdictions when official growth targets are adopted by the county for the unincorporated areas. Pierce County projections are based upon the Proposed Lakeland Hills South Mining and Reclamation Plan and Planned Community Development: Final Environmental Impact Statement. Demand -Capacity Comparison Figure 3.6 compares the projected demand for residential, industrial and commercial land to the capacity as calculated in figure 3.3. For all three of these uses, there appears to be sufficient capacity to meet future needs Page 3-6 Land Use with a sufficient oversupply of capacity to avoid the scarcity of land from significantly increasing market prices. The market factor will help to ensure that the market retains sufficient flexibility and that land values do not get overly constricted. Figure 3.6 Projected Demand vs Capacity by Year 2012 Commercial/Industrial 111 970 It is important to note that this comparison is between 1992 growth targets and 1996 land capacity. A portion of the 7,030 dwelling units and 2,488,000 square feet has already been accommodated. The actual excess capacity is therefore more than indicated in Figure 3.6. Issues and Background Auburn's Potential Annexation Area Auburn's Comprehensive Plan contains policies which designate types and intensities of land uses that will accomplish the City's long range goals. Since the Plan depicts a long term perspective of the City's growth, it is appropriate to also include on the Comprehensive Plan map those areas which may not currently be within the City limits, but will be in the future. Those areas are within the city's potential annexation area (PAA). (Map I.1) Within its potential annexation areas, Auburn intends for the existing County comprehensive plan designations (as determined by the Soos Creek Community Plan, the King County Comprehensive Plan, the Pierce County Comprehensive Plan or adopted development plans) or their City equivalent to remain in effect until Auburn has an opportunity to review them either at annexation or soon after. In this comprehensive plan, the terms potential annexation area and urban growth area (UGA) are synonymous and interchangeable. The city provides water and sewer service to many portions of the PAA. In addition, growth in the PAA can have significant impacts on other City services. Hence, it is important for City decision makers to consider the growth in these areas as well as within the city limits when making decisions concerning capital projects such as water and sewer extensions and road projects. (For a more thorough discussion of these issues; see Chapter 13, "Development in the Unincorporated Areas and Annexation. ") GOAL s. CITY EXPANSION AND ANNEXATION To ensure the orderly development and annexation of the City's potential annexation area in a manner that ensures adequate and cost-effective provision of required urban services and facilities, reduces sprawl, implements the goals, objectives and policies of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan, and protects designated rural areas. Objective 5.1 To designate Auburn's potential annexation area and to include those areas on the City's Comprehensive Plan Map. LU -1 Auburn's Potential Annexation Area is designated by Map 3.1. Areas with Rural zoning and designated Agricultural, Forest, and Mineral Resource Lands, although included within the Potential Annexation Area, are not suitable for urban levels of growth. LU -2 The Auburn City Council may revise the boundaries of the Potential Annexation Area in the future, in response to: a. Amendments to the King County Urban Growth Area as specified in the King County Countywide Policies; b. Discussions between Auburn and adjacent jurisdictions regarding Potential Annexation Area boundaries; c. Discussions with Pierce County concerning the designation of Potential Annexation Area boundaries; or d. Changed circumstances relating to population and employment growth and projections, urban service feasibility, or similar factors. Urban Form Planning deals with the basic geographic form of the city. While planning theory suggests a range of possible forms to consider, the unique character, setting and history of a community are significant determinants of urban form. Auburn's existing form separates the city into two parts: a concentration of employment base on the west with Page 3-8 Land Use sufficient existing and potential jobs to be of regional significance (region serving area), and residential and locally oriented business uses to the east (community serving area). This existing policy of a "split" form has generally been effective in avoiding gross land use conflicts between residential uses and more intensive (e.g. industrial) land uses. This Plan's policies maintain this basic split policy. However, Auburn's downtown area is also treated as a unique (both region and community - serving) part of the city's form. Another aspect of a city's form is its intensity of rural and urban development. Different intensities of development require different configurations of city services and facilities, and differing intensities create different impacts on the community. The location of different intensities can also assist in establishing the city's character and identity, and can be instrumental in furthering other important goals (protection of agricultural soils, protection against natural hazards, etc.). Policy established by the 1969 Comprehensive Plan assumed that the city would eventually be completely urban in character and the City's approach to developing it's service delivery system was driven by this assumption. No City policy or program addressed agricultural preservation. While extensive areas with rural development would require expensive restructuring of the City service delivery system, strategic long-term protection of some rural areas can assist in limiting urban sprawl, maintaining diversity of living environments, and protecting important environmental resources, in particular the City's water source at Coal Creek Springs. This Plan designates a limited amount of rural area for this purpose. This limited amount should not significantly affect the overall cost of city services. GOAL 6. URBAN FORM To establish an orderly urban form which separates uses on the basis of their functional relationship to the community, and which reinforces the identity of the community. Objective 6.1. To physically separate region serving employment centers and other regionally oriented land uses from areas that are residential or local in character while ensuring that regional facilities strengthen the community as a whole and enhance downtown Auburn. Policies: LU -3 Areas on the valley floor which are suitable to support large scale economic development projects should be reserved, for the most part, for uses which support Auburn's role as a regional employment and commercial center (to be known as the Region Serving Area -- See Map 3.2). LU -4 Areas delineated on the Urban Form Map (Map 3.2) as the Community Serving Area should be reserved for uses which are local in character or serve local markets. LU -5 Link together regionally significant land uses such as the SuperMall, Green River Community College, Boeing, the proposed Racetrack and commercial uses on Auburn Way in a manner that enhances the regional stature of Auburn while providing services, employment and tax base for the community. At the same time, these linkages should be designed to enhance Downtown Auburn as the community's focal point. Objective 6.2. Maintain downtown as an area that uniquely serves both regional and community needs. Policies: LU -6 The downtown shall be the focal point of the Auburn community. It should include a mix of uses including, but not limited to, government and civic uses, retail, residential and services that are appropriate to fill that role. LU -6A Focus growth and development in the Auburn Downtown to support economic development complement transit oriented development. direct growth pressures away from residential neighborhood and implement regional growth management strategies. Objective 6.3. To protect community identity while promoting diversity and conserving rural amenities, by designating rural areas along the city's periphery and in areas with significant environmental values. Policies: LU -7 The City shall support the County agricultural program in securing the development rights to strategically located parcels, especially along the northern city boundary and at the start of the Upper Green River Valley. Page 3-10 Land Use LU -8 The City shall not extend accessible City utility systems into the Upper Green Valley, and shall thus protect these agricultural soils from conversion to urban uses. LU -9 The City shall protect Coal Creek Springs by: 1) limiting density to less than one residential unit per four acres within the area tributary to the Coal Creek Springs Watershed and by 2) designating a Special Planning Area for the Mt. Rainier Vista site. LU -10 The City shall support low density County zoning adjacent to the city on the Enumclaw Plateau and will not extend City sewer and water facilities into the area if it will promote urban development. LU -11 The City shall consider the impacts of new development activities on resources (including agricultural resource lands, cultural resources, forest resource lands, and mineral resource areas (Map 9.3A)), the environment and natural resources (particularly critical areas, wildlife habitats and water quality) as part of its environmental review process. Residential Development Within most communities, a range of housing densities is allowed to provide a variety of housing opportunities. The wider the range, the greater the opportunity for individuals to find housing relative to their particular needs, affordability and preference. While the City's policy provides for a relatively wide range of residential densities, development over the past decade has been heavily concentrated toward the middle and upper levels of the range. This has resulted in the percentage of detached single family homes dropping steadily with a slight leveling in recent years. (See Figure 3.7) Figure 3.7 HOUSING MIX As land costs have escalated in the region, however, Auburn has remained relatively affordable to the average family. With considerable emphasis placed throughout the region for high density development in designated urban centers, there is considerable potential to restore Auburn's traditional character by taking advantage of the anticipated increase in demand for single family housing outside of these centers. This Plan provides that the City should seek to restore the traditional character of the community by encouraging preservation and development of housing that is suitable to the retention and attraction of families within the community. This would be best accomplished by protecting the residential character of existing single family neighborhoods and promoting the development of new neighborhoods of single family homes. Consequently, residential land use policies will emphasize the creation and preservation of single family neighborhoods, while still encouraging the development of other housing types for those who need or want them. GOAL 7. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT To emphasize housing development at single family densities, in order to reestablish a mix of housing types appropriate for a family oriented community, while recognizing the need and desire for both rural density and moderate density housing appropriately located to meet the housing needs of all members of the community. Objective 7.1. To establish a system of residential densities which accommodates a range of housing choices appropriate for the city. Policies: LU -12 The City should promote the provision, preservation and maintenance of adequate housing for the city's residents by encouraging a balanced mix of housing types and values appropriate to the income levels and lifestyles of area residents. Auburn has always been willing to accept its "fair share" of low and moderate cost housing opportunities. However, this has translated into a great disparity in Puget Sound communities with cities such as Auburn receiving more of these types of housing than other comparable communities. This has had impacts in terms of the costs of meeting social service needs as well as some poorly maintained multifamily properties which have caused a Page 3-12 LandUse variety of problems. Auburn will work to insure that housing units are equitably distributed across the region in terms of both physical location and cost. LU -13 Residential densities in areas designated 'rural" should be no greater than 1 dwelling unit per 4 acres. LU -14 Residential densities in areas designated for single family residential use should be no greater than 6 units per acre. In areas with good transit availability (1/4 mile or less to a route with at least half hour service), accessory dwelling units should be permitted to allow increased densities. Provisions in the accessory dwelling unit ordinance will limit the density increase permitted depending upon the zoning district. The bulk of the single family residential community should be developed at a density of between 4 and 6 dwelling units per acre. LU -15 Residential densities in areas designated for multiple family development should not exceed 20 units per acre. Multiple family densities should generally decrease with proximity to single family areas. Multiple family densities may exceed 20 units per acre provided they are within walking distance (1/4 mile) of regional transit facilities or are targeted to populations not requiring outdoor recreation areas and having low private automobile usage (e.g. elderly housing). These targeted developments should be located in close proximity to shopping, medical and public transportation services. Objective 7.2. To designate land for the development of new single family homes. Policies: LU -16 In applying the land use designations of the Comprehensive Plan, first consideration shall be given to designating an area for single family residential use. LU -17 Most of the undeveloped areas of the Community Serving Area of the city (see Map 3.1) shall be reserved for single family dwellings. The ability to buffer the area from incompatible land uses and heavily traveled arterials or highways should be considered in designating currently undeveloped areas for future single family use. Such buffering can be accomplished by taking advantage of topo- graphic variations and other natural features, requiring expanded setbacks along arterials, by orienting lots and houses away from arterials, by designating moderate density multiple family areas as transitional areas, and by other means. Objective 7.3. To promote the development of quality single family neighborhoods which relate the design and types of residential areas to important natural and manmade features. Policies: LU -18 Residential development should be related to topography, circulation, and other amenities, as guided by policies of this Plan. LU -19 Residential development should be discouraged in poorly drained areas. LU -20 The development of new neighborhoods should be governed by development standards which allow some flexibility. Flexibility should be considered to encourage compact urban development, to provide protection of critical areas, and resource lands (including, but not limited to, agricultural resource lands, cultural resources, forest resource lands, mineral resource areas (Map 9.3A) hillsides or wetlands), and to facilitate non -motorized transportation. The City should implement mechanisms such as "planned unit developments" which allow variation from normal development standards in exchange for enhanced design features and environmental protection, while maintaining consistency with this Plan. LU -21 The development of residential areas should recognize the importance of community and public facilities in developing a sense of neighborhood and community. LU -22 Residential development of shoreline areas shall be in accord with the City's Shoreline Management Program and should provide for the retention of public access to these areas. Special care should be taken in the design of residential areas in shoreline areas to reduce the potential conflict between residential use and public access. LU -23 Emphasis shall be placed upon the manner in which the recreational needs of the residents shall be met in the approval of any residential development. Page 3-14 Land Use LU -24 Any change from the rural designation shall be to a single family designation. Single family residential areas should also be used to buffer rural areas from other urban uses. LU -25 Areas abutting major arterials should be carefully planned to avoid potential conflict between the development of the arterial and single family uses. Single family uses in such areas should be platted in a manner which orients the units away from the arterial, however, non -motorized access between the residential area and the arterial should be provided. Where such orientation is not possible, a transition area should be zoned for moderate density uses. In areas with existing single family developments, substantial flexibility can be permitted for street front buffering. Objective 7.4. To establish new neighborhoods in a way that will minimize the potential for intrusion of incompatible uses. Policies: LU -26 Development design should utilize and preserve natural features, including, but not limited to, topography and stands of trees, to separate incompatible land uses and densities. LU -27 Development design should use open spaces, including parks, to separate incompatible uses. LU -28 Development codes shall be modified to allow the City to require that landscaped buffers, natural area preservation or other measures are utilized to separate new residential developments from incompatible uses and major streets. These buffers should permit access between the residential area and the major street by pedestrians and bicyclists. Multiple Family Housing The escalating gap between the costs of housing and the ability to pay rental or mortgage prices has increased the demand for multi -family units. Unfortunately, it is clear that the development of multiple family dwellings in single family areas has created an adverse reaction. The level of conflict between single family neighborhoods and multiple family dwellings must be reduced. Since much of this reaction is related to the design of these structures, design standards could substantially reduce this problem for new construction. City policy must respond to the need for multiple family dwellings by people who cannot afford or do not prefer single family dwellings. Controlled siting of multiple family dwellings can benefit single family neighborhoods by reducing blight in areas where single family units are beginning to deteriorate. Multiple family housing typically generates higher transit ridership than does single family housing. By locating multifamily housing in areas served by transit, its traffic impacts can be mitigated by reducing the number of automobile trips generated. As a further benefit, increased transit ridership clearly meets the goals of this Plan, the Washington State Growth Management Act and the Countywide Policies. Objective 7.5. To meet the need for multiple family dwellings while avoiding conflict with single family residential areas. Policies: LU -29 In considering where future higher density development should locate, priority shall be given to designated Special Planning Areas (where such use can be.balanced and planned with single family areas), the Downtown and areas with high levels of transit service. LU -30 Unless required for other purposes, the need for new higher density developments shall be based on local need for such units and should not substantially exceed a fair regional share of such housing. LU -31 Multiple -family developments should be located functionally convenient to the necessary supporting facilities including utilities, arterials, parks, transit service, etc. LU -32 Design codes and guidelines should be developed for multifamily housing to ensure high quality design and compatibility with surrounding development. LU -33 Multiple family dwellings shall not be permitted as a matter of right in single family residential districts, but should be permitted only where necessary to remove potential blight, to buffer single family uses from incompatible uses or activities, or to allow effective use of vacant areas. Standards for such siting should provide for design review to ensure compatibility and provide that the density of development is consistent with the density of the adjoining single family uses. Page 3-16 Land Use LU -34 Siting of moderate density units shall be encouraged as a buffer between single family areas and more intense uses. Such buffering is appropriate along arterials where existing platting prevents effective lot layout for single family units. Also, such buffering is appropriate between single family areas and commercial and industrial uses. Where there are established single family areas, the design and siting of moderate density units shall be controlled to reduce potential conflicts and to ensure buffering of uses. Higher density units are not to be considered such a buffer. LU -35 Higher density developments or larger scale multiple family developments should be limited to residential areas where they can be developed as a unit with the necessary supporting facilities. Such development shall provide adequate access by developed arterials with minimal potential to generate traffic through single family areas. Extensive buffering measures shall be required where such areas adjoin single family residential areas. Care should be exercised to avoid creating barriers to pedestrian and bicycle movement. Where feasible, new multiple family development should be planned in conjunction with single family and moderate density development. Manufactured Homes Manufactured homes provide affordable housing to many Auburn residents. In many cases, they provide the opportunity of home ownership to households which cannot afford to purchase more traditional types of housing. However, poorly designed, high density manufactured home parks can raise the same issues that multiple family developments pose. When sited on individual lots, poor design can adversely affect adjacent site -built homes. Both of these problems can be mitigated. Careful design and placement of manufactured housing in both parks and on individual lots, especially with appropriate landscaping, can greatly reduce problems otherwise associated with such development. This Plan's policies continue to recognize the benefits that manufactured homes can have on housing affordability. Improved codes requiring high standards for the design and siting of manufactured home parks and modular units on individual lots should be implemented. Objective 7.6 To continue to allow manufactured homes as an affordable form of home ownership, provided that such developments are carried out in a manner which supports rather than detracts from the quality of the community and adjacent uses. Page 3-18 Moderate and High Income Housing Land Uce Policies: LU -36 Manufactured home parks shall be considered a form of high density residential development and subject to the same policies. Manufactured home park densities should not exceed 8 units per acre. Any manufactured home park shall be bordered or contained by physical features, or planned and designed as part of a larger development incorporating other housing types in a manner which limits further manufactured home park expansion into adjacent areas. LU -37 Modular and manufactured homes are permitted on single family lots provided that they are sited and constructed in a manner which would blend with adjacent homes. Manufactured homes must meet minimum dimensional standards (double wide) and be placed on permanent foundations. The City wants to increase the amount of housing oriented toward those with moderate and high incomes. A jurisdiction typically encourages a type of development by providing incentives which lower the cost of producing that development type, thereby increasing 'its potential profitability. With the limited financial resources available to municipalities it is difficult to justify financial incentives to increase the profitability of the production of market rate housing. Further, since the production of housing for moderate and higher income groups is profitable without these incentives, it is not clear that incentives will have the desired affect of increasing the number of houses produced. Potential solutions to this issue need to address the demand side of the market rather than the supply. The market will provide these types of housing if there is sufficient demand for it within the city. Auburn can increase the demand for housing by those with moderate and higher incomes by improving its image within the region and making itself known as a desirable place to live. One approach taken by some jurisdictions to accomplish this goal is to provide sufficient land zoned for large lot development. Auburn currently includes areas zoned for 1 house per 4 acres and 1 house per acre. A comprehensive approach to increasing the demand for moderate and high income housing is through the implementation of this comprehensive plan. By building a community with parks and open spaces, job opportunities, high environmental quality, and abundant supportive services including commuter rail, Auburn will create for itself a more desirable image within the region and therefore a wider range of income groups will choose to live in Auburn than at present. LU -38 Consideration should be given to designating areas with a high degree of access and environmental amenities for low density residential uses. Codes should be revised to ensure that Auburn obtain its "fair share" of high end single family housing. This does not represent a decrease in Auburn's commitment to maintaining the majority of its housing stock as housing affordable to middle income households. Neighborhood Quality Auburn's existing stable residential neighborhoods form an important component of the community's character. Maintaining the vitality and stability of these neighborhoods is a key goal of this Comprehensive Plan. GOAL 8. NEIGHBORHOOD QUALITY To maintain and protect all viable and stable residential neighborhoods. Objective 8.1 To maintain and enhance all viable and stable residential neighborhoods. Policies LU -39 Regulatory decisions in all residential neighborhoods shall prioritize the maintenance or enhancement of the neighborhood's residential character. a. The location of uses other than those permitted outright shall only be allowed as specified in this comprehensive plan and in the zoning ordinance. b. Approval of any non-residential land use shall occur only after full environmental review. C. The City recognizes the important role that public facilities (such as sidewalks, neighborhood parks and elementary schools) and limited scale quasi -public uses (such as smaller churches and daycare centers) play in maintaining viable residential neighborhoods. Page 3-20 Land Use d. Single family detached residential neighborhoods should be protected from intrusion by non-residential or multi- family uses. LU -40 Spot zoning shall be prohibited in residential areas. LU -41 The City shall seek to abate existing incompatible uses in residential neighborhoods. Mineral extraction operations within mineral resource areas (Map 9.3A) operating in compliance with the conditions of their permit are not incompatible uses. LU -42 Home occupations in residential neighborhoods shall be permitted only if they comply with performance standards that ensure compatibility with adjacent residential uses. Greater flexibility may be appropriate for home occupations near the border of such neighborhoods as a transition to adjacent uses. LU -43 Limited commercial uses (such as daycare centers and professional offices) may be permitted, but only under appropriate conditions, by means of conditional use permits when landscaping and design features can be used to minimize impacts on surrounding uses and the site is: a. Along the border of residential neighborhoods; or b. In specific areas where site specific concerns may limit the use of the site for residential uses; or c. Along arterials transecting residential neighborhoods. LU -44 Development standards and regulations for residential areas should avoid unnecessary barriers to the renovation and improvement of homes in established neighborhoods built to previous standards. LU -45 The City should give special attention to improving the quality of low income neighborhoods and seek to implement programs which encourage rehabilitation of deteriorating structures and facilities in such neighborhoods. (Guidance for this policy is provided by the City's annual Block Grant Program Plan.) Objective 8.2 To provide for the orderly transition to other uses of older residential areas that are no longer viable. Policies: LU -46 The management of areas in transition from existing residences to a planned non-residential use, should balance the needs of existing residents with the need to accommodate new uses. LU -47 The conditional use procedure should be used to ensure that new uses are no more disruptive to existing uses than is reasonably necessary. LU -48 Interim spot zoning, with appropriate conditions, may be an appropriate transitional device where the spot zone is fully consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. LU -49 Greater flexibility should be provided for home occupations in transitional areas. Page 3-22 LU -50 Whenever considering a conversion from single family to another use, the burden shall be on demonstrating the unsuitability of an area for single family use. Transportation Impacts on Neighborhoods Two of the most significant community needs to be addressed by this planning process is the need to move traffic through the city and the need to protect residential quality. Unfortunately, these two needs are often in conflict. All expectations are that the pressure of traffic will increase and there will be pressure to construct new through routes. The most feasible of these routes sometime lie in nearby residential areas which are not now heavily impacted by traffic. In addition, as traffic on major through routes increases, drivers will cut through neighborhoods to reduce their travel time. This often results in cars traveling at inappropriate speeds and at inappropriate volumes on neighborhood streets. While the City will strive to avoid the intrusion of through traffic in neighborhoods, it will seek to ensure that neighborhoods have adequate circulation. The Plan's policies seek to recognize these problems as early as possible, and to proceed cautiously with careful study and analysis of potential alternatives and possible mitigation measures. Page 3-22 Land Use Objective 8.3. To respond to the growing need to accommodate traffic through the city with a minimum of adverse impact on residential neighborhoods. Policies: LU -51 Development of new through routes should occur as early as possible, before neighborhoods are developed to urban residential densities to avoid the intrusion of through traffic in neighborhoods. LU -52 The City should continue to fund or establish programs such as the Neighborhood Speedwatch Program or a Neighborhood Traffic Control Program which seek to mitigate the impacts of pass through traffic on neighborhoods. LU -53 Routes which bypass developed, urban neighborhoods shall be preferred over routes that would pass through them. Routes passing through such neighborhoods shall be supported by the City only when present and future traffic benefits are substantial and alternative ways to meet the need are not feasible. In these cases, a neighborhood traffic mitigation plan should be adopted and implemented by the City. LU -54 Where the only feasible traffic solution results in a significant adverse impact on a residential area, care shall be taken to identify any feasible opportunity to mitigate potential impacts. LU -55 Arterial routes should be planned to serve undeveloped areas prior to development and should be built as the area is developed. LU -56 Improved linkages in the city's residential collector system, such as the completed connection of lengthy dead-end streets, should be sought at every opportunity. LU -57 The City should adopt a comprehensive street classification system and map which designates neighborhood collectors. LU -58 While the City will strive to avoid the intrusion of "through" traffic in neighborhoods, it will also seek to ensure that neighborhoods are interconnected with one another. These interconnections are needed to ensure the proper functioning of arterial streets, acceptable emergency vehicle response times and also a sense of belonging to the Greater Auburn Community. Commercial Development Commercial land development provides needed services and jobs to Auburn and regional residents and visitors. Further, it is a major component of Auburn's tax base through the sales tax and property taxes it generates. There are several different types of commercial land, each providing different types of services and jobs and each with its own issues. The discussion and policies that follow recognize the importance of each of these types of commercial development and the important role that they play. GOAL 9. COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT To maintain and establish a variety of commercial environments which provide the full range of commercial services to the community and region in a manner which reduces conflicts between different types of commercial services and other uses. Neighborhood Commercial Small commercial centers within or adjacent to residential neighborhoods serve a useful function in providing convenient access to neighborhood residents for their "everyday" or "convenience" shopping needs. These centers can serve to reduce the number of automobile trips or at least shorten them by providing services near to one's residence. For neighborhood centers to provide these benefits, attention must be paid to ensuring adequate access to these centers from the adjacent neighborhood. However, these commercial areas can also adversely affect a neighborhood by generating traffic and land use conflicts. Due largely to the extensive commercialization of Auburn Way and the north/south orientation of the developed portions of Auburn, few residential neighborhoods within the city lie more than several blocks from a commercial area. Significant outlying commercial centers have also been developed, so that the currently developed residential neighborhoods are adequately served. However, future large scale residential developments will create a need for new small-scale commercial centers. This Plan's policy toward neighborhood commercial centers balances needs for shopping convenience with the protection of residential neighborhoods, and seeks to limit the develop- ment of new inappropriate commercial strips. Page 3-24 Land Use Objective 9.1. To provide for the convenience commercial needs of residential areas, while protecting existing and future residential neighborhoods from the disruptive effects of commercial intrusions. Policies: LU -59 Existing neighborhood oriented commercial centers should be identified and designated. Commercial uses within these centers should be limited to those having primary market areas considerably smaller than the entire community. LU -60 Designated neighborhood commercial centers should be prevented from spreading along the arterials that serve them. LU -61 A prime consideration in permitting the expansion of existing neighborhood commercial areas shall be the ability to adequately buffer any nearby residences from disruptive impacts. LU -62 In some instances of existing neighborhood commercial centers, a transition zone of moderate density residential uses should be designated between the center and single family residential areas. LU -63 New neighborhood commercial centers should be considered under the "Special Planning Areas" concept. Such areas should be carefully designed and integrated into the overall area development plan so as to minimize traffic and land use conflicts. Commercial uses should be limited to those having primary market areas approximately the size of the special planning area. LU -64 Consideration should be given to providing adequate access to neighborhood commercial development by non -motorized modes such as walking and biking. Barriers to these modes such as walls and fences should be removed when possible and shall be avoided in new development. Highway Commercial While commercial uses along arterials (often called "strip commercial" development) provide important services to community residents, the proliferation of commercial uses along arterials raises several land use planning issues. On the negative side, strip commercial development creates traffic flow problems and conflict with adjacent land uses. Due to their "linear" nature, commercial strips result in a maximum area of contact between commercial uses and other land uses resulting in a high potential for land use conflicts. Poor visual character due to excessive signage and architectural styles designed to attract attention instead of promoting a sense of community is an additional concern. Pedestrian shopping is made difficult, resulting in greater generation of automobile traffic, and large fields of asphalt parking lots are needed to accommodate single purpose vehicle trips. Despite the problems associated with commercial development along arterials, many such locations are often quite unsuitable for other uses, due to the impacts associated with heavy traffic volumes. Also, many commercial uses thrive at such locations due to high visibility and accessibility. The Plan seeks to manage existing arterial commercial areas to take advantage of the accessibility they provide, while minimizing traffic and land use conflicts and improving their visual appearance through an enhanced design review process and development standards. Objective 9.2. To encourage the appropriate use of areas adjacent to heavily traveled arterials while minimizing land use and traffic conflicts by: • Managing the continued commercial development of existing commercial arterials in a manner which minimizes traffic and land use conflicts. • Conserving residential qualities along heavily traveled arterials which are not yet commercialized, by restricting commercial development to types which provide an appropriate buffer. • Protecting existing, viable residential areas along lesser- traveled arterials, from commercial development. Page 3-26 Land Use Policies: LU -65 The City shall identify those existing commercial arterials that are appropriate for continued general (heavy) commercial development, and those arterials that are appropriate for continued or future limited (i.e. professional office type) commercial development. LU -67 The City shall review its standards relating to the number, size and location of driveways to ensure consistency with goals and policies relating to arterial commercial development. LU -66 The City shall encourage the grouping of individual commercial enterprises along commercial arterials to promote the sharing of parking areas, access drives and signs. Such grouping can be encouraged through land division regulations, sign regulations and development standards. LU -68 Moderate density multiple family residential development shall be used to buffer general (heavy) commercial arterial development from single family development. Extensive screening and landscaping shall be used to buffer general commercial uses from multiple family uses. However, the placement of walls and fences and site designs which prevent easy access by bicyclists and pedestrians should be avoided. LU -69 Arterials experiencing strong pressure for commercial development, but not yet committed to general (heavy) commercial uses, shall be designated for mixed light commercial and moderate density multi -family uses. Development regulations should encourage the development of professional office and similar uses and small scale multiple family housing, with development and design standards carefully drawn to ensure preservation of a quality living environment in adjacent neighborhoods. Development regulations could also allow other light commercial and higher density multi -family housing, subject to an extensive public review, and possibly a design review process. LU -70 Residential arterials having good potential for long term maintenance of a quality living environment should be protected from the intrusion of commercial uses. In some instances, these may be appropriate locations for churches Chapter 3 and other religious institutions, or moderate density multiple family uses. LU -71 Newly developed arterials shall incorporate design features, and development of adjacent land shall be managed such that creation of new commercial strips is avoided. Land division regulations shall result in single family residences being oriented away from the arterial, with access provided by a non -arterial street. LU -72 Commercial strip development along Auburn Way South should be limited to north of the R Street overpass. LU -73 The City should develop design standards and guidelines for development along_ arterials to improve their visual appearance. The Regional SuperMall Construction has begun on the "SuperMall of the Great Northwest", a 2,035,000 square foot retail shopping complex on 155 acres near the junction of SR167 and SR18. The SuperMall intends to be a "destination" mall that will attract consumers from long distances. According to the Environmental Impact Statement for the SuperMall, it will provide approximately 4,200 jobs and provide significant tax revenues to the City. A development of this type and size will have significant impacts on the surrounding community. During the Mall's development review a number of issues were raised. These issues included: • Downtown business impacts: The Mall will provide a shuttle bus from the SuperMall to the Downtown to bring additional customers to the area. Further, the SuperMall's developers have agreed to provide financial assistance to the Auburn Downtown Association to expand and improve their Downtown promotional activities. Additional programs and policies to bring the new customers to the downtown and other areas of the City should be explored and implemented. • Public safety impacts: While the Mall will place increased demands on the City's Police and Fire Departments, agreement has been reached whereby the SuperMall will provide the City with funding to hire, train and equip the additional personnel necessary to respond to Page 3-28 Land Use these demands. In addition, the Mall will provide funding towards the construction of a new Fire Station in the vicinity. • Traffic impacts: The Mall will generate numerous new trips impacting both local facilities and State routes. Significant improvements of the surrounding road network were required to handle this increase in demand. Money will be contributed towards the development of HOV lanes on SR167. In addition, a new park and ride facility will be located at the Mall with several bus route serving the new facility. • Adjacent land use impacts: The Mall has the potential to serve as a catalyst for new commercial development in the areas surrounding the Mall. This "commercial sprawl" would serve to exacerbate the Mall's impacts on downtown and on traffic. Adopted City policy is to prevent this from occurring by limiting the amount of commercial development permitted on sites near the Mall. Objective 9.3. To capture the retail market of customers visiting the SuperMall and strengthen Auburn's role as a major retail commercial center for the region. Policies: LU -74 Additional commercial development of land near the SuperMall shall be limited to those properties whose comprehensive plan designation and existing zoning (or a possible rezone to business park designation) allow for commercial uses. This development must meet the following conditions: a. If the new development is on industrially zoned property, the development shall be limited to office, entertainment, or other uses, e.g. motels, which complement the uses at the SuperMall. General retail uses would only be allowed in limited instances and only if incidental and subordinate to another use on the site. b. Small, individual commercial developments are discouraged. c. The traffic impacts of the commercial development shall receive significant consideration and will be mitigated as referred in this Plan. LU -75 The City will oppose the development of a regional shopping center in the unincorporated areas in the vicinity of the city. LU -76 The City will seek ways to draw customers from the SuperMall into the downtown and other areas within the city. LU -77 The City shall continue to recognize and support the development of downtown Auburn as a focal point of the Auburn community. Downtown Auburn Downtowns have historically served as the business, cultural and governmental focal points of their communities. In many communities like Auburn this role has been challenged by new shopping patterns focused on regional malls and commercial areas outside of the downtown. In Auburn, the growth of retail uses along Auburn Way and the new SuperMall have the potential for exacerbating what has become a common phenomenon in cities throughout the country. However, maintaining a healthy and vital downtown Auburn continues to be important as it is recognized by residents as a focal point of the com- munity and an important element of the City's identity. The image tha downte neweemers and visitors alike) think about Auburn, -vhieh in wrn nfftets all ,.inns of deeisions ttant to the eonummit3 's future. Among the supe market to the seudll���' alizPd Parl ing—prebletns e ' t,R relatively low vaeane -rate;— and Pharapt��- investment; geed4r-ansit aeress, good diversity; and usiness deterierminn emple}ee—p3rl ing—pedestrian and tFaffie eenflicts, buildings; ette7.. a 7 , eoPffiguFatisn f land available far new development- In .velopment. In May 2001. the Auburn City Council adopted the Auburn Downtown Plan. The Auburn Downtown Plan is the City's updated strategy to continue its downtown revitalization efforts consistent with State regional and local growth management planning concepts and strategies The Auburn Downtown Plan and Tthis Plan, provides that Downtown Auburn should remain the commercial, cultural and governmental focal point for the community. Efforts to enhance this function for Downtown Auburn are strongly supported Whip it is un-lik—ely that downtown will br-ea's retail trade market&,�g Page 3-30 Land Use The Auburn Downtown Plan is based on implementing policies and strategies through partnerships and innovative techniques The City, and the downtown business community and members of the community at- large–will need ,oto work closely together to maintain and upgrade the quality of the downtown working and shopping environment,fi-jAeF ehallenged by the new r-egienal mail. henee the Yete t tq for -it .,. 1.,. the `---, ---- ---- -"-�+ -enme ����—Part of the impetus for developing new strategies to approach downtown revitalization is the development of the Sound Transit Commuter Rail Transit Station. Theis Auburn Downtown Plan seeks to build on the excitement and energy resulting from public investment in the Transit Station and in other public investments such as the Third Street Grade Se aration project. As indicated in Chapter 2 a strategy envisioned in the Auburn Downtown Plan is the downtown area as an urban center. Consistent with this, the Auburn Downtown Plan: Establishes a 220 acre planning area that is the focus for downtown redevelopment. Provides incentives for downtown development and redevelopment through policy direction that supports: Removal of building height requirements in that portion of the urban center zoned C-2 Central Business District Elimination of transportation impact fees for a five year period; Elimination of stormwater improvements for redevelopment of existing sites that do not result in an increase in impervious surface; Lower level of service for transportation facilities; and Reduction in the off-street parking requirements in the C-2 zone compared to other zones in the city, with even greater reductions for area in immediate proximity of the transit center. • Encourages non -motorized pedestrian and bicycle connections and linkages to and within the urban center area • Encourages protection of historic assets and resources from redevelopment activities • Identifies potential catalyst projects and sites to spur development activity in the downtown and better focus redevelopment and marketing efforts • Encourages more residential development downtown and also 24-hour Lype uses and nighttime activity. Page 3-32 Land Use • Seeks to remove undesirable land uses and other bli htin iz influences in the downtown area • Promotes street improvements and enhancements to improve access and the visual qualities of the streetscape All of these strategies are consistent with the city's designation of downtown as an urban center. Zoning for much of the urban center is predominantly, although not exclusively C-2 Central Business District The C-2 zone encourages street level pedestrian commercial development and multi fames development overhead (mixed use) Many of the principles of the C-2 zone promote transit oriented development as well There are approximately 846 dwelling units and 3,218 employees within the urban center. It is envisioned in the Auburn Downtown Plan and in this Plan that revitalization of downtown can be facilitated through design codes and performance standards to ensure compatible growth. Mixed use developmentNew—pub ie � transit impFovements should be placed within the downtown whenever possible. Incentives for development downtown are encouraged The City should also seek to strengthen its working relationships with business groups and be an active participant in public and private partnerships when these support revitalization. GOAL 10 DOWNTOWN To encourage development and redevelopment within Downtown Auburn, which reflects its unique character as the community's historic center, that is consistent with the Auburn Downtown Plan's vision for Downtown Auburn as an urban center within King County and the Puget Sound region. Objective 10.1 To preserve and enhance the role of downtown Auburn as the focal point of the Auburn community for business, governmental and cultural activities. Policies: LU -78 For the purpose of implementing the goal and policies for downtown Auburn, "downtown" shall generally be considered that area bounded on the south by Highway 18; on the east by "F" Street; on the north by Park Avenue (extended); and on the west by the Union Pacific tracks. (See Map 3.3) LU -78A For the purposes of nominating and designating Downtown Auburn as urban center the boundaries shall be those established as the planning area for the Auburn Downtown Plan adopted May 2001 (See Map 3.3A). LU -78B Implement the policies and strategies of the Auburn Downtown Plan to support development of Auburn's urban center. LU -78C Encourage the attainment of urban center growth forecasts through implementation of higher intensity development to achieve the efficient use of land LU -79 Downtown shall continue to be recognized as the business, governmental and cultural focal point of the community. A diversity of uses including multifamily residential should be encouraged to maintain a vibrant, active and competitive center for the City of Auburn. LU -80 The City should continue to support the development and rehabilitation of multiple family housing in the Downtown, including housing targeted toward special needs (e.g. elderly and handicapped housing) populations. LU -81 The City shall maintain an ongoing downtown planning and action program involving the downtown business community and other interested groups. This activity should be guided by this document, the Auburn Downtown Plan and the Downtown Auburn Design Master Plan. LU -82 The City shall continue to give priority consideration to the maintenance and improvement of public facilities and services in the downtown area. Downtown Land Uses Objective 10.2 To recognize areas within the downtown that have identifiable characters and uses. Page 3-34 Land Use LU -83 The area north of First Street North, west of Auburn Avenue, south of Fifth Street North and east of the Burlington Northern tracks should be designated and managed as a medical and professional services area. New heavy commercial and industrial uses should be prohibited and existing ones amortized. Commercial uses supporting medical and professional uses should receive priority. LU -84 The area lying generally east of "D" Street S.E. and south of Main Street (not including the Main Street frontage) shall be designated for mixed residential and commercial uses. LU -85 The area lying generally between Auburn Way North (but not properties abutting AWN) and Auburn High School should be designated for multiple family residential uses. LU -86 Automobile oriented uses within the Central Business District shall be developed and located in accordance with the policy direction of the Auburn Downtown Plan and implementing C- 2, Central Business District code requirements. Downtown Urban Design Objective 10.3: To ensure that all new development and redevelopment in the downtown reflect the unique character of the area. LU -87 The City shall develop programs and ordinances to preserve and protect downtown's historic character. Development codes should be revised as needed to recognize the uniqueness of downtown through appropriate performance standards and design guidelines. A high level of visual amenity should be pursued, and no heavy outdoor uses or outdoor storage should be allowed. LU -88 The downtown area shall be comprised of a mixture of uses consistent with the area's role as the focal point of the community. These uses shall be primarily "people -oriented" as opposed to "automobile -oriented", and shall include commercial, medical, governmental, professional services, cultural and residential uses. LU -89 Regulations for the retail core of downtown should encourage retail uses, but should discourage uses which result in a high proportion of single use vehicle trips (such as fast food restaurants and drive-through windows). Downtown Transportation Objective 10.4: To emphasize pedestrian traffic and transit usage in the downtown. LU -90 Emphasis should be given to enhancing pedestrian linkages between the Hospital area, the Main Street retail core, the Performing Arts Center, the southwestern portion of Downtown, and the parking area adjacent to the Safeway Superstore. An important element of this emphasis will be to reduce the pedestrian barrier effect of Auburn Avenue and Auburn Way. LU -91 The City should build upon past efforts to improve pedestrian amenities, through public improvements, sign regulations and development standards. The maintenance of public and private improvements should be given priority commensurate with downtown's role as the focal point of the community. LU -92 The City shall work with transit providers to increase the availability and effectiveness of transit in downtown and between downtown, other commercial and employment areas, residential areas, and the region at large. LU -93 As regional transportation programs such as commuter rail are implemented, the City will strive to ensure that, the downtown is a beneficiary. Siting of-a-Eetnniuwr rw ; sstatien a the Auburn Rail Stab._ o:. uay_nom_ . _ Downtown Parking Objective 10.5: To develop a parking program for the downtown which recognizes the area's historic pedestrian character, while providing sufficient parking for customers of all businesses. LU -94 A strong Downtown shall be encouraged through improved parking, circulation, and the grouping of business outlets and governmental services. Parking standards should be developed which recognize the unique nature of downtown parking demand. The City should work with the business community in public/private partnerships to develop a Page 3-36 Land Use coordinated and effective approach to providing adequate parking and circulation. LU -95 A strong Downtown shall be encouraged through improved parking, circulation, and grouping of business outlets and governmental services. The development of public parking lots to serve the downtown should be guided by a Downtown Parking Plan. LU -96 The City views adequate parking in the downtown area as a critical step in implementing the downtown policies and the rehabilitation policies of this Plan. All business in the downtown area will be hindered if adequate parking is not available. However, parking needs coupled with rehabilitation needs in the downtown area require special policies: a. Some flexibility in the general parking requirements of the City may be necessary to accommodate reuse of existing buildings and to accommodate new development. Such flexibility should be directed at seeking to pool. parking resources through the formation of a Downtown parking LID when such parking cannot be provided by the business or through shared parking agreements. b. Since rigid parking requirements will interfere with redevelopment of downtown, and the pattern of existing development restricts the amount of parking available, public development of parking in the downtown area is appropriate. c. A comprehensive study of the parking needs of downtown should be made to determine the most efficient method of meeting the unique parking demands of the area. d. Parking policy for the downtown needs to balance the impact of parking on downtown's pedestrian character, economic development and transit usage. Downtown Redevelopment Objective 10.6: To work with all interested groups on revitalizing the Downtown area. LU -97 The City of Auburn should strive to maintain active working relationships with the Auburn Downtown Association, the Chamber of Commerce and other groups whose goal is the revitalization of downtown. The City will seek to become a partner with these and other groups, where feasible, in public/private partnerships that further the goal of downtown revitalization. LU -98 The City shall continue to support legislation to improve fiscal leverage in urban rehabilitation programs. LU -99 The City shall continue to support the redevelopment efforts of the private sector in the downtown area. Industrial Development Auburn's industrial land and the development that it supports accounts for a significant percentage of the City's tax base. It also provides a large number of jobs to both city and regional residents. Good industrial land is a limited resource and should be fully utilized to maximize its potential benefits. Industrial development typically utilizes extensive amounts of land and is typically located near major transportation facilities. For these reasons, industrial activities are often quite visible. For people traveling on SR167, industrial development is the primary view they have of Auburn. Page 3-38 Land Use GOAL 11. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT To provide for, establish and maintain a balance of industrial uses that respond to local and regional needs and enhance the city's image through optimal siting and location. Type of Industrial Uses There is a wide variety of possible industrial uses that could be sited in Auburn. As with the mix of residential uses, the mix of industry also affects the image of the city. The regional image of the city is that of an industrial suburb with an emphasis on heavy industry. This image is quite apparent as one travels along Highway 167 where there is an almost unending view of high -bay warehouse buildings. Current trends and forecasts indicate, however, that the number of jobs in the industrial sector will actually decrease in the upcoming years. Due to the increased and continued development of warehousing in the valley, these types of uses may be expected to dominate Auburn's industrial character. However, real estate development is cyclical and what was profitable in one decade may not be in the next. The location of large footprint high -bay buildings in Auburn was a factor of land price and access. Over time, as the price of vacant land rises, more intensive types of manufacturing, office or office campus development may become feasible. To the extent that these offer the city both an expanded property tax base and new employment opportunities, these should be encouraged. Different types of industrial areas should be separated since some types of industrial activities conflict with other industrial activities (especially those of a more desirable character). Such separation should be based primarily on performance standards. Location of Industrial Uses Before the adoption of the 1986 Comprehensive Plan, there had been little separation of various types of industrial uses. At the time, there was no well understood policy basis regarding the separation of different types of industrial uses and some areas very suitable for high quality light industrial uses were committed to heavier uses. High visibility corridors developed with a heavier industrial character and established a heavy industry image for the city. The Plan provides clear distinction between different industrial uses. It also reserves areas for light industrial uses. Objective 11.1. To create a physical image for the city conducive to attracting light industry. Policies: LU -100 Highly visible areas which tend to establish the image of the city should not be used by heavy industrial uses. LU -101 The City shall promote high quality development of all light industrial and warehouse areas. LU -102 The City shall aggressively seek to abate all potentially blighting influences in industrial areas, especially in areas visible to regional traffic flows and in areas designated for light industrial uses. Objective 11.2. To establish performance standards appropriate for developing industrial areas. Policies: LU -103 Compatibility among land uses should be enhanced through landscaping, building orientation and setbacks, traffic control and other measures to reduce potential conflicts. LU -104 All industrial development should incorporate aesthetically pleasing building and site design. The City shall amend its codes and performance standards which govern industrial development to implement this policy. a. Procedures shall be established to ensure aesthetically pleasing building and site design in areas designated for light industrial areas. b. Appropriate landscaping and site development standards shall regulate site development in heavy industrial areas. c. Unsightly views, such as heavy machinery, service entrances, storage areas, rooftop equipment, loading docks, and parking areas should be screened from view of adjacent retail, commercial, light industrial and residential areas and from public streets. Page 3-40 Land Use LU -105 Needed rights-of-way, on-site and off-site road improvements, and utilities should be assured before development occurs. LU -106 Individual development projects shall provide the following minimal improvements in accordance with established City standards: a. Full standard streets and sidewalks in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. b. Adequate off street parking for employees and patrons. C. Landscaping. d. Storm drainage. e. Water. f. Sanitary sewers. g. Controlled and developed access to existing and proposed streets. Objective 11.4. To reserve areas appropriate for industrial development. Policies: LU -107 Any significant industrial activity shall be limited to the designated Region Serving Area of the city (see Map 3.2). The City recognizes that industrial development's place varying demands on the community's quality of life and service capabilities. In addition to demonstrating a developments' consistency with Plan policies, applicable land use regulations, and environmental policies, significant industrial development shall be encouraged to provide a balance between service demands and impacts placed on the city's quality of life vs. the local benefits derived from such development. LU -108 Intrusions of residential uses into industrial areas shall not be allowed, and intrusions by commercial uses should be controlled. LU -109 The grouping of uses which will mutually benefit each other or provide needed services will be encouraged. a. Compatible commercial uses may be permitted in designated industrial areas, particularly those that primarily serve industrialbusinesses or their employees. b. Planned developments (such as "office parks") which provide a mixture of light industrial with supporting commercial uses are encouraged. c. Uses which support industrial and warehouse activities should be located near those uses. LU -110 Development of designated industrial sites shall be consistent with applicable environmental standards and policies. Objective 11.4. To reserve and protect areas which are highly suitable for light industrial development. Policies: LU -111 Designation of light industrial areas shall have priority over heavier industrial uses. LU -112 Highly visible areas (land visible from SRI 67 or SR18) which tend to establish the image of the city should not be used by heavy industrial uses. Objective 11.5. To identify areas appropriate for heavy industrial uses Policies: LU -113 Heavy industrial uses shall be separated from lighter industrial, commercial and residential areas. LU -114 The most appropriate areas for heavy industrial uses are in the central part of the Region Serving Area adjoining the rail lines. LU -115 Heavy industrial uses are appropriate in the southern portion of the Region Serving Area which is now developed in large scale industrial facilities. Page 3-42 Land Use LU -116 Heavy industrial uses shall be strictly prohibited from the Community Serving Area of Auburn (see Map 3.2). The only exception to this general policy shall be the continued heavy industrial use of the area east of "A" Street S.E., as shown by the Comprehensive Plan Map. Redevelopment and Infill A major goal of the Growth Management Act, the King County Countywide Planning Policies and this Comprehensive Plan is to reduce urban sprawl. One way to minimize this type of development pattern is to ensure that all areas that are already receiving urban services are fully developed prior to extending these services to additional areas. A further benefit of redevelopment is that it may lead to the removal of buildings and uses that detract from an area. Redevelopment can serve as a major catalyst in the stabilization and revitalization of areas throughout the city. GOAL 12. URBAN REDEVELOPMENT To encourage redevelopment of underutilized areas to reduce sprawl and take full advantage of the City's investment in existing infrastructure. Objective: 12.1 To facilitate infill development. Policy: LU -117 Encourage well designed ill and redevelopment projects to fully utilize previous investment in existing infrastructure. LU -118 Reduce the consumption of undeveloped land by facilitating the redevelopment of underutilized land and infill of vacant parcels whenever possible. P/T#8 Chapter 9 - Environment Chapter - Amendments addressing existing and pending environmental regulations and providing additional guidance for habitat protection. CHAPTER 9 THE ENVIRONMENT Introduction One of the key attractions of Auburn and the Puget Sound Region has always been the abundant natural resources found throughout the area. The Green River Valley was once a major supplier of agricultural goods for the region and farming remains in some parts of the valley. Thick forests, wetlands, and wildlife habitats are found throughout the area. As the area develops, many of these features, which serve to make the area attractive in the first place, are being lost. The strong emphasis placed on the designation and protection of resource lands and critical areas in the Growth Management Act, the Countywide Policies and this plan reflect the important role that these areas play in maintaining the health, safety and welfare of the area's citizens. Issues Environmental Constraints and Land Use The City's overall environmental policy should describe the kinds of environmental information and factors that are important to the community. This information can be used to decide if, where and how certain kinds of development and other activities should be allowed. City policy should recognize the natural constraints placed on development by such factors as unstable slopes, flooding and wetlands. A critical environmental concern is the proper management of gravel extraction. This is an industry which has been active in Auburn for many years and which remains a viable industry. The City should establish clear policies to guide the retention of valued aspects of the City's environment, such as protection of the City's open space and significant wildlife habitats. The policy should seek to ensure ample opportunity for the City's residents to meet their recreational needs. Policies should be established to protect the public health, safety and quality of life, and to also protect the area's most unique, sensitive and productive environmental resources. New development should be directed toward areas where their adverse impacts can be minimized. This Plan has increased the specificity of the City's policies relating to use and protection of the natural environment. It also provides a set of general policies which will be used to require the mitigation of significant adverse impacts. GOAL 18. Environment and Natural Resources To maintain and promote a safe and healthy environment and preserve the quality of life, and to protect the area's most unique, sensitive and productive natural resources. To encourage natural resource industries within the city to operate inn -a manner which enhances, (rather than detracts from), the orderly development of the City. Objective 18.1. To continue to enhance and maintain the quality of surface water, ground water, and shoreline resources in the City and Region. Policies: EN -1 The City shall seek to ensure adequate and healthful supplies of domestic water by protecting groundwater from degradation, by providing for surface water infiltration, by minimizing or prohibiting unnecessary withdrawals of groundwater and by preventing unintended groundwater discharges caused by disturbance of water -bearing geological formations. EN -2 Stormwater drainage improvement projects that are proposed to discharge to groundwater, such as open water infiltration ponds, shall provide for surface water pretreatment designed to standards outlined in the Washington State Department of Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin. Drainage improvement projects that may potentially result in the exchange of surface and ground waters, such as detention ponds, shall also incorporate these standards. EN -3 The City shall seek to minimize degradation to surface water quality and aquatic habitat of creeks, streams, rivers, ponds, lakes and other water bodies; to preserve and enhance the suitability of such water bodies for contact recreation and fishing and to preserve and enhance the aesthetic quality of such waters by requiring the Page 9-2 Environment use of current Best Management Practices for control of stormwater and nonpoint runoff. EN -4 The City will regulate any new storm water discharges to creeks, streams, rivers, ponds, lakes and other water bodies with the goal of no degradation of the water quality or habitat of the receiving waters, and where feasible seek opportunities to enhance the water quality and habitat of receiving waters. EN -5 The City Shoreline Master Program, shall govern the development of all designated Shorelines of the City (Map 9.1). Lands adjacent to these areas should be managed in a manner consistent with that program. EN -6 Where possible, streams and river banks should be kept in a natural condition, and degraded streambanks should be enhanced or restored. EN -7 Uses along the Green and albite Rivers should be limited to residential, agricultural, open space, recreational, mineral resource extraction and public and quasi -public uses. Commercial development shall only be allowed on the rivers, if such development adds new public access to the shoreline area and is constructed in a manner that will protect the shoreline and water quality of the rivers through the use of Best Management Practices. EN -8 Storm drainage structures and facilities located within the shoreline environment, parklands, or public open space shall incorporate high standards of design to enhance the natural appearance, protect significant cultural resources and appropriate use of the site and surrounding area. Any such facilities located within the shoreline environment shall be consistent with the State Shoreline Management Act and the City's Shoreline Management Program. If accessible to the general public, such facilities should, whenever possible, be designed to preclude the need for security fencing, and should use native vegetation and be properly maintained. EN -9 The City shall discourage the use of septic tanks except in those areas which are designated for rural uses and have suitable soils. EN -10 The City's design standards shall ensure that the post development peak stormwater runoff rates do not exceed the predevelopment rates. EN -11 The City will seek to ensure that the quality of water leaving the City is of equivalent quality to the water entering. This will be accomplished by emphasizing prevention of pollution to surface and ground waters through education programs and implementation and enforcement of Best Management Practices. EN -12 The City shall continue to work with adjacent jurisdictions to enhance and protect water quality in the region through coordinated and consistent programs and regulations. EN -13 The City shall consider the impacts of new development on water quality as part of its environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigating measures. Impacts on fish resources shall be a priority concern in such reviews. EN -14 The City shall require the use of Best Management Practices to enhance and protect water quality as dictated by the City's Design and Construction Standards and the Washington State Department of Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin. In all new development, approved water quality treatment measures that are applicable and represent the best available science or technology shall be required prior to discharging storm waters into the City storm drainage system or into environmentally sensitive areas (e.g. wetlands, rivers, and groundwater.) EN -15 The City recognizes that new development can have impacts including, but not limited to, flooding, erosion and decreased water quality on downstream communities and natural drainage courses. The City shall continue to actively participate in developing and implementing regional water quality planning and flood hazard reduction efforts within the Green River, Mill Creek and White River drainage basins. The findings and recommendations of these regional efforts, including, but not limited to, the "Draft" Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) for the Mill Creek Basin, the "Draft" Mill Creek Flood Control Plan, the Green River Basin Program Interlocal Agreement, and the Mill Creek Water Quality Management Plan, shall be considered by the City as City programs and plans are developed and updated. EN -16 The City recognizes the value and efficiency of utilizing existing natural systems (e.g., wetlands) for storm water conveyance and storage. However, these natural systems can be severely impacted or destroyed by the uncontrolled release of LL Page 9-4 Environment contaminated storm waters. Prior to utilizing natural systems for storm drainage purposes, the City shall carefully consider the potential for adverse impacts through the environmental review process. Important natural systems shall not be used for storm drainage storage or conveyance, unless it can be demonstrated that adverse impacts can be adequately mitigated to a less than significant level EN -17 The City recognizes that stormwater treatment facilities do not function efficiently unless maintained. The City shall strive to ensure that public and private stormwater collection, detention and treatment systems are properly maintained and functioning as designed. Objective 18.2. To continue to enhance and maintain the quality of air resources in the City and Region. Policies: EN -18 The City shall seek to secure and maintain such levels of air quality as will protect human health, prevent injury to plant and animal life, prevent injury to property, foster the comfort and convenience of area inhabitants, and facilitate the enjoyment of the natural attractions of the area. EN -19 The City will continue to support and rely on the various State, Federal and local programs to continue to protect and enhance air quality. EN -20 The City shall encourage the retention of vegetation and encourage landscaping in order to provide filtering of suspended particulates. EN -21 The City shall support an increased role for public transportation as a means to reduce locally generated air emissions. EN -22 The City shall consider the impacts of new development on air quality as a part of its environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigating measures. Objective 18.3. To continue to enhance and maintain the quality of land, wildlife and vegetative resources in the City and region. Policies: EN -23 The City shall seek to protect any unique, rare or endangered species of plants and animals found within the City by preventing the indiscriminate and unnecessary removal of trees and groundcover; by promoting the design and development of landscaped areas which provide food and cover for wildlife; and by protecting and enhancing the quality of aquatic habitat. EN -24 The City shall consider the impacts of new development on the quality of land, known or suspected fish and wildlife habitats (Map 9.2) and vegetative resources as a part of its environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigating measures. Such mitigation may involve the retention of significant habitats and the use of native landscape vegetation. EN -25 The preferred method of crossing a watercourse that has habitat suitable for anadromous fish use or that has the tential to be rehabilitated for fish use in the future is a bridge The use of culverts shall be discouraged as a crossing method for such Watercourses. Culvert systems may be considered if streambeds similar to natural channels can be provided, no loss of anadromous fish habitat will occur or the cost of a bride is prohibitive as reasonable method of mitigation EN -26 The City shall work in collaboration with other agencies the development community and other affected or interested parties to protect identified wildlife corridors and encourage the clustering of significant or adiacent resources to maintain connectivity of these systems Objective 18.4. To continue to enhance and maintain the quality of important wetland resources in the City and region. EN -27-5 The City recognizes the important biological and hydrological roles that wetlands play in providing plant and animal habitat, protecting water quality, reducing the need for man-made flood and storm drainage systems, maintaining water quality, and in providing recreational, open space, educational and cultural opportunities. The City will consider these roles and functions in all new development. Page 9-6 Environment EN -286 The City recognizes that wetlands provide varying degrees of biological and hydrological functions and values to the community depending on the size, complexity and location of the individual system, and that the overall degree of functions and values should be considered when reviewing proposals which impact wetlands. In a similar manner, the levels of protection afforded to a wetland shall be consistent with its existing function and values. The City shall continue to promote policies and practices of enhancing the wetlands that are hydraulically connected to the river systems to improve fish resources and aquatic habitat. EN -29-7 The City shall consider the impacts of new development on the quality of wetland resources as part of its environmental review process and shall require appropriate mitigation and monitoring measures of important wetland areas. Such mitigation may involve conservation, enhancement or restoration or replacement of important wetlands, and provisions for appropriate buffering. The goal of the mitigation should be no net loss of wetland functions and values. A permanent deed restriction shall be placed on any wetlands created or enhanced to ensure that they are preserved in perpetuity. EN -3028 Wetlands which are associated with a river or stream, or provide significant plant and animal habitat opportunities are recognized by the City as the most important wetland systems, and shall receive the highest degree of protection and mitigation through conservation, enhancement or relocation measures. Wetlands which are limited in size, are isolated from major hydrological systems or provide limited hydrological or plant and animal habitat opportunities may be considered by the City for development and displacement in conjunction with appropriate mitigation. EN -312-9 Speculative filling of wetlands shall only be permitted if in compliance with the Special Area Management Plan for Mill Creek, when it is adopted. EN -329 It is the City's intent to pursue development of an area -wide wetlands management program for the entire City to establish a systems approach to wetlands management. The City shall work with adjacent communities to adopt and implement the Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) for the Mill Creek Basin, a draft version of which has been developed with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The purpose of the SAMP is to establish uniform wetland definitions and methodology throughout the planning area, to develop a regional consensus and predictability by identifying important wetlands which must be conserved and less important wetlands which may be developed. The SAMP is intended to ensure a balance of the City's commitment between environmental and economic development interests. The City shall strive to streamline the permitting process for development in the areas covered by the SAMP. Map 9.3: General Location of Wetlands Map Note: This map provides an illustration of wetlands located within Auburn. Prepared on an area -wide basis, the inventory map provides a general delineation of known wetlands based on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers definition and the 1989 Federal Manual For Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands field methodology. It is important to note that this map is only a wetland inventory and not a wetland plan. Over time wetlands develop, expand and contract in conjunction with changing climatic, natural and artificial conditions. The map does not imply that a parcel covered by a wetland designation is fully occupied by wetlands. It is an indicator, however, that an in depth wetland delineation is required. Therefore, future site specific wetland studies conducted by the property owner will identify the precise location, delineation and functional characteristics of known wetland areas, and additional wetland areas not previously inventoried. The Auburn Planning Department has wetland reports that can provide information regarding soils, hydrology, vegetation and wildlife for these wetlands. Objective 18.5. To recognize the aesthetic, environmental and use benefits of vegetation and to promote its retention and propagation. Policies: EN -334- The City shall encourage the use of native vegetation as an integral part of public and private development plans. EN -343 The City shall discourage the unnecessary disturbance of natural vegetation in new development. EN -353 The City shall encourage the use of water conserving plants in landscaping for both public and private projects. Page 9-8 Environment EN -364 The City shall update and amend its landscaping ordinances to ensure that sufficient landscaping is a required component of all development. Emphasis should be placed on higher quality and quantity of landscaping. EN -373 The City shall strengthen the tree protection ordinance targeted at protecting large stands of trees and significant trees within the City. EN -386 The City shall develop a tree planting and maintenance program. Objective 18.6. To promote energy efficiency and management of resources in the development and operation of public facilities and services, as well as in private development. Policies: EN -397 The City shall encourage the use of renewable energy and other natural resources over non-renewable resources wherever practicable and shall protect deposits or supplies of important non-renewable natural resources from developments or activities which will preclude their future utilization. EN -4038 The City of Auburn Energy Management Plan is hereby incorporated as an element in this Comprehensive Plan. EN -4139 The City encourages site design practices that maximize winter exposure to solar radiation. Objective 18.7. Enhance and maintain the quality of life for the City's inhabitants by promoting a healthy environment and reducing the adverse impact of environmental nuisances. Policies: EN -420 The City shall seek to minimize the exposure of area inhabitants to the harmful effects of excess noise. Performance measures for noise impact on surrounding development should be adopted and enforced. EN -434- The City shall seek to minimize the exposure of area inhabitants to excessive levels of light and glare. Performance measures for Chapter 9 light and glare exposure to surrounding development should be adopted and enforced. EN -44 The City shall seek to minimize the exposure of area inhabitants from noxious plant species Objective 18.8. To establish management policies which effectively control the operation and location of mineral extraction in the City, in order to reduce the inherent adverse impacts that such activities produce in an urban environment. Policies: EN -457 The cost effective availability of sand and gravel materials is needed to support the development of freeways, roads, public works, and private construction. Mineral extraction may therefore be permitted if in accord with these policies. EN -463 Existing mineral extraction operations (as specifically authorized by a City permit to mine) shall be allowed to continue operation for the duration of, and in accord with, their existing permits. EN -474 Mineral extraction operations shall not be considered a permitted use in any zoning district. They are to be reviewed as special uses and shall be conducted only in accord with the measures needed to mitigate any adverse impact. Permits for the operation shall be denied whenever any impact is deemed by the City Council to be unacceptable or cannot be acceptably mitigated. EN -486 A final grading, drainage and erosion control plan shall be submitted with every application. Conditions of operation shall be spelled out in detail with performance bonds required to ensure compliance. Failure to comply with the provisions will be adequate grounds for suspension and subsequent termination of the permit. EN -496 The burden to demonstrate compliance with these policies and to demonstrate the need for a new permit or a renewal of a permit for any mineral extraction operation rests solely on the operator. The burden to operate in compliance with these policies and any permit issued in accord with the same shall also be on the operator. EN -5047 The City shall consider impacts of mining on groundwater and surface water quality as well as possible changes in Page 9-10 Environment hydrology as a result of the mining during the environmental review process and require appropriate mitigating measures to prevent water quality degradation. EN -5148 Mineral resource areas or lands are those lands which have high quality resources that can be commercially mined for a minimum of twenty years (Map 9.3A). Properties around which urban growth is occurring should not be considered as mineral resource areas. As required by RCW 36.70A.060, the City shall require notification on all plats, short plats, development permits and building permits issued for development within 500 feet of these lands on which a variety of commercial activities may occur that are not compatible with residential development for certain periods of limited duration. EN -5249 Additional mineral extraction operations or major expansion of existing operations onto adjacent parcels shall be permitted within mineral resource areas. Impacts of the operations must be studied thoroughly under the provisions of SEPA, and the City shall require implementation of all reasonable mitigating measures identified in those studies. Permits for the operation and renewal of permits for existing operations shall be denied whenever any impact cannot be acceptably mitigated. EN -530 Additional mineral extraction operations or expansions of existing operations will only be allowed outside of mineral resource areas where it is advisable to modify slope to create usable land (or to provide another public benefit associated with the site) and where the community will suffer no substantial short or long term adverse effect. Impacts of the operations must be studied thoroughly under the provisions of SEPA, and the City shall require implementation of all reasonable mitigating measures identified in those studies. Permits for the operation and renewal of permits for existing operations shall be denied whenever any impact cannot be acceptably mitigated. EN -544- New mineral extraction operations and expansion of existing mineral extraction operations will not be permitted in areas designated for 'open space" uses. EN -552 The creation of usable land consistent with this comprehensive plan should be the end result of a mineral extraction operation. The amount of material to be removed shall be consistent with the end use. While this policy shall be rigidly applied to Chapter 9 developed areas and to all areas outside of mineral resource areas, some flexibility may be appropriate within mineral resource areas. EN -563 Aesthetic qualities, erosion control, the effect on community and the creation of usable land which is consistent with approved Washington State Department of Natural Resources and City Reclamation Plans shall be the primary considerations in a decision to grant a permit for a new mineral extraction operation or to extend the scope of an existing mineral extraction operation outside designated mineral resource areas. GOAL 19. HAZARDS To minimize the risk from environmental and manmade hazards to present and future residents of the community. Objective 19.1. To reduce potential hazards associated with flood plains without unduly restricting the benefits associated with the continued development of the Lower Green River Valley floor. Policies: EN -574 The City shall seek to protect human health and safety and to minimize damage to the property of area inhabitants by minimizing the potential for and extent of flooding or inundation. EN -585 Flood prone properties outside of the floodway may be developable provided that such development can meet the standards set forth in the Federal flood insurance program. EN -596 Any subdivision of property within the flood plain shall avoid creating lots which would be subject to serious threats to life, health and property from floodwaters. EN-60-5Site plan review shall be required under SEPA for any significant (e.g. over the SEPA threshold) development in the flood plain. Appropriate mitigating measures shall be required whenever needed to reduce potential hazards. EN -6158 Any development within the floodway which would reduce the capacity of the floodway shall be prohibited. EN -623-9 The City shall enact ordinances and review development proposals in a manner which restricts and controls the discharge Page 9-12 Environment of storm water from new development. At a minimum the peak discharge rate after development shall not exceed the peak discharge rate before development. EN -630 The City's development standards should require control and management of storm waters in a manner which minimizes impacts from flooding. EN -641- The City shall consider the impacts of new development on frequently flooded areas (Map 9.4) as part of its environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigating measures. As part of this review process, flood engineering and impact studies may be required. Within FEMA designated 100 year floodplain and other designated frequently flooded areas, such mitigation may include flood engineering studies, the provision of compensatory flood storage, floodproofmg of structures, elevating of structures, and downstream or upstream improvements. EN -652 Areas designated as frequently flooded areas should include 100 year future condition floodplains wherever future condition flows have been modeled and adopted by the City as part of a basin plan. EN -663 Land uses and public and quasi -public facilities which would present special risks, such as hazardous waste storage facilities, hospitals, schools, nursing homes, and police and fire stations, should not be constructed in designated frequently flooded areas unless no reasonable alternative is available. If these facilities are located in designated frequently flooded areas, these facilities and the access routes needed for their operation, should be built in a manner that protects public health and safety during at least the 100 year flood. In addition, special measures should be taken to ensure that hazardous or toxic substances are not released into flood waters. EN -674 Developers in floodprone areas shall provide geotechnical information which identifies seasonal high groundwater elevations for a basis to design stormwater facilities in conformance with City design criteria. EN -683 The Mill Creek Basin Flood Control Plan, when completed, shall be the basis for the establishment of downstream drainage conditions for development in that area. Objective 19.2. To ensure that development is properly located and constructed with respect to the limitations of the underlying soils and subsurface drainage. Policies: EN -696 The City shall seek to ensure that land not be developed or otherwise modified in a manner which will result in or significantly increase the potential for slope slippage, landslide, subsidence or substantial soil erosion. The City's development standards shall dictate the use of Best Management Practices to minimize the potential for these problems. EN -706-7 Where there is a high probability of erosion (see Map 9.5), grading should be kept to a minimum and disturbed vegetation should be restored as soon as feasible. The City's development standards shall dictate the use of Best Management Practices for clearing and grading activity. EN -7169 The City shall consider the impacts of new development on hazards associated with soils and subsurface drainage as a part of its environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigating measures. EN -72651 Large scale speculative filling and grading activities not associated with a development proposal shall be discouraged as it reduces a vegetated site's natural ability to provide erosion control and biofiltration, absorb storm water, and filter suspended particulates. In instances where speculative filling is deemed appropriate, disturbed vegetation shall be restored as soon as possible, and appropriate measures to control erosion and sedimentation until the site is developed shall be required. EN -730 The City shall consider the impacts of new development on Class I and Class III landslide hazard areas (Map 9.6) as part of its environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigating measures. The impacts of the new development, both during and after construction, on adjacent properties shall also be considered. EN -741- Auburn will seek to retain areas with slopes in excess of 25 percent as primarily open space areas in order to protect against erosion and landslide hazards and to help conserve Auburn's identity within the metropolitan region. Land clearing or other Page 9-14 Environment significant removal of vegetation on such slopes shall be regulated by permit. EN -75.2 The City will require that a geotechnical report prepared by a professional engineer licensed by the State of Washington with expertise in geotechnical engineering be submitted for all significant activities proposed within Class I and Class III landslide hazard areas (Map 9.6). The City shall develop administrative guidelines which identify the procedures and information required for the geotechnical reports. EN -76-3 New development within Class I and Class III landslide hazard areas (Map 9.6) shall be designed and located to minimize site disturbance and removal of vegetation, and to maintain the natural topographic character of the site. Clustering of structures, minimizing building footprints, and retaining trees and other natural vegetation, shall be considered. Objective 19.3. To reduce risks associated with the transportation and storage of hazardous materials. Policies: EN -774 The City shall seek to minimize the exposure of area inhabitants to the risk of explosion or hazardous emissions, and to require proposals involving the potential risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances to include specific measures which will protect the public health, safety and welfare. EN -783 The risk of hazardous materials, substances and wastes shall be incorporated into the City's emergency management programs. EN -796 New commercial (other than retail commercial) or industrial uses which involve the transport or storage of hazardous materials, substances or wastes shall only be located in that portion of the designated Region Serving Area of the City between the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks and east of the West Valley Highway. EN -80-77 Any existing wholesale storage or manufacturing of hazardous materials, substances or wastes in the designated Community Serving Area of the City, or within 2000 feet of a school or medical facility, shall be considered a non -conforming use and the City should assertively seek its removal. Page 9-15 EN -8178 The treatment, storage, processing, handling and disposal of any hazardous material, substances or wastes shall be only in the strictest compliance with any applicable local, state or federal law. EN -8279 The City shall consider the impacts posed by new development on risks associated with hazardous materials, substances and wastes as a part of its environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigating measures. EN -839 The Local Hazardous Waste Management Plan for Seattic/King County, and the King County Solid Waste Interlocal Resolution No. 90-001, are hereby adopted and incorporated as an element of the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. EN -841 The City's surface water, ground water, sanitary, and storm drainage systems shall be protected from contamination by hazardous materials or other contaminants. EN -852 Use or removal of existing underground storage tanks shall only be done in the strictest compliance with applicable local, state and federal law. GOAL 20. POLICIES FOR PROTECTION OF ENDANGERED FISH SPECIES The City recognizes that anadromous Salmonids require cleancool well oxygenated water in adequate quantity for survival and especially during the cntical periods of rearing and migration both before spawning and after juveniles emerge. Salmonid eggs are highly affected during incubation and hatching by water temperature flow velocity, water quality and excessive turbidity. Streams composed of complex habitats with a high proportion of riffles and pools provide productive spawning habitats as well as juvenile rearing areas in eddying and off channel areas Objective 20.1 To aid in the protection of listed and candidate endangered fish species. EN -863 The City will continue to participate and support the various State, Federal and local programs including the_ipg_G0upAy Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) No. 9 (Green River) and WRIA No. 10 (White -Stuck River) to protect and restore endangered species. Page 9-16 Environment EN -874 The City shall seek to minimize surface water quality and aquatic habitat degradation of creeks, streams, rivers, ponds, lakes and other water bodies; to preserve and enhance the suitability of such water bodies as habitat for restoration of endangered species. EN -884 The City shall adept regulations a obtain ikon during the review of development proposals, as it relatesto the Endangered Species Act ' so that best management practices and best available science are considered and included in the City's evaluation and decision-making rocess EN -89 The City shall identify the types and qualities of aquatic resources within its borders and further develop plans and Program for the protection and enhancement of these resources based on their characteristics P/T#10 Chapter 7 - Transportation Element Replace Figure 7.3 in Transportation Element (2002-2007 TIP summary) with an updated Figure 7.3 containing 2003-2008 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) summary page.