The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12-14-2015 CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION AGENDAAlityrB URN WASHINGTON City Council Study Session December 14, 2015 - 5:30 PM Auburn City Hall AGENDA Watch the meeting LIVE! Watch the meeting video M eeti ng videos are not avai I abl e unti 172 hours after the meeting has concluded. I. CALL TO ORDER A. Roll Call 11. ANNOUNCEMENTS, REPORTS, AND PRESENTATIONS 111. AGENDA ITEMS FOR COUNCIL DISCUSSION A. Junior City Council Budget Presentation (5 Minute Presentation /10 Minute Q &A) B. Water District #111 and Algona Wholesale Rates (10 Minute Presentation /10 Minute Q &A)* (Snyder) C. Adjacent Purveyor Service Areas (15 Minute Presentation /15 Minute Q &A)* (Snyder) D. Capital Facilities Plans and School Impact Fees (5 Minute Presentation /5 Minute Q &A)* (Snyder) E. Year End Report - Code Enforcement and Abatement Program (20 Minute Presentation)* (Snyder) F. 2016 Legislative Agenda (15 Minute Presentation /10 Minute Q &A) (Hinman) IV. OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS V. ADJOURNMENT Agendas and minutes are available to the public at the City Clerk's Office, on the City website (http: / /www.auburnwa.gov), and via e -mail. Complete agenda packets are available for review at the City Clerk's Office. *Denotes attachments included in the agenda packet. Page 1 of 57 DI.B C=ITY OF�4 AUBURN WASH I NCTO AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Date: Water District #111 and Algona Wholesale Rates (10 December 8, 2015 Minute Presentation /10 Minute Q &A) Department: CD & PW Attachments: Power point Presentation Administrative Recommendation: Budget Impact: $0 For discussion only. Background Summary: The City of Auburn currently has wholesale rates adopted in Auburn City Code through 2017. This discussion concerns the wholesale rates for Water District (WD) #111 and the potential to review our wholesale rates as part of the anticipated 2017 Rate Study that will be used to assist in setting rates beyond 2017. Background on Water District #111 Agreement: In 1996, Auburn, Covington, and Water District(WD) #111 entered into Interlocal Agreement 2 (IA2) for Auburn to provide interruptible, daily water supply to the other two entities, and for those entities to provide Auburn with emergency water supply if requested. In 2002, the three parties entered into an Interim Water Sales Agreement ( "Take or Pay Agreement ") to "avoid unpredictable water sales and create a predictable and reliable cost for wholesale water to be sold by Auburn to Covington and WD 111". The parties continued the Take or Pay Agreement in 2005 for a 5 -year period. In 2010, Auburn and WD #111 continued the Take or Pay Agreement for another 5 -year period, however Covington opted not to continue. Auburn and WD #111 are currently considering the renewal of the Take or Pay Agreement. The rates in the Take or Pay Agreement over the past 13 years were based in part on WD #111's past financial contribution toward the supply and delivery infrastructure in Auburn's system. The wholesale rates that WD #111 is paying in 2015 is $0.99 per 100 cubic feet (ccf) from October through May for 0.75 million gallons per day (mgd), and $1.24 per ccf from June through September for 1.0 mgd. The current wholesale rate paid by WD #111 to Auburn is insufficient to cover Auburn's cost of purchasing water from Tacoma. AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 2 of 57 DI.B Background on Algona Agreement : In 2002, Auburn and Algona entered into an Interlocal Agreement (IA3) and Auburn became the sole source of supply for Algona. The wholesale rate paid by Algona ($2.32 per ccf in 2015, increasing to $2.40 per ccf in 2016) includes consideration of the cost of purchasing water from Tacoma. The current agreement also includes initial costs paid by Algona to Auburn for securing storage and system improvements within the Auburn system to be able to serve Algona. Auburn's Current Supply Sources: As discussed previously with the Council , some of Auburn's wells are not currently operational and are undergoing rehabilitation and repairs. Our recent Comprehensive Plan identified a need for additional water source supply to meet demand through 2035 without needing to take water from Tacoma. However, since 2012, Auburn has been purchasing water from Tacoma to meet the needs of its retail and wholesale customers at a higher cost ($2.12 per ccf winter and $2.64 per ccf summer) than water produced from Auburn supplies. The proposed renewal of the Interim Water Sales Agreement provides Auburn and WD #111 with an opportunity to renegotiate a more equitable wholesale water rate. Recommendations: 1. Consider adopting a single wholesale rate for Auburn's wholesale customers that is sufficient to recover Auburn's cost of supplying and delivering water to its wholesale customers. For 2016, increase WD #111's wholesale rate to match Algona's wholesale rate (this will require amending the rates in Auburn Municipal Code 13.06.360) and leave Algona's rates as currently adopted. 2. Proceed with a wholesale rate study in conjunction with an anticipated rate study for all Auburn utility rates in preparation for establishing rates beyond 2017. The wholesale rate study could consider the cost for Auburn to supply wholesale water from its own sources, with a surcharge to pass through the cost of any water purchased from Tacoma to meet the wholesale commitments. Reviewed by Council Committees: Councilmember: Meeting Date: December 14, 2015 Staff: Snyder Item Number: DI.B AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 3 of 57 Water District #111 and City of Algona Wholesale Water Rates DI.B Auburn City Council Study Session December 14, 2015 Presentation - Community Development and Public Works Department Page 4 of 57 Wholesale Water Customers DI .B 91!LIN T ini mum TIPP Ftarliiffl. ,,_ IMPONEMEL- i GOLF Ear 1 BREW PE,was . M ' _ F I r - L, rag ,,,..,:iii .i 1 14 ■1 /.2 00=NJ eon ,cdt 1s0' aiii NIIINmII ! e`1 ■IIIINIIIIIII! Y111;■ Page 5 of 57 Tonight's Discussion Review potential increase in wholesale water rate for Water District #ni No change proposed in Algona's wholesale water rate (as defined in the current water rate schedule ACC 13.06.360) DI.B Page 6 of 57 ge7of57 Basis of Wholesale Agreements Intertie Agreement Delivery commitment Capital investment paid to Auburn Rates Established (2012 -2017) 2015 monthly base charge 2015 cost per 100 cubic feet Interlocal Agreement 2 (1996) Take -or -Pay Agreement (2010) Interlocal Agreement 3A (2002) Interruptible (0.75 mgd) Firm (0.3 mgd) $3.7M Take -or -pay agreement $253.65 $800,000 Periodic cost of service study $7o.86 $o.99 /ccf winter $2.32 /ccf (ccf) $1.24 /ccf summer Responsibility for operation, rehabilitation /replacement cosh B Auburn Pa Auburn Factors in Determining Auburn's Wholesale Water Rate Cost of Auburn water supply, including Tacoma Equity between wholesale customers Wholesale customer's investment in Auburn water system Quantity and source of water supplied to wholesale customers Auburn's rehabilitation and replacement costs DI.B Page 8 of 57 Questions Should Water District #iii's wholesale rate be increased to match Algona's rate of $2.4o /ccf and $73.34 monthly base rate in 2016, as defined in ACC 13.06.360? Should a wholesale rate study be conducted in 2017 in conjunction with planned utility rate study to evaluate a single wholesale rate for 2018 and beyond? If Auburn purchases Tacoma water, should Auburn pass through the Tacoma wholesale rate to Auburn's wholesale customers, up to the amount purchased from Tacoma for the wholesale customers? DI.B Page 9 of 57 DI.0 C=ITY OF�4 AUBURN WASH I NCTO Agenda Subject: Adjacent Purveyor Service Areas (15 Minute Presentation /15 Minute Q &A) Department: CD & PW AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Attachments: Power point Presentation Administrative Recommendation: Date: December 8, 2015 Budget Impact: $0 For discussion only. Background Summary: Previously, the former Public Works Committee requested a review of what it would take to serve water to the area of Auburn currently being served by the City of Bonney Lake. As a follow up to the water utility optimization study completed earlier this year, staff reviewed each of the four areas of Auburn's jurisdiction that is currently served by an adjacent purveyor. These include the City of Bonney Lake, City of Kent, Lakehaven Utility District and Water District #111 who currently serve approximately 5,700 customers within Auburn's corporate boundaries. Auburn currently provides direct water service to approximately 15,000 customers. The results of the preliminary analysis of the estimated cost and feasibility of Auburn providing water service to each of these areas will be discussed with the Council at the December 14th Study Session. Background Information: City of Bonney Lake — In 1998, Auburn and Bonney Lake executed a Potential Annexation Settlement Agreement to have Bonney Lake provide water service in the South Lakeland Hills area. The boundaries have been set but are subject to change should Auburn and Bonney Lake agree to change them. Lakehaven Utility District (LUD) — In 1979, LUD and Auburn agreed to the service area boundary along the West Hill area to provide efficient water service to the properties within the service area. The agreement provides for any changes to the boundary to be by mutual agreement. AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 10 of 57 DI.0 City of Kent — In 2007 Auburn annexed a portion of Lea Hill that included a defined service area boundary for Kent's water service area which is in the north central portion of Auburn. Kent also serves the Bridges development which is within the City of Kent's jurisdiction. Outside of the Bridges, Kent serves relatively few customers in the the service area within Auburn's jurisdiction. Many of the existing houses are currently served by small, private water systems. Water District #111 (WD #111) — In 2007, Auburn annexed a portion of Lea Hill that included a defined service area boundary for WD #111 that was previously agreed by Auburn in 1978. WD #111's water service area boundary is in the northeastern Lea Hill area of Auburn. Planning and Political Considerations — Expansion of Auburn's water service areas into any of the adjacent purveyors' service areas would require revised Interlocal agreements, comprehensive water plan amendments by each entity, an amendment to Auburn's City Comprehensive Plan amendment, SEPA review for all Plan amendments, revision to the Coordinated Water System Plans in South King County and in Pierce County, review of the proposed changes by the Boundary Review Board, design and construction of any necessary facilities to provide water from Auburn, and payment for any assumed assets, if applicable. For LUD and WD #111, it would also involve assumption of a portion of a water district, such process as defined in Chapter 35.13A of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW). Reviewed by Council Committees: Councilmember: Meeting Date: December 14, 2015 Staff: Snyder Item Number: DI.0 AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 11 of 57 ADJACENT PURVEYOR SERVICE AREAS AUBURN CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION DECEMBER 14, 2015 DECEMBER 14, 2015 PRESENTATION - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS DI.0 Page 12 of 57 1 TONIGHT'S DISCUSSION Provide water service to the portion of Auburn tha currently receives water service from the City of Bonney Lake? Provide water service to other portions of Auburn that currently receive water service from City of Kent, Water District #1 1 1, or Lakehaven Utility • District? DI.0 Page 13 of 57 Service Boundary Map of Adjacent Water Purveyors DI.0 Ng iUit; ��iuiuinn,n !�d � t., arirria ra I I ff 12 1 p . ' i .I mpl4 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Large capital cost to serve Bonney Lake and Lakehaven areas More efficient operations and smaller capital cost to serve Kent and Water District # 1 1 1 areas Planning and political considerations DI.0 Page 15 of 57 COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS AUBURN ASSUMPTION OF ADJACENT AREAS Bonney Lake WD #111 Kent Lakehaven New customers, existing (future) 2,860 (3,060) 530 (1,050) 380 (810) 1,960 (2,800) Water bill savings no no yes no New water supply (cost) 1.2 mgd* ($2M) 0 mgd ($0) 0 mgd ($0) 1.1 mgd ($2M) Est. cost of new facilities (annual operating cost) $17-$24M ($60,000 /year) $2M ( <$5,000 /year) $2M ( <$5,000 /year) $16-$19M ($65,000 /year) New interlocal agreements Yes Yes Yes Yes Est. time to transfer service 10 - 15 years 2 - 4 years 2 - 4 years 10 - 15 years Approximate payback period 20 years 10 years 10 years Over 20 years *mg0I73million gallons per day Page 16 of 57 PLANNING AND POLITICAL CONSIDERATIONS Revised interlocal agreements Comprehensive Water Plan amendments Auburn City Comprehensive Plan amendment SEPA review for all Plan amendments Coordinated Water System Plan amendments (South King County and Pierce County) Boundary Review Board Assumption of a portion of a water district -mu Estimated time for implementation: 2 -15 years DI.0 Page 17 of 57 QUESTIONS Do you believe that the assumption of the Kent and WD # 1 1 1 areas warrant additional evaluation and discussion? If WD #1 1 1 is not in favor of an assumption, do you believe that the effort to pursue assumption is warranted? -iii Do you believe that expanding water service into jil the Bonney Lake and Lakehaven service areas has an acceptable return on investment and should be evaluated further? DI.0 Page 18 of 57 7 DI.D AuBuRN ITY CAF • \VASH E NGTo AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Date: Capital Facilities Plans and School Impact Fees (5 Minute December 9, 2015 Presentation /5 Minute Q &A) Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Planning and Development Staff Report on Planning Commission $0 Recommendations on Annual Camp. Plan Text Amendments Summary M atrix Staff Report on School I mpact Fees Table Comparison of School Impact Fees Pierce County Ordinance No. 2015 -76s Administrative Recommendation: Staff to review the Planning Commission's recommendations on the four (4) school districts' Capital Facilities Plans and the City's Capital Facility Plan and the related topic of future revisions to the School Impact Fee Ordinance Background Summary: See attached Staff Report on Planning Commission recommendations on Annual Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments (4 School District Capital Facilities Plans & City Capital Facilities Plan) and attachments (The 2015 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments working binder has been distributed to Councilmembers with a copy provided to the City Clerk for reference). See attached staff report on school impact fee ordinance revisions and attachments. Reviewed by Council Committees: Councilmember: Staff: Snyder Meeting Date: December 14, 2015 Item Number: DI.D AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 19 of 57 DI.D AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 20 of 57 AUB WASHINGTON AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject CPA15 -0001, 2015 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments — City Initiated Plan Policy /Text Amendments Date: December 7, 2015 Department: Community Development & Public Works Attachments: See separate summary matrix and the policy /text amendment sections of the binder Budget Impact: N/A Administrative Recommendation: City Council to review and discuss planning commission recommendation on 2015 City- Initiated Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments. Background Summary: The City of Auburn adopted amendments to its Comprehensive Plan in 1995 in response to the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements, as amended. Since then the Auburn Comprehensive Plan has been amended annually. This year the City is also updating the Comprehensive Plan in response to the periodic update required under the WA State Growth Management Act (GMA). Comprehensive plan amendments can be initiated by the City of Auburn (city- initiated) and by private citizens (privately- initiated). This year the city is initiating: • Five policy /text amendments. • (No map amendments are currently being processed with this year's amendment process) The city received three privately- initiated plan map amendments by the submittal deadline. However, the processing of these has been postponed to allow the environmental review process to be completed, as required. These are listed in the docket, but the applications are not included in the notebooks. These will be considered at a future, yet- to -be- determined time. This staff report and recommendation addresses Comprehensive Policy/Text (P/T) Amendments P/T # 1 through # 5. This is the only staff report associated with the annual comprehensive plan amendment process. In terms of process, the Comprehensive plan amendments are initially reviewed during a public hearing process before the City of Auburn Planning Commission, who then provides a recommendation to the City Council for final action. City Council consideration and action on the amendments generally occurs but is not required prior to the end of the year. Reviewed by Council & Committees: COMMITTEES: Services & Dev. Works Reviewed by Departments & Divisions: • Arts Commission COUNCIL • Building • M &O • Airport • Finance • Cemetery • Mayor • Hearing Examiner • Municipal • Finance • Parks • Human Services • Planning • Fire Planning • Park Board • Public • Legal • Police Planning Comm. • Other .1 Public Works • Human Resources Action: Committee Approval: Council Approval: Referred to Tabled ▪ Yes ❑No ▪ Yes ❑No Call for Public Hearing _/ / Until / / Until / / Councilmember: Staff: Dixon Meeting Date: December 14, 2015 Item Number: DI.D Page 21 of 57 Agenda Subject: CPA15 -0001, 2015 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendments — City Initiated Plan Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: December 7, 2015 At its December 8, 2015 public hearing, the Planning Commission reviewed the following annual comprehensive plan amendments: P/T #1 — Incorporate Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan P/T #2 — Incorporate Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan P/T #3 — Incorporate Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plan P/T #4 — Incorporate Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan P/T #5 — Incorporate City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan The Planning Commission has forward its recommendation for approval to the City council on all comprehensive plan amendments. A. Findings 1. RCW 36.70A.130 (Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA)) provides for amendments to locally adopted GMA comprehensive plans. Except in limited circumstances provided for in State law, comprehensive plan amendments shall be considered by the city or county legislative body no more frequently than once per year. 2. The City of Auburn established a June 5, 2015 deadline for the submittal of privately - initiated comprehensive plan applications (map or policy /text). Notice to the public of the filing deadline was provided on the City's website, the Seattle Times Newspaper, and sent to a compiled "interested parties" notification list in May 2015. The City received three privately- initiated plan map amendments by the submittal deadline. However, the processing of these has bene postponed to allow the environmental review process to be completed, as required by City and state law. These applications have been listed in the docket, but the application materials are not provided in the notebooks. These applications will be considered at a future unspecified time. 3. The City of Auburn received annual updates to the four school district Capital Facilities Plans whose districts occur within the City of Auburn. These Capital Facilities Plans, as well as the City's Capital Facilities Plan are referenced in Chapter 5, Capital Facilities, of the existing Auburn Comprehensive Plan and Volume 3, Capital Facilities Element, of the Updated Comprehensive Plan. The incorporation of the Capital Facilities Plans is processed as Policy /Text (P /T) amendments. 4. The environmental review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) for the school district capital facilities plans were prepared separately by each school district acting as their own lead agency, as allowed by state law. Each district issued separate Determinations of Non - Significance (DNS). 5. The environmental review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) for the remaining amendment resulted in a Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) issued for the City- initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendments on November 2, 2015 (City File # SEP15- 0030). The comment period ended November 16, 2015 and the appeal period ended November 30, 2015. The City did not receive any comments in response to the issuance of the Determination of Non - Significance (DNS). DI.D Page22of57 Agenda Subject: CPA15 -0001, 2015 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendments — City Initiated Plan Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: December 7, 2015 6. Auburn City Code Chapter 14.22 outlines the process for submittal of privately- initiated amendments and the general processing of comprehensive plan amendments as follows: "Section 14.22.100 A. The planning commission shall hold at least one public hearing on all proposed amendments to the comprehensive plan. Notice of such public hearing shall be given pursuant to Chapter 1.27 ACC and, at a minimum, include the following: 1. For site - specific plan map amendments: a. Notice shall be published once in the official newspaper of the city not less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of public hearing; b. Notice shall be mailed by first class mail to all property owners of record within a radius of 300 feet of the proposed map amendment request, not less than 10 calendar days prior to the public hearing; 2. For area -wide plan map amendments: a. Notice shall be published once in the official newspaper of the city not less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of public hearing; b. Notice shall be mailed by first class mail to all property owners of record within the area subject to the proposed amendment; c. Notice shall be posted in at least two conspicuous locations in the area subject to the proposed amendment not less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of the public hearing. B. Notwithstanding the above, the director may expand the minimum noticing provisions noted above as deemed necessary. C. Planning Commission Recommendation. The planning commission shall conduct a public hearing on all potential comprehensive plan amendments and shall make and forward a recommendation on each to the city council. The planning commission shall adopt written findings and make a recommendation consistent with those findings to the city council. D. The city council, if it elects to amend the comprehensive plan, shall adopt written findings and adopt said amendments by ordinance. E. State Review. All comprehensive plan amendments considered by the planning commission shall be forwarded for state agency review consistent with RCW 36.70A.106. F. Any appeal of an amendment to the comprehensive plan shall be made in accordance with Chapter 36.70A RCW. (Ord. 6172 § 1, 2008.)" 7. As provided in the City Code, the Comprehensive Plan amendments are initially reviewed during a public hearing process before the City of Auburn Planning Commission, who then provides a recommendation to the City Council for final action. City Council consideration and action on the amendments generally occurs, but is not required, prior to the end of the year. 8. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, the proposed comprehensive plan amendments outlined in this agenda bill were sent to the Washington State Office of Commerce and other state agencies as required for the state review on November 6, 2015. The Washington State Office of Commerce acknowledged receipt by letter dated November 9, 2015. No comments have been received from the Washington State Department of Commerce or other state agencies as of the writing of this report. DI.D Page23of57 Agenda Subject: CPA15 -0001, 2015 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendments — City Initiated Plan Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: December 7, 2015 9. Due to the nature and limited number of policy /text changes, and the lack of private initiated map amendments, the optional process for conducting a public open house was not conducted as provided for in the city code. 10. The notice of public hearing was published on November 12, 2015 in the Seattle Times which is at least 10 -days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing scheduled for December 8, 2015. 11. On December 8, 2015 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed annual amendments as part of the process required by code. 12. The following report identifies the Comprehensive Plan Map Policy /Text (P /T) amendments that were considered by the Planning Commission at their December 8, 2015 public hearing with a staff recommendation and the subsequent Planning Commission recommendation. December 8, 2015 Planning Commission Public Hearing Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments (File No. CPA15 -0001) (No map amendments are currently proposed with this year's amendment process) Comprehensive Plan Policy /Text Amendments (File No. CPA15 -0001) P/T #1 Incorporate the Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan 2015 through 2021 into the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Discussion The Auburn School District has provided the City with its annually updated Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) covering from 2015 -2021. The CFP was adopted by the Auburn School District School Board of Directors on June 8, 2015 and has been subject to separate SEPA review and a Determination of Non Significance (DNS). Information contained in the School District CFP serves as the basis for the City's collection of school impact fees on behalf of the school district. The Planning Commission action is incorporation of the Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan into the City's Comprehensive Plan. The CFP includes the following: • six —year enrollment projections • Auburn school district level of service standards • An inventory of existing facilities • The district's overall capacity of the 6 -year period • District capital construction Plan • Impact fee calculations A review of the Auburn School District's updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the District is requesting a change in the fee obligations. The net fee obligation for single - family dwellings is proposed to be $5,330.88, an increase of $1,193.67 and the requested fee for multiple - family dwellings is $2,625.01, a decrease of $893.16. The actual impact fee to be established is set by ordinance by the Auburn City Council. DI.D Page 24 of 57 Agenda Subject: CPA15 -0001, 2015 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendments — City Initiated Plan Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: December 7, 2015 Planning Commission Recommendation Planning Commission recommends approval of the Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan 2015 through 2021 to the City Council P /T #2 Incorporate the Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2016 -2021 into the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Discussion The Dieringer School District has provided the City with its annually updated Capital Facilities Plan 2016 - 2021. The CFP was adopted by the Dieringer School District Board of Directors on June 15, 2015. The CFP has been subject to separate SEPA review and a DNS. Information contained in the School District CFP serves as the basis for the City's collection of school impact fees on behalf of the school district. The Planning Commission action is incorporation of the School District Capital Facilities Plan into the City's Comprehensive Plan. The CFP includes the following: • Overview • An inventory of existing facilities • six —year enrollment projections • standard of service • Capacity projects • Finance plan • Impact fee calculations A review of the Dieringer School District's updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the District is requesting a change in the fee obligations. The net fee obligation for single - family dwellings is proposed to be $4,672.00, an increase of $1,402.00 and the requested fee for multiple family dwellings is $1,518.00; a decrease of $207.00. The actual impact fee to be established is set by ordinance by the Auburn City Council. Planning Commission Recommendation Planning Commission recommends approval of the Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2016 -2021 to the City Council. P/T #3 Incorporate the Federal Way School District 2016 Capital Facilities Plan into the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Discussion The Federal Way School District has provided the City with its annually updated Capital Facilities Plan 2016. The CFP was adopted by the Federal Way School District School Board July 28, 2015. The CFP has been subject to separate SEPA review and a DNS. Information contained in the School District CFP serves as the basis for the City's collection of school impact fees on behalf of the school district. The Planning Commission action is incorporation of the School District Capital Facilities Plan into the City's Comprehensive Plan. The CFP includes the following: • Introduction DI.D Page25of57 Agenda Subject: CPA15 -0001, 2015 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendments — City Initiated Plan Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: December 7, 2015 • Inventory of educational facilities & non - instructional facilities • Needs forecast, existing & new facilities • Six —year finance plan • Maps of district boundaries • Building capacities & portable locations • Student forecast • Capacity summaries • Impact fee calculations • Summary of changes from the 2015 plan A review of the Federal Way School District's updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the District is requesting a change in the fee obligations. The net fee obligation for single - family dwellings is proposed to be $2,899.00, representing a decrease of $2,275.00 and the requested fee for multi - family dwellings is $506.00, a decrease of $1,328.00. The actual impact fee to be established is set by ordinance by the Auburn City Council. Planning Commission Recommendation Planning Commission recommends approval of the Federal Way School District's 2016 Capital Facilities Plan to the City Council. P/T #4 Incorporate the Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan 2015 -2016 to 2020 -2021 into the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Discussion The Kent School District has provided its annually updated 2015 -2016 to 2020 -2021 Capital Facilities Plan. The CFP was adopted by the Kent School District School Board on July 14, 2015 and has been subject to separate SEPA review and a DNS. Information contained in the School District CFP serves as the basis for the City's collection of school impact fees on behalf of the school district. The Planning Commission action is incorporation of the School District Capital Facilities Plan into the City's Comprehensive Plan. The CFP includes the following: • Executive Summary • Six -year enrollment projection & history • District standard of service • Inventory, capacity & maps of existing schools • Six -year planning & construction plan • Portable classrooms • Projected classroom capacity • Finance Plan, cost basis and impact fee schedules • Summary of changes to previous plan A review of the Kent School District's updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the District is requesting a change in the fee obligations. The net fee obligation for single - family dwellings is proposed to be $4,990.00, representing a decrease of $496.00 and the requested fee for multi - family dwellings is $2,163.00, a decrease of $1,215.00. The actual impact fee to be established is set by ordinance by the Auburn City Council. DI.D Page26of57 Agenda Subject: CPA15 -0001, 2015 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendments — City Initiated Plan Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: December 7, 2015 Planning Commission Recommendation Planning Commission recommends approval of the Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan 2015 -2016 to 2020 -2021 to the City Council. CPM #5 Incorporate the City of Auburn's 6 -year Capital Facilities Plan 2016 -2021, into the City's Comprehensive Plan. Discussion A Capital Facilities Plan is one of the comprehensive plan elements required by the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) (RCW 36.70A). The GMA requires that a capital facilities plan include an inventory of existing capital facilities (showing locations and capacities), a forecast of future needs for such capital facilities, proposed locations and capacities of new or expanded capital facilities, and a minimum of a six -year plan to finance capital facilities with identified sources of funding. The proposed City of Auburn 6 -year Capital Facilities Plan 2016- 2021 satisfies the GMA requirements for a capital facilities element as part of the Comprehensive Plan. Each comprehensive plan prepared under the GMA must include a capital facilities plan element. More specifically, RCW 36.70A.070 (3) of the GMA requires the following: "A capital facilities plan element consisting of: (a) An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities, showing the locations and capacities of the capital facilities; (b) a forecast of the future needs of such capital facilities; (c) the proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital facilities; (d) at least a six -year plan that will finance such capital facilities within projected funding capacities and clearly identifies sources of public money for such purposes; and (e) a requirement to reassess the land use element if probable funding falls short of meeting existing needs and to ensure that the land use element, capital facilities plan element, and financing plan within the capital facilities plan element are coordinated and consistent. Park and recreation facilities shall be included in the capital facilities plan element." A capital facility is defined as a structure, street or utility system improvement, or other long - lasting major asset, including land. Capital facilities are provided for public purposes. Capital facilities include, but are not limited to, the following: streets, roads, highways, sidewalks, street and road lighting systems, traffic signals, domestic water systems, storm and sanitary sewer systems, parks and recreation facilities, and police and fire protection facilities. These capital facilities include necessary ancillary and support facilities. The memo dated November 10, 2014 prepared by the City's Finance Department contained in the three ring binder highlights the major changes in the CFP from last year. The proposed City of Auburn 6 -year Capital Facilities Plan 2016 -2021 is incorporated by reference in the Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 5, Capital Facilities. This will be incorporated into the "Capital Facilities Element" of the updated Comprehensive Plan (GMA required periodic update). DI.D Page27of57 Agenda Subject: CPA15 -0001, 2015 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendments — City Initiated Plan Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: December 7, 2015 Planning Commission Recommendation Planning Commission recommends approval of the City of Auburn's 6 -year Capital Facilities Plan 2016 -2021 to the City Council with the revised Pages 2, 3, 195, 197 and 202 as recommended by staff. DI.D Page28of57 Year 2015 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) Summary Matrix (CPM = Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment; P/T = Policy /Text Amendment) Created: December 9, 2015 DI.D Page 29 of 57 Page 1 of 1 Description Staff Recommendation Planning Commission Recommendation PCDC Recommendation City Council Action P/T #1 Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan Incorporate Auburn School District 2015 -2021 Capital Facilities Plan, as part of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Approval Approval Approval PC Hearing was conducted on December 8, 2015. Bob Kenworthy, Assistant Director, Capital Projects, Auburn School District, testified in favor of the request. Virginia Haugen testified in favor. P/T #2 Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan Incorporate the Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2016 -2021 as part of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Approval Approval Approval PC Hearing was conducted on December 8, 2015. No public testimony. P/T #3 Federal Way Capital Facilities Plan Incorporate Federal Way School District 2016 Capital Facilities Plan, as part of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Approval Approval Approval PC Hearing was conducted on December 8, 2015. Due to conflict, Tanya Nascimento, Enrollment and Demographic Analyst, Federal Way School District, submitted a letter for the hearing dated November 8, 2015 supporting the request. No public testimony. P/T #4 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan Incorporate Kent School District 2015/2016— 2020/2021 Capital Facilities Plan, as part of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Approval Approval Approval PC Hearing was conducted on December 8, 2015. Ralph Fortunato, CSBC, Director of Fiscal Services for the Kent School District testified in favor of the request. Virginia Haugen testified in favor. P/T City of Auburn's 6 -year Capital Facilities Plan Incorporate the City of Auburn's 6 -year Capital Facilities Plan 2016 -2020, into the City's Comprehensive Plan. Approval Approval The PC recommended approval with the 5 revised pages. Approval PC Hearing was conducted on December 8, 2015. Virginia Haugen testified in favor. The Planning Commission's packet and distribution, identified that Pages 2, 3, 195, 197, and 202 of the CFP needed to change to reflect revised schedule for the City Council Chambers Remodel Project (cp1518). The PC recommended approval with the revised 5 pages. Created: December 9, 2015 DI.D Page 29 of 57 Page 1 of 1 AUB WASHINGTON AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: ZOA15 -0005; Ordinance update related to revision of school district impact fees Date: December 7, 2015 Department: Community Development & Public Works Dept. Attachments: Table Comparison of Impact Fees indicated in each CFPs Budget Impact: (none) Pierce County Ordinance 2015 -76s Administrative Recommendation: City Council to discuss school impact fee ordinance revisions Background Summary: Title 19 (Impact Fees) of the Auburn City Code contains standards and regulations pertaining to the imposition of impact fees in the City of Auburn. Specifically, Chapter 19.02 (School Impact Fees) addresses the establishment, calculation, collection and amendment of school impact fees within the municipal boundaries of the City of Auburn. The city originally established school impact fees in 1998 by Ordinance No. 5078. Portions of four school districts lie within the City limits. Pursuant to Code Section 19.02.060 (Annual Council Review) of the Auburn City Code, on at least an annual basis, the Auburn City Council shall review the information submitted by the Districts pursuant to ACC 19.02.050. The review shall be in conjunction with any update of the capital facilities plan element of the city's comprehensive plan. The City Council may also at this time determine if an adjustment to the amount of the impact fees is necessary. The City of Auburn annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment process for 2015 included requests for City approval of the Capital Facilities Plans of the four districts as follows: * 2015 - 2021 Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan; * 2016 -2021 Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan; * 2016 Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plan; and * 2015 -2016 through 2020 -2021 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan. These requests were submitted in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.02.050 (Submission of District Capital Facilities Plan and Data) of the Auburn City Code. The School Districts' Capital Facilities Plans are contained in the working notebooks (three ring binders) for the 2015 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments, distributed to the City Council. Reviewed by Council & Committees: • Arts Commission COUNCIL COMMITTEES: • Airport • Finance • Hearing Examiner • Municipal Serv. • Human Services Planning & CD • Park Board • Public Works Planning Comm. • Other Reviewed by Departments & Divisions: • Building • M &O • Cemetery • Mayor • Finance • Parks • Fire Planning ►1 Legal • Police • Public Works • Human Resources Action: Committee Approval: • Yes • No Council Approval: • Yes • No Call for Public Hearing _ /_ /_ Referred to Until /_ /_ _ Tabled Until / / Councilmember: Staff: Dixon Meeting Date: December 14, 2015 Item Number: DI.D AUBURN * MOR_E THAN YOU IM INED age 30 of 57 Agenda Subject: Updates to School Impact Fee Ordinance Date: December 7, 2015 Definition The city's code section 19.02 contains the city's regulations governing school impact fees. It provides the following definition: "Impact fee" means a payment of money imposed upon development as a condition of development approval to pay for school facilities needed to serve new growth and development that is reasonably related to the new development that creates additional demand and need for public facilities, that is a proportionate share of the cost of the school facilities, and that is used for such facilities that reasonably benefit the new development. Related Authority Other key points of the city's regulations include: The impact fee shall be based on a capital facilities plan adopted by the district and incorporated by reference by the city as part of the capital facilities element of the city's comprehensive plan, adopted pursuant to Chapter 36.70A RCW, for the purpose of establishing the fee program. Separate fees shall be calculated for single - family and multifamily types of dwelling units, and separate student generation rates must be determined by the district for each type of dwelling unit. v The fee shall be calculated on a district -wide basis using the appropriate factors and data supplied by the district. The fee calculations shall also be made on a district -wide basis to assure maximum utilization of all available school facilities in the district which meet district standards. As a condition of the city's authorization and adoption of a school impact fee ordinance, the city and the applicable district shall enter into an interlocal agreement governing the operation of the school impact fee program, and describing the relationship and liabilities of the parties. The agreement must provide that the district shall hold the city harmless for all damages. On an annual basis (by July 1st or on a date agreed to by district and the city and stipulated in the interlocal agreement), any district for which the city is collecting impact fees shall submit the Capital facilities plan and supporting information to the city. Applicants for single - family and multifamily residential building permits shall pay the total amount of the impact fees assessed before the building permit is issued, using the impact fee schedules in effect, unless the fee has been deferred pursuant to City Ordinance No. 6341. The impact fee calculation shall be based upon the formula set forth in ACC 19.02.110, "Impact fee formula ". The formula is the city's determination of the appropriate proportionate share of the costs of public school capital facilities needed to serve new growth and development to be funded by school impact fees based on the factors defined in ACC 19.02.020. Based on this formula, the "Fee Obligation" is the "Total Unfunded Need" x 50% = Fee Calculation. The Capital Facilities Plans that were approved by the school boards contain proposed school impact fees for each of the Districts. The requests for adjustment of the school impact fees are required to be submitted concurrent with the submittal of the Capital Facilities Plans. A separate letter request is only required to be submitted to the city when the fee adjustment is requested to increase. Page 2 of 3 DI.D Page 31 of 57 Agenda Subject: Updates to School Impact Fee Ordinance Date: December 7, 2015 Council Review and Decision The setting of the actual fees occurs through separate Council action amending Chapter 19.02 of the Auburn City Code. Section 19.02.060, (Annual Council Review) specifies the following: On at least an annual basis, the city council shall review the information submitted by the district pursuant to ACC 19.02.050. The review shall be in conjunction with any update of the capital facilities plan element of the city's comprehensive plan. The city council may also at this time determine if an adjustment to the amount of the impact fees is necessary; provided, that any school impact fee adjustment that would increase the school impact fee shall require the submittal of a written request for the adjustment by the applicable school district concurrent with the submittal of the annual capital facilities plan pursuant to ACC 19.02.050. In making its decision to adjust impact fees, the city council will take into consideration the quality and completeness of the information provided in the applicable school district capital facilities plan and may decide to enact a fee less than the amount supported by the capital facilities plan. Section 19.02.060 establishes that the Auburn City Council is not obligated to accept the fees proposed by the School Districts within their submitted Capital Facilities Plans and may establish fees that the Council determines are more appropriate and consistent with the public's interest in reasonably mitigating school impacts within the affected portion of the City. Recommendation The Dieringer School District submitted a proposed fee calculation of $5,330.88 for single family residential and $2625.01 for multiple family residential based on their Capital Facilities Plan. Related to this, the Pierce County Council by Ordinance No. 2015 -76s adopted November 10, 2015 and effective January 1, 2016, established a school impact fee for the Dieringer School District of $3,330.00 for single family residential and $1,518.00 for multiple family residential. (The Dieringer School District is the only school district common to both the jurisdictions of the City of Auburn and Pierce County). Pierce County imposes the same maximum school impact fee for all school districts located in Pierce County. To be consistent, it is appropriate to establish a fee applicable to Auburn for the Dieringer School district that is the same as Pierce County's fee since it is more appropriate and consistent with the public's interest in reasonably mitigating school impacts within the affected portion of the City. The draft Ordinance will be prepared to reflect school impact fees that are the same as Pierce County's school impact fee and differs from what the Dieringer School District has requested, as historically has been done. Scheduling of Actions A discussion of the School District Capital Facilities Plans school impact fee changes is proposed to be held at the City Council Work Session on December 14, 2015 and a Draft Ordinance and first reading of the proposed ordinance is scheduled for January 4, 2016. Page 3 of 3 DI.D Page32of57 School Impact Fee Proposal (Effective Year 2016) School District Multiple Family Single Family Past 2015 fee, Per ACC 19.02 CFP says: Requested Amount Change: Past 2015 fee, Per ACC 19.02 CFP says: Requested Amount Change? Auburn $3,518.17 $2,625.01 Page 28 $2,625.01 Decrease of $893.16 $4,137.21 $5,330.88 Page 28 $5,330.88 Increase of $1,193.67 Dieringer $1,725.00 $1,518.00 Page 13 $1,518.00 Decrease of $207.00 $3,270.00 $4,672.00 Page 13 $4,672.00 Increase of $1,402.00 Federal Way $1,834.00 $506.00 Page 28 & 30 $506.00 Decrease of $1,328.00 $5,171.00 $2,899.00 Page 28 & 30 $2,899.00 Decrease of $2,275.00 Kent $3,378.00 $2,163.00 Page 31 $2,163.00 Decrease of $1,215.00 $5,486.00 $4,990.00 Page 30 $4,990.00 Decrease of $496.00 CFP = Capital Facilities Plan ACC = Auburn City Code 11 -6 -15 DI.D Page 33 of 57 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Sponsored by: Councilmember Derek Young Requested by: Pierce County Council ORDINANCE NO. 2015 -76s An Ordinance of the Pierce County Council Amending Section 4A.10.080 of the Pierce County Code, "Impact Fee Assessment and Collection," to Eliminate the Sunset Date; Amending Section 4A.30.030 of the Pierce County Code, "School Impact Fee Schedule," to Adjust School Impact Fees for 2016 Based Upon Changes in the Consumer Price Index; Requesting the Pierce County Executive to Provide Recommendations Regarding Impact Fee Deferrals Required Pursuant to Engrossed Senate Bill (ESB) 5923 for Implementation in 2016; Making Other Necessary Modifications to Title 4A of the Pierce County Code; and Setting an Effective Date. Whereas, school impact fees in Pierce County are calculated according to the formulas in Section 4A.30.020 of the Pierce County Code (PCC), then the fee is "capped" by a "Maximum Fee Obligation" (MFO) which increases annually according to the Consumer Price Index for the Seattle/Tacoma /Bremerton Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (PCC 4A.30.020 D.); and Whereas, the annual adjustment must be adopted by Ordinance following the adoption of the Capital Facilities Plan and any review of impact fees; and Whereas, it has been the practice of the Pierce County Council to only adjust impact fees in increments of five dollars, rounding up to the nearest five dollar increment; and Whereas, the Pierce County Council temporarily suspended inflationary adjustments to park and school impact fees for the years 2012 and 2013 for economic reasons through the adoption of Ordinance Nos. 2011 -81s and 2012 -71; and Whereas, school impact fees are collected for residential development in the unincorporated County for school districts that meet the requirements in Title 4A PCC; and Whereas, the Consumer Price Index for all urban customers for the Seattle - Tacoma- Bremerton area for January 2006 was calculated to be 202.25 (the base index for school impact fees); for August 2015 it was 251.62 which is an increase of 24.41 percent; and DI.D Ordinance No. 2015 -76s Pierce County CounPla 930 Tacoma Ave S, Rm 1046 Tacoma, WA 98402 Page 1 of 3 of 57 Whereas, the MFO for school districts effective in January 2006 and adopted in Ordinance No. 2004 -94s was $2,675.00 for single - family dwelling units and $1,410.00 for each multi - family dwelling unit; and Whereas, as a result of inflationary adjustments from prior years, the current MFO for schools is $3,270.00 for single - family dwelling units, and $1,725.00 for multi- family dwelling units; and Whereas, after adjusting for changes to the Consumer Price Index through August 2015 and rounding up to the nearest five dollar increment, the adjusted school MFOs are $3,330.00 for single - family dwelling units and $1,755.00 for multi - family dwelling units, an increase of $60.00 and $30.00, respectively; and Whereas, pursuant to PCC 4A.10.130 and 4A.30.010 C., the County has reviewed the relevant School Districts' Capital Facilities Plans, County Comprehensive Plan Amendments, and Title 4A PCC; and Whereas, the White River and Carbonado School Districts have requested that no impact fees be collected by Pierce County within their respective districts; and Whereas, the Council is reviewing the school impact fee changes in conjunction with the annual review and update of the Capital Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive Plan, as required by PCC 4A.10.030 A.; and Whereas, ESB 5923, Chapter 241, Laws of 2015, requires local government to adopt and maintain an impact fee deferral program for all impact fees by September 1, 2016, in order to remain eligible to collect impact fees; and Whereas, Pierce County currently has an impact fee deferral program for park and traffic impact fees which is scheduled to sunset December 31, 2015; and Whereas, in order to meet the requirements of ESB 5923, the sunset date needs to be removed and additional modifications to the deferral program may be required, to include expanding the deferral program to school impact fees; Now Therefore, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of Pierce County: Section 1. Section 4A.10.080 of the Pierce County Code, "Impact Fee Assessment and Collection," is hereby amended as shown in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Section 2. Section 4A.30.030 of the Pierce County Code, "School Impact Fee Schedule," is hereby amended as shown in Exhibit B, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. DI.D Ordinance No. 2015 -76s Page 2 of 3 Pierce County CourPa 930 Tacoma Ave S. Rm 1046 Tacoma. WA 98402 of 57 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Section 3. The Pierce County Executive is requested to develop proposed amendments to Title 4A of the Pierce County Code, "Impact Fees," related to impact fee deferrals to ensure that Pierce County's impact fee programs remain compliant with the requirements of ESB 5923. In developing the proposed amendments, the Pierce County Executive is requested to consult with school district representatives regarding school impact fee deferrals. The Pierce County Executive is further requested to present the proposed amendments to the Planning Commission for consideration no later than May 1, 2016. Section 4. This Ordinance shall become effective on January 1, 2016. PASSED this ? C'` day of , 2015. ATTEST: PIERCE COUNTY COUNCIL Pierce County, Washington Denise D. Johnson Clerk of the Council Dan Roach Council Chair Pat McCarthy Pierce County Approved 02-.5—day of 2015. Date of Publication of Notice of Public Hearing: Oc +r al I 5 Effective Date of Ordinance: J Lckc h- DI.D Ordinance No. 2015 -76s Page 3 of 3 Pierce County Couriaa 930 Tacoma Ave S, Rm 1046 Tacoma, WA 98402 of 57 Exhibit A to Ordinance No. 2015 -76s Only those portions of Section 4A.10.080 that are proposed to be amended are shown. Remainder of text, tables and /or figures is unchanged. 4A.10.080 Impact Fee Assessment and Collection. A. For all development activity located in a service area where fees have been imposed, the County shall determine the total impact fee at the time the impact fee is paid, based on the Capital Facilities Plan element of the Pierce County Comprehensive Plan and the resulting fee schedule in effect at the time of payment. B. School impact fees shall be paid to the County at the time a complete building permit application is submitted to the County. Except as otherwise provided in PCC 4A.10.080 D., traffic and park impact fees for single or multi - family residential uses shall be paid to the County either at the time of recording of the final plat or prior to building permit issuance. Traffic impact fees for non - residential uses shall be paid to the County prior to final building inspection. C. Except as otherwise provided in PCC 4A.10.080 D., the Department of Planning and Land Services shall not issue the building permit for single or multi- family construction or conduct the final building inspection for non - residential construction unless and until the impact fees set forth in this Title have been paid in the amount that they exceed exemptions or credits provided pursuant to this Title. ID. The owner /seller of single or multi - family residential property being constructed or improved for resale may request, at the time of submittal of a complete building permit application, that payment of traffic and park impact fees be deferred to the time of closing of sale or no later than 24 months after building permit issuance, whichever comes first. The request will be approved, provided the property owner agrees to the following: 1. A lien payable to the County for the estimated amount of the deferred traffic and park impact fees plus accrued interest shall be recorded against the subject property prior to building permit issuance. 2. At the time of building permit application, the property owner shall pay a non- refundable fee, the amount of which shall be determined by the Director, to cover all administrative costs incurred by the County to process the lien document, provided that this fee shall not exceed $250.00 unless otherwise approved by the Council through ordinance. In addition, said property owner shall pay the costs of recording the lien and all other related costs. 3. As consideration for the impact fee deferral, the property owner shall be responsible for either payment of interest on the deferred impact fees based on a rate of 3 percent per annum and accrued from the date of building permit issuance until the date of full payment of said impact fees or shall waive the right to recovery of fees not spent within the 10 year statutory timeframe. The consideration option to be utilized shall be specified by the property owner prior to the recording of the lien. 4. The County shall be responsible for recording the lien with the Pierce County Auditor prior to building permit issuance. DI.D Exhibit A to Ordinance No. 2015 -76s Page 1 of 2 Pierce County CourRa 930 Tacoma Ave S, Rm 1046 Tacoma, WA 98402 of 57 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 5. The property seller shall be responsible for full payment of the deferred impact fees by the closing date of sale or, in any event, no later than two years from the date of building permit issuance. In no case shall building occupancy occur prior to the full payment of the deferred traffic and parks impact fees. Notice of the prohibition on occupancy shall be included on all certificates of occupancy issued by Pierce County. The actual amount of traffic and park impact fees to be paid will be based on the fee schedules in place at the time of building permit issuance. 6. Full payment of the deferred impact fees must be made prior to any segregation of the subject property. 7. Escrow /title companies shall collect both the traffic and park impact fees, as well as the cost of releasing the lien, from the sale proceeds at the time of closing and shall forward those funds to the County. 8. The County will release the lien after the County has confirmed payment of the deferred traffic and park impact fees. IE. In the event that a property constructed or improved for resale is later proposed for lease or rental, all deferred impact fees applicable to the property pursuant to PCC 4A.10.080 D. shall become due and payable. Full payment of all deferred impact fees applicable to the subject property shall occur prior to occupancy. Upon confirmation of full payment of the deferred impact fees, Pierce County shall release the lien recorded against the property for the deferred impact fees. &F. Failure to pay impact fees as required by this Title shall constitute a Class 1 infraction and shall be subject to penalty and enforcement as set forth within Chapter 1.16 PCC. 1G. Failure to comply with limitations on occupancy established pursuant to PCC 4A.10.080 D. shall constitute a violation of the Certificate of Occupancy and shall be subject to penalty and enforcement as set forth within Title 17C PCC. -H. Pierce County may decline to allow a property owner to utilize the deferred impact fee payment option established pursuant to PCC 4A.10.080 D. for good cause. *PCC 4A.10.080 D. through H. shall sunset on December 31, 2015. DI.D Exhibit A to Ordinance No. 2015 -76s Page 2 of 2 Pierce County Cour a 930 Tacoma Ave S, Rm 1046 Tacoma, WA 98402 of 57 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Exhibit B to Ordinance No. 2015 -76s Only those portions of Section 4A.30.030 that are proposed to be amended are shown. Remainder of text, tables and /or figures is unchanged. 4A.30.030 School Impact Fee Schedule. DI.D Exhibit B to Ordinance No. 2015 -76s Page 1 of 1 Pierce County Council 930 Tacoma Ave S, Rm 1046 Tacoma, WA 984Cpa 9 of 57 PER SINGLE - FAMILY DWELLING UNIT PER MULTI- FAMILY DWELLING UNIT 20152016 Impact 20152016 Impact SCHOOL School District Fee (Maximum Fee School District Fee (Maximum Fee DISTRICT Fee Calculation for 20152016 Obligation Effective 1/01/4316 is 0 Fee Calculation for 20152016 Obligation Effective 1/01/516 is $1,725 $3,330) $1,755) Bethel $16,511 $3,270 $12,501 $1,725 $10,608 $3,330 $7,514 $1,755 Carbonado 0 0 0 0 Dieringer $5,231 $3,270 $1,839 $1,725 $4,672 $3,330 $1,518 $1,518 Eatonville $4,497 $3,215 $2,104 $1,695 0 0 0 0 Fife $2,610 $2-764-0 $5,664 $1,725 $3,216 $3,216 $6,875 $1,755 Franklin Pierce $10,032 $30 $4,530 $1,725 $3,330 $1,755 Orting $3,675 $3,270 $52 $5S $4,841 $3,330 $163 $163 Peninsula $4 $3,270 $273 $1,725 -80 $5,296 $3,330 $3,085 $1,755 Puyallup $8,955 $30, $539 $1,725 $8,144 $3,330 $2,202 $1,755 Steilacoom $4,665 $372-70 $--5-3-2 $535 $6,184 $3,330 $0 $0 Sumner $10,396 $3,270 $4,500 $1,725 $12,750 $3,330 $4,302 $1,755 White River 0 0 0 0 Ye Im $4,450 $30 $1,812 $1,725 $3,330 $1,755 DI.D Exhibit B to Ordinance No. 2015 -76s Page 1 of 1 Pierce County Council 930 Tacoma Ave S, Rm 1046 Tacoma, WA 984Cpa 9 of 57 DI.E AuBuRN ITY Cdr • \VASHENG`Or, AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Date: Year End Report - Code Enforcement and Abatement December 9, 2015 Program (20 Minute Presentation) Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Planning and Development Year End Report - CcdeEnfocementand $0 Abatement Administrative Recommendation: Background Summary: Please find undercover of this memo the PowerPoint slides that will be presented to City Council during the December 14, 2015 Study Session meeting. In hard copy form the PowerPoint slides are likely to generate a minor amount of confusion because of a number of overlapping graphics and audio clips that are embedded in the presentation. The visual display and presentation on the Council Chambers monitor will provide greater meaning and logic of the information that is conveyed by personnel from Code Enforcement. Reviewed by Council Committees: Councilmember: Meeting Date: December 14, 2015 Staff: Snyder Item Number: DI.E AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 40 of 57 CITY OF AUBURN WASHINGTON CITY OF AUBURN CODE ENFORCEMENT LitWe are more than just grass &weeds 111 IV 1-1■0111r Page 41 of 57 Page 41 of 57 Jason Arbogast — • Empeflsince 2012 • 12 years Law Enforcement experience • Has worked Corrections (fail), School Security & Federal Law Enforcement rill ■ Chris Barack - • ir'loyed since 2014 • 2 6,years Enforcement, Management & Customer Service experience • Has worked School Security, Loss Prevention & Restaurant Management Tami Kapule • Employed since 2015 • 14 years Outreach, Education & Resource experience • Has worked local Fire Department & Occupat'o Page 42 of ori,44 4 TYPES OF CASES WE SEE Illegal dumping AWARNING 41 Biohazard. Authorized personnel only. Page 43 of 57 VOICEMAILS DI.E Page 44 of 57 'c*ous animals Spiders M hMao _rows / II re • Transient's w/ possible warrants Adult Protective Services Thr I if i RIJN ; Project 'I Health= Li Li Li u pugPtSound r •■rnry r awASFPICMN STATE DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING r � A Auburn 6 LAJavuw�M nom. Department of Social 7 & Health Services 1 CA Children'sAdministralion DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY State of Washington Page 46 of 57 • Finding a Responsible Party: • Corporate entities and Bankruptcy • Introduction and Relationship Building: • We don't lack authority but legal authority does not = quick results • Notice to Correct: • Between 1 and 15 working days to comply • Notice of Infraction and /or Notice of Penalty: • When there is failure to comply with NTC — tickets and liens • Abatement: • Requires Council action and costs money DUE PROCESS — IT CAN TAKE TIME Page 47 of 57 0 STREET SE Page 48 of 57 1 28TH STREET SE Page 50 of 57 Prior to 2015 a dedicated abatement budget did not exist. Due to the lack of budget, doing abatements were few and far between. Only the worst case scenario properties which presented life safety issues, were abated. Now with a dedicated abatement budget, we have been able to get those neglected properties cleaned up for the greater good of the community and City. This greater good has been expressed in face to face meetings on the street with citizens, as well as phone calls saying "thank you!" 1 or --11 Without the generous abatement budget, we would not have been able to evolve as a department like we have. With that being said, DI.E Page 51 of 57 • Community utreach, Ed uction Connection to KAY MIST! • Changing the administrative provisions of the code; more efficiency and faster. • Proactive engagement of multifamily property owners. • Focus on Impression Corridors and gateways. • Expanding mental health connections. • Expanding volunteerism to resolve issues. • Renewed approach to City graffiti response. DI.E Page 56 of 57 Thank you! Continuing to build & maintain relationships for a better community