The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11-28-2016 CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION AGENDA (2)City Council Study Session November 28, 2016 - 5:30 PM City Hall Annex - 1 East Main Street AGENDA Watch the meeting LIVE! Watch the meeting video Meeting videos are not available until 72 hours after the meeting has concluded. I. CALL TO ORDER A. Roll Call II. ANNOUNCEMENTS, REPORTS, AND PRESENTATIONS III. AGENDA ITEMS FOR COUNCIL DISCUSSION A. Tourism Lodging Tax Committee and Tourism Board Update (10 Minute Presentation)* (Hinman) B. City Council Organization Committee/Study Session Hybrid C. Police Department Range History & Usage (10 Minute Presentation)* (Lee) A brief overview of the Auburn Police Department's range history and usage. D. 3rd Quarter 2016 Financial Report (10 Minute Presentation)* (Coleman) E. Ordinance No. 6632 (10 Minute Presentation)* (Snyder) An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Auburn, Washington, relating to Planning; adopting the 2016 Annual Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Amendments pursuant to the provisions of RCW Chapter 36.70A F. Ordinance No. 6627 (5 Minute Presentation)* (Snyder) An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Auburn, Washington amending sections 19.02.115, 19.02.120, 19.02.130 and 19.02.140 of the Auburn City Code relating to School Impact Fees G. Ordinance No. 6630 (5 Minute Presentation)* (Coleman) An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Auburn, Washington, amending Section 13.06.360 of the Auburn City Code relating to utility rates. H. Ordinance No. 6633 (10 Minute Presentation)* (Snyder) An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Auburn, Washington, creating a permit for truck parking on city streets and restricting the movement of large vehicles in the downtown urban center I. Capital Project Status Update and Feature Capital Project (20 Minute Presentation)* (Snyder) J. 2015 State of Our Streets Report (10 Minute Presentation)* (Snyder) Page 1 of 181 K. Homelessness Taskforce Update (10 Minute Presentation)* (Hinman) L. Emergency Management Winter Weather Preparation Update (10 Minute Presentation) (Hinman) IV. 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 2 of 181 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Tourism Lodging Tax Committee and Tourism Board Update (10 Minute Presentation) Date: November 21, 2016 Department: Administration Attachments: Tourism Update Budget Impact: $0 Administrative Recommendation: Background Summary: Reviewed by Council Committees: Councilmember: Staff:Hinman Meeting Date:November 28, 2016 Item Number:DI.A AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINEDDI.A Page 3 of 181 City of Auburn City Council Study Session 11-28-16 2016 Update Briefing Tourism Lodging Tax Committee Auburn Tourism Board Douglas Lein Mgr. City of Auburn Department: Administration Division: Economic development DI.A Page 4 of 181 Lodging Tax Advisory Committee & Tourism Board The board serves in an advisory capacity to the mayor and city council, as the tourism board, to be distinguished from the city’s lodging tax advisory committee, established by city ordinance codified under Chapter 2.76 ACC, and pursuant to RCW 67.28.1817. (Ord. 6041 §1, 2006.) The tourism board is created to assist the city council formulate strategies for tourism-related activities, projects and programs geared to promote the city of Auburn as a tourist destination, and enhance the ability of local businesses to serve the needs of tourists and the tourist industry in Auburn. DI.A Page 5 of 181 2016 Auburn Tourism Business Plan Vision Statement The Lodging Tax Advisory Committee’s (LTAC) vision to is to capitalize on partnerships that showcase the city’s location, businesses, entertainment, festivals, shopping and gaming assets to increase tourism activity. Objectives Increase hotel occupancies and generate greater revenues for tourism marketing activities. Encourage sustained, year round visitors by promoting shoulder and off-season periods. Increase lengths of stay by converting corporate business travelers and other visitors into tourists. Promote Retail options as part of tourism DI.A Page 6 of 181 2016 in Review 52,000.00 in tourism grants approved RFP released for Tourism Marketing Consultant LTAC & ATB Retreat workshop 2016 Business plan approved 2016 Budget amendment approved 2017 & 2018 Budgets approved Tourism Assigned to Economic Development Division DI.A Page 7 of 181 2016 in Review Tourism Coordinator position filled Tourism Marketing Consultant contract finalized 2017 & 2018 Marketing Plan Development Branding & Marketing plan New website and video Media Buy budget 4th Qtr. Media Buy planDI.A Page 8 of 181 Partnering Lodging –Entertainment-Retail The campaign will run from November 4-December 31. In addition to positioning the city as a festive place to celebrate the holidays, we will specifically promote the marquee events. Magical Night of Giving November 6 Outlet Collection Holiday Gift Festival November 12-13 Emerald Downs Santa Parade and Tree Lighting, City Hall Yule Be Rocking Concert, Auburn Avenue Theater December 3 Christmas Story The Musical, Auburn Avenue Theater December 10, 11, 17, 18 December 9, 10, 15, 16, 17 New Year’s Eve @ Muckleshoot Casino and All local locations that will have New Year’s events. December 31 •Webpage •Radio Ads •Reports •Print AdsDI.A Page 9 of 181 Thank you Questions 2016 Update Briefing Tourism Lodging Tax Committee Auburn Tourism Board Douglas Lein Mgr. City of Auburn Department: Administration Division: Economic development DI.A Page 10 of 181 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Police Department Range History & Usage (10 Minute Presentation) Date: November 10, 2016 Department: Police Attachments: Auburn Police Range Budget Impact: $0 Administrative Recommendation: Background Summary: Reviewed by Council Committees: Councilmember: Staff:Lee Meeting Date:November 28, 2016 Item Number:DI.C AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINEDDI.C Page 11 of 181 Auburn Police Range Courage Honor Integrity Professionalism DI.C Page 12 of 181 Range Location •Located at the base of Terrace Drive and 15th Street NW •Entrance was originally on 15th street northwest, now on Terrace Drive •King County parcel 1121049003, total 39.13 acres •Range occupies the southeast corner DI.C Page 13 of 181 Range Location DI.C Page 14 of 181 Range Location DI.C Page 15 of 181 DI.C Page 16 of 181 Range History DI.C Page 17 of 181 Range History •Not open for Public usage •Known to have been used as a Police Range since at least the 1950’s •Originally faced west, reconfigured in the late 1990’s •Currently facing north/northwest DI.C Page 18 of 181 Range History 1960 2016 DI.C Page 19 of 181 Current Amenities •Range building constructed in 2013 •No running water •Port a Potty serviced weekly •Benches/weapons stands created by Boy Scouts as service projects •Gravel and foliage maintenance done by Public Works upon request •Power is available but not in use DI.C Page 20 of 181 Current Amenities DI.C Page 21 of 181 Design •Gravel base with earth berms surrounding firing lanes •Backdrop is sand with earth behind •Trees/hill surround site to help minimize noise DI.C Page 22 of 181 Design DI.C Page 23 of 181 Range Security •Entrance gate off Terrace Drive is padlocked •Range proper is completely fenced with barbed wire on top and separate gate •No Trespassing signs posted around perimeter DI.C Page 24 of 181 Range Security DI.C Page 25 of 181 Range Security DI.C Page 26 of 181 Current Use •Originally used 7 days a week day/night by any agency that requested •Currently only APD, Valley SWAT, and SCORE can use the range. Retired Law Enforcement qualifications •Range hours are 0800-1600 Monday-Friday •Any night shooting or weekends have to have authorization by Chief. •Only two Saturdays used since 2014 •Weapons used include handguns/rifles max distance 100 yards. DI.C Page 27 of 181 Questions? DI.C Page 28 of 181 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: 3rd Quarter 2016 Financial Report (10 Minute Presentation) Date: November 21, 2016 Department: Finance Attachments: Q3 Financial Report Budget Impact: $0 Administrative Recommendation: For discussion only. Background Summary: The quarterly financial report summarizes the general state of Citywide financial affairs and highlights significant items or trends that the City Council should be aware of. The attachment provides the third quarter 2016 status report based on financial data available as of October 28, 2016 for the period ending September 30, 2016 and sales tax information representing business activity that occurred through July 2016. Reviewed by Council Committees: Councilmember: Staff:Coleman Meeting Date:November 28, 2016 Item Number:DI.D AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINEDDI.D Page 29 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 General Fund Summary Property TaxesSales TaxesOther TaxesIntergovernmental(Grants, etc.)DevelopmentService FeesCulture &RecreationOther Fees& ChargesOtherRevenuesPersonnelSupplies& ServicesIntergovernmentalOther ExpendituresRevenues Expenditures $0 $5 $10 $15 $20 $25 $30 MillionsYTD Budget YTD Actuals (Favorable) YTD Actuals (Unfavorable) Year-To-Date General Fund Revenues and Expenditures (Through Q3-2016)$41.7 $50.0$45.0 $46.8 Total Revenues Total Expenditures $0 $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60 MillionsCouncil& MayorAdministrativeServicesCommunity &Human ServicesMunicipal Court& ProbationHumanResourcesFinanceCity AttorneyCommunityDevelopmentJail - SCOREPolicePublic WorksParks, Arts& RecreationStreetsNon-Departmental$0 $5 $10 $15 $20 MillionsYTD Budget YTD Actuals (Favorable) YTD Actuals (Unfavorable) Year-To-Date General Fund Expenditures by Department(Through Q3-2016) 1DI.D Page 30 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 September 2016 Financial Report General Fund 2015 Summary of Sources and Uses Annual Budget YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Actual Amount Operating Revenues Property Tax 5 17,733,500$ 9,763,600$ 9,920,666$ 9,500,023$ 157,066$ 1.6 % Sales Tax 6 14,572,000 10,793,100 11,036,028 10,850,092 242,928 2.3 % Sales Tax - Annexation Credit 1,912,000 1,411,100 1,500,373 1,469,642 89,273 6.3 % Criminal Justice Sales Tax 1,747,000 1,288,300 1,454,287 1,341,552 165,987 12.9 % Brokered Natural Gas Tax 282,000 226,500 177,005 195,126 (49,495) (21.9)% City Utilities Tax 8 3,521,200 2,618,300 2,901,188 2,712,038 282,888 10.8 % Admissions Tax 333,600 257,800 269,321 278,210 11,521 4.5 % Electric Tax 8 3,297,700 2,511,200 2,733,513 2,393,107 222,313 8.9 % Natural Gas Tax 8 852,000 754,800 833,093 878,683 78,293 10.4 % Cable TV Franchise Fee 9 906,700 678,500 728,136 689,428 49,636 7.3 % Cable TV Franchise Fee - Capital 64,000 48,000 49,877 53,921 1,877 3.9 % Telephone Tax 8 1,620,000 1,233,600 1,144,823 1,271,170 (88,777) (7.2)% Garbage Tax (external)8 106,000 79,470 92,985 84,177 13,515 17.0 % Leasehold Excise Tax 33,000 23,200 191,475 45,968 168,275 725.3 % Gambling Excise Tax 334,400 276,800 403,771 147,986 126,971 45.9 % Taxes sub-total 47,315,100$ 31,964,270$ 33,436,540$ 31,911,123$ 1,472,270$ 4.6 % Business License Fees 11 221,000$ 127,700$ 106,657$ 154,096$ (21,044)$ (16.5)% Building Permits 10 1,190,000 938,800 1,432,215 977,631 493,415 52.6 % Other Licenses & Permits 533,600 382,200 582,773 434,921 200,573 52.5 % Intergovernmental (Grants, etc.)12 5,627,893 4,073,903 4,179,792 3,929,887 105,889 2.6 % Charges for Services: General Government Services 13 67,200 49,300 61,991 60,462 12,691 25.7 % Public Safety 13 520,300 395,678 453,345 396,978 57,666 14.6 % Development Services Fees 14 680,600 501,600 794,082 933,627 292,482 58.3 % Culture and Recreation 15 2,105,080 1,810,600 2,076,505 2,030,266 265,905 14.7 % Fines and Forfeits 16 796,180 613,000 696,072 711,380 83,072 13.6 % Fees/Charges/Fines sub-total 11,741,853$ 8,892,781$ 10,383,431$ 9,629,247$ 1,490,650$ 16.8 % Interest and Other Earnings 17 35,200$ 26,000$ 81,161$ 32,834$ 55,161$ 212.2 % Rents, Leases and Concessions 17 630,600 508,600 645,327 574,287 136,727 26.9 % Contributions and Donations 17 32,000 25,100 26,883 31,947 1,783 7.1 % Other Miscellaneous 17 157,800 117,900 228,553 159,007 110,653 93.9 % Transfers In 220,926 139,000 139,112 76,000 112 0.1 % Insurance Recoveries - Capital & Operating 25,000 18,743 58,094 131,404 39,352 210.0 % Other Revenues sub-total 1,101,526$ 835,343$ 1,179,131$ 1,005,479$ 343,789$ 41.2 % Total Operating Revenues 60,158,479$ 41,692,393$ 44,999,102$ 42,545,850$ 3,306,709$ 7.9 % Operating Expenditures Council & Mayor 1,085,833$ 810,500$ 802,274$ 662,611$ 8,226$ 1.0 % Administration 1,350,722 1,013,400 831,249 746,156 182,151 18.0 % Community & Human Services 1,329,547 819,200 577,608 644,041 241,592 29.5 % Municipal Court & Probation 2,355,889 1,974,000 1,892,377 1,888,511 81,623 4.1 % Human Resources 1,406,554 1,016,200 930,960 793,308 85,240 8.4 % Finance 1,300,773 1,029,500 898,832 975,764 130,668 12.7 % City Attorney 2,194,830 1,568,500 1,410,070 1,370,421 158,430 10.1 % Community Development 4,731,841 3,507,500 3,014,962 2,868,071 492,538 14.0 % Jail - SCORE 5,583,542 3,485,746 3,014,605 2,744,147 471,141 13.5 % Police 23,794,252 17,687,100 17,490,649 16,388,842 196,451 1.1 % Public Works 2,809,335 2,090,900 2,262,105 1,975,023 (171,205) (8.2)% Parks, Arts & Recreation 11,584,205 8,768,200 8,627,328 8,320,497 140,872 1.6 % Streets 3,466,563 2,389,100 2,256,727 2,044,555 132,373 5.5 % Non-Departmental 5,539,627 3,862,413 2,783,240 4,145,992 1,079,173 27.9 % Total Operating Expenditures 68,533,514$ 50,022,259$ 46,792,985$ 45,567,941$ 3,229,273$ 6.5 % Page Ref 2016 2016 YTD Budget vs. Actual Favorable (Unfavorable) Percentage 2DI.D Page 31 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 Executive Summary This Executive Summary provides an overview of the City’s overall financial position for the fiscal period ending September 30, 2016, reflecting financial data available as of October 28, 2016. Through September 2016, General Fund revenues totaled $45.0 million compared to a budget of $41.7 million, and were $2.5 million higher than the revenues collected during the same period in 2015. Some notable variances to budget year-to-date include: • Property tax collections through Q3-2016 totaled $9.9 million, which is 1.6% or $157,000 above budget expectations and exceed collections in the same period last year by $421,000, or 4.4%. The majority of property tax revenues are collected during the months of April and October, coinciding with the due dates for the County property tax billings. [page 5] • General Fund retail sales tax revenues totaled $11.0 million, exceeding budget by 2.3% or $243,000, and exceeding 2015 collections by $186,000. The primary area of significant increase in sales activity compared to 2015 was the services category. [page 6] Collections in criminal justice sales tax revenues exceeded budget by $166,000, or 12.9%. • The Other Taxes category performed better than budget through Q3-2016. City utility tax revenues exceeded budget by $283,000 or 10.8%, predominately due to higher than budgeted capital system development revenues collected in the Water, Sewer and Storm funds. Electric and natural gas tax revenues collected through September exceeded budget by $222,000 and $78,000, respectively. These revenues were somewhat offset by an unfavorable variance in telephone tax collections of $89,000. [page 8] Year-to-date collections of leasehold excise taxes were $168,000 favorable to budget due to an unbudgeted payment for the Emerald Downs property which is tribally owned. Gambling excise tax revenues exceeded budget by $127,000 primarily due to the timing of payments: the City’s main remitter of card game taxes paid 6 months worth of taxes from 2015 in the current year. • Building permit revenue through Q3-2016 exceeded budget by $493,000, and already exceeds year-end budget expectations. This was predominately due to a higher than anticipated volume of building permits as well as multiple large commercial building permits issued. [page 10] • Other licenses and permit revenues exceeded budget expectations by $201,000 primarily due to higher than anticipated revenue collected for plumbing permits. This increase in revenues was a result of increased construction activity within the City. One project in particular that contributed to this influx of revenue is the permitting for the Promenade Apartment Project on 312th Street. • Development services fees revenues collected year-to-date exceeded budget expectations by $292,000, or 58.3%. This is predominately due to higher than anticipated revenues collected for plan check services related to multiple single family and commercial construction projects within the City. [page 14] 3DI.D Page 32 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 • Culture and recreation revenues exceeded year-to-date budget by $266,000, and exceeded revenues collected the same period in 2015 by $46,000, or 2.3%. Revenue sources that were significantly above budget include golf course and special events revenues. [page 15] • Year-to-date rents, leases and concession revenues were $137,000 or 26.9% above budget, and were $71,000 more than collected the same period in 2015. This favorable variance is attributed to higher than anticipated revenues collected for City owned facility rentals and parking lot fees. [page 17] General Fund expenditures through the third quarter of 2016 totaled $46.8 million compared to a budget of $50.0 million, representing a 6.5% favorable variance to budget. All departments operated within their allocated budget through Q3-2016 with the exception of the Public Works department. This department is running over budget YTD through September by $171,000, or 8.2%. The variance to budget is seen in salary and benefit expenditures, as project engineers are charging more of their time to general fund projects versus transportation and utility projects. Year-to-date through September General Fund expenditures are $1.2 million, or 2.7%, higher than the same period last year. Salary and benefit costs increased by $1.4 million, or 5.7% compared to the same period in 2015. This year-over-year increase is due primarily to an increase in Council approved FTEs (Full Time Equivalents) and increased costs associated with healthcare and pension benefits. In addition, charges for services paid to Valley Communications for 911 services have increased year-over-year by $406,000, or 20.0%. These increased expenditures were somewhat offset by a reduction in intergovernmental expenditures by $915,000 as compared to the same period in 2015. $41.7 M $50.0 M $45.0 M $46.8 M $0.0 $10.0 $20.0 $30.0 $40.0 $50.0 $60.0 Revenues Expenditures $ Millions General Fund 2016 Revenues vs. Expenditures 2016 YTD Actual 2016 YTD Budget 4DI.D Page 33 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 Revenues The combined total of property, sales/use, utility, gambling, and admissions taxes provides approximately 80% of all resources supporting general governmental activities. The following section provides additional information on these sources. Property Tax collections through Q3-2016 totaled $9,921,000, which is 1.6% or $157,000 above budget expectations. Property tax collections through Q3-2016 exceeded collections for the same period last year by $421,000, or 4.4%. The majority of property tax revenues are collected during the months of April and October, coinciding with the due dates for the County property tax billings. $0.0 $2.0 $4.0 $6.0 $8.0 $10.0 $12.0 $14.0 $16.0 $18.0 $20.0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsProperty Taxes 2016 Budget 2016 YTD Actual 2015 Actual 5DI.D Page 34 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 Sales tax collections year-to-date totaled $12.7 million, of which $11.0 million was distributed to the General Fund and $1.7 million was distributed to the Local Street Fund (SOS) program.* Through September 2016, total sales tax revenue distributions to the General Fund exceeded budget expectations by $243,000, or 2.3%. * Beginning in 2013, Local Street Fund (Fund 103) street repairs have been funded from sales taxes on construction. The total amount transferred year-to-date through Q3-2016 was $1,651,379. The graphic above presents sales taxes under the current policy. $0.0 $2.0 $4.0 $6.0 $8.0 $10.0 $12.0 $14.0 $16.0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsSales & Use Tax (Net of Revenue from Construction) 2016 Budget 2016 YTD Actual 2015 Actual 6DI.D Page 35 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 The following table breaks out the City’s base sales tax, excluding Criminal Justice, Annexation Credit and Streamlined Sales Tax Mitigation, by major business sector. Total sales tax revenue collected through Q3-2016 exceeded prior year collections by $223,000, or 1.8%. The business sectors showing the largest increase in revenues compared to last year were the service and construction industries. Sales tax revenue on construction, which is transferred to the Local Street Fund (Fund 103) for local street repair and maintenance, totaled $1,651,000, which is $48,000 higher than the same period in 2015. Year-to-date sales tax on construction revenue exceeded budget expectations by $498,000 or 43.1%. 2015 2016 Component Group Actual Actual Amount Construction 1,602,935$ 1,651,379$ 48,443$ 3.0 % Manufacturing 666,248 602,662 (63,586)(9.5)% Transportation & Warehousing 46,931 65,962 19,031 40.5 % Wholesale Trade 934,506 930,697 (3,808)(0.4)% Automotive 2,772,680 2,746,266 (26,415)(1.0)% Retail Trade 3,719,022 3,636,892 (82,130)(2.2)% Services 2,651,561 3,018,436 366,875 13.8 % Miscellaneous 51,225 15,603 (35,622)(69.5)% YTD Total 12,445,109$ 12,667,897$ 222,788$ 1.8 % Change from 2015 September 2016 Comparison of Sales Tax Collections by SIC Group Percentage $0.0 $0.2 $0.4 $0.6 $0.8 $1.0 $1.2 $1.4 $1.6 $1.8 $2.0 $2.2 $2.4 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsSales Tax on Construction Transfer 2016 Budget 2016 YTD Actual 2015 Actual 7DI.D Page 36 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 Utility Taxes consist of interfund taxes on City utilities (Water, Sewer, Storm and Solid Waste) and taxes on external utilities (Electric, Natural Gas, Telephone and Solid Waste). Utility taxes collected through Q3-2016 totaled $7.7 million and exceeded year-to-date budget by $508,000, or 7.1%. Favorable variances in City interfund utility tax, electric tax, natural gas tax and solid waste tax revenues more than offset lower than expected collections from the telecommunication industry. City interfund utility tax revenue was $283,000 or 10.8% higher than the year-to-date budget. A significant portion of this favorability to budget is predominately due to higher than budgeted capital system development revenues collected in the Water, Sewer and Storm funds. $0.0 $2.0 $4.0 $6.0 $8.0 $10.0 $12.0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsUtility Tax 2016 Budget 2016 YTD Actual 2015 Actual 2015 2016 2016 Utility Tax Type YTD Actual YTD Budget YTD Actual Amount Amount City Interfund Utility Taxes 2,712,038$ 2,618,300$ 2,901,188$ $ 189,150 7.0 % $ 282,888 10.8 % Electric 2,393,107 2,511,200 2,733,513 340,406 14.2 %222,313 8.9 % Natural Gas 878,683 754,800 833,093 (45,590) (5.2)%78,293 10.4 % Telephone 1,271,170 1,233,600 1,144,823 (126,347) (9.9)%(88,777) (7.2)% Solid Waste (external)84,177 79,470 92,985 8,808 10.5 %13,515 17.0 % YTD Total 7,339,175$ 7,197,370$ 7,705,602$ $ 366,427 5.0 % $ 508,232 7.1 % September 2016 Utility Tax by Type 2016 vs. 2015 Actual 2016 vs. Budget Percentage Percentage 8DI.D Page 37 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 Cable TV Franchise Fees, which are collected quarterly, totaled $728,000 for Q3-2016. Year- to-date revenues exceeded budget of $679,000 by $50,000, or 7.3%. $0 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700 $800 $900 $1,000 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th QuarterThousandsCable TV Franchise Fee 2016 Budget 2016 YTD Actual 2015 Actual 9DI.D Page 38 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 Licenses and Permits include business licenses, building permits, plumbing, electric and other licenses and permit fees. Building permit fees and business licenses make up about 70% of the annual budgeted revenue in this category. Building permit revenues collected through September total $1.4 million and compare to a year- to-date budget of $939,000. Building permits issued through September totaled 660, and compare to 594 issued during the same period in 2015. Major projects contributing to revenues this quarter include building permits for the Promenade Apartment Project, Lakeland Storage and the Green River College Student Affairs building, as well as other projects and numerous housing developments within the City – most notably Lakeland Hills Estates and Calla Crest. $0.0 $0.2 $0.4 $0.6 $0.8 $1.0 $1.2 $1.4 $1.6 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsBuilding Permits 2016 Budget 2016 YTD Actual 2015 Actual 10DI.D Page 39 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 Business license revenues collected through September total $107,000 and compare to budget of $128,000; these revenues were below budget by $21,000 largely due to the timing of collections. The graphic below reflects the timing of payments by business owners, where the majority of business license payments are typically collected during the first two months of the year and the last month of the year. $0 $20 $40 $60 $80 $100 $120 $140 $160 $180 $200 $220 $240 $260 $280 $300 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecThousandsBusiness Licenses 2016 Budget 2016 YTD Actual 2015 Actual 11DI.D Page 40 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 Intergovernmental revenues include grants (direct and indirect Federal, state and local), compact revenue from the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT), intergovernmental, and state shared revenues. Collections to date total $4.2 million and were $106,000, or 2.6% higher than budget. Favorable variances in Criminal Justice High Crime revenues and Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax revenues offset the reduced revenues received in Federal and State grant monies. Year-to- date, grant revenues collected are under budget although this is primarily due to the timing of when grant reimbursement is requested. Effective during the state’s 2016-2017 fiscal year budget cycle, the City of Auburn qualified for the Criminal Justice High Crime revenue distribution monies (distributions are made quarterly between July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2017). The eligibility requirements are based upon the City’s crime rate statistics – those Cities whose crime rate exceeds 125% of the statewide average qualify for the distribution. The first distribution was received in July and totaled $143,000. 2015 2016 2016 Revenue YTD Actual YTD Budget YTD Actual Amount Amount Federal Grants 148,202$ 228,600$ 181,274$ $ 33,073 22.3 % $ (47,326)(20.7)% State Grants 192,790 152,000 120,966 (71,824) (37.3)%(31,034) (20.4)% Interlocal Grants 9,707 13,400 28,973 19,267 0.0 %15,573 116.2 % Muckleshoot Casino Emerg.449,301 472,500 496,524 47,223 10.5 %24,024 5.1 % Intergovernmental Service 14,423 10,195 17,304 2,882 20.0 %7,109 69.7 % State Shared Revenues: Streamlined Sales Tax 1,468,082 1,500,000 1,443,924 (24,158) (1.6)%(56,076) (3.7)% Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax 784,333 788,100 823,044 38,712 4.9 %34,944 4.4 % Criminal Justice - High Crime 96,509 48,000 142,628 46,118 47.8 %94,628 197.1 % Criminal Justice - Population 14,843 13,500 15,480 637 4.3 %1,980 14.7 % Criminal Justice - Special Prog.54,433 50,800 56,494 2,061 3.8 %5,694 11.2 % Marijuana Enforcement 4,881 14,625 19,589 14,708 301.3 %4,964 33.9 % State DUI 8,328 10,100 8,843 515 6.2 %(1,257) (12.4)% Fire Insurance Tax 75,702 70,000 76,569 867 1.1 %6,569 9.4 % Liquor Excise 117,851 226,958 259,959 142,107 120.6 %33,001 14.5 % Liquor Profit 490,501 475,125 488,220 (2,282) (0.5)%13,095 2.8 % Total State Shared:3,115,465 3,197,208 3,334,750 219,284 7.0 %137,542 4.3 % YTD Total 3,929,887$ 4,073,903$ 4,179,792$ 249,905$ 6.4 %105,889$ 2.6 % September 2016 Intergovernmental 2016 vs. 2015 Actual 2016 vs. Budget % Change % Change 12DI.D Page 41 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 Charges for Services consist of general governmental services, public safety, development service fees and cultural & recreation fees. Overall, charges for services collected through Q3- 2016 totaled $3.4 million and compare to a year-to-date budget of $2.8 million; they were 1.0% or $35,000 less than revenues collected the during the same period in 2015. General governmental revenues through Q3-2016 totaled $62,000 compared to a budget of $49,000. Budget expectations for these revenues were revised from the prior year due to the fact that the City no longer provides services to the City of Algona; therefore, the City does not receive reimbursement for services. The majority of the favorable variance was due to increased sales related to passport services, which are running $14,000 higher than year-to- date budget and $8,000 higher than collections the same period in 2015. Public safety revenues consist of revenues generated for Police Officer extra duty overtime, where officers are contracted for services and reimbursement is made by the hiring contractor. Effective June 2014, public safety revenue also includes reimbursement from the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT) for a full-time dedicated Police Officer and associated expenditures. Public safety revenues collected year-to-date totaled $453,000, compared to budget of $396,000. Year-over-year revenues collected increased by $56,000 – which was a result of a 14.3% increase in billable hours for extra duty overtime, compared to the same period in 2015. 2015 2016 2016 Revenue YTD Actual YTD Budget YTD Actual Amount Amount General Government 60,462$ 49,300$ 61,991$ $ 1,529 2.5 % $ 12,691 25.7 % Public Safety 396,978 395,678 453,345 56,367 14.2 %57,666 14.6 % Development Services 933,627 501,600 794,082 (139,545) (14.9)%292,482 58.3 % Culture & Recreation 2,030,266 1,810,600 2,076,505 46,239 2.3 %265,905 14.7 % YTD Total 3,421,332$ 2,757,178$ 3,385,923$ (35,409)$ (1.0)% $628,745 22.8 % September 2016 Charges for Services by Type 2016 vs. 2015 Actual 2016 vs. Budget Percentage Percentage 13DI.D Page 42 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 Development services fee collections, which primarily consist of plan check fees, totaled $794,000 and already exceed annual budget expectations by $113,000. Year to date plan check revenues, the largest component of development services fees, totaled $587,000 as compared with an annual budget of $550,000 and a year-to-date budget of $405,000. Revenues collected through Q3-2016 are from numerous commercial and residential projects including the Multicare remodel project, Lakeland Storage, improvements at Boeing as well as plans for Lakeland Hills Estates, Edgeview and Mountain View North housing developments. $0.0 $0.2 $0.4 $0.6 $0.8 $1.0 $1.2 $1.4 $1.6 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsDevelopment Service Fees 2016 Budget 2016 YTD Actual 2015 Actual 14DI.D Page 43 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 Culture and recreation revenues totaled $2.1 million, exceeding year-to-date budget by $266,000 and exceeding revenues collected the same period the year prior by $46,000, or 2.3%. Revenue sources with significant increases compared to 2015 include Special Events revenue and revenue generated from the Cultural Arts Program. $0.0 $0.2 $0.4 $0.6 $0.8 $1.0 $1.2 $1.4 $1.6 $1.8 $2.0 $2.2 $2.4 $2.6 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsCulture & Recreation 2016 Budget 2016 YTD Actual 2015 Actual 15DI.D Page 44 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 Fines & Penalties include traffic and parking infraction penalties, criminal fines (including criminal traffic, criminal non traffic and other criminal offenses) as well as non-court fines such as false alarm fines. Total revenues collected through Q3-2016 totaled $696,000, and compare to a budget of $613,000. Significant sources of revenue increases compared to year-to-date budget expectations include increase in false alarm fines and parking infractions. 2015 2016 2016 Month YTD Actual YTD Budget YTD Actual Amount Amount Civil Penalties 8,823$ 11,900$ 21,179$ $ 12,355 140.0 % $ 9,279 78.0 % Civil Infraction Penalties 384,758 349,800 358,003 (26,756) (7.0)%8,203 2.3 % Redflex Photo Enforcement 1,859 0 13,550 11,691 628.9 %13,550 N/A % Parking Infractions 105,877 83,500 100,942 (4,936) (4.7)%17,442 20.9 % Criminal Traffic Misdemeanor 41,568 37,600 38,984 (2,584) (6.2)%1,384 3.7 % Criminal Non-Traffic Fines 36,895 36,300 34,146 (2,750) (7.5)%(2,154) (5.9)% Criminal Costs 42,706 33,500 46,044 3,338 7.8 %12,544 37.4 % Non-Court Fines & Penalties 88,892 60,400 83,226 (5,666) (6.4)%22,826 37.8 % YTD Total 711,380$ 613,000$ 696,072$ $ (15,308)(2.2)% $ 83,072 13.6 % September 2016 Fines & Forfeits by Type 2016 vs. 2015 Actual 2016 vs. Budget Percentage Percentage $0.0 $0.1 $0.2 $0.3 $0.4 $0.5 $0.6 $0.7 $0.8 $0.9 $1.0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsFines & Penalties 2016 Budget 2016 YTD Actual 2015 Actual 16DI.D Page 45 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 Miscellaneous revenues primarily consist of investment earnings, income from facility rentals, contributions & donations, and other miscellaneous income, which includes the quarterly purchasing card (P-card) rebate monies. Total revenues collected in this category through Q3- 2016 totaled $982,000 and exceeded budget expectations by $304,000, or 44.9%. Primary contributors to this favorable variance to budget include higher than anticipated revenues from facilities rentals and golf cart rentals. In addition, P-card rebate revenues collected to date were $67,000 higher than anticipated. 2015 2016 2016 Month YTD Actual YTD Budget YTD Actual Amount Amount Interest & Investments 32,834$ 26,000$ 81,161$ 48,327$ 147.2 %55,161$ 212.2 % Rents & Leases 574,287 508,600 645,327 71,040 12.4 %136,727 26.9 % Contributions & Donations 31,947 25,100 26,883 (5,064)(15.9)%1,783 7.1 % Other Miscellaneous Revenue 159,007 117,900 228,553 69,546 43.7 %110,653 93.9 % YTD Total 798,076$ 677,600$ 981,925$ 183,849$ 23.0 %304,325$ 44.9 % Miscellaneous Revenues by Type September 2016 2016 vs. 2015 2016 vs. Budget Percentage Percentage 17DI.D Page 46 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) revenue is receipted into the Capital Improvement Projects Fund and is used for governmental capital projects. REET revenues collected through Q3-2016 totaled $3.5 million and exceeded year-to-date budget by $1.2 million, or 56.2%. Year-to-date revenues collected were $235,000 lower than the same period in 2015, which included the sale of several large businesses in the City such as the Outlet Collection – Seattle and the Lakeland Town Center. Real estate sales in the City of Auburn in Q3-2016 represent the sale of both commercial and single family residences including the sale of numerous multifamily apartment complexes, several warehouses and multiple large acre vacant lots. 2015 2016 2016 Month Actual Budget Actual Amount Amount Jan 125,089$ 97,400$ 339,594$ 214,505$ 171.5 %242,194$ 248.7 % Feb 115,287 128,700 286,943 171,656 148.9 %158,243 123.0 % Mar 1,394,226 601,900 293,361 (1,100,865) (79.0)%(308,539) (51.3)% Apr 423,394 244,000 574,925 151,531 35.8 %330,925 135.6 % May 345,489 234,300 255,078 (90,410) (26.2)%20,778 8.9 % Jun 436,101 267,400 329,081 (107,020) (24.5)%61,681 23.1 % Jul 348,745 260,200 360,857 12,112 3.5 %100,657 38.7 % Aug 269,454 212,100 673,012 403,557 149.8 %460,912 217.3 % Sep 228,140 163,500 338,340 110,200 48.3 %174,840 106.9 % Oct Nov Dec YTD Total 3,685,925$ 2,209,500$ 3,451,191$ (234,734)$ (6.4)%1,241,691$ 56.2 % 2016 vs. 2015 2016 vs. Budget Percentage Real Estate Excise Tax Revenues September 2016 Percentage $0.0 $0.5 $1.0 $1.5 $2.0 $2.5 $3.0 $3.5 $4.0 $4.5 $5.0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsReal Estate Excise Tax 2016 Budget 2016 YTD Actual 2015 Actual 18DI.D Page 47 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 Pet Licensing Year-to-date, 3,616 pet licenses were sold, resulting in $99,925 in revenue. For the same period in 2015, 3,956 licenses were sold, resulting in $113,335 in revenue. 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 $0 $2 $4 $6 $8 $10 $12 $14 $16 $18 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDecNumber of Licenses IssuedLicense Revenue( thousands )Pet Licensing Revenues vs Licenses Sold 2016 vs 2015 2015 License Revenue 2016 License Revenue 2015 Licenses Issued 2016 Licenses Issued 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 $0 $20 $40 $60 $80 $100 $120 $140 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDecNumber of Licenses IssuedLicense Revenue( thousands )Cumulative Pet Licensing Revenue & Licenses Issued 2016 vs 2015 2016 License Revenue 2016 Licenses Issued 2015 Licenses Issued 19DI.D Page 48 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 Street Funds This section provides financial overview of the City’s three street funds for the fiscal period ending September 30, 2016. The City’s three street funds are: the Arterial Street Fund (Fund 102), the Local Street Fund (Fund 103), and the Arterial Street Preservation Fund (Fund 105). Capital project expenditures are budgeted primarily based on the collection/disbursement average for the same period of the prior two years. Fund 102 – Arterial Street Fund The Arterial Street Fund is a Special Revenue Fund that is funded by transportation grants, traffic impact fees, a portion of the City’s gas tax receipts, Public Works Trust Fund loans, developer contributions, and other sources. There are over 40 separate street projects budgeted in this fund in 2016. Some of these projects include the South 272nd /South 277th Street Corridor Improvement Project, the West Main Street Multimodal Corridor and ITS Improvement Project, and the AWS Corridor Safety Improvement Project (Muckleshoot Plaza to Dogwood). Through September 2016, revenues collected totaled $2.3 million and compare to collections of $2.4 million for the same period in 2015. Expenditures through September totaled $3.0 million and compare to $3.9 million spent the same period last year. Expenditures for the projects South 272nd/South 277th Street Corridor Improvements and West Main Street Multimodal Corridor and ITS Improvements, which constitute nearly 60% of budgeted capital expenditures, are below budget due to delays in project start times and timing lag between work performance and the City’s reimbursement of costs incurred. Fund 102 - Arterial Street 2015 Summary of Sources and Uses Annual Report Period: September 2016 Budget YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Actual Amount Revenues Federal Grants 7,270,016$ 3,185,116$ 493,143$ 975,716$ (2,691,973)$ (84.5)% State Grants 4,292,973 1,912,095 198,554 319,214 (1,713,541) (89.6)% Motor Vehicle Fuel and Multimodal Taxes 530,000 397,500 432,411 363,669 34,911 8.8 % Developer Contributions 1,601,145 - 188,781 - 188,781 Miscellaneous Revenue 373,805 280,354 64,862 82,953 (215,492) (76.9)% Other Governmental Agencies - - - 61,520 - Public Works Trust Fund Loans - - - - - Operating Transfer In 3,882,586 - 943,207 553,723 943,207 Investment Income 2,000 1,500 5,478 2,159 3,978 265.2 % Total Revenues 17,952,525$ 5,776,564$ 2,326,435$ 2,358,953$ (3,450,129)$ (59.7)% Expenditures Salary and Benefits 839,323$ 609,574$ 355,490$ 299,722$ 254,084$ 41.7 % Capital Outlay 17,428,903 9,460,179 2,216,277 3,178,951 7,243,903 76.6 % Subtotal - Capital Project Expenditures 18,268,226 10,069,753 2,571,766 3,478,673 7,497,987 74.5 % Services and Charges 245,000 183,750 187,898 146,492 (4,148) (2.3)% Interfund Payments for Services 74,550 55,913 55,917 53,361 (5) (0.0)% Debt Service Principal and Interest 217,862 - 210,205 218,761 (210,205) Operating Transfer Out - - - - - Total Expenditures 18,805,638$ 10,309,416$ 3,025,786$ 3,897,287$ 7,283,630$ 70.7 % Net Change in Fund Balance (853,113)$ (4,532,852)$ (699,351)$ (1,538,334)$ 3,833,501$ (84.6)% Beg. Fund Balance, September 2016 2,405,821$ Net Change in Fund Balance, September 2016 (699,351) Ending Fund Balance, September 2016 1,706,470$ 2016 Budgeted Ending Fund Balance 1,552,709$ 2016 2016 YTD Budget vs. Actual Favorable (Unfavorable) Percentage 20DI.D Page 49 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 This table presents the status of the projects with the most significant impact on this fund: Notes: • S 277th St. Corridor Improvements: Environmental requirements causing delays. Roughly 70% of project ($4.2 million) is scheduled for completion in 2017. • W. Main St. Multimodal: Roughly 80% of project ($3.5 million) is projected to be completed during 2017. • AWS Corridor Safety Improvements: Project slowed during ROW acquisition. Balance of $2.4 million will be completed in 2017. $0.0 $2.0 $4.0 $6.0 $8.0 $10.0 $12.0 $14.0 $16.0 $18.0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsFund 102 -Capital Project Expenditures 2016 YTD Budget 2016 YTD Actual 2015 YTD Actual 2016 YE Budget $18.3M 2015 YE Actual $6.4M 2016 YTD Actual $2.6M 2015 YTD Actual $3.5M *Data consists of capital outlays, salaries and benefits. Name Annual Budget YTD Actual Variance S. 277th St Corridor Improvements $ 5.99 M $1.10 M $ 4.89 M W. Main St Multimodal Corridor & ITS Imp $ 4.38 M $0.37 M $ 4.01 M AWS Corridor Safety Imp. -- Muckleshoot Pl.$ 2.58 M $0.18 M $ 2.40 M All Other Projects $ 5.32 M $0.92 M $ 4.40 M Total $18.27 M $2.57 M $15.70 M Fund 102 - Arterial Street Capital Projects Status 21DI.D Page 50 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 Fund 103 – Local Street Fund The Local Street Fund is a Special Revenue Fund where the revenues from sales taxes on construction are used for local street repairs. Through September 2016 the revenues in this fund exceeded budget expectations by $504,000, or 38.6%, due to higher than anticipated sales tax revenues from local construction projects. Expenditures through September totaled $1.1 million and compare to a year to date budget of $1.2 million. The majority of expenditures from the Fund’s largest project, 2016 Local Street Pavement Reconstruction Project, are anticipated to occur in Q4-2016. Fund 103 - Local Street Fund 2015 Summary of Sources and Uses Annual Report Period: September 2016 Budget YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Actual Amount Revenues Sales Tax on Construction 1,610,000$ 1,153,700$ 1,651,379$ 1,602,935$ 497,679$ 43.1 % Operating Transfer In 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 - - Interest Earnings 2,500 1,875 8,501 2,667 6,626 353.4 % Total Revenues 1,762,500$ 1,305,575$ 1,809,880$ 1,755,602$ 504,305$ 38.6 % Expenditures Salary and Benefits 175,090$ 131,317$ 89,919$ 78,943$ 41,398$ 31.5 % Services and Charges 300 225 532 416 (307) (136.5)% Capital Outlay 2,676,768 1,041,860 953,978 1,107,349 87,882 8.4 % Interfund Payments for Services 12,240 9,180 9,180 9,360 - - Operating Transfer Out - - - - - - Total Expenditures 2,864,398$ 1,182,582$ 1,053,610$ 1,196,068$ 128,973$ 10.9 % Net Change in Fund Balance (1,101,898)$ 122,993$ 756,270$ 559,534$ 633,278$ 514.9 % Beg. Fund Balance, September 2016 2,080,690$ Net Change in Fund Balance, September 2016 756,270 Ending Fund Balance, September 2016 2,836,960$ 2016 Budgeted Ending Fund Balance 978,792$ 2016 2016 YTD Budget vs. Actual Favorable (Unfavorable) Percentage 22DI.D Page 51 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 This table presents the status of the projects with the most significant impact on this fund: Notes: • 2016 Local Street Pavement Reconstruction: Scheduled for substantial completion November 2016. • 2017 Local Street Reconstruction & Preservation: Still in design phase, to be carried forward to 2017. $0.0 $0.5 $1.0 $1.5 $2.0 $2.5 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsFund 103 -Capital Outlay 2016 YTD Budget 2016 YTD Actual 2015 YTD Actual 2016 Projected Actual 2016 YE Budget $2.7M 2016 YE Projected Actual $2.1M 2016 YTD Actual $0.95M 2015 YE Actual $2.3M Name Annual Budget YTD Actual Variance 2016 Local Street Pavement Reconst.$2.36 M $0.93 M $1.42 M 2017 Local St. Reconst. & Preservation $0.30 M $0.00 M $0.30 M All Other Projects $0.02 M $0.02 M $0.00 M Total $2.68 M $0.95 M $1.72 M Fund 103 - Local Street Capital Projects Status 23DI.D Page 52 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 Fund 105 – Arterial Street Preservation Fund The Arterial Street Preservation Fund is a Special Revenue Fund which is primarily funded by a 1.0% utility tax that was adopted by Council in 2008. These utility tax revenues are restricted for arterial street repair and preservation projects. Some projects budgeted within the Arterial Street Preservation Fund in 2016 include Pavement Patching and Overlay, the Annual Arterial and Collector Crack Seal Project, the Auburn Way North Preservation Project and the B Street NW Reconstruction Project. Through September 2016 revenues totaled $1.6 million and compare to a budget of $2.1 million. The difference is mostly due to the Auburn Way North Preservation project being pushed back to 2017, resulting in $880,000 in budgeted federal grant funding being delayed. Expenditures through September totaled $862,000, which is approximately 63% of budgeted expenditures for the period. Actuals are lower than budget primarily due to the Fund’s main project, Auburn Way North Preservation, being repackaged and sent to bid a second time after the first round of bidding produced higher-than-expected costs. This project is anticipated to be rebid in February 2017, affecting the Fund’s 2016 year-end projection significantly. In addition, the Fund’s next-largest project, B Street NW Reconstruction, remains in the design phase due to prioritizing grant-funded projects on the verge of expiration. Construction on this project is anticipated to start in March 2017. Fund 105 - Arterial St. Presv. 2015 Summary of Sources and Uses Annual Report Period: September 2016 Budget YTD Budget YTD Actual YTD Actual Amount Revenues City Utility Tax 589,000$ 437,900$ 483,531$ 452,006$ 45,631$ 10.4 % Electric Utility Tax 660,500 502,900 546,703 478,621 43,803 8.7 % Natural Gas Utility Tax 170,400 151,500 166,619 175,737 15,119 10.0 % Cable TV Tax 181,300 135,700 147,046 139,192 11,346 8.4 % Telephone Utility Tax 324,000 251,000 228,965 254,234 (22,035) (8.8)% Garbage Utility Tax (External Haulers)17,700 13,275 15,498 14,030 2,223 16.7 % Grants 1,053,626 517,881 843 35,301 (517,038) (99.8)% Developer Mitigation Fees - - - - - - Operating Transfer In 150,000 112,500 30,932 612,340 (81,568) - Interest Earnings 1,500 1,125 6,673 2,719 5,548 493.2 % Total Revenues 3,148,026$ 2,123,781$ 1,626,809$ 2,164,180$ (496,972)$ (23.4)% Expenditures Salary and Benefits 124,095$ 93,072$ 206,327$ 162,060$ (113,256)$ (121.7)% Capital Outlay 4,258,226 2,093,016 448,274 2,850,174 1,644,742 78.6 % Subtotal - Capital Project Expenditures 4,382,321 2,186,088 654,601 3,012,234 1,531,486 70.1 % Supplies - - - - - - Services and Charges 212,500 159,375 37,525 - 121,850 76.5 % Operating Transfer Out 401,750 301,313 170,276 8,411 131,037 43.5 % Total Expenditures 4,996,571$ 2,646,775$ 862,402$ 3,020,645$ 1,784,373$ 67.4 % Net Change in Fund Balance (1,848,545)$ (522,994)$ 764,407$ (856,465)$ 1,287,401$ (246.2)% Beg. Fund Balance, September 2016 1,943,865$ Net Change in Fund Balance, Sept. 2016 764,407 Ending Fund Balance, September 2016 2,708,272$ 2016 Budgeted Ending Fund Balance 95,319$ 2016 2016 YTD Budget vs. Actual Favorable (Unfavorable) Percentage 24DI.D Page 53 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 This table presents the status of the projects with the most significant impact on the fund: Notes: • Auburn Way N Preservation: This project to be re-bid in Spring 2017 after unsatisfactory 2016 bids. • B Street NW Reconstruction: Project still in design due to prioritizing grant-funded projects that were expiring. $0.0 $0.5 $1.0 $1.5 $2.0 $2.5 $3.0 $3.5 $4.0 $4.5 $5.0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsFund 105 -Capital Projects Expenditures 2016 YTD Budget 2016 YTD Actual 2015 YTD Actual 2016 Projected Actual 2016 YE Budget $4.4M 2015 YE Actual $4.0M 2016 YTD Actual $0.65M 2016 YE Projected Actual $0.79M *Data consists of capital outlays, salaries and benefits. Name Annual Budget YTD Actual Variance Auburn Way North Preservation $1.81 M $0.08 M $1.73 M B Street NW Reconstruction $1.43 M $0.05 M $1.38 M All Other Projects $1.14 M $0.53 M $0.62 M Total $4.38 M $0.66 M $3.73 M Capital Projects Status Fund 105 - Arterial Street Preservation 25DI.D Page 54 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 Fund 124 – Mitigation Fees The Mitigation Fees Fund is a Special Revenue Fund funded from revenue from new development, which is assessed at the time applications are received for development activity. These funds are used to mitigate costs associated with City growth. Through Q3-2016, revenues were significantly above budget expectations, at 255.1% of the annual budgeted amount. This is due to higher-than-expected transportation, parks and fire impact fee revenues in the month of July, driven by the construction of The Promenade, a 298-unit apartment complex in Lea Hill. Another revenue spike is anticipated in Q4-2016 due to the construction of a 600-unit mixed-use senior and multifamily housing development comprising The Villas and The Reserve. Expenditures year-to-date are well below budget due to delays in construction projects funded by these revenues. Fund 124 - Mitigation Fees Summary of Sources and Uses Report Period Through:Ending Ending September 2016 Fund Balance Fund Balance Transportation Impact Fees 1,695,367$ 767,294$ 4,610,158$ 800,000$ 3,006,075$ 1,476,010$ Transportation Migitation Fees -$ 4,020$ 253,690$ -$ 173,144$ 84,566$ Fire Impact Fees 160,728$ -$ 474,948$ 100,000$ 50,000$ 364,220$ Fire Mitigation Fees -$ -$ 82$ -$ -$ 82$ Parks Impact Fees 1,544,598$ 70,661$ 2,597,150$ 75,000$ 300,000$ 898,213$ Parks Mitigation Fees -$ -$ 330,319$ -$ -$ 330,319$ School Impact Admin Fees 16,744$ 40,112$ 54,747$ 15,000$ 61,626$ 31,489$ Wetland Mitigation Fees -$ -$ 68,626$ -$ -$ 68,626$ Interest and Investment Income 21,849$ -$ 21,849$ 4,890$ -$ 4,890$ Fees in Lieu of Improvements 122,525$ -$ 122,525$ -$ -$ -$ Operating Transfers -$ -$ -$ 400,000$ -$ 400,000$ Total 3,561,810$ 882,087$ 8,534,092$ 1,394,890$ 3,590,845$ 3,658,415$ Beginning Fund Balance, September 2016 5,854,370$ Net Change in Fund Balance, September 2016 2,679,722$ Ending Fund Balance, September 2016 8,534,092$ 2016 Budgeted Ending Fund Balance 3,658,415$ YTD ACTUALS BUDGET Revenues Expenditures Revenues Expenditures 26DI.D Page 55 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 Proprietary Funds Detailed income and expense statements for Enterprise and Internal Service funds can be found in the Appendices at the end of this report. The format changed in Q1-2016 and, in lieu of a working capital statement, there are now operating and capital fund reports for most of these funds showing budget, actual and variance. The operating fund houses all the operating costs along with debt service and financing obligations. The capital fund shows costs associated with capital acquisition and construction. Both the operating fund and the capital fund have a working capital balance. This approach isolates those funds available for capital and cash flow needs for daily operations, and project managers will know exactly how much working capital is available for current and planned projects. Budget Amendment #6, adopted July 2016, moved working capital from the operating funds to the capital funds along with all the other beginning fund balance adjustments. System development revenues previously credited to the operating funds are now directed to the corresponding capital funds. At the end of the third quarter, the Water Utility had operating income of $3.3 million as compared with operating income of $3.2 million for the same period in 2015. Water sales through Q3-2016 totaled 2.71 million hundred cubic feet (ccf), compared to 2.66 million ccf during the same period in 2015, representing a 2.1% increase. Year-to-date revenues are 10.0% above budget but this is expected to come closer to budget in Q4-2016, as the highest revenues are historically generated from August through October. 0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 700,000 800,000 900,000 1,000,000 $0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 $1,400 $1,600 $1,800 $2,000 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec CCFThousandsWater Revenues vs Water Sold 2016 vs 2015 2015 Water Sales ($) 2016 Water Sales ($) 2015 Water Sold (ccf) 2016 Water Sold (ccf) 27DI.D Page 56 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 The Sewer Utility ended the quarter with net operating income of $1.5 million, which is $124,000 higher than the same period in 2015. The Sewer-Metro Utility ended the quarter with a year-to-date net operating income of $236,000, as compared with $59,000 through Q3-2015. $0 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700 $800 $900 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecThousandsSewer 2016 Budget Revenue 2016 Actual Revenue 2016 Actual Expenses 2015 Actual Revenue 2016 Budget vs. Actual Monthly Revenues and Expenditures 28DI.D Page 57 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 The Stormwater Utility ended Q3-2016 with $2.1 million in operating income, which is about $1.3 million below the same period in 2015. This is due in large part to the receipt of grant revenues from the Department of Ecology in Q2 and Q3-2015. $0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 $1,400 $1,600 $1,800 $2,000 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecThousandsStorm Drainage 2016 Budget Revenue 2016 Actual Revenue 2016 Actual Expenses 2015 Actual Revenue 2016 Budget vs. Actual Monthly Revenues and Expenditures Dept. of Ecology Revenues 29DI.D Page 58 of 181 Quarterly Financial Report Through Q3-2016 The Cemetery Fund ended the second quarter with a year-to-date operating income of $167,000 as compared with operating income of $102,000 for the same period in 2015. Operating expenditures totaled $857,000 in through Q3-2016, compared to $838,000 in the same period last year. The increase is mainly a result of higher cost of supplies due to increased inventory costs associated with higher demand. Internal Service Funds Operating expenditures within the Insurance Fund represent the premium cost pool that will be allocated monthly to other City funds over the course of 2016. As a result, this balance will gradually diminish each month throughout the year. No significant variances are reported in the Worker’s Compensation, Facilities, Innovation & Technology, or Equipment Rental Funds. Contact Information This report is prepared by the Finance Department. Additional financial information can also be viewed at our website: http://www.auburnwa.gov/. For any questions about this report please contact Shelley Coleman at scoleman@auburnwa.gov. $0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 $1,400 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecThousandsCemetery 2016 YTD Budget Revenue 2016 YTD Actual Revenue 2015 YTD Actual Revenue 2016 YTD Actual Expenses Cumulative Revenues and Expenditures 2016 Budget vs. Actual 30DI.D Page 59 of 181 Investment Purchase Purchase Maturity Yield to Type Date Price Date Maturity State Investment Pool Various 113,513,552$ Various 0.52% KeyBank Money Market Various 5,263,806 Various 0.02% FNMA 3/11/2016 998,844 2/22/2019 1.20% LAKUTL 9/25/2013 235,919 11/1/2017 1.90% Total Cash & Investments 120,012,120$ 0.503% Investment Mix % of Total State Investment Pool 94.6%Current 6-month treasury rate 0.47% KeyBank Money Market 4.4%Current State Pool rate 0.52% US Treasury 0.0%KeyBank Money Market 0.02% FNMA 0.8% LAKUTL 0.2% 100.0% City of Auburn Investment Portfolio Summary September 30, 2016 Summary 31DI.D Page 60 of 181 SALES TAX SUMMARY SEPTEMBER 2016 SALES TAX DISTRIBUTIONS (FOR JULY 2016 RETAIL ACTIVITY) 2015 Annual Total 2015 YTD 2016 YTD YTD 2015 Annual Total 2015 YTD 2016 YTD YTD NAICS CONSTRUCTION (Nov '14-Oct '15)(Nov '14-Jul '15)(Nov '15-Jul '16)% Diff NAICS AUTOMOTIVE (Nov '14-Oct '15)(Nov '14-Jul '15)(Nov '15-Jul '16)% Diff 236 Construction of Buildings 1,229,166 863,806 798,884 -7.5%441 Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealer 3,465,199 2,587,136 2,563,887 -0.9% 237 Heavy and Civil Construction 252,280 164,662 229,621 39.4%447 Gasoline Stations 241,336 185,544 182,379 -1.7% 238 Specialty Trade Contractors 815,416 574,468 622,874 8.4%TOTAL AUTOMOTIVE 3,706,535 2,772,680 2,746,266 -1.0% TOTAL CONSTRUCTION 2,296,863 1,602,935 1,651,379 3.0%Overall Change from Previous Year -26,415 Overall Change from Previous Year 48,443 2015 Annual Total 2015 YTD 2016 YTD YTD 2015 Annual Total 2015 YTD 2016 YTD YTD NAICS RETAIL TRADE (Nov '14-Oct '15)(Nov '14-Jul '15)(Nov '15-Jul '16)% Diff NAICS MANUFACTURING (Nov '14-Oct '15)(Nov '14-Jul '15)(Nov '15-Jul '16)% Diff 442 Furniture and Home Furnishings 253,871 189,327 135,870 -28.2% 311 Food Manufacturing 3,973 2,181 2,485 13.9%443 Electronics and Appliances 295,127 217,286 175,342 -19.3% 312 Beverage and Tobacco Products 9,323 7,080 7,153 1.0%444 Building Material and Garden 589,676 439,564 434,761 -1.1% 313 Textile Mills 372 247 219 -11.2%445 Food and Beverage Stores 368,411 274,668 298,973 d 8.8% 314 Textile Product Mills 3,039 2,029 2,157 6.3%446 Health and Personal Care Store 220,603 166,104 202,426 21.9% 315 Apparel Manufacturing 116 105 146 38.9%448 Clothing and Accessories 1,079,933 793,985 835,833 5.3% 316 Leather and Allied Products 8 2 32 1650.0%451 Sporting Goods, Hobby, Books 220,168 164,796 189,123 14.8% 321 Wood Product Manufacturing 65,039 52,040 45,860 -11.9%452 General Merchandise Stores 988,004 742,535 c 770,897 3.8% 322 Paper Manufacturing 7,762 4,547 5,475 20.4%453 Miscellaneous Store Retailers 578,836 451,623 356,739 -21.0% 323 Printing and Related Support 59,750 45,614 40,523 -11.2%454 Nonstore Retailers 394,268 279,134 236,928 -15.1% 324 Petroleum and Coal Products 5,394 4,187 1,902 -54.6%TOTAL RETAIL TRADE 4,988,898 3,719,022 3,636,892 -2.2% 325 Chemical Manufacturing 5,508 4,178 6,034 44.4%Overall Change from Previous Year -82,130 326 Plastics and Rubber Products 9,081 7,083 6,439 -9.1% 327 Nonmetallic Mineral Products 14,514 8,429 12,750 51.3% 331 Primary Metal Manufacturing 1,692 1,430 295 -79.4%2015 Annual Total 2015 YTD 2016 YTD YTD 332 Fabricated Metal Product Manuf 37,819 22,553 23,415 3.8%NAICS SERVICES (Nov '14-Oct '15)(Nov '14-Jul '15)(Nov '15-Jul '16)% Diff 333 Machinery Manufacturing 21,693 18,010 12,686 -29.6%51*Information 526,003 380,736 b 461,338 21.2% 334 Computer and Electronic Product 8,388 6,352 8,508 33.9%52*Finance and Insurance 95,471 71,027 83,165 17.1% 335 Electric Equipment, Appliances 827 466 350 -24.8%53*Real Estate, Rental, Leasing 334,095 245,591 269,926 9.9% 336 Transportation Equipment Man 536,513 427,859 381,562 -10.8%541 Professional, Scientific, Tech 195,478 146,216 175,612 20.1% 337 Furniture and Related Products 20,389 14,397 13,358 -7.2%551 Company Management 9,230 9,225 307 -96.7% 339 Miscellaneous Manufacturing 50,358 37,458 31,315 -16.4%56*Admin. Supp., Remed Svcs 373,781 252,765 256,106 1.3% TOTAL MANUFACTURING 861,555 666,248 602,662 -9.5%611 Educational Services 60,189 43,751 a 36,214 -17.2% Overall Change from Previous Year -63,586 62*Health Care Social Assistance 81,684 63,869 75,015 17.5% 71*Arts and Entertainment 207,717 131,423 133,281 1.4% 72*Accommodation and Food Svcs 1,159,033 852,841 895,831 5.0% 2015 Annual Total 2015 YTD 2016 YTD YTD 81*Other Services 475,505 354,970 519,028 46.2% NAICS TRANSPORTATION AND WAREHOUSING (Nov '14-Oct '15)(Nov '14-Jul '15)(Nov '15-Jul '16)% Diff 92*Public Administration 127,364 99,148 112,614 13.6% 481 Air Transportation 0 0 1 N/A TOTAL SERVICES 3,645,551 2,651,561 3,018,436 13.8% 482 Rail Transportation 10,457 7,211 9,679 34.2%Overall Change from Previous Year 366,875 484 Truck Transportation 7,590 5,900 2,756 -53.3% 485 Transit and Ground Passengers 209 155 67 -56.7% 488 Transportation Support 36,669 25,606 41,861 63.5%2015 Annual Total 2015 YTD 2016 YTD YTD 491 Postal Service 259 196 196 0.1%NAICS MISCELLANEOUS (Nov '14-Oct '15)(Nov '14-Jul '15)(Nov '15-Jul '16)% Diff 492 Couriers and Messengers 1 1 192 16179.7%000 Unknown 0 0 0 N/A 493 Warehousing and Storage 10,487 7,861 11,210 42.6%111-115 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing 4,510 3,103 4,277 37.8% TOTAL TRANSPORTATION 65,671 46,931 65,962 40.5%211-221 Mining & Utilities 27,456 20,228 21,424 5.9% Overall Change from Previous Year 19,031 999 Unclassifiable Establishments 39,581 27,894 -10,098 e -136.2% TOTAL SERVICES 71,548 51,225 15,603 -69.5% Overall Change from Previous Year -35,622 2015 Annual Total 2015 YTD 2016 YTD YTD NAICS WHOLESALE TRADE (Nov '14-Oct '15)(Nov '14-Jul '15)(Nov '15-Jul '16)% Diff 423 Wholesale Trade, Durable Goods 1,010,730 777,233 718,538 -7.6%GRAND TOTAL 16,865,540 12,445,109 12,667,897 424 Wholesale Trade, Nondurable 216,303 155,789 210,485 35.1%Overall Change from Previous Year 222,788 1.8% 425 Wholesale Electronic Markets 1,885 1,484 1,675 12.8% TOTAL WHOLESALE 1,228,919 934,506 930,697 -0.4% Overall Change from Previous Year -3,808 Includes Adjustments in excess of +/- $10,000. a. WA State Dept of Revenue audit adjustment to sales tax returns for period of February 2015 (adjustment: $11,845). b. WA State Dept of Revenue audit adjustment to sales tax returns for period of March 2015 (adjustment: -$17,839). c. WA State Dept of Revenue audit adjustment to sales tax returns for period of April 2015 (adjustment: -$43,875). d. WA State Dept of Revenue audit adjustment to sales tax returns for period of November 2015 (adjustment: $10,572). e. WA State Dept of Revenue audit adjustment to sales tax returns for period of April 2016 (adjustment: - $52,898). 10/03/16 Prepared by Auburn Finance Department 32DI.D Page 61 of 181 Budget YTD Actual Variance Budget YTD Actual Variance Budget YTD Actual Variance Budget YTD Actual Variance 430 430 431 431 433 433 432 432 OPERATING FUND:460 460 461 461 462 462 OPERATING REVENUES Charges For Service 13,698,782 10,713,435 (2,985,347) 7,847,883 6,238,777 (1,609,106) 16,332,687 12,557,592 (3,775,095) 9,151,487 7,129,978 (2,021,509) Grants - - - 50,000 - (50,000) Interest Earnings 7,735 31,342 23,607 10,697 42,122 31,425 700 3,434 2,734 13,865 45,862 31,997 Interfund Charges For Service - - - - Sewer Metro Service Revenue - - - - Operating Transfers - - - Rents, Leases, Concessions, & Other 206,854 430,744 223,890 70,128 46,417 (23,711) - - - 58,674 60,175 1,501 TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES 13,913,371 11,175,521 (2,737,850) 7,928,708 6,327,317 (1,601,391) 16,333,387 12,561,026 (3,772,361) 9,274,026 7,236,015 (2,038,011) OPERATING EXPENSES Salaries & Wages 2,587,276 1,878,687 708,589 1,758,478 1,249,369 509,109 - - - 2,397,119 1,911,568 485,551 Benefits 1,251,312 860,576 390,736 871,146 572,282 298,865 - - - 1,224,350 867,463 356,888 Supplies 321,994 207,146 114,848 130,500 70,650 59,850 - - - 94,300 56,657 37,643 Other Service Charges 5,185,175 3,259,070 1,926,105 2,723,275 1,848,723 874,552 - - - 1,670,215 954,776 715,439 Capital - 739 (739) - - - - - - - - - Intergovernmental Services 133,960 74,335 59,625 172,008 99,870 72,138 415,980 313,682 102,298 Waste Management Payments Sewer Metro Services 16,317,200 12,325,136 3,992,064 Debt Service Interest 1,006,253 461,036 545,217 277,082 149,443 127,639 - - - 360,525 186,317 174,208 Interfund Loan Repayment - - - Interfund Operating Rentals & Supplies 1,276,967 957,760 319,207 952,338 714,543 237,795 - - - 1,312,518 985,939 326,579 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 11,762,936 7,699,349 4,063,586 6,884,827 4,704,879 2,179,948 16,317,200 12,325,136 3,992,064 7,475,007 5,276,402 2,198,605 OPERATING REVNUES LESS EXPENSES BEFORE DEPRECIATION (*) 2,150,435 3,476,172 1,325,737 1,043,881 1,622,438 578,557 16,187 235,889 219,702 1,799,019 1,959,613 160,594 BEGINNING WORKING CAPITAL - January 1, 2016 2,488,639 2,488,639 - 4,262,859 4,262,859 - 2,358,518 2,358,518 - 2,691,382 2,691,382 - ENDING WORKING CAPITAL - September 30, 2016 4,639,074 5,964,811 1,325,737 5,306,740 5,885,297 578,557 2,374,705 2,594,407 219,702 4,490,401 4,650,995 160,594 NET CHANGE IN WORKING CAPITAL (see Note)2,150,435 3,476,172 1,325,737 1,043,881 1,622,438 578,557 16,187 235,889 219,702 1,799,019 1,959,613 160,594 CAPITAL FUND: CAPITAL REVENUES Interest Revenue 1,265 - (1,265) 2,303 - (2,303) 2,135 - (2,135) Grants 300,000 - Contributions - - - - - - 7,806 - (7,806) Other Non-Operating Revenue - - - - - - - - - Gain (Loss) On Sale Of Fixed Assets - - - - - - - - - Increase In Contributions - System Development 350,000 1,160,029 810,029 240,000 1,002,061 762,061 350,000 541,018 191,018 Increase In Contributions - Area Assessments - - - - - - - - - Increase In Contributions - Other - - - - - - - - - Increase In Contributions - FAA - - - - - - - - - Proceeds of Debt Activity 4,070,037 820,037 (3,250,000) - - - - - - Operating Transfers In - - - - - - - - - Other Sources - - - - - - - 142,511 142,511 TOTAL CAPITAL REVENUES 4,421,302 1,980,066 (2,441,236) 242,303 1,002,061 759,758 659,941 683,529 323,588 CAPITAL EXPENSES Other Non-Operating Expense - - - - - - - - - Net Change In Restricted Net Assets - - - Increase In Fixed Assets - Salaries 245,725 180,734 64,991 230,786 65,226 165,560 294,980 65,690 229,290 Increase In Fixed Assets - Benefits 81,637 73,861 7,775 76,412 28,440 47,972 97,969 27,254 70,715 Increase In Fixed Assets - Services - 224 (224) - 142 (142) - 161 (161) Increase In Fixed Assets - Site Improvements - 29,785 (29,785) - - - - - Increase In Fixed Assets - Land - - - - Increase In Fixed Assets - Equipment - - - Increase In Fixed Assets - Construction 9,160,179 4,661,505 4,498,674 3,831,262 462,921 3,368,340 4,390,563 443,245 3,947,318 Increase In Fixed Assets - Other - - - 161 (161) Debt Service Principal 1,702,563 572,855 1,129,708 541,127 288,262 252,865 - - - 413,162 - 413,162 Operating Transfers Out - - - - - - - - - TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENSES 11,190,103 5,518,965 5,671,139 4,679,587 844,992 3,834,595 5,196,674 536,510 4,660,164 BEGINNING WORKING CAPITAL - January 1, 2016 6,772,562 6,772,562 - 8,600,000 8,600,000 - 11,900,000 11,900,000 - ENDING WORKING CAPITAL - September 30, 2016 3,761 3,233,664 3,229,903 4,162,716 8,757,069 4,594,353 7,363,267 12,047,019 4,683,752 NET CHANGE IN WORKING CAPITAL (see Note)(6,768,801) (3,538,899) 3,229,903 (4,437,284) 157,069 4,594,353 (4,536,733) 147,019 4,683,752 Total Change in Working Capital (4,618,366) (62,727) 4,555,640 (3,393,403) 1,779,507 5,172,910 16,187 235,889 219,702 (2,737,714) 2,106,632 4,844,346 (*) Depreciation 2,726,100 2,263,137 2,104,200 1,644,112 - - 1,688,400 1,452,624 Note: Working Capital = Current Assets minus Current Liabilities ENTERPRISE FUNDSOPERATING & CAPITAL FUNDS WATER SEWER SEWER METRO STORMthrough September 2016 11/21/2016 3:13 PM33DI.D Page 62 of 181 OPERATING FUND: OPERATING REVENUES Charges For Service Grants Interest Earnings Interfund Charges For Service Sewer Metro Service Revenue Operating Transfers Rents, Leases, Concessions, & Other TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES OPERATING EXPENSES Salaries & Wages Benefits Supplies Other Service Charges Capital Intergovernmental Services Waste Management Payments Sewer Metro Services Debt Service Interest Interfund Loan Repayment Interfund Operating Rentals & Supplies TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES OPERATING REVNUES LESS EXPENSES BEFORE DEPRECIATION (*) BEGINNING WORKING CAPITAL - January 1, 2016 ENDING WORKING CAPITAL - September 30, 2016 NET CHANGE IN WORKING CAPITAL (see Note) CAPITAL FUND: CAPITAL REVENUES Interest Revenue Grants Contributions Other Non-Operating Revenue Gain (Loss) On Sale Of Fixed Assets Increase In Contributions - System Development Increase In Contributions - Area Assessments Increase In Contributions - Other Increase In Contributions - FAA Proceeds of Debt Activity Operating Transfers In Other Sources TOTAL CAPITAL REVENUES CAPITAL EXPENSES Other Non-Operating Expense Net Change In Restricted Net Assets Increase In Fixed Assets - Salaries Increase In Fixed Assets - Benefits Increase In Fixed Assets - Services Increase In Fixed Assets - Site Improvements Increase In Fixed Assets - Land Increase In Fixed Assets - Equipment Increase In Fixed Assets - Construction Increase In Fixed Assets - Other Debt Service Principal Operating Transfers Out TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENSES BEGINNING WORKING CAPITAL - January 1, 2016 ENDING WORKING CAPITAL - September 30, 2016 NET CHANGE IN WORKING CAPITAL (see Note) Total Change in Working Capital (*) Depreciation Note: Working Capital = Current Assets minus Current Liabilities OPERATING & CAPITAL FUNDS through September 2016 Budget YTD Actual Variance Budget YTD Actual Variance Budget YTD Actual Variance Budget YTD Actual Variance 434 434 435 435 436 436 501 501 464 464 465 465 466 466 - 13,467,100 10,450,311 (3,016,789) 747,400 615,184 (132,216) 878,000 1,022,806 144,806 - - - 109,000 15,375 (93,625) - - - - - 1,300 10,685 9,385 969 2,617 1,648 300 1,669 1,369 1,000 2,644 1,644 - - - - - - - - 300,000 - - 320 320 500 (1,370) (1,870) - 20 20 - 13,577,400 10,476,692 (3,100,708) 748,869 616,431 (132,438) 1,178,300 1,024,495 146,195 1,000 2,644 1,644 406,645 306,935 99,711 25,723 20,590 5,133 453,837 356,166 97,671 - - - 206,181 139,203 66,977 10,496 7,010 3,486 258,783 182,759 76,023 215,000 112,132 102,868 34,200 7,248 26,952 2,000 1,523 477 191,300 192,732 (1,432) - - - 1,387,775 909,439 478,336 463,050 335,903 127,147 151,700 87,051 64,649 3,900 269,004 (265,104) - - - - 420,600 181,206 239,394 - - - - - - - - - 10,645,300 7,228,668 3,416,632 - - - 35,693 675 35,018 - - - - - - 39,947 43,081 (3,134) - - 104,209 78,147 26,062 - - - 50,740 38,052 12,688 - - - 13,204,910 8,850,846 4,354,063 576,908 408,783 168,126 1,106,360 856,761 249,599 218,900 381,136 (162,236) 372,490 1,625,845 1,253,355 171,961 207,649 35,688 71,940 167,734 95,794 (217,900) (378,492) (160,592) 3,477,387 3,477,387 - 166,604 166,604 - 105,646 105,646 - 1,530,589 1,530,589 - 3,849,877 5,103,232 1,253,355 338,565 374,253 35,688 177,586 273,380 95,794 1,312,689 1,152,096 (160,592) 372,490 1,625,845 1,253,355 171,961 207,649 35,688 71,940 167,734 95,794 (217,900) (378,492) (160,592) 31 - (31) - - - 14,456 7,107 (7,349) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 263,834 108,146 (155,688) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 278,321 115,253 (163,068) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 12,699 14,541 (1,842) - - - - - - - - 469,911 162,608 307,303 - - - - - - - - 150,000 - 150,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - 619,911 162,608 457,303 12,699 14,541 (1,842) 350,000 350,000 - 270,000 270,000 - 8,410 302,645 294,235 257,301 255,459 (1,842) (341,590) (47,355) 294,235 (12,699) (14,541) (1,842) 372,490 1,625,845 (169,629) 160,294 329,923 59,241 153,193 93,952 (217,900) (378,492) (160,592) 20,000 14,114 426,100 341,007 58,300 37,887 - - INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDSENTERPRISE FUNDS SOLID WASTE AIRPORT CEMETERY INSURANCE 11/21/2016 3:13 PM34DI.D Page 63 of 181 OPERATING FUND: OPERATING REVENUES Charges For Service Grants Interest Earnings Interfund Charges For Service Sewer Metro Service Revenue Operating Transfers Rents, Leases, Concessions, & Other TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES OPERATING EXPENSES Salaries & Wages Benefits Supplies Other Service Charges Capital Intergovernmental Services Waste Management Payments Sewer Metro Services Debt Service Interest Interfund Loan Repayment Interfund Operating Rentals & Supplies TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES OPERATING REVNUES LESS EXPENSES BEFORE DEPRECIATION (*) BEGINNING WORKING CAPITAL - January 1, 2016 ENDING WORKING CAPITAL - September 30, 2016 NET CHANGE IN WORKING CAPITAL (see Note) CAPITAL FUND: CAPITAL REVENUES Interest Revenue Grants Contributions Other Non-Operating Revenue Gain (Loss) On Sale Of Fixed Assets Increase In Contributions - System Development Increase In Contributions - Area Assessments Increase In Contributions - Other Increase In Contributions - FAA Proceeds of Debt Activity Operating Transfers In Other Sources TOTAL CAPITAL REVENUES CAPITAL EXPENSES Other Non-Operating Expense Net Change In Restricted Net Assets Increase In Fixed Assets - Salaries Increase In Fixed Assets - Benefits Increase In Fixed Assets - Services Increase In Fixed Assets - Site Improvements Increase In Fixed Assets - Land Increase In Fixed Assets - Equipment Increase In Fixed Assets - Construction Increase In Fixed Assets - Other Debt Service Principal Operating Transfers Out TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENSES BEGINNING WORKING CAPITAL - January 1, 2016 ENDING WORKING CAPITAL - September 30, 2016 NET CHANGE IN WORKING CAPITAL (see Note) Total Change in Working Capital (*) Depreciation Note: Working Capital = Current Assets minus Current Liabilities OPERATING & CAPITAL FUNDS through September 2016 Budget YTD Actual Variance Budget YTD Actual Variance Budget YTD Actual Variance Budget YTD Actual Variance 503 503 505 505 518 518 550 550 - - 568 568 560 560 743,000 641,188 (101,812) 3,495,900 2,570,056 (925,844) 5,531,965 4,095,083 (1,436,883) 3,371,780 2,478,749 (893,031) - - - - - - 100 2,685 2,585 2,500 7,880 5,380 3,088 10,665 7,577 4,048 17,534 13,486 - - - - - - - - 137,950 4,342 203,997 99,997 120,000 30,431 (89,569) - - - - - 26,282 26,282 863,100 674,304 (188,796) 3,498,400 2,577,936 (920,464) 5,673,003 4,110,090 (1,429,305) 3,579,825 2,622,562 (853,263) 84,590 53,712 30,878 707,569 498,500 209,069 1,711,060 1,232,183 478,877 593,881 423,176 170,705 367,005 138,287 228,718 390,621 258,557 132,064 708,330 499,323 209,008 314,545 212,913 101,632 - - - 128,200 131,320 (3,120) 431,480 310,567 120,913 1,341,600 538,615 802,985 402,715 248,535 154,180 2,350,990 1,491,309 859,682 2,737,121 1,937,361 799,760 377,500 229,034 148,466 - - - - - - - - - - - 890,827 - 890,827 - - - 626,392 616,790 9,602 - - - - - - - - - 5,033 3,885 1,148 - - - - - - - 110,841 83,133 27,708 160,790 120,591 40,199 212,390 159,397 52,993 854,310 440,535 413,776 4,579,048 2,462,818 2,116,230 5,748,782 4,100,025 1,648,757 3,471,341 2,183,810 1,287,531 8,790 233,769 224,979 (1,080,648) 115,119 1,195,767 (75,779) 10,065 85,844 108,484 438,752 330,268 778,233 778,233 - 2,410,754 2,410,754 - 2,305,195 2,305,195 - 2,974,119 2,974,119 - 787,022 1,012,002 224,979 1,330,105 2,525,872 1,195,767 2,229,416 2,315,260 85,844 3,082,603 3,412,871 330,268 8,790 233,769 224,979 (1,080,648) 115,119 1,195,767 (75,779) 10,065 85,844 108,484 438,752 330,268 412 - (412) 1,652 - (1,652) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 442,150 326,651 (115,499) 1,118,926 965,101 (153,825) - - - - - - 442,562 326,651 (115,911) 1,120,578 965,101 (155,477) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1,579,579 655,552 924,027 2,907,063 1,718,014 1,189,049 - 723,002 55,241 667,761 - 9,740 - - - - - - - - - 39,107 19,480 19,627 - - - - - - 1,579,579 655,552 924,027 3,669,172 1,802,476 1,876,436 1,400,000 1,400,000 - 3,100,001 3,100,001 - 262,983 1,071,099 808,116 551,406 2,262,625 1,711,220 (1,137,017) (328,901) 808,116 (2,548,595) (837,375) 1,711,220 8,790 233,769 224,979 (1,080,648) 115,119 1,195,767 (1,212,796) (318,836) 893,959 (2,440,111) (398,623) 2,041,488 - - - - 546,400 525,631 822,500 790,556 WORKER'S COMPENSATION FACILITIES INNOVATION & TECHNOLOGY EQUIPMENT RENTAL INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS 11/21/2016 3:13 PM35DI.D Page 64 of 181 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Ordinance No. 6632 (10 Minute Presentation) Date: November 21, 2016 Department: Community Development & Public Works Attachments: Staff Report - Agenda Bill Summary Matrix Ordinance No. 6632 Budget Impact: $0 Administrative Recommendation: Background Summary: Please see the attached Agenda Bill. Reviewed by Council Committees: Other: Legal, Public Works & Planning Councilmember:Hands Staff:Snyder Meeting Date:November 28, 2016 Item Number:DI.E AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINEDDI.E Page 65 of 181 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Page 1 of 30 Agenda Subject: Ordinance #6632 CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001, & CPA16-0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Department: Community Development and Public Works Dept. Attachments: Ordinance # 6632 Summary Matrix See separate map amendment & policy/text amendment sections of binder Budget Impact: N/A Administrative Recommendation: City Council to introduce and approve Ordinance # 6632 amending the Comprehensive Plan to include 2016 Annual Comprehensive Plan Map and Policy/Text 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. The City adopted a substantially revised Comprehensive Plan in December 2015. 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 one map amendment and Five policy/text amendments. In addition, the city received in prior years two privately-initiated plan map amendments that will be processed this year. The City received no map or text amendments this year (2016) by the submittal deadline of June 3, 2016. This staff report and Planning Commission recommendation addresses all of this year’s amendments: · CPA14-0002, Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment (CPM) # 1 – private application · CPA15-0002, Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment (CPM) # 2 – private application · CPA16-0002, Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment (CPM) # 4 – City-initiated · CPA16-0001, Comprehensive Plan Text/Policy (P/T) Amendments P/T # 1 – 5, Five City-initiated 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: Reviewed by Departments & Divisions: Arts Commission COUNCIL COMMITTEES: Building M&O Airport Finance Cemetery Mayor Hearing Examiner Municipal Services Finance Parks Human Services Planning & Dev. Fire Planning Park Board Public Works Legal Police Planning Comm. Other Public Works Human Resources Action: Committee Approval: Yes No Council Approval: Yes No Call for Public Hearing ___/___/____ Referred to _________________________________ Until ____/___/____ Tabled ______________________________________ Until ___/___/____ Councilmember: Staff: Snyder Meeting Date: November 28, 2016 Item Number: DI.E Page 66 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 2 of 30 At its June 21, 2016 public hearing, the Planning Commission considered the following Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments: A. Map Amendment CPM #2 – (File # CPA15-0002) Request by Kana B. LLC to change the map designation of two parcels (Parcel # 3121059036 & 3121059033) totaling approx. 5.9 acres from “Light Commercial” to “Light Industrial” on the east side of A ST SE, between Lakeland Hills Blvd SE & LK Tapps Pkwy SE. At its November 9, 2016 public hearing, the Planning Commission considered the following Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments: A. Map Amendments CPM #1 – (File # CPA14-0002) Request by Romart Investments LLC to change the map designation of one parcel (Parcel #0520051045) of approx. 2.27 acres from “Single Family Residential” to “Light Commercial” at the NW corner of 182nd ST E and Lk Tapps Parkway SE. CPM #4 – (File # CPA16-0002) City initiated change in the map designation of three parcels (Parcel # 2421049004, 2521049114 & 2521049115) totaling approx. 144.6 acres from: “Light Industrial” and “Institutional” to “Heavy Commercial” at the SW corner of 15th ST SW and C ST SW. B. Text/policy Amendments (CPA16-0001): P/T #1 – Incorporate Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan P/T #2 – Incorporate Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan P/T #3 – Incorporate Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plan P/T #4 – Incorporate Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan P/T #5 – Incorporate City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan The Planning Commission has forwarded its recommendation for approval to the City Council on all the 2016-year Comprehensive Plan Amendments. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A. General Findings Applicable to all amendments 1. RCW 36.70A.130 (The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA)) provides for amendments to locally adopted GMA-compliant comprehensive plans. Except in limited circumstances provided for in State law and repeated in City Code Section 14.22.060, comprehensive plan amendments shall be considered by the city no more frequently than once per year. 2. The City of Auburn established a June 3, 2016 deadline for the submittal of privately- initiated comprehensive plan applications (map or policy/text). Notice to the public of the application filing deadline was provided on the City’s website, the Seattle Times Newspaper, and sent to a compiled notification list in May 2016. The City received no privately-initiated plan map or policy/text amendments this year by the submittal deadline. 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 DI.E Page 67 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 3 of 30 as the City’s Capital Facilities Plan are referenced in the Capital Facilities, of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan and are 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 individually by each school district acting as their own lead agency, as allowed by state law. 5. The City conducted the environmental review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) for City’s Capital Facilities Plan (PT #5 Policy/Text Amendment). This resulted in a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) issued for the City-initiated Comprehensive Plan Policy/Text Amendments on September 28, 2016 (City File # SEP16-0010). The comment period ended October 13, 2016 and the appeal period ended October 28, 2018. The City received not comments or appeals. 6. The City conducted the environmental review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) for City’s Map Amendment (CPM #4). This resulted in a Determination of Non- Significance (DNS) issued for the City-initiated Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment on October 3, 2016 (City File # SEP16-0018). The comment period ended October 18, 2016 and the appeal period ended November 1, 2016. The City received not comments or appeals. 7. 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. DI.E Page 68 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 4 of 30 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.)” 8. 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. 9. 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 60-day state review. No comments have been received from the Washington State Department of Commerce or other state agencies as of the writing of this report. 10. Due to the nature and limited number of the city-initiated amendments and the scope and limited number of privately initiated policy/text changes, the optional process as provided in the city code for staff to hold a public open house was not conducted. 11. The public hearing notice was published on June 10, 2016 in the Seattle Times which is at least 10-days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing conducted on June 21, 2016 and the public hearing notice was published on October 25, 2016 in the Seattle Times which is at least 10-days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing conducted on November 9, 2016. _________________________________ ---------------------JUNE 21, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING---------------------- Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments CPM #2 File # CPA15-0002: Request by Kana B. LLC to amend the map comprehensive plan map designation of the northern 2 of 4 parcels under the same ownership totaling approximately 5.9 acres from the current designation of “Light Commercial” to “Light Industrial” on the east side of A ST SW. Background 1. The Applicant submitted a Comprehensive Plan map amendment application on June 5, 2015, before the year 2015 application submittal deadline for comprehensive plan amendments. The Application is vested to the Comprehensive Plan in effect prior to revision adopted at the end of 2015. 2. The application was submitted by Mary J. Urback, Agent and Attorney for Jon Cheetham, Managing Member of Kana B LLC, Property Owner. Jon Cheetham and Greg O’Farrell are the managing members of Kana B Limited Liability Company (LLC). Jon Cheetham and Greg O’Farrell are the principals of Lakeridge Paving Company. DI.E Page 69 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 5 of 30 3. In addition to the Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment Application, the Applicants also submitted an environmental checklist application (File #SEP15-0019) and a rezone application (File #REZ15-0001). 4. The Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment application seeks to change the comprehensive plan map designation of the northern 2 of 4 parcels (Parcel numbers 3121059036 & 3121059033) from the current designation of “Light Commercial” to “Light Industrial”. 5. The related rezone application (File #REZ15-0001) seeks to change the zoning designation of the northern 2 parcels zoning designation from C1, Light Commercial to M1, Light Industrial and to change the southern 2 parcels under the same ownership (southern two parcels – Parcel #3121059056 & 13121059010) from C”3, Heavy Commercial” to “M1, Light Industrial” to correspond. The Applicant identifies in the environmental checklist application that this is a non-project action. 6. As indicated by the Applicant’s narrative submitted statement with the application, the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and related rezoning have been requested for the purpose of bringing the entirety of both properties under the same land use designation to ensure the ability for future redevelopment. Lakeridge Paving Company as lessee to Kana B LLC is a “construction contractor” business and has plans for further development of the site to include a future office building and a future building for storage of construction equipment and vehicles. While certain further future development of the southern two parcels is capable of being done under the existing C3, Heavy Commercial zoning designation in effect (office uses and parking structures are allowed) it is complicated by being subject to different use limitations and zoning development standards. 7. The current Comprehensive Plan designation, zoning classification and current land uses of the sites and surrounding properties are as follows: Comprehensive Plan Designation Zoning Classification Existing Land Use On- Site Light Commercial C1, Light Commercial Single family house and outbuildings and temporary storage of unoccupied buildings North “Light Commercial” C1, Light Commercial Single family residence South “Light Industrial” for the two parcels owned by the subject Applicant with “Light Commercial” designated properties, located beyond C1, Light Commercial The two parcels owned by the subject Applicant are mostly vacant. The properties beyond contain a heavy construction contractor business East “Moderate Density Residential l” R7, Residential Seven Dwelling Units Per Acre. Steep undeveloped hillside DI.E Page 70 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 6 of 30 West East Valley Highway (A ST SE) , railroad line and City limits with City of Pacific, beyond East Valley Highway (A ST SE) , railroad line and City limits RO zoned property located in the City of Pacific, beyond ” East Valley Highway (A ST SE), railroad line and agricultural property, beyond in the City of Pacific. ^ North DI.E Page 71 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 7 of 30 Process and Criteria for Requested Amendment 8. The Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment application seeks to change the designation of two adjacent parcels; two of the four parcels owned by the applicants. The northernmost parcel, Parcel #3121059033 consists of 1.08 acres and next parcel, Parcel #3121059036 consists of 1.14 acres. The two properties considered together are roughly rectangular in shape with the longer axis oriented north-south and measuring approximately 500 feet. 9. The northern property the northern property (Parcel #3121059033) contains a single family house. The southern property (Parcel # 3121059036) has recently had the single family residence removed. Unoccupied buildings have temporarily been stored on-site under a temporary use permit. 10. Both sites are bordered to the west by developed A ST SE (a.k.a. East Valley Highway) which is classified by the City as a “Principal Arterial” which prescribes a five-lane road with 87 feet of right-of-way. The adjacent street is not currently developed to the “Principal Arterial” street standard. The site does not border any other roadway rights-of-way. 11. The property is located within the King County portion of the City of Auburn. It was annexed to the City in 1962 by Ordinance # 1492. 12. Based on historic zoning maps, the subject properties were zoned UNCL, Unclassified from the time of annexation up until 1987 and then were changed to the second category of residential zoning of R2, a Single Family Residential (6,000 square foot minimum lot size). The properties were subsequently changed to a “Light Commercial” comprehensive plan designation and a “C1, Light Commercial” zoning classification. 13. The two properties slope gently to the west at the base of the transition in grade from the western face of a steep hillside to the valley floor. 14. The purpose of the City’s Comprehensive Plan document is to provide a policy basis for the future zoning changes to ensure that the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance are consistent as required by the following city code provision: “ACC 14.22.050 Conformance and consistency. The zoning, land division and other development codes contained or referenced within Auburn City Code shall be consistent with and implement the intent of the comprehensive plan. Capital budget decisions shall be made in conformity with the comprehensive plan. “ 15. The City code provides certain criteria for decisions for comprehensive plan amendments as follows: “ACC 14.22.110 Decision criteria for plan amendments. A. The comprehensive plan was developed and adopted after significant study and public participation. The principles, goals, objectives and policies contained therein shall be granted substantial weight when considering a proposed amendment. Therefore, the burden of proof for justifying a proposed DI.E Page 72 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 8 of 30 amendment rests with the applicant, who must demonstrate that the request complies with and/or relates to the following decision criteria: 1. The proposed change will further and be consistent with the goals and objectives of the plan and the plan will remain internally consistent; 2. Whether the capacity to provide adequate services is diminished or increased; 3. Assumptions upon which the comprehensive plan is based are found to be invalid; 4. A determination of change or lack of change in conditions or circumstances has occurred since the adoption of the latest amendment to the specific section of the comprehensive plan that dictates the need for a proposed amendment; 5. If applicable, a determination that a question of consistency exists between the comprehensive plan and Chapter 36.70A RCW, the countywide planning policies for either King and/or Pierce County, as appropriate, and Vision 2040: Growth and Transportation Strategy for the Puget Sound Region.” CONCLUSIONS 1. The first criterion is that the change must further and be consistent with the goals and objectives of the plan and the plan will remain internally consistent. The Applications are vested to the Comprehensive Plan in effect prior to the adoption of substantially revised Comprehensive Plan adopted in December of 2015. The Comprehensive Plan contains policy guidance related to this application. Specifically, Chapter 14, Comprehensive Plan Map, starting at Page 14-14 provides the following purpose and description of the ‘Light Industrial’ Comprehensive Plan designation: The 2014 Comprehensive Plan to which the application is vested provides the following purpose statement of the “Light Industrial” comprehensive plan land use designation. “Light Industrial” “Purpose: To reserve quality industrial lands for activities that implement the City's economic development goals and policies.” “Description: This category is intended to accommodate a wide range of industrial and commercial uses. This designation is intended to provide a location attractive for manufacturing, processing and assembling land use activities that benefit from quality surroundings and appropriate commercial retail uses that benefit from the location, access, physical configuration, building types of these properties. It is distinguished from heavier industrial uses by means of performance criteria. All significant activities shall take place inside buildings, and the processing or storage of hazardous materials shall be strictly controlled and permitted only as an incidental part of another use. The siting and design of industrial buildings shall be of an "industrial or business park" character. Certain residential uses may be permitted, especially in industrial areas that have been established to promote a business park environment that complements environmental features, and/or if development standards are developed to promote compatibility between residential and other non-residential land uses.” (Emphasis added) DI.E Page 73 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 9 of 30 “Compatible Uses: A wide range of industrial and heavy commercial uses may be permitted, subject to performance standards. These uses include indoor manufacturing, processing and assembling of materials from previously prepared or raw materials and ancillary and necessary warehousing and distribution of finished goods associated with manufacturing and industrial uses. Certain residential uses may be permitted if development standards are established to promote compatibility between residential and other non-residential land uses.” “Outside storage shall be permitted only subject to performance criteria addressing its quantity and location to ensure it is compatible with adjacent uses and so that such storage would not detract from the potential use of the area for light industry. In all cases such storage shall be extensively screened. In the Environmental Park District that implements the “Light Industrial” plan map designation; outdoor storage will be strictly limited to promote compatibility with adjacent environmental land uses. Uses involving substantial storage or processing of hazardous materials as well as substantial emissions should not be permitted in these areas. A wide range of commercial activities may be allowed to provide increased opportunities for sales tax revenue.” “To ensure the City’s long-term ability to invest in public infrastructure and services remains viable, the City will continue to assess, evaluate, and if necessary pursue implementation of policies that incentivize the transition of current and future land uses in its industrial zones away from distribution and warehouse uses based on future changes on tax structure at the State level or other similar actions. The City believes that manufacturing and industrial land uses are preferential to and should be encouraged over warehouse and distribution land uses currently existing in the City and that any future warehouse and distribution uses should be ancillary to and necessary for the conduct of manufacturing and industrial uses. Manufacturing and industrial uses are more appropriate and beneficial through higher and better use of the land, enhanced employment densities, increased property tax revenues and potential on-site sales tax revenue generation for receipt of materials and other goods and services.” “The establishment of regulations and incentives that create a basis for increased commercial retail uses in the City’s industrial zoning districts will provide greater opportunity for the generation of sales tax revenue in the City. Increased sales tax revenue will positively impact the City’s continued ability to maintain and operate a strong public investment program in infrastructure and services. Commercial retail uses will in turn be attracted to and benefit from the location, access, physical configuration and building types of industrial zoned properties.” “Criteria for Designation: This designation should be applied to a majority of the Region Serving Area designated under this Plan. It is particularly appropriate for industrial land within high visibility corridors. This category should separate heavy industrial areas from other uses.” “Considerations Against Applying this Designation: Within the Community Serving Area, this designation should only be applied to sites now developed as light industrial sites. Industrial sites along rail corridors are generally more appropriate for heavier industrial uses, unless in high visibility corridors.” DI.E Page 74 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 10 of 30 “Appropriate Implementation: This designation is implemented by the Light Industrial (M-1), Environmental Park (EP) or Business Park (BP) zone.” Per ACC 18.23.020 C the stated purpose of the “Light Commercial” zone is as follows: “C. C-1, Light Commercial Zone. The C-1 zone is intended for lower intensity commercial adjacent to residential neighborhoods. This zone generally serves as a transition zone between higher and lower intensity land uses, providing retail and professional services. This zone represents the primary commercial designation for small- to moderate-scale commercial activities compatible by having similar performance standards and should be developed in a manner which is consistent with and attracts pedestrian-oriented activities. This zone encourages leisure shopping and provides amenities conducive to attracting shoppers and pedestrians.” Per the zoning code section, ACC 18.23.020.G, the stated intent of the “M1, Light Industrial” zoning district is to: “. . accommodate a variety of industrial, commercial, and limited residential uses in an industrial park environment, to preserve land primarily for light industrial and commercial uses, to implement the economic goals of the comprehensive plan and to provide a greater flexibility within the zoning regulations for those uses which are non-nuisance in terms of air and water pollution, noise, vibration, glare or odor. The light industrial/commercial character of this zone is intended to address the way in which industrial and commercial uses are carried out rather than the actual types of products made. The character of this zone will limit the type of primary activities which may be conducted outside of enclosed buildings to outdoor displays and sales. Uses which are not customarily conducted indoors or involve hazardous materials are considered heavy industrial uses under this title and are not appropriate for the M-1 zone. An essential aspect of this zone is the need to maintain a quality of development that attracts rather than discourages further investment in light industrial and commercial development. Consequently, site activities which could distract from the visual quality of development of those areas, such as outdoor storage, should be strictly regulated within this zone.” As identified in ACC 18.23.030 the “M1, Light Industrial” zoning classification allows a wide range of uses. While primarily manufacturing and processing in concentration, the regulations also allow a wide variety of commercial and service oriented uses of a more intensive nature. The zoning development standards such as setbacks, building height, etc. of the zone are contained in ACC 18.23.040. As discussed above, the southerly 2 parcels have been re-designated as “Light Industrial” under the 2015 Comprehensive Plan Update. The 2 northerly parcels are contiguous with these two southerly parcels. Also, the parcels are contiguous to existing land uses that function as light industrial uses such as industrially zoned properties across A Street SE located outside of Auburn City limits to the west, and Rodarte Construction Company to the south. Additionally, along this segment of A Street SE and within a distance of a quarter mile, there are no other established land uses except for one remaining single family residence (SFR) and a church (other SFR’s are depicted on the property in relatively recent aerial photographs, but some have been removed by the Applicant). Included with the application are statements by real estate agents that indicate that the property is not conducive to commercial development and is better suited to industrial development. There are many factors that may lead to this opinion for DI.E Page 75 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 11 of 30 example; the market may not have reached maturity at this location that make the property suitable for redevelopment consistent with the commercial designation. The range of uses allowed in the light industrial zone are characterized by a greater amount of outdoor storage and outdoor activity and greater potential for noise and sharp transition in land use, regardless of the specific development arrangement and use. Without appropriate mitigation and design consideration, the proximity of the site to a heavily traveled “Principal Arterial” street corridor has the potential to result in land use and visual impacts to nearby properties and to the traveling public. The fact that the site rises in elevation approximately 15 feet and may be further filled to facilitate development increases the potential visibility of the site and future development. As well as, the location is at the south end of main transportation corridor at the perimeter, that forms a prominent visual identify for the City. The Comprehensive Plan description of the purpose of this designation emphasizes that outside storage shall be permitted only subject to performance criteria addressing its quantity and location to ensure it is compatible with adjacent uses and so that such storage would not detract from the potential use of the area for light industry. In all cases such storage shall be extensively screened. Applicable policies from the City’s Comprehensive plan that are adopted and designated as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority under SEPA to approve, condition or deny proposed action are noted as follows: 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. 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. DI.E Page 76 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 12 of 30 GP-31 The City should appropriately support local businesses that enhance the image of the City through their contribution to economic vitality, educational, and historic value of the community. Objective 11.1. To create a physical image for the city conducive to attracting light industry. LU-96 Highly visible areas which tend to establish the image of the city should not be used by heavy industrial uses. LU-97 The City shall promote high quality development of all light industrial and warehouse areas. LU-98 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. LU-99 Compatibility among land uses should be enhanced through landscaping, building orientation and setbacks, traffic control and other measures to reduce potential conflicts. LU-100 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. Consistent with this discussion in the Comprehensive Plan, the subject properties are adjacent to a highly visible transportation corridor that forms a visual identify for the city. Also, with the recent change in the map designation of the two properties located to the south and under the same ownership, the properties border other property designated “Light Industrial” by the Comprehensive Plan. The site is separated by hillside from residential uses to the east. Residential uses continue to exist to the north on property designated for light commercial use. The site is not located in the regional-serving area. The development of the property will be required to be served with high capacity and high quality public services and facilities concurrent with development; these will include half street improvements and utility extensions. The properties have frontage and access to West Valley Hwy N that is classified as a “Principal Arterial” in the City’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan. DI.E Page 77 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 13 of 30 The City’s comprehensive plan seeks to establish and maintain a balance of industrial uses that respond to local and regional needs while enhancing the city's image through optimal siting and location of light industrial uses. 2. The second decision criterion is that the comprehensive plan amendment must not diminish or increase the ability to provide adequate services. The proposed application for a change in comprehensive plan designation and zoning has been reviewed by Valley Regional Fire Agency and the City Utilities and Traffic divisions. Based in these reviews, the change would not adversely affect the provision of services. The proposed Comprehensive Plan map change by itself, if approved will not affect the ability to provide adequate services. As typical with development in the city, the infrastructure improvements needed to support the development would be the responsibility of the future development. At the time of development, adequate services would be required to be provided concurrent with the development in order for the project to be authorized. So, it is not anticipated that approval of the request negatively affects provision of services. Utility and street frontage improvements would be required to support the development While the site is not yet developed consistent with city standards for the operation of a paving contractor business, Lakeridge Paving Company seeks to develop the site for a “construction contractor” business and has plans for further development of the southern lot to include a future office building and a future building for storage of vehicles. While this further future development is capable of being done under the C3, Heavy Commercial zoning classification (office uses and parking structures are allowed) it is complicated by being subject to different zoning development standards. The Applicant has recently submitted additional applications to the city for the future development of the site. These will be reviewed for consistency with city standards, including City Public Works Design Standards prior to authorization. 3. The third decision criterion is that the assumptions on which the comprehensive plan is based are found to be invalid. While the policies of the Comprehensive Plan are not invalid, the city has already changed the map designation to “Light Industrial” of two contiguous parcels off-site to the south and therefore making this requested change more logical as an expansion of the existing designation. However, this property owner’s parcels would be different in designation than all surrounding parcels. 4. The fourth decision criterion is that there has been a change or lack of change in conditions or circumstances has occurred since the adoption of the latest amendment to the comprehensive plan that dictates the need for a proposed amendment. There has been a lack of change in conditions that generates the need for the change. The pattern of “Light Commercial”-designated parcels has not been revisited for many years. The proposed change is for two parcels that are located adjacent to other parcels with the “Light Industrial” designation and provides more regular boundaries that reduce potential for land use conflicts. 5. The fifth decision criterion is that the change must be determined to be consistent with the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A), the Countywide Planning Policies of DI.E Page 78 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 14 of 30 the relevant county and “Vision 2040: Growth and Transportation Strategy for the Puget Sound Region”. The change if approved would continue to be consistent with the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A), the Countywide Planning Policies of King County and “Vision 2040: Growth and Transportation Strategy for the Puget Sound Region”. The proposal is consistent because it provides land suitable for industrial development. 6. The sixth decision criterion, applies only to changes of the mapped land use designation of a specific property, the applicant must demonstrate one of the following: a. The current land use designation was clearly made in error or due to an oversight; b. The proposed land use designation is adjacent to property having a similar or compatible designation, or other conditions are present to ensure compatibility with surrounding properties; c. There has been a change in conditions since the current land use designation came into effect. The same land use designation as proposed occurs on adjacent properties to the south and thus meets item b. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council approval of the Kana B LLC (CPA15- 0002) request for a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to change the map designation of two parcels, Parcel Nos. 3121059036 - 2.33 acres & 3121059033 – 1.32 acres from “Light Commercial” to “Light Industrial”. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission recommended approval of the Kana B LLC (CPA15-0002) request for a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment. ___________________________ -------------------NOVEMBER 9, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING--------------- CPM #1 - File #CPA14-0002: Request by Romart Investments LLC to amend the Comprehensive Plan map designation of an approx. 2.27-acre parcel from the current designation of “Single Family Residential" to “Light Commercial” at northwest corner of the 182nd Avenue East & Lake Tapps Parkway East. Background 1. The Applicant submitted a Comprehensive Plan map amendment application on June 6, 2014, before the year 2014 application submittal deadline for comprehensive plan amendments. The Application is vested to the Comprehensive Plan in effect prior to revision adopted at the end of 2015 2. The application was submitted by V.E. Mahrt (“Bud”) who is identified as Managing Member of Romart Investments LLC, Property Owner. DI.E Page 79 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 15 of 30 3. In addition to the Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment Application, the Applicant also submitted a rezone application (File #REZ14-0001 and subsequently submitted an environmental checklist application (File #SEP15-0022). 4. The Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment application seeks to change the comprehensive plan map designation of an approximately 2.27-acre vacant parcel from the current designation of “Single Family Residential” to “Light Commercial”. 5. The related rezone application (File #REZ14-0001) seeks to change the zoning designation of an approximately 2.27-acre vacant parcel from the current designation of “R5, Residential, Five dwelling units per acre” to “C1, Light Commercial”. 6. As indicated by the Applicant’s narrative statement submitted with the application, the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and related rezoning have been requested for the purpose of a commercial land use designation to ensure the ability for future commercial development. Pierce County Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) and a Conditional Use Permit (land use approval) (File #CP33-94), for the development of the North Lake Tapps Center provided for the construction of an 18,000 commercial building and 88 associated parking stalls on the southeastern 4.12-acre portion of an 11.78-acre parcel to be served by Bonney Lake Water and City of Auburn Sewer. Site is, located in the General Use Zone classification (Application Number 196781) in 2008. The property was annexed to the City of Auburn in 2005 while the vesting application was under review by Pierce County. The CUP was issued in 2008 and the Applicant continued to renew the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) with Pierce County and the City of Auburn, but the CUP expired in 2013. At annexation in the year 2005, the property was given a comprehensive plan designation of “Single Family Residential" and zoning designation that is now referred to as “R5, Residential Five Dwelling Units Per Acre”. 7. The current Comprehensive Plan designation, zoning classification and current land uses of the sites and surrounding properties are as follows: Comprehensive Plan Designation Zoning Classification Existing Land Use On- Site Single Family Residential R5, Residential, Five dwelling units per acre Vacant North The BPA utility easement and property beyond is designated “Single Family Residential” R5, Residential, Five dwelling units per acre Utility transmission corridor (Northwest Pipeline) and vacant land South Pierce County, Neighborhood Commercial Pierce County, NC, Neighborhood Commercial Single family residential East Pierce County, Rural 10 Pierce County, R- 10, Rural 10 Gas station and strip commercial DI.E Page 80 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 16 of 30 West The utility easement and property beyond is designated “Single Family Residential” R5, Residential, Five dwelling units per acre Vacant Vicinity Map ^ North DI.E Page 81 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 17 of 30 Process and Criteria for Requested Amendment 8. The Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment application seeks to change the comprehensive plan map designation of an approximately 2.27-acre vacant parcel from the current designation of “Single Family Residential” to “Light Commercial” 9. The property is a diagonal rectangle in shape and is vacant, Tax Parcel #0520101045. 10. The east side of the site is bordered by a Pierce County roadway of 182nd Avenue East which is a two-lane north-south roadway with left turn lanes provided at major intersections and gravel shoulders. To the south the site is bordered by Lake Tapps Parkway SE, a City of Auburn “Principal Arterial” classified roadway. This street has two lanes in each direction with a center turn lane. The shoulders are usually curb, gutter and sidewalk. The site does not border any other roadway rights-of-way. On the diagonal, to the north and west is a public storm pond and Northwest Pipeline underground utility transmission corridor. The utility corridor appears to contain wetlands that extend on to the northern portion of the site. 11. The property is located within the Pierce County portion of the City of Auburn. It was annexed to the City in 2005 by Ordinance #5932. 12. The property rises slightly in the center to an elevation of approximately 544 feet and slopes down on all directions. The lowest portion of the site is near the northeast corner at an elevation of 534 feet and was previously identified by Pierce County as containing wetlands. 13. As indicated by the Applicant in the narrative submitted with the application, the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and related rezoning have been requested for the purpose of changing the land use designation of the property to allow future development consistent with nearby properties. 14. The purpose of the City’s Comprehensive Plan document is to provide a policy basis for the future zoning changes to ensure that the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance are consistent as required by the following city code provision: “ACC 14.22.050 Conformance and consistency. The zoning, land division and other development codes contained or referenced within Auburn City Code shall be consistent with and implement the intent of the comprehensive plan. Capital budget decisions shall be made in conformity with the comprehensive plan. “ 15. The City code provides certain criteria for decisions for comprehensive plan amendments as follows: “ACC 14.22.110 Decision criteria for plan amendments. A. The comprehensive plan was developed and adopted after significant study and public participation. The principles, goals, objectives and policies contained therein shall be granted substantial weight when considering a proposed amendment. Therefore, the burden of proof for justifying a proposed amendment rests with the applicant, who must demonstrate that the request complies with and/or relates to the following decision criteria: 1. The proposed change will further and be consistent with the goals and objectives of the plan and the plan will remain internally consistent; DI.E Page 82 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 18 of 30 2. Whether the capacity to provide adequate services is diminished or increased; 3. Assumptions upon which the comprehensive plan is based are found to be invalid; 4. A determination of change or lack of change in conditions or circumstances has occurred since the adoption of the latest amendment to the specific section of the comprehensive plan that dictates the need for a proposed amendment; 5. If applicable, a determination that a question of consistency exists between the comprehensive plan and Chapter 36.70A RCW, the countywide planning policies for either King and/or Pierce County, as appropriate, and Vision 2040: Growth and Transportation Strategy for the Puget Sound Region.” CONCLUSIONS 1. The first criterion is that the change must further and be consistent with the goals and objectives of the plan and the plan will remain internally consistent. The Applications are vested to the Comprehensive Plan in effect prior to the adoption of substantially revised Comprehensive Plan adopted in December of 2015. The Comprehensive Plan contains policy guidance related to this application. Specifically, Chapter 14, Comprehensive Plan Map, starting at Page 14-9 provides the following purpose and description of the ‘Light Commercial’ Comprehensive Plan designation. The 2015 and earlier Comprehensive Plan to which the application is vested provides the following purpose statement of the “Light Commercial” comprehensive plan land use designation. “Light Commercial” “Purpose: To create people oriented commercial areas to supply a wide range of general commercial services to area residents.” “Description: This category represents the prime commercial designation for small to moderate scale commercial activities. These commercial areas should be developed in a manner which is consistent with and attracts pedestrian oriented activities. The ambiance of such areas should encourage leisure shopping and should provide amenities conducive to attracting shoppers.” (Emphasis added) “Compatible Uses: A wide range of consumer oriented goods and services are compatible within this designation since the emphasis would be on performance criteria which create an attractive shopping environment. However, uses which rely on direct access by vehicles or involve heavy truck traffic (other than for merchandise delivery) are not appropriate in this category. Unsightly outdoor storage and similar activities should be prohibited. Permitted uses would consist of retail trade, offices, personal services, indoor eating establishments, financial institutions, governmental offices, and similar uses. Multiple family dwellings should be encouraged as part of mixed-use developments where they do not interfere with the shopping character of the area, such as within the upper stories of buildings. Since taverns can break up the continuity of people oriented areas, taverns would be permitted generally only as a conditional use. Drive in windows should only be allowed as ancillary to a permitted use, and only when carefully sited under the conditional use permit process in order to ensure that an area's pedestrian environment is not seriously affected.” DI.E Page 83 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 19 of 30 “Criteria for Designation: This designation should include moderate sized shopping centers, and centrally located shopping areas. This designation should be preferred for commercial sites where visual and pedestrian amenities are an important concern outside of the downtown.” “Considerations Against Applying this Designation: Commercial areas which cannot be readily separated from high traffic volumes (such as shallow lots along busy arterials) should not be included in this designation. Areas not large enough for separation from any adjacent heavier commercial or industrial area should not be designated as light commercial.” “Appropriate Implementation: This designation is implemented by the C-1 Light Commercial District. This district provides for a wide range of small and moderate scale commercial oriented towards the leisure shopper and pedestrian oriented activities.” (Emphasis added) While the purpose statement is not a perfect fit to this request, the request is sought for the purpose of creating a small to moderate scale commercial activities that can provide services and retailing products that serve an adjacent residential area. Currently, sidewalk exists along Lake Tapps Parkway connecting to nearby neighborhoods. Per ACC 18.23.020 C the stated purpose of the “Light Commercial” zone is as follows: “C. C-1, Light Commercial Zone. The C-1 zone is intended for lower intensity commercial adjacent to residential neighborhoods. This zone generally serves as a transition zone between higher and lower intensity land uses, providing retail and professional services. This zone represents the primary commercial designation for small- to moderate-scale commercial activities compatible by having similar performance standards and should be developed in a manner which is consistent with and attracts pedestrian-oriented activities. This zone encourages leisure shopping and provides amenities conducive to attracting shoppers and pedestrians.” Per the zoning code section, ACC 18.07.010.D, the stated intent of the “R5, Residential” zoning district is to: “D. R-5 Residential Zone – Five Dwelling Units per Acre. The R-5 single-family residential zones are intended to create a living environment of optimum standards for single-family dwellings. It is further intended to achieve development densities of four to five dwelling units per net acre. This zone will provide for the development of single- family detached dwellings and for such accessory uses as are related, incidental and not detrimental to the single-family residential environment.” . As identified in ACC 18.07.010 the “R5, Residential” zoning district is intended to create a living environment of optimum standards for single-family dwellings. The property configuration of a triangular-rectangle shape bordering two transportation corridors and up against a utility corridor and storm pond on the remaining sides and does not represent ideal living environment for single family dwellings. The property has remained undeveloped under the City’s residential zoning classification since the Pierce County Conditional Use Permit (Land use approval) expired June 30, 2013. DI.E Page 84 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 20 of 30 The range of uses allowed in the light commercial zone are characterized by a greater variety of commercial businesses including retail and service. Applicable policies from the City’s Comprehensive plan that are adopted and designated as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority under SEPA to approve, condition or deny proposed action are noted as follows: “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 9.3. To encourage the appropriate use of areas adjacent to heavily traveled arterials while minimizing land use and traffic conflicts by: 1. Managing the continued commercial development of existing commercial arterials in a manner which minimizes traffic and land use conflicts. 2. Conserving residential qualities along heavily traveled arterials which are not yet commercialized, by restricting commercial development to types which provide an appropriate buffer. 3. Protecting existing, viable residential areas along lesser-traveled arterials, from commercial development. 4. Concentrate population and employment growth within the eight key economic development strategy areas within the City identified as follows: · Auburn Way North Corridor · Auburn Way South Corridor · Urban Center · Auburn Environmental Park and Green Zone · 15th Street SW/C Street SW/West Valley Highway/Supermall · A Street SE Corridor · SE 312th Street/124th Avenue SE Corridor DI.E Page 85 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 21 of 30 · M Street SE between Auburn Way North and Auburn Way South. Policies: LU-58 The City has identified those existing commercial arterials that are appropriate for continued commercial development and employment growth as well as a concentration of population growth. These areas are identified as the eight economic development strategy areas as identified under Objective 9.3. Sub-area plans for these strategy areas should be developed. LU-59 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-60 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-61 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-62 Arterials experiencing strong pressure for commercial development, but not yet committed to commercial uses, shall be designated for mixed use commercial and high density multi-family uses. Development regulations should encourage the development of professional office and similar uses and multiple family housing, with development and design standards carefully drawn to ensure preservation of a quality living environment in adjacent neighborhoods. LU-63 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 and other religious institutions, or moderate density multiple family uses. LU-64 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-65 Along the Auburn Way South Corridor, employment and population growth should be limited to north of the R Street SE overpass. LU-66 The City should develop design standards and guidelines for development along arterials to improve their visual appearance. While the property that is the subject of this request is not specifically identified as a location targeted for commercial development by the language of the policies and DI.E Page 86 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 22 of 30 objectives, it is located at the intersection of major streets and separated from adjacent residential zoned property by the utility transmission corridor, storm pond and wetlands. Consistent with this discussion in the Comprehensive Plan, the subject property is adjacent to a highly visible transportation corridor that forms a visual identify for the city. The property is sufficiently separated from single family residential uses and not likely to contribute to undesirable strip commercial. Future driveway access to the Pierce County roadway of 182nd Avenue East will require careful coordination with Pierce County Transportation as the jurisdiction owning the road. The coordination will occur during construction authorizations. Concern about sufficient driveway separation from the intersection for safety was previously identified by Pierce County’s in their SEPA decision (Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance). 2. The second decision criterion is that the comprehensive plan amendment must not diminish or increase the ability to provide adequate services. The proposed application for a change in comprehensive plan designation and zoning has been reviewed by Valley Regional Fire Agency and the City Utilities and Traffic divisions. Based in these reviews, the change would not adversely affect the provision of services. The proposed Comprehensive Plan map change by itself, if approved will not affect the ability to provide adequate services. As typical with development in the city, the infrastructure improvements needed to support the development would be the responsibility of the future development. At the time of development, adequate services would be required to be provided concurrent with the development in order for the project to be authorized. So, it is not anticipated that approval of the request negatively affects provision of services. Utility and street frontage improvements would be required to support the development. As noted above, future driveway access to the Pierce County roadway of 182nd Avenue East will require careful coordination with Pierce County Transportation as the jurisdiction owning the road. Half-street improvements would likely be required as well as the concern about sufficient driveway separation from the intersection was identified in Pierce County’s previous SEPA decision (Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance). Pierce county also previously issued a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) (land use approval) for a smaller commercial development of the site. The CUP was extended several time but expired on June 30, 2013. 3. The third decision criterion is that the assumptions on which the comprehensive plan is based are found to be invalid. While the policies of the Comprehensive Plan are not invalid, the “Single Family Residential” land use designation was established in 2005 when the property as part of larger area that was annexed to the City of Auburn. A storm pond was subsequently constructed to the west side of the property and Lake Tapps Parkway SE widened. There also have has been further in-fill development of nearby single family subdivisions and commercial development within the Lakeland Hills South Planned Unit Development since the time of annexation. 4. The fourth decision criterion is that there has been a change or lack of change in conditions or circumstances has occurred since the adoption of the latest amendment to the comprehensive plan that dictates the need for a proposed amendment. DI.E Page 87 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 23 of 30 There has been both “change” and a “lack of change”. The “change” is described above in response to the development that has occurred in the intervening time since annexation. The “lack of change” in conditions that generates the need for the amendment is that the pattern of “Light Commercial”-designated parcels and the appropriate land use designation of the property has not been revisited for many years. The map change is requested for property that is effectively surrounded by roadways and utility corridors that provides boundaries that reduce potential for land use conflicts. 5. The fifth decision criterion is that the change must be determined to be consistent with the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A), the Countywide Planning Policies of the relevant county and “Vision 2040: Growth and Transportation Strategy for the Puget Sound Region”. The change if approved would continue to be consistent with the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A), the Countywide Planning Policies of King County and Pierce County and “Vision 2040: Growth and Transportation Strategy for the Puget Sound Region”. The proposal is consistent because it provides land suitable for commercial development and municipal revenue. 6. The sixth decision criterion, applies only to changes of the mapped land use designation of a specific property, the applicant must demonstrate one of the following: d. The current land use designation was clearly made in error or due to an oversight; e. The proposed land use designation is adjacent to property having a similar or compatible designation, or other conditions are present to ensure compatibility with surrounding properties; f. There has been a change in conditions since the current land use designation came into effect. While it may not be an error or oversight, the land use designation applied to the property at the time of annexation did not take into account the fact that Pierce County had a vested application being processed for a Conditional Use Permit (CP33-94), for the development of the site as “North Tapps Center”. The development proposal consisted of construct an 18,000 square foot commercial building and 88 associated parking stalls on the southeastern 4.12-acre portion of an 11.78-acre parcel to be served by City of Bonney Lake Water and City of Auburn Sanitary Sewer, located in a General Use zone classification. The Conditional Use Permit was issued by Pierce County in 2008 and was renewed by the Applicant until June 30, 2013, when it expired. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council approval of the Romart Investment LLC (CPA14-0002) request for a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to change the map designation of an approximately 2.27-acre parcel (Parcel # 0520051045 from “Single Family Residential” to “Light Commercial”. DI.E Page 88 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 24 of 30 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission recommended approval of the Romart Investment LLC (CPA14-0002) request for a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment. CPM #4 (CPA16-0002) Amend the Official Comprehensive Plan Map for a City-initiated change to the designation of three parcels totaling approximately 144.7 acres from “light Industrial” and “Institutional” to “Heavy Commercial”. This change is proposed in anticipation of US Government, General Services Administration (GSA’s) stated intent to reconfigure their current facility, which is anticipated to result in a reduced need for land and possible disposal (sale) of a portion of the approx. 135 acres. Request also includes two adjacent City-owned parcels 1.56 acres and 8.04 acres to the south of GSA Properties. All the properties are generally located at southwest corner of C ST SW and 15th ST SW. Parcels are 2421049004, 2521049114 & 2521049115 Discussion 1. The current Comprehensive Plan designation, zoning designation and land uses of the 3 sites and surrounding properties are as follows: Comprehensive Plan Designation Zoning Classification Existing Land Use On- Site Light Industrial (GSA) & Institutional (City) M1, Light Industrial The GSA property contains government offices, warehouses & daycare. The City property contains a satellite fire station North Institutional and Heavy Industrial P1, Public and M2, Heavy Industrial Across 15th ST SW Municipal Park School District Bus Center South Heavy Industrial M2, Heavy Industrial Airplane Manufacturing Plant and Grocery Store Distribution Center East Light Industrial (Rail Yard Special Planning Area) M1, Light Industrial Across C ST SW, Railroad yard West Heavy Industrial M2, Heavy Industrial Airplane Manufacturing Plant DI.E Page 89 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 25 of 30 2. This city-initiated proposal seeks to change the designation of the following three contiguous properties: · North Parcel # 2421049004, 134.49 acres owned by US Government administered by General Services Administration · Southwest Parcel # 2521049114, 8.7 acres owned by City of Auburn (Fire Station) · Southeast Parcel # 2521049115, 1.56 acres owned by City of Auburn (Access for Fire Station) The combined area of the three subject parcels is approximately 144.76 acres. 3. All three sites border C ST SW, which is “Minor Arterial” classified street which is developed with two lanes in each direction aligned north-south. The largest parcel (Parcel # 2421049004) also borders 15th ST SW, aligned east-west, which is classified by the City as a “Principal Arterial” which prescribes a five-lane road with a minimum 87 feet of right-of- way. North of the parcels, the road has five lanes but varies in lane configuration and right- of-way width along its length. 4. The property is located within the King County portion of the City of Auburn. It was annexed to the City in 1958 by Ordinance #1226. DI.E Page 90 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 26 of 30 5. The properties are relatively flat with slight slope to the north and west. The southern portion of the site occurs at elevation 98 feet and 88 feet near the north end. 12. Historically, the comprehensive plan designation of the properties was “Heavy Industrial” as changed in 1987. Subsequently, the GSA property was changed to “Light Industrial”. The two City properties were changed to “Institutional” by the map adopted with the substantially revised Comprehensive Plan (including map amendments) in response to periodic updates required by the Growth Management Act (GMA) by Ordinance #6584 on December 14, 2015. 13. The City of Auburn is proposing to change the land use designation of approximately 135 acres of land owned by the United States Government and is managed by the General Services Administration (GSA) as well as the two adjacent properties owned by the City. GSA and/or the U.S. Government is not proposing the change. This change in land use designation is proposed in anticipation of GSA’s stated intent to reconfigure their current facility, which will likely result in a reduced need for land and the possibility of a U.S. Government disposal of a portion of the 135 acres. City of Auburn staff is recommending the Comprehensive Plan land use designation be changed to facilitate higher and better uses than the current “Light Industrial” designation offers. Staff is proposing that the land use designation be changed to "Heavy Commercial”. 14. Staff is proposing the change in anticipation of the U.S. Government disposing of land so that the City can promote redevelopment that generates sales tax revenues, family wage jobs, and promotes economic development. The range of uses allowed in the “Heavy Commercial” designation is better suited to accomplish these goals than the “Light Industrial” designation. 15. Because changing the comprehensive plan map designation can only occur once per year, except under specific limitations, staff is seeking the change now because the annual amendment limitation does now allow us to respond quickly in the event that U.S. Government initiates the disposal process. 16. The U.S. Government has not provided the City with a long-term development or redevelopment plan. GSA has indicated that to maintain their mission of service delivery for the Northwest region, they plan to continue at their current location at this time. GSA has also indicated its land utilization needs will likely change, resulting in a reduction of land/space. 17. Staff has notified the U.S. Government of its intentions to seek a land use designation change. The U.S. Government has not indicated that they have objection or concern over the change so long as the underlying designation can also serve their long term needs in the event that it is determined that they are obligated to comply with local land use regulations. 18. The U.S. Government representatives have indicated that they are supportive of local efforts that promote economic development and that create jobs and that they would like to be viewed as a partner in accomplishing these objective. 19. The two contiguous City parcels are proposed to be changed from “Institutional” to “Heavy Commercial” since a majority of the city parcels were originally acquired from GSA and the deeds are subject to a reversionary clause requiring that (l) The property be used and DI.E Page 91 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 27 of 30 maintained for emergency management response, including fire purposes; and (2) the property not be sold, leased, mortgaged, assigned or otherwise disposed of except to another government agency for the same purpose. The change in designation provides the greatest flexibility and can continue to be used for emergency management purpose under a revised designation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Planning Staff recommended approval Comprehensive Plan Map for a City-initiated change to the designation of three parcels totaling approximately 144.7 acres from “light Industrial” and “Institutional” to “Heavy Commercial” at southwest corner of C ST SW and 15th ST SW. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission recommended approval to the City Council Comprehensive Plan Policy/Text Amendments P/T #1 Incorporate Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan 2016 through 2022, adopted by School Board June 13, 2016 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 2016-2022. The CFP was adopted by the Auburn School District School Board on June 13, 2016 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. 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 $5,469.37, an increase of $138.37 and the requested fee for multiple-family dwellings is $1,639.70, a decrease of $985.31. The actual impact fee rate is set by ordinance by the Auburn City Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Planning Staff recommended approval PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission recommended approval of the Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan 2016 through 2022. P/T#2 Incorporate the Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2017-2022 adopted July 25, 2016 by the School Board as part of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Discussion The Dieringer School District has provided the City with its annually updated Capital Facilities Plan 2017 - 2022. The CFP was adopted by the Dieringer School District Board of Directors on July 25, 2016. The CFP has been subject to separate SEPA review and a DNS. Information DI.E Page 92 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 28 of 30 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. A review of the Dieringer School District’s updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the District is not requesting a change in the fee obligations. The net fee obligation for single- family dwellings is proposed to remain $3,330.00, and the requested fee for multiple family dwellings is proposed to remain at $1,518.00. The actual impact fee rate is set by ordinance by the Auburn City Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Planning Staff recommended approval. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission recommended approval of the Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2017-2022 to the City Council. P/T #3 Incorporate Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plan 2017 adopted June 14, 2016 by the School Board into the City Comprehensive Plan. Discussion The Federal Way School District has provided the City with its annually updated 2017 Capital Facilities Plan. The CFP was adopted by the Federal Way School District School Board on June 14, 2016. 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. 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 $3,198.00, representing an increase of $299.00 and the requested fee for multi-family dwellings is $8,386.00, an increase of $7,880.00. The actual impact fee rate is set by ordinance by the Auburn City Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Planning Staff recommended approval PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission recommended approval of the Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plan 2017 to the City Council P/T #4 Incorporate Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan 2016-2017 to 2021-2022 adopted May 14, 2016 by the School Board into the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Discussion The Kent School District has provided its annually updated 2016-2017 to 2021-2022 Capital Facilities Plan. The CFP was adopted by the Kent School District School Board on May 14, 2016 and has been subject to separate SEPA review and a Determination of Non Significance DI.E Page 93 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 29 of 30 (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. A review of the Kent School District’s updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the District is requesting a change in the fees. The Plan indicates the net fee obligation for single-family dwellings of $5,100.00, representing an increase of $110.00, and for multi-family dwellings a fee of $2,210.00, representing an increase of $47.00. The actual impact fee rate is set by ordinance by the Auburn City Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Planning Staff recommended approval PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission recommended approval of the Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan 2016-2017 to 2021-2022 to the City Council CPM #5 Incorporate the City of Auburn’s 6-year Capital Facilities Plan 2017-2022, 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 2017- 2022 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. RCW 36.70A.070(3) of the GMA states 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 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 DI.E Page 94 of 181 Agenda Subject: CPA14-0002, CPA15-0002, CPA16-0001 & CPA16- 0002, 2016 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Map Amendments and Policy/Text Amendments Date: November 18, 2016 Page 30 of 30 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 from the Finance Department contained in the working notebook identifies the major changes in the CFP from last year. The proposed City of Auburn 6-year Capital Facilities Plan 2017-2022 is incorporated by reference in the Comprehensive Plan, Capital Facilities Element. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Planning Staff recommended approval PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission recommended approval of City of Auburn’s 6-year Capital Facilities Plan 2017-2022 to the City Council. DI.E Page 95 of 181 Year 2016 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) Summary Matrix (CPM = Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment; P/T = Policy/Text Amendment) November 18, 2016 Page 1 of 2 CPA # Title Description Staff Recommendation Planning Commission Recommendation City Council Action Notes CPM # 1 Comprehensive Plan Map File # CPA14-0002, Request by Romart Investments LLC to change the map designation of one parcel (Parcel # 0520051045) of approx. 2.27 acres from “Single Family Residential” to “Light Commercial” at the NW corner of 182nd ST E and Lk Tapps Parkway SE to facilitate subsequent rezoning to accommodate future development originally contemplated years ago while in Pierce Co. Approval Approval PC Hearing conducted on November 9, 2016. Cheryl Ebsworth, Apex Engineering Inc., as representiative of the Applicant/Property Owner testified in favor of the map amendment. CPM # 2 Comprehensive Plan Map File # CPA15-0002, Request by Kana B. LLC to change the map designation of two parcels (Parcel # 3121059036 & 3121059033) totaling approx. 5.9 acres from “Light Commercial” to “Light Industrial” on the east side of A ST SE, between Lakeland Hills Blvd SE & LK Tapps Pkwy SE. to facilitate subsequent rezoning to accommodate future development. Approval Approval PC Hearing conducted on June 21, 2016. Jon Cheetham, Applicant, testified in favor of the proposed map amendment. CPM # 4 Comprehensive Plan Map File # CPA16-0002, City initiated change in the map designation of three parcels (Parcel # 2421049004, 2521049114 & 2521049115) totaling approx. 144.6 acres from: “Light Industrial” and “Institutional” to “Heavy Commercial” at the SW corner of 15th ST SW and C ST SW to facilitate subsequent rezoning in anticipation of GSA’s stated intent to reconfigure their facility and reduced need for land, while promoting redevelopment that contributes to city economic development goals. Approval Approval PC Hearing conducted on November 9, 2016. There was no public testimony. DI.EPage 96 of 181 Created: November 18, 2016 P/T # Title Description Staff Recommendation Planning Commission Recommendation City Council Action Notes P/T #1 Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan Incorporate Auburn School District 2016-2022 Capital Facilities Plan, as part of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Approval Approval PC Hearing was conducted on November 9, 2016. Bob Kenworthy, Assistant Director, Capital Projects, Auburn School District, testified in favor of the request. P/T #2 Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan Incorporate the Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2017-2022 as part of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Approval Approval PC Hearing was conducted on November 9, 2016. There was no public testimony. P/T #3 Federal Way Capital Facilities Plan Incorporate Federal Way School District 2017 Capital Facilities Plan, as part of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Approval Approval PC Hearing was conducted on November 9, 2016. Tanya Nascimento, Enrollment and Demographic Analyst, Federal Way School District, testified in favor of the request. P/T #4 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan Incorporate Kent School District 2016/2017 – 2021/2022 Capital Facilities Plan, as part of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Approval Approval PC Hearing was conducted on November 9, 2016. Lisa Taylor, Supervisor of Budget/Fiscal Planning-Kent School District testified in favor of the request. P/T #5 City of Auburn’s 6-year Capital Facilities Plan Incorporate the City of Auburn’s 6-year Capital Facilities Plan 2017-2022, into the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Approval Approval PC Hearing was conducted on November 9, 2016. There was no public testimony. DI.EPage 97 of 181 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6632 November 18, 2016 Page 1 ORDINANCE NO. 6 6 3 2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO PLANNING; ADOPTING 2016 ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AND TEXT AMENDMENTS PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF RCW CHAPTER 36.70A WHEREAS, on August 18, 1986, the City Council of the City of Auburn 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 Auburn City Council adopted Comprehensive Plan Amendments by Resolution No. 2635 to comply with the Washington State Growth Management Act; and WHEREAS, on September 5, 1995, the Auburn City Council reaffirmed that action by its adoption of Ordinance No. 4788; and WHEREAS, on December 14, 2015, the Auburn City Council adopted an updated Comprehensive Plan which includes a Map establishing the location of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations throughout the City by Ordinance No. 6584; and WHEREAS, the City of Auburn published in the Seattle Times Newspaper an advertisement that the City was accepting comprehensive plan amendment applications and established a deadline for submittal of June 3, 2016; and WHEREAS, the City of Auburn received privately-initiated map amendments in previous years (File Nos. CPA14-0002 & CPA15-0002) however these applications were not complete for processing; and DI.E Page 98 of 181 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6632 November 18, 2016 Page 2 WHEREAS, the City of Auburn did not receive any privately-initiated map or text/policy amendments for the year 2016 annual amendments; and WHEREAS, the City of Auburn initiated one map amendment (CPA16-0002) and five text/policy amendments (File No. CPA16-0001); and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan text/policy amendments were processed by the Community Development & Public Works Department as proposed Year 2016 annual amendments to the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, maintaining a current Capital Facilities Plan is required of the City in order to meet regulations of the Growth Management Act under RCW 36.70A; and WHEREAS, the environmental impacts of the proposed Year 2016 Comprehensive Plan amendments were considered in accordance with procedures of the State Environmental Policy Act (File No. SEP15-0022 (Romart LLC), SEP15-0016 (Kana B. LLC), SEP16-0010 (City-initiated Text) & SEP16-0018 (City-initiated Map)) and were determined to have no environmental significance; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendments were transmitted to the Washington State Department of Commerce, Growth Management Services Division and other State agencies for the 60-day review period in accordance with RCW 36.70A.106; and WHEREAS, after proper notice published in the City’s official newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the hearings, the Auburn Planning Commission on June 21, 2016 and on November 9, 2016, conducted public hearings on the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, at the public hearings the Auburn City Planning Commission heard and considered the public testimony and the evidence and exhibits presented to it; and DI.E Page 99 of 181 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6632 November 18, 2016 Page 3 WHEREAS, the Auburn City Planning Commission thereafter made recommendations to the City Council on the proposed Year 2016 annual Comprehensive Plan map and text amendments; and WHEREAS, on November 28, 2016, the Auburn City Council reviewed the Planning Commission’s recommendations to the City Council; and WHEREAS, on December 5, 2016, the Auburn City Council considered the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments as recommended by the City of Auburn Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Application CPA14-0002, Romart Investments LLC Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, requesting a land use designation change from “Single Family Residential” to “Light Commercial” for an approximately 2.27-acre parcel identified by parcel number: 0520051045 is approved as set forth in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Council adopts both the Planning Commission’s November 9, 2016 recommendations, and the findings and conclusions outlined in the October 19, 2016, staff report, both attached as Exhibit “B”. Section 2. Application CPA15-0002, Kana B. LLC Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, requesting a land use designation change from “Light Commercial” and “Heavy Commercial” to “Light Industrial” for two parcels totaling approximately 5.9 acres, identified by parcel numbers: 3121059036 and 3121059033 is approved as set forth in Exhibit “C” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Council adopts both the Planning Commission’s June 21, 2016 recommendations, and the DI.E Page 100 of 181 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6632 November 18, 2016 Page 4 findings and conclusions outlined in the June 9, 2016, staff report, both attached as Exhibit “D”. Section 3. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan city-initiated Map Amendment (CPA16-0002) is adopted and approved as set forth in Exhibit “E” as attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The City Clerk shall file Exhibit “E” along with this Ordinance and keep them available for public inspection. Section 4. The 2016 annual Comprehensive Plan city-initiated Text Amendments (CPA16-0001), as set forth in Exhibit "F" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, are adopted and approved. The City Clerk shall file Exhibit "F" along with this Ordinance and keep them available for public inspection. The full text of the Capital Facilities Plan of the City and the four school district’s Capital Facilities Plans are adopted with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, copies of which shall be on file with the Office of the City Clerk. The City Clerk shall file them along with this Ordinance and keep them available for public inspection. Council adopts both the Planning Commission’s recommendations, dated November 9, 2016, and the Findings and Conclusions outlined in the October 20, 2016, staff report, attached as Exhibit "B". Section 5. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan amendments modify the Comprehensive Plan adopted on August 18, 1986, by Resolution No. 1703; and adopted by Ordinance No. 4788 on September 5, 1995; and adopted December 14, 2015 by Ordinance No. 6584. Section 6. The adopted Comprehensive Plan as amended is designated as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority under the Washington State DI.E Page 101 of 181 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6632 November 18, 2016 Page 5 Environmental Policy Act by the City's responsible environmental official in accordance with RCW. 43.21C.060. Section 7. 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 8. 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", Exhibit "B", Exhibit “C”, Exhibit “D”, Exhibit “E” and Exhibit “F” preparing and publishing the amended Comprehensive Plan. FIRST READING: SECOND READING: ____________________ PASSED: APPROVED: Nancy Backus MAYOR ATTEST: __________________________ Danielle E. Daskam, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: DI.E Page 102 of 181 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6632 November 18, 2016 Page 6 __________________________ Daniel B. Heid, City Attorney Published: _____________________ DI.E Page 103 of 181 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6632 November 18, 2016 Page 7 Exhibit "A" Colored Map as an excerpt of the City’s Comprehensive Plan Map showing a change from “Single Family Residential” to “Light Commercial” for an approximately 2.27-acre parcel identified by parcel number: 0520051045 for Romart Investments LLC. (Please see “Comp. Plan Map Amendments CPA14-0002” tab in the working binder). DI.E Page 104 of 181 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6632 November 18, 2016 Page 8 Exhibit "B" Agenda bill/staff report dated October 19, 2016. CPA14-0002, for a change from “Single Family Residential” to “Light Commercial” for an approximately 2.27-acre parcel identified by parcel number: 0520051045 for Romart Investments LLC. DI.E Page 105 of 181 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6632 November 18, 2016 Page 9 Exhibit "C" Colored Map as an excerpt of the City’s Comprehensive Plan Map showing a change from “Light Commercial” and “Heavy Commercial” to “Light Industrial” for two parcels totaling approximately 5.9 acres, identified by parcel numbers: 3121059036 and 3121059033 for Kana B. LLC. (Please see “Comp. Plan Map Amendments CPA15-0002” tab in the working binder). DI.E Page 106 of 181 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6632 November 18, 2016 Page 10 Exhibit "D" Agenda bill/staff report dated June 9, 2016. CPA15-0002, for a change from “Light Commercial” and “Heavy Commercial” to “Light Industrial” for two parcels totaling approximately 5.9 acres, identified by parcel numbers: 3121059036 and 3121059033 for Kana B. LLC. DI.E Page 107 of 181 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6632 November 18, 2016 Page 11 Exhibit E Colored map as an excerpt of “Comprehensive Plan”, showing the change from “Light Industrial” and “Institutional” to “Heavy Commercial” for three parcels identified by Parcel Nos. 2421049004, 2421049114 and 2421049115. (Please see “Comp. Plan Map Amendments” tab in the working binder) DI.E Page 108 of 181 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6632 November 18, 2016 Page 12 Exhibit "F" The Auburn, Dieringer, Federal Way, and Kent School District Capital Facilities Plans City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan (See “Comp. Plan Policy/Text Amendments” tab in the working binder) DI.E Page 109 of 181 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Ordinance No. 6627 (5 Minute Presentation) Date: November 21, 2016 Department: Planning and Development Attachments: Agenda Bill Ordinance No. 6627 Table Comparison Pierce County Ordinance King County Ordinance Budget Impact: $0 Administrative Recommendation: Background Summary: Please see the attached Agenda Bill. Reviewed by Council Committees: Other: Legal, and Planning Councilmember: Staff:Snyder Meeting Date:November 28, 2016 Item Number:DI.F AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINEDDI.F Page 110 of 181 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: ZOA16-0007; Ordinance # 6627 to revise school district impact fees for 2017 Date: November 21, 2016 Department: Community Development & Public Works Dept. Attachments: Ordinance # 6627 Table Comparison of Impact Fees indicated in each CFPs Pierce Co. Ordinance #2016-79 Budget Impact: (none) 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 collection 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 2016 included requests for City approval of the Capital Facilities Plans of the four districts as follows: * 2016 - 2022 Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan; * 2017-2022 Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan; * 2017 Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plan; and * 2016-2017 through 2021-2022 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 2016 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments, distributed to the City Council prior to the 11-28- 16 study session. Reviewed by Council & Committees: Reviewed by Departments & Divisions: Arts Commission COUNCIL COMMITTEES: Building M&O Airport Finance Cemetery Mayor Hearing Examiner Municipal Serv. Finance Parks Human Services Planning & CD Fire Planning Park Board Public Works Legal Police Planning Comm. Other Public Works Human Resources Action: Committee Approval: Yes No Council Approval: Yes No Call for Public Hearing ___/___/____ Referred to _________________________________ Until ____/___/____ Tabled ______________________________________ Until ___/___/____ Councilmember: Staff: Snyder Meeting Date: November 28, 2016 Item Number: DI.F Page 111 of 181 Agenda Subject: Ordinance No. 6627 related to adjusting School Impact Fees Date: November 21, 2016 Page 2 of 4 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: v 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. v Separate fees shall be calculated for single-family and multifamily types of dwelling units, and separate student generation rates must be determined by the district for each type of dwelling unit. v 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. v As a condition of the city's authorization and adoption of a school impact fee ordinance, the city and the applicable district shall enter into an interlocal agreement governing the operation of the school impact fee program, and describing the relationship and liabilities of the parties. The agreement must provide that the district shall hold the city harmless for all damages. v On an annual basis (by July 1st or on a date agreed to by district and the city and stipulated in the interlocal agreement), any district for which the city is collecting impact fees shall submit the Capital facilities plan and supporting information to the city. v Applicants for single-family and multifamily residential building permits shall pay the total amount of the impact fees assessed before the building permit is issued, using the impact fee schedules in effect, unless the fee has been deferred pursuant to City Ordinance No. 6341. v 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 each of 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. Under City regulations a separate letter request is only required to be subm itted to the city when the fee adjustment is requested to increase. DI.F Page 112 of 181 Agenda Subject: Ordinance No. 6627 related to adjusting School Impact Fees Date: November 21, 2016 Page 3 of 4 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 Dieringer School District: The Dieringer School District indicated by correspondence submitted with their Capital Facilities Plan that there were not requesting an increase in school impact fees for year 2017. The year 2016 fees are $3,330.00 for single family residential and $1,518.00 for multiple family residential. However, a proposed fee calculation of $5,053.00 for single family residential and $1,759.00 for multiple family residential is identified based on their Capital Facilities Plan. Related to this, the Pierce County Council by Ordinance No. 2016-79 adopted November 15, 2016 and effective January 1, 2017, established a school impact fee for the Dieringer School District of $3,400.00 for single family residential and $1,759.00 for multiple family residential. Pierce County routinely establishes a uniform rate for all districts within their jurisdiction and only makes yearly adjustments based on the Consumer Price Index. (The Dieringer School District is the only school district common to both the jurisdictions of the City of Auburn and Pierce County). To be consistent, it is appropriate to establish a fee applicable in the City of 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 has been 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. Federal Way School District: The Federal Way School District proposes a fee calculation for multiple family residential the year 2017 of $8,386.00 which is a substantial increase from the 2016 fee of $506.00. Tanya Nascimento, Student & Demographic Forecaster for the Federal Way Public Schools provided the following explanation for the increase as follows: DI.F Page 113 of 181 Agenda Subject: Ordinance No. 6627 related to adjusting School Impact Fees Date: November 21, 2016 Page 4 of 4 When calculating the impact fees for the capital facilities plan, the District can only use actual student generation rates, either our own or the King County average. For the past several years, there had been no multi-family development in our District, so we were using the King County average. We had two developments become fully occupied by the end of 2015. These were used in the calculation of our 2017 multi-family impact fee. We have another multiple family development that became fully occupied by June 2016 and there is one more currently under construction. Our multi-family generation rates will continue to fluctuate as these new developments become part of our calculations. Scheduling of Actions A discussion of the School District Capital Facilities Plans school impact fee changes and Ordinance No. 6627 is scheduled for Council Work Session November 28, 2016. City Council consideration is tentatively planned for December 5, 2016. DI.F Page 114 of 181 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ordinance No. 6627 November 21, 2016 Page 1 of 7 ORDINANCE NO. 6 6 2 7 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON AMENDING SECTIONS 19.02.115, 19.02.120, 19.02.130 AND 19.02.140 OF THE AUBURN CITY CODE RELATING TO SCHOOL IMPACTS FEES WHEREAS, the City of Auburn has adopted a school impact fee ordinance and collects school impact fees on behalf of certain school districts located or located in part within the City of Auburn; and WHEREAS, the Auburn School District, Dieringer School District, Federal Way School District, and the Kent School District, each being located in part within the City of Auburn, have provided the City of Auburn with updated capital facilities plans to be considered during the City’s 2016 annual comprehensive plan amendment process that addresses among other things, the appropriate school impact fee for single family residential dwellings and multi- family residential dwellings for each district; and WHEREAS, the Auburn School District issued a Determination of Non - Significance for the 2016 - 2022 Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan May 27, 2016; the Dieringer School District issued a Determination of Non- Significance for the 2017-2022 Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan July 5 2016; the Federal Way School District issued a Determination of Non-Significance for the 2017 Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plan May 13, 2016; and the Kent School District issued a Determination of Non-Significance for the 2016-2017 through 2021-2022 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan May 20, 2016; and DI.F Page 115 of 181 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ordinance No. 6627 November 21, 2016 Page 2 of 7 WHEREAS the City of Auburn issued a Determination of Non -Significance (DNS) on September 28, 2016 for the City of Auburn Year 2016 city-initiated comprehensive plan map and text amendments (File No. SEP16-0010), 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 November 9, 2016 conducted public hearings on the proposed Auburn School District 2016-2022 Capital Facilities Plan, the proposed Dieringer School District 2017 - 2022 Capital Facilities Plan; the proposed Federal Way School District 2017 Capital Facilities Plan; and for the proposed Kent School District 2016-2017 through 2021-2022 Capital Facilities Plan; and WHEREAS, following the conclusion of the public hearing on November 9, 2016, and subsequent deliberations, the Auburn Planning Commission, following individual positive motions, made separate recommendations to the Auburn City Council on the approval of the Auburn School District 2016-2022 Capital Facilities Plan, the Dieringer School District 2017 - 2022 Capital Facilities Plan; the Federal Way School District 2017 Capital Facilities Plan; and for the Kent School District 2016-2017 through 2021-2022 Capital Facilities Plan; and WHEREAS, the Auburn City Council reviewed the recommendations of the Auburn Planning Commission on the school district capital facilities plans at a regularly scheduled study session on November 28, 2016; and WHEREAS, the Auburn City Council considered the recommendations of the DI.F Page 116 of 181 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ordinance No. 6627 November 21, 2016 Page 3 of 7 Auburn Planning Commission on the capital facilities plans at a regularly scheduled meeting on December 5, 2016, and a positive motion approved the Auburn School District 2016-2022 Capital Facilities Plan, the Dieringer School District 2017 - 2022 Capital Facilities Plan; the Federal Way School District 2017 Capital Facilities Plan; and for the Kent School District 2016-2017 through 2021-2022 Capital Facilities (Ordinance No. 6632); and WHEREAS, on November 28, 2016 the Auburn City Council at a regularly scheduled study session reviewed amendments to Title 19 (Impact Fees) and more specifically, Chapter 19.02 (School Impact Fees) pertaining to school impact fees for single family residential dwelling units and multi-family dwelling units to be applied in the City of Auburn for the Auburn School District; Dieringer School District, Federal Way School District, and the Kent School District; respectively, based on the aforementioned capital facilities plans for each of these districts; and WHEREAS, the Auburn City Code provides for adjustments to school impact fees based on a review of the capital facilities plans for each of the districts; and WHEREAS, Section 19.02.060 (Annual Council Review) of the Auburn City Code specifies that the Auburn City Council will in making its decision to adjust impact fees 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 tha n the amount supported by the capital facilities plan. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: DI.F Page 117 of 181 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ordinance No. 6627 November 21, 2016 Page 4 of 7 Section 1. Amendment to the City Code. Section 19.02.115 of the Auburn City Code is hereby amended to read as follows. 19.02.115 Impact fee calculation and schedule for the Dieringer School District. The impact fee calculation and schedule below is based upon a review of the impact fee calculation for single-family residences and for multifamily residences set forth in the most recent version of the Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan adopted by the Auburn city council as an element of the Auburn comprehensive plan. The calculation is the determination of the appropriate proportionate share of the co sts of public school capital facilities needed to serve new growth and development to be funded by school impact fees based on the factors defined in ACC 19.02.020. Effective January 1, 20162017, or the effective date of this ordinance whichever is later, the school impact fee shall be as follows: Per Single-Family Dwelling Unit $3,330.00$3,400.00 Per Multifamily Dwelling Unit $1,518.00$1,759.00 (Ord. 6581 § 1, 2016; Ord. 6542 § 1, 2014; Ord. 6488 § 1, 2013; Ord. 6445 § 1, 2012; Ord. 6393 § 1, 2011; Ord. 6341 § 2, 2011; Ord. 6340 § 1, 2010; Ord. 6279 § 1, 2009; Ord. 6214 § 1, 2008; Ord. 6134 § 1, 2007; Ord. 6060 § 1, 2006; Ord. 5950 § 2, 2005 .) Section 2. Amendment to the City Code. Section 19.02.120 of the Auburn City Code is hereby amended to read as follows. 19.02.120 Impact fee calculation and schedule for the Auburn School District. The impact fee calculation and schedule is based upon a review of the impact fee calculation for single-family residences and for multifamily residences set forth in the most recent version of the Auburn School District’s Capital Facilities Plan adopted by the Auburn city council as an element of the Auburn comprehensive plan. The calculation is the DI.F Page 118 of 181 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ordinance No. 6627 November 21, 2016 Page 5 of 7 determination of the appropriate proportionate share of the costs of public school capital facilities needed to serve new growth and development to be funded by school impact fees based on the factors defined in ACC 19.02.020. Effective January 1, 20162017, or the effective date of this ordinance whichever is later, the school impact fee shall be as follows: Per Single-Family Dwelling Unit $5,330.88$5,469.37 Per Multifamily Dwelling Unit $2,625.01$1,639.70 (Ord. 6581 § 2, 2016; Ord. 6542 § 2, 2014; Ord. 6488 § 2, 2013; Ord. 6445 § 2, 2012; Ord. 6393 § 2, 2011; Ord. 6341 § 2, 2011; Ord. 6340 § 2, 2010; Ord. 6279 § 2, 2009; Ord. 6214 § 2, 2008; Ord. 6134 § 2, 2007; Ord. 6060 § 2, 2006; Ord. 5950 § 1, 2005; Ord. 5793 § 1, 2003; Ord. 5232 § 1, 1999.) Section 3. Amendment to the City Code. Section 19.02.130 of the Auburn City Code is hereby amended as follows. 19.02.130 Impact fee calculation and schedule for the Kent School District. The impact fee calculation and schedule is based upon a review of the impact fee and calculation for single-family residences and for multifamily residences set forth in the most recent version of the Kent School District’s Capital Facilities Plan adopted by the Auburn city council as an element of the Auburn comprehensive plan. The calculation is the determination of the appropriate proportionate share of the costs of public school capital facilities needed to serve new growth and development to be funded by school impact fees based on the factors defined in ACC 19.02.020. Effective January 1, 20162017, or the effective date of this ordinance whichever is later, the school impact fee shall be as follows: Per Single-Family Dwelling Unit $4,990.00$5,100.00 Per Multifamily Dwelling Unit $2,163.00$2,210.00 (Ord. 6581 § 3, 2016; Ord. 6542 § 3, 2014; Ord. 6488 § 3, 2013; Ord. DI.F Page 119 of 181 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ordinance No. 6627 November 21, 2016 Page 6 of 7 6445 § 3, 2012; Ord. 6393 § 3, 2011; Ord. 6341 § 2, 2011; Ord. 6340 § 3, 2010; Ord. 6279 § 3, 2009; Ord. 6214 § 3, 2008; Ord. 6134 § 3, 2007; Ord. 6060 § 3, 2006; Ord. 5950 § 1, 2005; Ord. 5233 § 1, 1999.) Section 4. Amendment to the City Code. Section 19.02.140 of the Auburn City Code is hereby amended to read as follows. 19.02.140 Impact fee calculation and schedule for the Federal Way School District. The impact fee calculation and schedule is based upon a review of the impact fee and calculation for single-family residences and for multifamily residences set forth in the most recent version of the Federal Way School District’s Capital Facilities Plan adopted by the Auburn city council as an element of the Auburn comprehensive plan. The calculation is the determination of the appropriate proportionate share of the costs of public school capital facilities needed to serve new growth and development to be funded by school impact fees based on the factors defined in ACC 19.02.020. Effective January 1, 20162017, or the effective date of this ordinance whichever is later, the school impact fee shall be as follows: Per Single-Family Dwelling Unit $2,899.00$3,198.00 Per Multifamily Dwelling Unit $506.00$8,386.00 (Ord. 6581 § 4, 2016; Ord. 6542 § 4, 2014; Ord. 6488 § 4, 20 13; Ord. 6445 § 4, 2012; Ord. 6393 § 4, 2011; Ord. 6341 § 2, 2011; Ord. 6340 § 4, 2010; Ord. 6279 § 4, 2009; Ord. 6214 § 4, 2008; Ord. 6134 § 4, 2007; Ord. 6060 § 4, 2006; Ord. 6042 § 1, 2006.) Section 5. Constitutionality and Invalidity. If any section, subsection sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance, is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any Court of competent jurisdiction such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. DI.F Page 120 of 181 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ordinance No. 6627 November 21, 2016 Page 7 of 7 Section 6. Implementation. The Mayor is authorized to implement such administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directions of this legislation. Section 7. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force five days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. FIRST READING: SECOND READING: ____________________ PASSED: APPROVED: NANCY BACKUS, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ Danielle E. Daskam, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________ Daniel B. Heid, City Attorney Published: _____________________ DI.F Page 121 of 181 School Impact Fee Proposal (Effective Year 2017) 11-6-15 School District Multiple Family Single Family Past 2016 fee, Per ACC 19.02 CFP says: Requested Amount Change? Past 2016 fee, Per ACC 19.02 CFP says: Requested Amount Change? Auburn $2,625.01 $1,639.70 Page 29 $1,639.70 Decrease of $985.31 $5,330.88 $5,469.37 Page 29 $5,469.37 Increase of $138.49 Dieringer $1,518.00 $1,759.00 Page 13 $1,518.00 No change requested $3,330.00 $5,053.00 Page 13 $3,330.00 No change requested Federal Way $506.00 $506.00 Page 28 & 30 $8,386.00 Increase of $7,880.00 $2,899.00 $2,899.00 Page 28 & 30 $3,198.00 Increase of $299.00 Kent $2,163.00 $2,210.00 Page 32-33 $2,210.00 Increase of $47.00 $4,990.00 $5,100.00 Page 32-33 $5,100.00 Increase of $110.00 CFP = Capital Facilities Plan ACC = Auburn City Code DI.F Page 122 of 181 DI.F Page 123 of 181 DI.F Page 124 of 181 DI.F Page 125 of 181 DI.F Page 126 of 181 DI.F Page 127 of 181 DI.F Page 128 of 181 1200 King County Courthouse 516 Third Avenue Seattle, WA 98104 King County Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:22016-0474 Status:Type:Ordinance Passed File created:In control:10/3/2016 Budget and Fiscal Management Committee On agenda:Final action:11/7/2016 Enactment date:11/17/2016 18384Enactment #: Title:AN ORDINANCE relating to school impact fees; adopting the capital facilities plans of the Tahoma, Federal Way, Riverview, Issaquah, Snoqualmie Valley, Highline, Lake Washington, Kent, Enumclaw, Fife, Auburn and Renton school districts as subelements of the capital facilities element of the King County Comprehensive Plan for purposes of implementing the school impact fee program; establishing school impact fees to be collected by King County on behalf of the districts; and amending Ordinance 10122, Section 3, as amended, Ordinance 10470, Section 2, as amended, Ordinance 10472, Section 2, as amended, Ordinance 10633, Section 2, as amended, Ordinance 10722, Section 2, as amended, Ordinance 10722, Section 3, as amended, Ordinance 10790, Section 2, as amended, Ordinance 10982, Section 2, as amended, Ordinance 12063, Section 11, as amended, Ordinance 12532, Section 12, as amended, Ordinance 13338, Section 13, as amended, Ordinance 17220, Section 14, as amended and Ordinance 10122, Section 2, as amended, and K.C.C. 27.44.010. Sponsors:Dave Upthegrove Indexes:Fees, Schools Code sections:27.44.010 - Attachments:1. 18384.pdf, 2. A. Tahoma - 2016 CFP, 3. B. Federal Way - 2016 (2017) CFP, 4. C. Riverview SD 2016 CFP, 5. D. Issaquah SD - 2016 CFP, 6. E. Snoqualmie Valley - 2016 CFP FINAL Adopted 6.23, 7. F. Highline School District No. 401 CFP 2016-2021 adopted June 22, 2016, dated October 17, 2016, 8. G. LWSD - 2016 CFP, 9. H. Kent 2016 CFP, 10. I. Northshore School District No. 417 Proposed CF Plan 2016 adopted September 27, 2016, dated October, 17, 2016, 11. J. Enumclaw - 2016 CFP -2021 Final Draft, 12. K. Fife - 2016-2022 CFP Adopted June 27, 2016, 13. L. Auburn - 2016 CFP, 14. M. Renton 2016 CFP, 15. F. Highline School District No. 401 CFP 2016-2021 adopted June 22, 2016, dated October 17, 2016, 16. C. Riverview SD 2016 CFP, 17. A. Tahoma - 2016 CFP, 18. B. Federal Way - 2016 (2017) CFP, 19. J. Enumclaw - 2016 CFP -2021 Final Draft, 20. F. Highline - CFP 2016 Adopted June 22, 2016, 21. G. LWSD - 2016 CFP, 22. I. Northshore 2016 CFP Board FINAL Draft 92716, 23. I. Northshore School District No. 417 Proposed CF Plan 2016 adopted September 27, 2016, dated October, 17, 2016, 24. 2016-0474 legislative review form.pdf, 25. K. Fife - 2016-2022 CFP Adopted June 27, 2016, 26. L. Auburn - 2016 CFP, 27. M. Renton 2016 CFP, 28. 2016-0474 2016 School Impact Fee Stakeholders List.doc, 29. 2016-0474 Dept of Commerce REVISED Notice of Intent to Adopt Amendment.docx, 30. 2016-0474 Fiscal Note.xlsx, 31. 2016-0474 REGULATORY NOTE.docx, 32. 2016-0474 REVISED 2nd 2016 Advertising summary .doc, 33. 2016-0474 School Impact fee notice Seattle Times 10--5-16.doc, 34. 2016-0474 REVISED 2016 NOTICE OF INTENT TO AMEND.docx, 35. 2016-0474 REVISED 2016 Plain Language Summary.docx, 36. 2016-0474 Transmittal letter.docx, 37. 2016-0474_SR_SchoolImpactFees.pdf, 38. 2016-0474_ATT2_AMD1_and_Attachments_SchoolImpactFees.pdf, 39. 2016- 0474_Revised_SR_SchoolImpactFees.docx, 40. 2016-0474 Affidavit of Pub - School Impact fee - Seattle Times .pdf, 41. Department of Commnerce Notice of Intent. 2016-0474.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Hearing HeldMetropolitan King County Council11/7/2016 2 PassedMetropolitan King County Council11/7/2016 2 Pass Recommended Do Pass SubstituteBudget and Fiscal Management Committee 11/1/2016 1 Pass King County Printed on 11/21/2016Page 1 of 7 powered by Legistar™ DI.F Page 129 of 181 Committee DeferredBudget and Fiscal Management Committee 10/26/2016 1 DeferredBudget and Fiscal Management Committee 10/25/2016 1 ReferredMetropolitan King County Council10/3/2016 1 Clerk 11/08/2016 AN ORDINANCE relating to school impact fees; adopting the capital facilities plans of the Tahoma, Federal Way, Riverview, Issaquah, Snoqualmie Valley, Highline, Lake Washington, Kent, Enumclaw, Fife, Auburn and Renton school districts as subelements of the capital facilities element of the King County Comprehensive Plan for purposes of implementing the school impact fee program; establishing school impact fees to be collected by King County on behalf of the districts; and amending Ordinance 10122, Section 3, as amended, Ordinance 10470, Section 2, as amended, Ordinance 10472, Section 2, as amended, Ordinance 10633, Section 2, as amended, Ordinance 10722, Section 2, as amended, Ordinance 10722, Section 3, as amended, Ordinance 10790, Section 2, as amended, Ordinance 10982, Section 2, as amended, Ordinance 12063, Section 11, as amended, Ordinance 12532, Section 12, as amended, Ordinance 13338, Section 13, as amended, Ordinance 17220, Section 14, as amended and Ordinance 10122, Section 2, as amended, and K.C.C. 27.44.010. STATEMENT OF FACTS: 1. Chapter 36.70A RCW, which is the Growth Management Act, and chapter 82.02 RCW authorize the collection of impact fees for new development to provide public school facilities to serve the new development. 2. Chapter 82.02 RCW requires that impact fees may only be collected for public facilities that are addressed in a capital facilities element of a comprehensive land use plan. File #:2016-0474,Version:2 King County Printed on 11/21/2016Page 2 of 7 powered by Legistar™ DI.F Page 130 of 181 File #:2016-0474,Version:2 3. King County adopted Ordinances 9785 and 10162 for the purposes of implementing Chapter 82.02 RCW. 4. The Tahoma School District, Federal Way School District, Riverview School District, Issaquah School District, Snoqualmie Valley School District, Highline School District, Lake Washington School District, Kent School District, Northshore School District, Enumclaw School District, Fife School District, Auburn School District and Renton School District have previously entered into interlocal agreements with King County for the collection and distribution of school impact fees. Each of these school districts, through this ordinance, seeks to renew its capital facilities plan for adoption as a subelement of the capital facilities element of the King County Comprehensive Plan. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF KING COUNTY: SECTION 1.This ordinance is adopted to implement King County Comprehensive Plan policies, Washington State Growth Management Act and King County Ordinance 10162, with respect to the Tahoma School District, Federal Way School District, Riverview School District, Issaquah School District, Snoqualmie Valley School District, Highline School District, Lake Washington School District, Kent School District, Northshore School District, Enumclaw School District, Fife School District, Auburn School District and Renton School District. This ordinance is necessary to address identified impacts of development on the districts to protect the public health, safety and welfare, and to implement King County's authority to impose school impact fees under RCW 82.02.050 through 82.02.080. SECTION 2. Ordinance 10122, Section 3, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows: The Tahoma School District No. 409 Capital Facilities Plan, ((2015 to 2020, adopted July 28, 2015)) 2016 to 2021, adopted June 28, 2016, which is included in Attachment A to ((Ordinance 18182))this ordinance and is incorporated herein by reference, is adopted as a subelement of the capital facilities element of the King County Comprehensive Plan. King County Printed on 11/21/2016Page 3 of 7 powered by Legistar™ DI.F Page 131 of 181 File #:2016-0474,Version:2 SECTION 3. Ordinance 10470, Section 2, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows: The Federal Way Public Schools ((2016)) 2017 Capital Facilities Plan, ((adopted July 28, 2015)) adopted May, 2016, which is included in Attachment B to ((Ordinance 18182))this ordinance and is incorporated herein by reference, is adopted as a subelement of the capital facilities element of the King County Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 4. Ordinance 10472, Section 2, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows: The Riverview School District No. 407 2016 Capital Facilities Plan, adopted ((June 23, 2015)) adopted May 24, 2016, which is included in Attachment C to ((Ordinance 18182))this ordinance and is incorporated herein by reference, is adopted as a subelement of the capital facilities element of the King County Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 5. Ordinance 10633, Section 2, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows: The Issaquah School District No. 411 ((2015)) 2016 Capital Facilities Plan, adopted ((August 12, 2015 )) May 25, 2016, which is included in Attachment D to ((Ordinance 18182))this ordinance and is incorporated herein by reference, is adopted as a subelement of the capital facilities element of the King County Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 6. Ordinance 10722, Section 2, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows: The Snoqualmie Valley School District No. 410 Capital Facilities Plan ((2015 adopted June 11, 2015)) 2016 adopted June 23, 2016, which is included in Attachment E to ((Ordinance 18182))this ordinance and is incorporated herein by reference, is adopted as a subelement of the capital facilities element of the King County Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 7. Ordinance 10722, Section 3, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows: The Highline School District No. 401 Capital Facilities Plan ((2015-2020 adopted July 8, 2015)) 2016- 2021 adopted June 22, 2016, which is included in Attachment F to ((Ordinance 18182))this ordinance and is incorporated herein by reference, is adopted as a subelement of the capital facilities element of the King County King County Printed on 11/21/2016Page 4 of 7 powered by Legistar™ DI.F Page 132 of 181 File #:2016-0474,Version:2 Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 8. Ordinance 10790, Section 2, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows: The Lake Washington School District No. 414 Six-Year Capital ((Facilities)) Facility Plan 2016-2021 adopted June 6, 2016, which is included in Attachment G to ((Ordinance 18182))this ordinance and is incorporated herein by reference, is adopted as a subelement of the capital facilities element of the King County Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 9. Ordinance 10982, Section 2, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows: The Kent School District No. 415 Capital Facilities Plan ((2015-2016 - 2020-2021)) 2016-2017 - 2021- 2022, dated ((June 2015 and adopted July 14, 2015)) May 2016 and adopted May 11, 2016 , which is included in Attachment H to ((Ordinance 18182))this ordinance and is incorporated herein by reference, is adopted as a subelement of the capital facilities element of the King County Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 10.Ordinance 11148, Section 2, as amended, and K.C.C. 20.12.468 are each hereby amended to read as follows: The Northshore School District No. 417 ((2015)) Capital Facilities Plan 2016, adopted ((June 23, 2015)) September 27, 2016, which is included in Attachment I to ((Ordinance 18182))this ordinance and is incorporated herein by reference, is adopted as a subelement of the capital facilities element of the King County Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 11. Ordinance 12063, Section 11, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows: The Enumclaw School District No. 216 Capital Facilities Plan ((2015-2020, adopted July 20, 2015)) 2016-2021, adopted on July 18, 2016, which is included in Attachment J to ((Ordinance 18182))this ordinance and is incorporated herein by reference, is adopted as a subelement of the capital facilities element of the King County Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 12. Ordinance 12532, Section 12, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows: The Fife School District No. 417 Capital Facilities Plan ((2015-2021)) 2016-2022, adopted ((June 29, King County Printed on 11/21/2016Page 5 of 7 powered by Legistar™ DI.F Page 133 of 181 File #:2016-0474,Version:2 2015)) June 27,2016 which is included in Attachment K to ((Ordinance 18182))this ordinance and is incorporated herein by reference, is adopted as a subelement of the capital facilities element of the King County Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 13. Ordinance 13338, Section 13, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows: The Auburn School District No. 408 Capital Facilities Plan ((2015 through 2021)) 2016 through 2022, adopted ((June 8, 2015)) June 13, 2016, which is included in Attachment L to ((Ordinance 18182))this ordinance and is incorporated herein by reference, is adopted as a subelement of the capital facilities element of the King County Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 14. Ordinance 17220, Section 13, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows: The Renton School District No. 403 ((Six-Year)) 2016 Capital Facilities Plan ((2015-2021), ((dated and )) adopted ((May 27, 2015)) May 25, 2016, which is included in Attachment M to ((Ordinance 18182))this ordinance and is incorporated herein by reference, is adopted as a subelement of the capital facilities element of the King County Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 15. Ordinance 10122, Section 2, as amended, and K.C.C. 27.44.010 are each hereby amended to read as follows: A. The following school impact fees shall be assessed for the indicated types of development: SCHOOL DISTRICT SINGLE FAMILYMULTIFAMILY per dwelling unitper dwelling unit Auburn, No. 408 $((5,330))5,469 $((2,625))1,640 Enumclaw, No. 216 ((5,762))5,497 ((1,618))1,595 Federal Way, No. 210 ((2,899))3,198 ((506))8,386 Fife, No. 417 ((3,216))6,670 ((6,875))1,772 Highline, No. 401 ((8,229))7,528 ((7,453))6,691 Issaquah, No. 411 ((4,635))7,921 ((1,534))2,386 King County Printed on 11/21/2016Page 6 of 7 powered by Legistar™ DI.F Page 134 of 181 File #:2016-0474,Version:2 Kent, No. 415 ((4,990))5,100 ((2,163))2,210 Lake Washington, No. 414 ((9,715))10,822 ((816))956 Northshore, No. 417 ((0))10,563 0 Renton, No. 403 ((5,643))6,432 ((1,385))1,448 Riverview, No. 407 ((4,868))5,325 ((1,247))1,483 Snoqualmie Valley, No. 410 ((8,490))10,052 ((1,657))1,291 Tahoma, No. 409 ((5,496))7,077 ((1,196))1,393 B. The county's administrative costs of administering the school impact fee program shall be thirteen dollars per dwelling unit and shall be paid by the applicant to the county as part of the development application fee. C. The school impact fees established in subsection A. of this section take effect January 1, ((2016)) 2017. SECTION 16. If any provision of this ordinance or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the ordinance or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected. King County Printed on 11/21/2016Page 7 of 7 powered by Legistar™ DI.F Page 135 of 181 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Ordinance No. 6630 (5 Minute Presentation) Date: November 21, 2016 Department: Finance Attachments: Ordinance No. 6630 Budget Impact: $0 Administrative Recommendation: City Council to introduce and adopt Ordinance No. 6630 Background Summary: The current WD #111 wholesale rate is based on the December 6, 2010 Interim Water Sales Agreement (Resolution No. 4660) between Auburn and WD #111. The agreement stated WD #111 would purchase a minimum block of water each year on a “take or pay” basis. The agreement has an annual CPI inflator. The cost of water to the district in 2016 is $.99 per ccf in the winter (.75 MGD block) and $1.25 per ccf (1 MGD block) for the guaranteed water and any taken in excess. The Agreement will terminate on December 31, 2016 and has not been renegotiated. This Ordinance No. 6630, will establish a new rate for WD #111 in ACC 13.06.360 to reflect the actual cost of providing wholesale water service. It is proposed that the wholesale rate for water purchased by WD #111 match the wholesale rate for the other wholesale customer, City of Algona. The proposed rate, if adopted, would go into effect on January 1, 2017. Reviewed by Council Committees: Councilmember: Staff:Coleman Meeting Date:November 28, 2016 Item Number:DI.G AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINEDDI.G Page 136 of 181 ---------------------- Ordinance No. 6630 November 10, 2016 Page 1 ORDINANCE NO. 6 6 3 0 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, AMENDING SECTION 13.06.360 OF THE AUBURN CITY CODE RELATING TO UTILITY RATES WHEREAS, Auburn Ordinance No. 6401, adopted May 7, 2012, provided for monthly utility rates for the various classes of customers who receive water service from the City of Auburn, for the period from June 1, 2012 through 2017, as shown in Auburn’s Municipal Code ACC 13.06.360; and WHEREAS, these customer classes included a Wholesale category, with separate rates for Auburn’s two wholesale customers: City of Algona, and King County Water District No. 111 (WD #111); and WHEREAS, the WD #111 wholesale rate was based in part on the December 6, 2010, Interim Water Sales Agreement (Auburn Resolution No. 4660) between the City of Auburn and WD #111, providing a “Take or Pay” Agreement whereby WD #111 would purchase a minimum block of water each year on a “take or pay” basis; and WHEREAS, the “Take or Pay” Agreement of Resolution No. 4460 will terminate on December 31, 2016, by mutual agreement of Auburn and WD #111; and WHEREAS, as WD #111’s wholesale rate in ACC 13.06.360 was based on the “take or pay” concept, which is soon expiring, it is now appropriate to modify that rate to reflect the actual cost of providing WD #111 with future wholesale water service. DI.G Page 137 of 181 ---------------------- Ordinance No. 6630 November 10, 2016 Page 2 NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Amendment to City Code. That Section 13.06.360 of the Auburn City Code is amended to read as follows: 13.06.360 Rates – Generally. Effective as of January 1, 2017, the monthly rates for water supplied by meter shall be as follows: Customer Class Base Rate Charge per 100 cubic feet (ccf) Single-family residential $16.12 $3.20 0 – 7 ccf $3.91 7.01 – 15 ccf $4.44 >15 ccf Multifamily residential $48.04 $3.35 Commercial $48.04 $3.82 Manufacturing/industrial $48.04 $3.11 Schools $48.04 $3.62 City accounts $48.04 $4.44 Irrigation only $16.21 $4.44 Wholesale Algona $75.91 $2.48 WD # 111 $271.7275.91 2016 rate X CPI winter over 1.5 mgd $2.48 2016 rate X CPI + $0.25 summer over 1.5 mgd Provided, however, that 50 percent shall be added to all rates for water service outside the city limits. City of Auburn utility taxes are included in the monthly rate for all customers except wholesale accounts. Wholesale rates exclude the 50 percent out of city service charge and state excise taxes. (Ord. 6401 § 1, 2012; Ord. 6286 § 1, 2010; Ord. 6204 § 1, 2008; Ord. 5898 § 2, 2005; Ord. 5876 § 2, 2004; Ord. 5849 § 1, 2004; Ord. 5789 § 2, 2003; Ord. 5712 § 2, 2002; Ord. 5669 § 2, 2002; Ord. 5664 § 2, 2002; Ord. 5618 § 2, 2002; Ord. 5291 § 2, 1999; Ord. 5216 § 1, 1999; Ord. 4878 § 3, 1996.) DI.G Page 138 of 181 ---------------------- Ordinance No. 6630 November 10, 2016 Page 3 Section 2. Implementation. The Mayor is hereby authorized to implement such administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directions of this ordinance. Section 3. Severability. If any portion of this Ordinance or its application to any person or circumstances is held invalid, the remainder of the Ordinance or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected. Section 4. Effective date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force five (5) days from and after its passage, approval and publication, as provided by law and as indicated herein. INTRODUCED: ___________________ PASSED: ________________________ APPROVED: _____________________ CITY OF AUBURN ________________________________ NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR ATTEST: _________________________ Danielle E. Daskam, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________ Daniel B. Heid, City Attorney Published: _________________ DI.G Page 139 of 181 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Ordinance No. 6633 (10 Minute Presentation) Date: November 21, 2016 Department: CD & PW Attachments: Draft Ordinance No. 6633 Proposed Downtown Traffic Control Zone Map Budget Impact: $0 Administrative Recommendation: For discussion only. Background Summary: The City has experienced an increase in problems associated with truck parking and truck traffic. Out of town businesses have been parking trucks on Auburn city streets, some businesses have been parking multiple trucks at a time on our public streets, and trash, used vehicle parts, fluids and waste from parked trucks have fouled the right of way and sensitive areas. The City has also experienced an increase in large trucks, not involved in local deliveries, using its downtown streets for through trips, sometimes these trucks cause physical damage to our infrastructure in the process. In an effort to reduce these impacts while continuing to assist local truckers and businesses, the City is proposing to revise City Code. Ordinance #6633 will create changes in truck parking and restrict truck movements in a downtown traffic control zone. Effective January 1, 2017 on - street parking for trucks 16,000 lbs. or over will be allowed only for trucks registered to an Auburn resident with an Auburn business license within the allowed truck parking areas of the City. In order to be able to park a truck on the public streets where truck parking is allowed, a new parking permit will be required to be displayed on the vehicle and only one parking permit will be issued to each eligible business. The Ordinance also creates a traffic control zone in the downtown area. Trucks 16,000 lbs. or over will be prohibited from operating within this zone - except to originate from local businesses or to make local deliveries. Reviewed by Council Committees: AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINEDDI.H Page 140 of 181 Councilmember: Staff:Snyder Meeting Date:November 28, 2016 Item Number:DI.H AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINEDDI.H Page 141 of 181 -------------------------------- Ordinance No. 6633 November 22, 2016 Page 1 of 6 ORDINANCE NO. 6 6 3 3 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, CREATING A PERMIT FOR TRUCK PARKING ON CITY STREETS AND RESTRICTING THE MOVEMENT OF LARGE VEHICLES IN THE DOWNTOWN URBAN CENTER WHEREAS, the parking of trucks with a gross weight of 16,000 pounds or more upon city streets creates congestion, significantly reduces parking for smaller vehicles, and interferes with sight distances for the traveling public; and WHEREAS, the weight of larger trucks and unattached commercial trailers exceeds the capacity for the shoulder of some city streets causing damage to those streets; and WHEREAS, the Auburn Police Department has observed that many of the trucks that park on City of Auburn streets are registered to residents of surrounding cities and not to Auburn residents; and WHEREAS, RCW 46.44.080 authorizes cities to prohibit the operation of vehicles upon city streets and impose limits as to the weight of vehicles traveling on those streets, as a city deems necessary; and WHEREAS, the downtown area lies at the intersection of several travel corridors, has a higher frequency of pedestrian and bike travel, consists of shorter blocks, and is bordered by two designated truck routes; and WHEREAS, the operation of trucks with a gross weight exceeding 16,000 pounds within the downtown area of Auburn can seriously damage the downtown streets and presents a safety hazard to other vehicles and pedestrians; and DI.H Page 142 of 181 -------------------------------- Ordinance No. 6633 November 22, 2016 Page 2 of 6 WHEREAS, prohibiting all travel of large trucks within the downtown Auburn area would impose an austere economic impact upon individuals moving into downtown residences and upon the few downtown businesses that regularly receive deliveries in trucks of 16,000 pounds or more; and WHEREAS, the creation of a downtown traffic control zone will not inhibit the travel of large trucks not having business within the Auburn downtown area as those vehicles may use the designated truck routes on C Street NW and Auburn Way South to access other Auburn locations. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN as follows: Section 1. Amendment to City Code. That section 10.36.190 of the Auburn City Code be and the same hereby is amended to read as follows: 10.36.190 Commercial vehicles and large vehicles. A. Except as provided for in this section, no person shall parking any vehicle with a gross vehicle weight rating of 16,000 pounds or more, as indicated on the vehicle or in the records of the Washington State Department of Motor Vehicles for the vehicle, on any street, alley or public right-of-way in the city is prohibited. B. Parking vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 16,000 pounds or more, as indicated on the vehicle or as indicated in the records of the Washington State Department of Motor Vehicles, is permitted for vehicles displaying a valid city-issued large truck parking permit in the following locations: 1. Lower half of the driver’s side door. Vehicles must be registered to an Auburn, Washington resident with an Auburn, Washington business license within the corporate limits of the city, as set forth below. Truck Parking on public streets is only allowed with a valid city issued truck parking permit at the following locations: a1. D Street NW both sides, between 44th Street NW and S 277th Street, where where legal practical; DI.H Page 143 of 181 -------------------------------- Ordinance No. 6633 November 22, 2016 Page 3 of 6 2. 44th Street NW south side, west of D Street NW and east of the Union Pacific RR right-of-way; b3. E Street NE west side, between 23rd Street NE and 26th Street NE; c4. Lund Road SW east side, W. Main Street to end. 2. The Department of Community Development and Public Works shall process applications for large truck parking permits. The application for a parking permit shall be submitted on forms obtained from that department and shall contain all the information required by the city. Proof of residency of the owner or lessee of a vehicle must be presented when applying for a permit. The applicant shall sign and certify the information furnished on the application. The permit holder shall report any changes of address or changes in vehicle registration. A change of residential or business address to outside the corporate limits of the City of Auburn shall require surrender of the permit to the city. 3. Only City of Auburn residents with a valid Auburn, Washington business license for a business located within the corporate limits of the city are eligible for a permit. Eligible residents are limited to one (1) large truck parking permit. “Resident” as used in this chapter applies only to a person who lives in a residence, and does not include a person occupying property used exclusively as a place of business, or occupying property used for any other purpose other than as the person’s place of abode. Permits shall be automatically revoked or suspended upon revocation or suspension of the resident’s business license, and shall be valid only as long as the resident’s business license is valid. A permit holder shall surrender such permit to the city upon written notification. Failure to surrender a permit, when so requested, shall be a violation of law subject to the process and penalties in ACC 1.25. 4. A permit shall be valid for a calendar year and will renew automatically when the permit holder’s business license is renewed, unless the permit holder requests otherwise. At its discretion, the city may simultaneously issue to a resident parking permits for two calendar years if also issuing to that resident business licenses covering two calendar years. 5. Once granted, a permit shall be effective for the vehicle identified upon the resident’s permit application and it shall not be assignable or transferable to any other vehicle. A displayed parking permit shall be valid only in the locations described in this section. The permit does not guarantee a parking space nor shall it exempt the vehicle or operator from other regulations of this code. If a permit has been lost, stolen or destroyed, the city will reissue the permit if the resident’s business license is currently valid. 6. To be valid, a permit shall be affixed in a permanent fashion by its adhesive face to the lower half of the driver’s side door of the vehicle. C. Commercial vehicles may be stopped or parked in other safe locations while in the process of actively loading, unloading or providing services to DI.H Page 144 of 181 -------------------------------- Ordinance No. 6633 November 22, 2016 Page 4 of 6 residences or businesses in the immediate vicinity of where the vehicle is parked; provided, that the free flow of traffic is unobstructed. D. The penalty for parking in violation of this section shall be a fine of $250.00 per violation, in addition to other costs and assessments provided by law. A violation of this section shall be considered a parking infraction and shall be processed in accordance with the state statutes, court rules and city ordinances regarding parking infractions. Each calendar day during which a violation occurs shall constitute a separate infraction, and each instance when a commercial vehicle parks at a location in violation of this section shall be a separate violation. E. The provisions of this section do not apply to recreational vehicles as regulated by ACC 10.36.191. Additionally, parking larger vehicles on or along certain arterial streets within residential zoning districts is further regulated by ACC 10.36.193. F. This section does not permit or authorize anyone to park any vehicle weighing more than 16,000 pounds on any street within the city that does not have adequate space for parking or where parking is otherwise prohibited. (Ord. 6404 § 1, 2012; Ord. 6273 § 1, 2009; Ord. 6222 § 2, 2009; Ord. 6035 § 1, 2006; Ord. 6030 § 1, 2006; Ord. 5943 § 1, 2005; Ord. 5492 § 1, 2001.) Section 2. Amendment to City Code. That section 9.90.020 of the Auburn City Code be and the same hereby is amended to read as follows: 9.90.020 Truck route designation and restrictions. A. The city’s designated truck routes shall be as identified in the city’s comprehensive transportation plan. Streets designated as future truck routes shall not be considered truck routes for the purpose of this chapter. B. All through truck trips, with origins and destinations outside the Auburn city limits, shall take place on the designated city or state truck routes, as identified in the city’s comprehensive transportation plan. C. Signage identifying a corridor as a truck route shall be placed along public highways, roads, streets, and thoroughfares included in the designated truck network. D. All streets not designated as truck routes within the limits of the city of Auburn shall be restricted to allow only vehicles rated under 30,000 pounds GW, except for local truck trips which shall be defined, for the purpose of this chapter, as all truck trips with origins or destinations within the limits of the city of Auburn. No trucks of 16,000 pounds or more may travel within the downtown traffic control zone, as provided in subsection G of this section. E. A truck making a local truck trip shall travel by city truck routes to a location as close to its delivery or pickup point as possible and then travel to that destination by the shortest route practicable, remaining on the city’s arterial street DI.H Page 145 of 181 -------------------------------- Ordinance No. 6633 November 22, 2016 Page 5 of 6 network whenever possible. Local truck trips may be subject to route restrictions by the city engineer or designee as provided for in the Auburn City Code. F. All trucks, whether conducting through or local trips, must be in conformance with the Washington State legal limits for trucks, unless granted a permit from the city for overweight truck hauling. Overweight truck hauling without a city-issued permit shall be a civil infraction subject to the penalties identified in RCW Title 46. G. Except as provided for in this section, no person shall operate any vehicle with a gross vehicle weight rating of 16,000 pounds or more, as indicated on the vehicle or in the records of the Washington State Department of Motor Vehicles for the vehicle, on any street, alley or public right-of-way in the downtown traffic control zone. 1. The downtown traffic control zone is the area from east of C Street NW/SW to west of Auburn Way N/S and from north of 3rd Street SW/SE and Cross Street SE to south of 3rd Street NW/NE and 4th Street NE. 2. A vehicle with a gross vehicle weight rating of 16,000 pounds or more, as indicated in the records of the Washington State Department of Motor Vehicles for the vehicle, may operate in the downtown traffic control zone if the vehicle a. is traveling within the downtown traffic control zone for the purpose of making a delivery to a property located within the downtown traffic control zone, or returning from such a delivery; b. originated from a property located in the downtown traffic control zone; c. is a public transit or emergency vehicle; or d. is operating on a truck route specifically designated in the City Comprehensive Transportation Plan. E. Vehicles exceeding the state legal load or size limit are prohibited in the downtown traffic control zone unless they have received a city-issued haul route permit under this code. (Ord. 6093 § 1, 2007; Ord. 5682 § 1, 2002; Ord. 5319 § 2, 1999. Formerly 9.12.020.) Section 3. Implementation. The Mayor is hereby authorized to implement such administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directions of this legislation. Section 4. Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section or portion of this ordinance, or the invalidity of the DI.H Page 146 of 181 -------------------------------- Ordinance No. 6633 November 22, 2016 Page 6 of 6 application thereof to any person or circumstance shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this ordinance, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. Section 4. Effective date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force five days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. INTRODUCED: ___________________ PASSED: ________________________ APPROVED: _____________________ ________________________________ NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR ATTEST: ___________________________ Danielle E. Daskam, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________ Daniel B. Heid, City Attorney Published: _________________ DI.H Page 147 of 181 Downtown Traffic Control Zone Boundary DI.HPage 148 of 181 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Capital Project Status Update and Feature Capital Project (20 Minute Presentation) Date: November 21, 2016 Department: CD & PW Attachments: Vicinity Map Budget Impact: $0 Administrative Recommendation: For discussion only. Background Summary: The purpose of this discussion is to inform the Council and Public of the overall status of the City’s Capital Project program managed by the Community Development & Public Works (CDPW) Department and to present this quarter’s feature capital project: 22nd Street NE & I Street NE Intersection Improvements. Time permitting, staff will also be presenting a video prepared for the Civics Academy that demonstrates the City's Public Works team. The Capital Projects Group of CDPW is currently managing 36 active projects with a total cost of $74 million. Of these projects, 22 are in the design phase and 15 are under construction. Within the next 3 months, 8 projects are expected to be advertised for bids and the construction of 6 projects are anticipated to be completed. The total value of projects completed by years is as follows: 2012 = $23.7 million 2013 = $29.9 million 2014 = $29.6 million 2015 = $35.0 million 2016 = $31.8 million (anticipated) The 22nd Street NE & I Street NE Intersection Improvements project will improve the safety for drivers, pedestrians, and bicyclists crossing the intersection of 22nd Street NE and I Street NE, by constructing a single lane roundabout in place of the existing all-way stop-control. The roundabout will reduce driver confusion and traffic delays compared with the current multilane all-way stop control. Pedestrians and cyclists will also be less exposed to traffic since crossing distances will be greatly reduced and median islands will allow them to cross the road one lane at a time and they will only have to look for vehicles coming from a single direction. AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINEDDI.I Page 149 of 181 This project will also reconfigure the existing storm drainage system in this intersection to accommodate the new intersection configuration, upsize the existing waterlines from 8-inches to 12-inches to accommodate future water demands, and replace the sewer service line to 901 22nd Street NE to reduce maintenance issues. The project team will provide a general project update, including an overview of the proposed design, budget status and schedule. Reviewed by Council Committees: Finance Councilmember: Staff:Snyder Meeting Date:November 28, 2016 Item Number:DI.I AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINEDDI.I Page 150 of 181 22nd St NE and I St NE Intersection Improvements Vicinity Map Printed Date: Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy. Map Created by City of Auburn eGIS 5/8/2014 DI.I Page 151 of 181 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: 2015 State of Our Streets Report (10 Minute Presentation) Date: November 21, 2016 Department: CD & PW Attachments: Draft 2015 State of Our Streets Report Budget Impact: $0 Administrative Recommendation: For discussion only. Background Summary: Attached for your information you will find the 2015 State of Our Streets Report. In previous years, staff has reported on only the Local Street Program; however, staff felt this gave an incomplete picture of the condition of the Cities streets. Therefore, the annual report has been revised to include both our Arterial Preservation and Local Street Preservation Programs. This report provides a brief history of both Street Preservation Programs, talks about the pavement conditions of Arterial, Collector and Local streets, how the City maintains streets, details the street selection process for these programs, and gives an overview of the list of projects that were completed in 2015, projects underway in 2016, and projects selected so far for future years. Reviewed by Council Committees: Councilmember: Staff:Snyder Meeting Date:November 28, 2016 Item Number:DI.J AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINEDDI.J Page 152 of 181 DI.J Page 153 of 181 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The State of our Streets overall has improved over the past several years and should continue to see gains with improved resourcing. Recent City success in securing federal grants has helped leverage existing City funds for increased preservation capacity of the Arterial Street Program. The Arterial and Collector Program is currently focused on preserving the streets that are in fair condition, however without additional funding resources for the Arterial Program, several roads are at risk of degrading to the point of failure which will need to be addressed soon. Map 1 – Arterial and Collector Pavement Conditions, graphically illustrates the condition of the Arterial and Collector streets in the network with the worst streets shown as yellow and red lines. The local street system continues to see positive gains overall, and we feel is funded appropriately. Map 2 –Local Street Pavement Conditions, shows the current condition of the local street system. The program is currently focused on working on streets in the worst condition, with remaining funds being used for preservation. In 2015, the Arterial and Local Street Preservation Programs accounted for approximately $6.3 million dollars of roadway preservation investments in city road infrastructure. The current estimated street conditions, including improvements made during 2015, are shown in Table 1. This purpose if this report is to document the pavement preservation program’s process and progress, current infrastructure conditions and the forecasted needs of the approximately 245 centerline miles of paved roadways owned and maintained by the City. City owned paved alleys and gravel roads are maintained by the Maintenance & Operations service area and are not included in this report. The City manages the roadway pavement infrastructure through two separate programs: the Arterial Street Preservation Program and the Local Street Preservation Program. The Arterial Program covers the “classified” roadways, consisting of approximately 70 miles of arterials and 30 miles of collectors. The Local Street Program is responsible for the “unclassified” roadways consisting of approximately 145 miles of residential and non-residential local streets. CURRENT SYSTEM PAVEMENT RATINGS MILES PAVEMENT CONDITION RATING (WEIGHTED) PAVEMENT CONDITION RATING (WEIGHTED) CHANGE IN RATING 245 61 65 4 70 55 59 4 30 57 64 7 145 67 69 2 2013 Including 2015 improvements All Streets Arterial Streets Collector Streets Local Streets 2DI.J Page 154 of 181 POUNDING THE PAVEMENT PAVEMENT INVENTORY & RATING The pavement condition survey that is conducted by the City’s service providers every few years is a semi - autonomous process where technicians drive over each road in the street system to rate the condition . The vehicle is equipped with high grade Global Positioning System (GPS) equipment as well as a laser measuring device to measure the depth of rutting present in each lane and to measure the roughness of the ride. All of this is done as one of the technicians visually rates each segment of pavement based on the amount of surface distress that is present, while the GPS is used to tie all of the data collected in the field to the street network maps of the City of Auburn’s Geographic Information System (GIS). The amount of damage and distress is called the Pavement Condition Index (PCI). The PCI ratings, rut depths, and roughness of ride are all measures that help to determine when a stretch of pavement is due for rehabilitation or replacement. The three metrics are used to rate a pavement segment as very good, good, fair, poor, or very poor. A good condition pavement is smooth with few defects while a poor condition pavement is characterized by cracking, patching, rutting and roughness. Pavement segments are prioritized for rehabilitation based on the condition survey, along with input from several of the City’s departments to determine which streets are packaged into a particular street project. The City of Auburn, like most cities, utilizes a Pavement Management Database to track pavement condition and manage the street system. City staff has evaluated the data and have noted that there has been a downward movement in the pavement ratings between the survey completed in 2006/2008 and the most recent survey completed in 2013. There are several reasons for the downward movement in pavement conditions. The previous pavement management software that the City employed used the 2006/2008 pavement rating survey 90-100 Excellent 80-89 Very Good 70-79 Good 60-69 Fair 42-59 Marginal 20-41 Poor 0-19 Very Poor do an adequate job of predicting the actual rate of decline. Additionally, the pavement rating data collected in 2013 was far more comprehensive than previous surveys. In the 2006/2008 surveys, an entire street segment was rated on the condition of a small sample. Because of the advancements in technology, the 2013 pavement condition rating survey used a more automated process for collecting the pavement conditions over the entire length and width of each street segment. There are several other factors that play a role in pavement degradation, including the pavement age, thickness, base materials and traffic loading. In the case of the arterial and collector street conditions, we are aware that many of our aging arterial and collector streets, while constructed to the standards at the time, are inadequate for the amount of vehicle loading that they carry today. Having more accurate information allows us to make better projections of future conditions and budget needs for long range planning. Pavement Condition Index Rating Scale data to forecast pavement conditions in subsequent years, and with only one data point in the system, it did not 3DI.J Page 155 of 181 WHAT DO THE NUMBERS MEAN? The City measures pavement condition using the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) for each street in the network. PCI values represent conditions based on a scale from 0 to 100 with 100 being new pavement and 0 indicating the pavement has failed. The City’s goal is to maintain a Citywide PCI at or above 70. PCI values generally indicate surface condition and are useful in indicating the best time to repair the pavement. The most cost effective time to preserve pavement is when the PCI ratings are in the 50-70 range, because the pavement repair typically requires less expensive treatments that preserve the existing pavement. Additionally, pavement condition tends to diminish at an accelerated rate after they have reached a PCI range of 50-70. Pavements with moderate to low PCI values usually require more expensive rehabilitative treatments. Pavements with very low PCI values are often unsalvageable and have to undergo a very expensive rebuild. The table below shows the various pavement preservation treatments used for different PCI ranges, and the typical life span and approximate cost of each treatment. The goal for the preservation programs is to maintain the entire street network at a PCI score of 70 or greater. The PCI of a street is an estimated measure of the amount of visible cracking, rutting and roughness of a particular segment of roadway. Every street in the network is rated periodically, and those scores are used to indicate when a particular street is in need of some sort of preservation, rehabilitation or replacement. Pavement rating surveys should be completed every two to three years. The most recent comprehensive street rating survey was done in 2013 with another underway in 2016. SETTING THE BAR PCI Treatment Type Treatment Life Typical Cost 90-100 No treatment needed.N/A N/A 70-89 Seal Cracks –Cracks are sealed with liquid asphalt to prevent water from penetrating the pavement and weakening the base material that forms the foundation for the pavement. 3-5 Years $0.75 per sq yd 50-69 Patching and Overlay –Broken pavement is replaced (patched) to renew the load carrying ability of the existing pavement, then the road is overlaid with a thin layer of pavement (1.5 –2 inches) to preserve the existing pavement and provide a smooth driving surface. Chip Seal –A thin layer of liquid asphalt is sprayed over the entire pavement surface and then covered with a thin layer of aggregate. Chip seals typically do not last as long as a thin overlay nor do they provide as smooth of a driving surface. Patching and Overlay: 15 Years Chip Seal:3- 10 Years Patching and Overlay: $25- $30 per sq yd Chip Seal: $8- $12 per sq yd 25-49 Extensive Patching and Overlay –Same treatment as above only more extensive patching is typically required. (Some streets in this condition require a thicker overlay of 2 inches or greater). Double Chip Seal –A thin layer of liquid asphalt is sprayed over the entire pavement surface and then covered with a thin layer of aggregate, then this process is repeated a second time. Based on experience, the City has found that double chip seals typically last longer than single chip seals, especially when the existing pavement is in poor condition. Extensive patching and Overlay: 15- 20 Years Double Chip Seal: 3-10 Years Extensive Patching and Overlay: $35- $45 per sq yd Double Chip Seal: $10-$15 per sq yd 0-24 Rebuild Pavement –Existing pavement is completely removed and new road is constructed.20 years $160-$210 per sq yd 4DI.J Page 156 of 181 INTERNATIONAL ROUGHNESS INDEX (IRI) Rating Rank Description 81-100 Excellent Very Smooth 61-80 Good Smooth with a few bumps or depressions 41-60 Fair Comfortable with intermittent bumps or depressions 21-40 Poor Uncomfortable with frequent bumps or depressions 0-20 Very Poor Uncomfortable with constant bumps or depressions The International Roughness Index (IRI) was developed by the World Bank in the 1980s. IRI is used to define the characteristic ride of a traveled wheel path and constitutes a standardized roughness measurement. The commonly used units are inches per mile or meters per kilometer. The IRI is based on a standardized vehicle’s accumulated suspension motion (in inches, mm, etc.) divided by the distance traveled by the vehicle during the measurement (in/mi, m/km, etc.). Roughness is an important pavement characteristic because it affects not only ride quality but also vehicle delay costs, fuel consumption and maintenance costs; also, the general public perception of a good road is one that provides a smooth ride. The citywide map showing the ride quality for all of the streets in the City is shown on Map 3 –Ride Quality. In the pavement rating survey that was completed in 2013, IRI data was collected and recorded on a zero to one hundred scale. Several state agencies actually use IRI as a parameter for street selection for improvement projects. The City of Auburn has not established an official policy on the use of IRI data for managing the street system; however, the roughness of a roadway segment can be a tie breaker between similarly rated streets to be included in a project. Ride quality is a frequent comment that we receive from our citizens, so having this data helps to be able to track and anticipate issues that may arise in the future . Additionally, in the future after we have conducted more pavement rating surveys and have a chance to analyze the trends in pavement roughness, IRI may become a viable metric in the street selection process for the City of Auburn. The City’s service provider measures pavement Rut Depth with an automated laser rut measuring device. The rut depth is measured for each street in the network, and then averaged over the length of each street segment. Pavement rutting can create safety issues if the depth of the rut is deep enough to interrupt the flow of water across the road. These issues directly affect a vehicles ability to handle and stop in normal traffic situations. The Washington State Department of PAVEMENT RUT DEPTH MEASUREMENT Transportation considers a rut depth of greater than 0.5-inch to be the maximum threshold before it triggers a pavement maintenance operation to be performed, since the highway system has a much greater average speed limit than a city street and WSDOT’s standard cross slope for a road is 2%. The City of Auburn’s arterial roads typically have a range of speeds between 30-45 mph, with a standard cross slope of 3%. A 3% cross slope and the lower speeds of City streets results in a much lower risk of hydroplaning, however standing water negatively affects a vehicle’s ability to stop. 5DI.J Page 157 of 181 The rut depth information that was collected during the last pavement rating survey is illustrated on Map 4 – Citywide Pavement Rut Map. Although the City does not have a policy on the use of rut depth as a trigger to preserve roadways, the data is useful. If an otherwise intact piece of pavement is showing extreme rutting, then that is an indication that either the pavement subgrade is failing or the roadway is extremely overloaded by heavy vehicles. These instances would be clear indications that something needs to be done to correct these rutting issues, and would serve as proper justification for including a particular street in a project. The City’s service provider surveys Auburn’s street system approximately every 2-5 years and rates each street segment as discussed in the previous section. Since the repair costs for the overall system far exceeds what the City can fund in any given year, the City then prioritizes, narrows and selects a limited number of streets for each of the annual street preservation programs. There are many factors the City must consider when determining which streets to rebuild and or rehabilitate each year. We use the Pavement Management Database to produce a list of street segments that are in the PCI range for a reconstruction or preservation project. City staff then will perform a site visit to confirm the ratings, compile site specific data and take pictures. Next, staff will estimate the rough cost to do the work at each site. One of the most important factors the City considers when choosing which streets to rebuild or improve is utility input. If there is a need to improve a utility along with improving the street, then staff needs to consider the availability of utility funds to pay for any needed utility work. If the Utilities have a long range plan to improve their infrastructure in the street but lack immediate funding, that would be a suitable reason to delay working on a particular roadway. Replacing the utility mains at the same time as street restoration is more economical and disturbs the neighboring residences only once. Additionally, it prevents a newly reconstructed or treated surface from being damaged by trenching that’s needed to replace underground utilities. Another important factor is to consult with the City’s maintenance staff when selecting streets to restore or rebuild. Maintenance and Operations staff help to identify streets that are beyond what they can adequately maintain themselves or where excessive staff time is being spent on temporary repairs. Streets that require more attention by staff are given a higher priority. Streets with significant drainage problems and poor ride quality are also given consideration. Additionally, City staff consider the volume of vehicles per day, the number of businesses and residents being served by the street, coordination with third party utility companies and coordination with private property developments when selecting streets to improve each year. AUBURN’S STREET SELECTION PROCESS 6DI.J Page 158 of 181 PRESERVATION PROGRAMS ARTERIAL STREET PRESERVATION PROGRAM The Arterial and Collector Preservation Program is responsible for maintaining the overall condition of approximately 100 centerline miles of roadway that are vital to our City. These roads carry the vast majority of our citizens, goods and services to and from our regional growth center and connect our communities to the greater Puget Sound Region. The Arterial Street Preservation Program has focused almost exclusively on preservation treatments given the lack of funding to complete much needed major reconstruction projects. However, the appropriation of surplus Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) funding by the City Council, favorable bids on several recent projects and the successful acquisition of federal grant funds have generated sufficient capacity in the existing budget to program the reconstruction of B St. NW between 37th St. NW and S 277th St., which is the worst arterial street segment in the network. The goal of the Arterial Preservation Program is to improve the arterial and collector network to an overall PCI of 70 (out of 100 scale rating). The current condition of the arterial and collector roadway network averages a PCI Rating of 60 (fair condition). Over the next several years, the City has secured federal grant funding for several projects which will help leverage existing city funds to better improve the health of our street system. Currently funded 2016 through 2020, the Arterial Street Preservation Projects are shown on Map 5 –Planned Arterial and Collector Projects –2016 to 2020. $1.8 MILLION approximate budget of Arterial Street Preservation Program ARTERIAL STREET PRESERVATION FUNDING The Arterial Street Preservation Program is funded by a 1% utility tax which has supported annual budgets of approximately $1.8 Million over that past few years. This funding has remained relatively stable however, it is insufficient to complete the reconstruction work needed to reach the overall system PCI maintenance goal. Beginning in 2016, the City has successfully obtained federal grant funding for seven projects leveraging City funds spent on preserving our arterial system. However, federal grant funds are subject to competitive selection and cannot be relied upon as a stable source of funding beyond the current slate of projects. The grant funded street reconstruction and preservation projects starting in 2016 through 2020, are detailed below in Table 4. 7DI.J Page 159 of 181 Year Project Title From To City Funding Grant Funding Total Project Investment 2016 West Main St. Multi-Modal Corridor and ITS Improvements Project West Valley Highway Interurban Trail $676,060 $3,774,340 $4,450,400 2016 -17 S 277th St. Corridor Capacity & Non- motorized Trail Improvements Project Auburn Way N Green River $607,386 $5,020,700 $5,628,086 2017 Auburn Way N Preservation Project (Originally 2016) 22nd St. NE 45th St. NE $875,000 $875,000 $1,750,000 2017 Lake Tapps Parkway Preservation Project (Pierce County) City Limits Lakeland Hills Way SE $212,850 $750,000 $962,850 2017 15th St NW/NE and Harvey Rd. Preservation Project SR 167 8th St. NE $917,500 $817,500 $1,735,000 2018 Auburn Way N Preservation Project Phase 2 8th St NE Vic.22nd St. NE $618,280 $889,720 $1,508,000 2019 Auburn Way N Preservation Project Phase 3 SR 18 8th St. NE Vic.$975,140 $975,194 $1,950,333 2020 A St. SE Preservation Project East Main St.East Main St.$881,798 $881,798 $1,763,596 TABLE 4 –GRANT FUNDED STREET PROJECTS TOTALS: $5,764,014 | $13,984,252 | $19,748,265 8DI.J Page 160 of 181 The Local Street Preservation Program is responsible for maintaining the pavement on approximately 145 miles of roadways throughout the city. Each year that number grows with the construction of development driven projects. In the beginning years of the Local Street Preservation Program, formerly the “Save Our Streets Program,” the program focused on preserving streets in fair to poor condition. In 2009, after making significant progress on these roads, the City refocused the program to rebuilding streets that were in very poor condition. The goal of the Local Street Preservation Program is to improve the Local Street system to an overall PCI rating of 70 (out of 100 scale rating). The current condition of the Local Street network is in fair condition (PCI Rating of 69). The Local Street Preservation Program is very close to achieving its goal. Local street improvements scheduled for 2016 and 2017 are shown on Map 6 –Planned Local Street Program Projects. PRESERVATION PROGRAMS LOCAL STREETS PROGRAM LOCAL STREETS PRESERVATION FUNDING In 2004 the public expressed concern over the condition of local streets, however funding for local streets had dropped dramatically in the preceding years and the City could not afford to make the needed improvements (see Figure 1). In response to the situation, the City proposed a funding measure which was approved by Auburn citizens in the November 2004 General Election. The original funding measure allowed the City’s property tax levy to generate additional revenue for a dedicated local street fund which is used solely to fund a local street preservation and improvement program, called the Save Our Streets (SOS) Program. At the end of 2012, the practice of funding the SOS Program from property taxes ended . In 2013, the City Council earmarked sales taxes from new construction to be dedicated to the SOS Program, and all property taxes were retained in the General Fund. In 2005, the City had approximately 59 miles of local streets that were in need of repair (this mileage includes streets that were later annexed into the City in 2008). Since 2005, the SOS Program has improved the condition of 48 miles of those City streets, however as time passes, other streets in our network age and their condition continues to deteriorate. In the next few years, additional streets will need to be maintained and/or rebuilt to keep the street system healthy. 2000: Loss of Motor Vehicle Excise Tax (Initiative 695) 2003 Loss of $15 Local Option Vehicle Excise Tax (Initiative 776) 2005 SOS Established Figure 1: Local street funding through the years 9 DI.J Page 161 of 181 The City of Auburn had three major paving projects in construction in 2015 which were funded by the Arterial and Collector Street Preservation and Local Street Preservation funds . The 2014 Citywide Arterial Pavement Patching and Overlay Project, Map 7, was carried forward to spring 2015 in order to complete the project in better weather conditions and to take advantage of a more favorable bidding period. The 2015 Citywide Arterial Pavement Patching and Overlay Project, Map 8, was awarded in the summer of 2015 and completed construction in early 2016. Lastly, the 2015 Local Street Pavement Reconstruction Project, Map 9, was constructed during the summer and fall of 2015. These projects and several utility projects that had pavement restoration components accounted for preservation or reconstruction of over 11 miles of Auburn roadways including: 0.9 miles of pavement reconstruction; 2.4 miles of pavement patching and overlay; 4.8 miles of pavement grind and overlay; and 3.4 miles of extensive pavement patching. 2014 Citywide Pavement Patching & Overlay Project 2015 PRESERVATION PROJECTS This project improved City streets by grind and overlay of one mile of arterial and collector streets, pavement patching on 9.5 lane- miles of arterial and collector streets;thick overlay of 0.4 lane- miles of arterial and collector streets;and thin overlay of one lane-mile of local residential streets as part of the Save Our Streets Program.It also included replacement of 30 curb ramps to meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)requirements in the project area as shown on Map 7. This work was funded by Local Street and Arterial Street Preservation Program funds. This project preserved and enhanced City streets by grinding and overlaying approximately one mile of arterial and collector streets,patching pavement on approximately two miles of arterial and collector streets,and applying a thin overlay to over 3/4 of a mile of local residential streets as shown on Map 8.The project also replaced 28 curb ramps to meet Americans with Disabilities Act requirements.This work was funded by Local Street and Arterial Street Preservation Program funds. This project reconstructed 0.9 miles of local streets including:7th St.SE between A St.SE and Auburn Way S;D St.SE between Auburn Way S and 12th St.SE;D St.SE between 37th St SE and 41st St.SE; and the east half of K St.SE between 17th St.SE and 21st St.SE. The project also installed 1,365 lineal feet of sanitary sewer main, 3,563 lineal feet of 8-inch water main,new side sewer services for 33 residents and new water services for 51 residents along the project streets.It also replaced a total of 41 curb ramps to meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)requirements.The streets are shown on the Map 9.This work was funded by the Local Street Preservation Program,water utility funds,and sanitary sewer utility funds. 2015 Citywide Pavement Patching & Overlay Project 2015 Local Street Pavement Reconstruction Project Working Hard Figure 2: S 288th Street grind and overlay 10DI.J Page 162 of 181 2016 •West Main St. Multimodal Corridor & ITS Improvements •37th St. SE & A St. SE Traffic Signal Safety Improvement Project •S 277th St. Corridor Capacity & Non- motorized Trail Improvement Project •2016 Local Street Reconstruction & Preservation Project 2017 •Auburn Way N Preservation Project, Phase 1 – 45th St. NE to 22nd St. NE (delayed due to poor bids) •B St. NW Reconstruction Project –37th St. NW to S 277th St. •15th St. NW/NE and Harvey Rd. Preservation Project –SR-167 to 8th St. NE •M St. SE, E Main to 3rd St. SE Improvement Project •Lake Tapps Parkway Preservation Project Construction Lakeland Hills Way to Western City Limits •2017 Local Street Reconstruction Project Construction 2018 •Auburn Way North Preservation Project, Phase 2 –22nd St. NE to 8th St. NE 2019 •Auburn Way North Preservation Project, Phase 3 –8th St. NE to 4th St. SE 2020 •A St. SE Preservation Project –3rd St. SE to 17th St. SE PLANNED PRESERVATION PROJECTS Staff will be conducting the street selection processes for the Arterial and Local Street Programs to identify additional streets that need to be addressed, and to prepare a long range plan to meet those needs in budget years 2017, 2018 and 2019. Those streets will be prioritized and packaged together in projects for each year. At the time of this report, the Local Street Program has identified project streets for reconstruction and thin overlay for the 2017 budget year and the Arterial Street Preservation Program has won several competitive grants for budget years 2016 through 2020. 11DI.J Page 163 of 181 The list of local streets that need to be reconstructed is shrinking and will be prioritized to align with the City Utility’s planned budgets. Progress that has been made on street reconstructions over the past several years under the Local Street Preservation Program. The program will continue to reconstruct as many streets as limited budgets will allow and preserve more roads in fair condition. This approach will continue to improve the condition of the local street network overall. FUTURE NEEDS MOVING FORWARD We anticipate several issues that will need to be addressed and managed . One issue is that the data from the latest pavement rating survey in 2013, when compared to the previous pavement rating surveys, suggests that as the pavement ages the condition of the pavement is degrading at an accelerated rate. Since the previous pavement ratings are from 2006 and 2008, it is difficult to draw this conclusion definitively. The need for additional data is key to managing the City’s pavement network. We need to be able to focus our energy on the correct projects at the correct times to maximize the use and benefit of our funding . Staff has contracted for a 2016 pavement rating survey that is currently underway. That data should be available for use by end of 2016. At that time we’ll be able to analyze the data and determine if we are focusing our limited resources in the most appropriate locations. If the data shows that the pavement is in fact degrading at an accelerated rate, then additional funding to preserve more of the existing pavements may be needed to obtain the City’s desired goal of an average PCI rating of 70. Another issue is that as we continue to improve the streets that can be preserved by conventional methods, we have more arterial and collector streets that are in various states of disrepair and will need to be reconstructed in the next several years. Many of our arterial and collector streets do not have adequate pavement structure to endure the current level of traffic loading that uses them, so preserving these roads may not result in good long-term performance. The lack of adequate pavement structure for these major roads likely contributes to an accelerated decline in pavement condition. The cost of rebuilding one of these roadways would require combining several years of funding in the Arterial and Collector Program, at the current funding levels. Additional funding streams will need to be identified to address the larger issues on our arterial and collector street network. The longer we wait to reconstruct a street means greater costs to maintain the street; additional complaints from the traveling public; and greater strain on existing funding sources to address these issues. Figure 3: Street Reconstruction of D St SE between Auburn Way South and 12th St SE 12DI.J Page 164 of 181 L A K ELAKETAPP STAPPS TS18 TS18 S 277TH ST 24TH ST E SE 2 7 4 T H S T PACIFIC AVE SJOVITABLVDE ELLINGSON RD SW 132ND AVE SESE 272ND ST 8TH ST E WESTVALLEYHWY140TH AVE E136TH AVE ES 272ND ST 124TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY S108TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY NWSTEWART RD SWWEST VALLEYHWYEVALENTINE AVE SEM ILIT A R Y R D S 142NDAVEES E KENT-KANGLEY RD STEWART RD SE 116THAVESEA ST SEWEST V A L L EYHWYSS 27 7 T H S T WESTVALLEYHWYS12TH ST EMILITARY RD S182ND AVE EAUBURN-BLACKDIAMONDRDSE9THST E S 288TH ST 2 1 0 T H A V E E 16 TH S T E S2 72N D WAY 214TH AVE EFORESTCANYON R D E A U B U R N-E N U M C L A W R D SAUBURN WAY NMILITARYRDSTS167 TS167 A ST SEI ST NEAUBURN W AY SB ST NWC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY N51ST AVE S124TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY N132ND AVE SES 277TH ST C ST NW15TH ST SW W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW SE 304TH ST E M A IN S T LAK E T A P P SPKW YS ER ST SE29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST KER SEYWAYSE 8T H S T N E 37TH ST NW LA K E L A NDHI LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSESE 320TH STDSTNW P E A S L EYCANYON RD S 104THAVESEWESTVALLEYHWYSS 316TH ST 321ST ST S AUBURN-BLACKDIAMOND RD SED ST NE112TH AVE SEEAST VALLEY HWY ESE304THWAYSE 281ST ST 17TH ST SE 6TH ST SE 112TH AVE SEA ST SESE30 4 T H ST RSTSEC ST NE2ND ST E STUCK RIVER DR SE 53RD ST SE SE 288TH ST 37TH ST SE M ST NE22ND ST NE 17TH ST SE S 296TH ST 25TH ST SE 12TH ST SE R ST NEPERIMETERRDSWD ST SE55TH AVE SEAST BLVDA C A D E M Y DRSE110TH AVE SEPACIFIC AVE S51ST AVE S118TH AVE SEGR E E N RIVERRDSE N ST NEW ST NWS 287TH ST SCENIC D R S E 62NDST SE56TH AVE SA ST NE4 9 T H ST NE K ST SE58TH AVE S144THAVESEEVERGRE E N W A Y S EF ST SET ST SEDOGWOOD ST SEMONTEVISTADRSEPIKE ST NEBRIDGET AVE SEH ST SEG ST SEB ST SEFOSTER AVE SEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNE1 0 5 THPLSE140TH AVE SEMILLPONDDRSE52ND AVE S47TH ST SE 56TH ST SE S 305TH ST RIVERDRSE57THPLSUSTNW54TH AVE S28TH ST NE E MAIN ST 30TH ST NE 51ST S T N E 26TH ST SE 3 5 T H W A Y S E S 3 0 0 T H S T B ST NE32N D S T S E OL I VEAVESES E 3 1 8 T H W A Y 29TH ST NW ASTE 24TH ST SE SE 298TH P L HEMLOCK ST SEFOREST R ID G E DR SE23RD ST SE22ND ST SE85TH AVE SS 288TH ST O ST SEH I G H L A NDDRSE SE 282ND ST 64TH AVE S111THPLSE20TH ST SE SE 286TH ST 108THAVESEHICR EST D RNW1 0 4 T H P L S E 16TH ST SE 148TH AVE SE42ND ST NE 7 3 R D S T S ET ST NW57TH ST SES292NDST SE 285TH ST ELM ST SESE312T H W A Y61ST STSE GINKGOSTSE15TH ST SE PEARLAVESET ST NE45TH S T NE S 303RD PL 19TH ST SE S 302ND PL 21ST ST SE 33RD ST SE SE 307TH ST 55TH ST SE RANDALL AVE SE63R D PLSEWARD AVE SE107TH PL SE55THWAYSE 43RD ST NE 63RD PL S59TH AVE SFIR ST SE6T H S T N E66TH AVE SSE 314TH PL S 328TH ST S 3 21 ST ST S ST SE65TH ST SEJ PL NE56TH AVE SN ST NE118TH AVE SES 292ND ST 57TH ST SE EVERGREENWAYSER ST NEG ST SE56TH AVE SK ST SE4 9 T H S T N E F ST SE17T H S T S E M U C K L E S H O O TMUCKLESHOOTCASINOCASINO T H E T H E O U T L E T O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N C O L L E C T I O N K E N TKENT K I N GKINGCOUN T YCOUNTY P I E R C EPIERCECOUNTYCOUNTY P A C I F I CPACIFIC S U M N E RSUMNEREDGEWOODEDGEWOOD A L G O N AALGONA Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy. Printed On: 10/4/2016Map ID: 4756 Map 1- Arterial & Collector Pavement Conditions Pavement Condition Index (PCI) of Arterial and Collector Street Network 0 - 25 Very Poor 26 - 50 Poor 51 - 69 Fair 70 - 100 GoodDI.J Page 165 of 181 L A K ELAKETAPP STAPPS TS18 TS18 S 277TH ST 24TH ST E SE 2 7 4 T H S T PACIFIC AVE SJOVITABLVDE 132ND AVE SEELLINGSON RD SW SE 272ND ST 8TH ST E WESTVALLEYHWY140TH AVE E136TH AVE ES 272ND ST WEST VALLEY HWY S108TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY NWM ILIT A R Y R D S STEWART RD SWWEST VALLEYHWYEVALENTINE AVE SE68TH AVE S124TH AVE SE116TH AVE SE142NDAVEESTEWART RD SE A ST SEWESTVALLEYHWYSSE 272ND ST WEST V A L L EYHWYSS 2 7 7 T H S T 124TH AVE SE12TH ST EMILITARY RD S182ND AVE EAUBURN-BLACKDIAMONDRDSE9THST E S 288TH ST 2 1 0 T H A V E E 16 TH S T E S2 72N D WAY 214TH AVE EA U B U R N-E N U M C L A W R D SAUBURN WAY NMILITARYRDSTS167 TS167 A ST SEI ST NEAUBURN W AY SB ST NWC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE51ST AVE S124TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY N132ND AVE SES 277TH ST C ST NW15TH ST SW W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW SE 304TH ST E M A IN S T LAK E T A P P SPKW YS E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST KER SEYWAYSE 8T H S T N E 37TH ST NW LA K E L A NDHI LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSESE 320TH ST P E A S L EYCANYON RD S DSTNW104THAVESEWESTVALLEYHWYSS 316TH ST 321ST ST S AUBURN-BLACKDIAMOND RD SED ST NE112TH AVE SEEAST VALLEY HWY ESE304THWAYSE 281ST ST 17TH ST SE 6TH ST SE SE30 4 T H ST112TH AVE SEA ST SEC ST NE2ND ST E STUCK RIVER DR SE 53RD ST SE SE 288TH ST 37TH ST SE M ST NE4 1 ST ST S E 22ND ST NE 17TH ST SE S 296TH ST 25TH ST SE 12TH ST SE R ST NEPERIMETERRDSWD ST SE55TH AVE SEAST BLVDA C A D E M Y DRSE110TH AVE SEPACIFIC AVE S51ST AVE S118TH AVE SEGRE E N RIVERRDSE N ST NEW ST NWS 287TH ST SCENIC D R S E 62NDST SE56TH AVE SA ST NE4 9 T H ST NE K ST SE58TH AVE S144THAVESEEVERGRE E N W A Y S EF ST SET ST SEDOGWOOD ST SEMONTEVISTADRSEPIKE ST NEBRIDGET AVE SEH ST SEG ST SEB ST SEFOSTER AVE SEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNE1 0 5 THPLSE140TH AVE SEMILLPONDDRSE52ND AVE S47TH ST SE 56TH ST SE S 305TH ST 57THPLSUSTNW54TH AVE S28TH ST NE E MAIN ST 30TH ST NE 51S T S T N E 26TH ST SE 3 5 T H W A Y S E S 3 0 0 T H S T B ST NE36T H STSEOL I VEAVESES E 3 1 8 T H W A Y 29TH ST NW ASTE 24TH ST SE SE 298TH PL HEMLOCK ST SEFOREST R ID G E DR SE23RD ST SE22ND ST SE85TH AVE SS 288TH ST O ST SESE 282ND S T 64TH AVE S111THPLSE20TH ST SE SE 286TH ST 108THAVESEHICR EST D RNW1 0 4 T H P L S E 16TH ST SE 148TH AVE SE42ND ST NE 7 3 R D S T S E 3 7 T H W A YSET ST NW57TH ST SES292NDST SE 285TH ST ELM ST SESE312T H W AY61ST STSE GINKGOSTSE15TH ST SET ST NE45TH S T NE S 303RD PL 19TH ST SE S 302ND PL 21ST ST SE 33RD ST SE 55TH ST SE RANDALL AVE SE63R D PL S E WARD AVE SE107TH PL SE55THWAYSE 43RD ST NE 63RD PL S59TH AVE S133RD AVE SEFIR ST SE66TH AVE SSE 314TH PL S 328TH ST S 3 21 ST ST S ST SE65TH ST SEJ PL NE4 9 T H S T N E R ST NES 292ND ST SE 282ND ST B ST SE118TH AVE SEN ST NE56TH AVE SGSTSE57TH ST SEK ST SE56TH AVE S17T H S T S E F ST SEEVERGREENWAYSEM U C K L E S H O O TMUCKLESHOOTCASINOCASINO T H E T H E O U T L E T O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N C O L L E C T I O N K E N TKENT K I N GKINGCOUN T YCOUNTY P I E R C EPIERCECOUNTYCOUNTY P A C I F I CPACIFIC S U M N E RSUMNEREDGEWOODEDGEWOOD A L G O N AALGONA Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy. Printed On: 10/4/2016Map ID: 4755 Map 2- Local Road Pavement Conditions Pavement Condition Index (PCI) of Local Street Network 0 - 25 Very Poor 26 - 50 Poor 51 - 69 Fair 70 - 100 GoodDI.J Page 166 of 181 L A K ELAKETAPP STAPPS TS18 TS18 S 277TH ST WESTVALLEYHWYS24TH ST E SE 2 7 4 T H S T 132ND AVE SEPACIFIC AVE SJOVITABLVDE SE 272ND ST ELLINGSON RD SW 8TH ST E WESTVALLEYHWY140TH AVE E136TH AVE ES 272ND ST 108TH AVE SESEKENT-K A N G LEYRD68TH AVE S124TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY NW116TH AVE SEM ILIT A R Y R D S STEWART RD SW VALENTINE AVE SECENTRAL AVE S142ND AVE ESTEWART RD SE A ST SE124TH AVE SEWEST V A L L EYHWYSSE 272ND ST S 2 7 7 T H S T 12TH ST EMILITARY RD S182ND AVE EAUBURN-BLACKDIAMONDRDSE9THST E S 288TH ST FOREST CA N YONRD E 2 1 0 T H A V E E 16 TH S T E 214TH AVE ES2 72N D WAY A U B U R N -E N U M C L A W R D SMILITARYRDSTS167 TS167 A ST SEB ST NWI ST NEAUBURN W AY S C ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY N124TH AVE SER ST SEWEST VALLEY HWY N132ND AVE SES 277TH ST C ST NW15TH ST SW W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW SE 304TH ST E M A IN S T LAK E T A P P SPKW YS E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST 51ST AVE SKER SEYWAYSE 8T H S T N E 37TH ST NW LA K E L A NDHI LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSESE 320TH ST P E A S L EYCANYON RD S DSTNW104THAVESEWESTVALLEYHWYSAUBURN-BLACKDIAMOND RD SED ST NE112TH AVE SEEAST VALLEY HWY ESE304THWAYTERRACEDRNW SE 281ST ST 17TH ST SE 6TH ST SE SE30 4 T H ST112TH AVE SEA ST SERSTSEC ST NE2ND ST E STUCK RIVER DR SE 53RD ST SE SE 288TH ST 37TH ST SE M ST NE4 6 TH P L S 22ND ST NE 17TH ST SE S 296TH ST 25TH ST SE 12TH ST SE R ST NEPERIMETERRDSWD ST SE55TH AVE SEAST BLVDA C A D E M Y DRSE110TH AVE SEPACIFIC AVE S51ST AVE S118TH AVE SEN ST NEW ST NWS 287TH ST SCENIC D R S E 62NDS T SE56TH AVE SS30 0 T H P L A ST NE4 9 T H ST NE K ST SE58TH AVE S144THAVESEEVERGRE E N W A Y S EF ST SET ST SEDOGWOOD ST SEBRIDGET AVE SEH ST SEG ST SEB ST SEFOSTER AVE SEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNE1 0 5 THPLSE140TH AVE SEMILLPONDDRSE52ND AVE S47TH ST SE 56TH ST SE57THPLSUSTNW54TH AVE S28TH ST NE E MAIN ST 30TH ST NE 43RD S T NE 51ST S T N E 26TH ST SE 3 5 T H W A Y S E S 3 0 0 T H S T B ST NE6 4 T H S T S E OL I VEAVESES E 3 1 8 T H W A Y 29TH ST NW ASTE HEMLOCK ST SEFORESTR ID G ED R SE23RD ST SE22ND ST S E85TH AVE SS 288TH ST O ST SESE 282ND S T 64TH AVE S111THPLSE108THAVESEHICR E ST D RNW1 0 4 T H P L S E 16TH ST SE 148TH AVE SE42ND ST NE 7 3 R D S T S ET ST NW57TH ST SES292NDST SE 285TH ST ELM ST SESE312T H W AY52NDPLSGINKGOSTSE15TH ST SET ST NE45TH S T NE S 303RD PL 19TH ST SE S 302ND PL 21ST ST SE 33RD ST SE 55TH ST SE RANDALL AVE SEWARD AVE SE3 5 T H S T S E 55THWAYSE63RD PL S59TH AVE S133RD AVE SE66TH AVE SSE 314TH PL S 297TH PL S 328TH ST S ST SE65TH ST SEJ PL NE56THAVE S 118TH AVE SE57TH ST SE56TH AVE SR ST NEGSTSE56TH AVE S59TH AVE SN ST NEF ST SES 292ND ST 4 9 T H S T N E M U C K L E S H O O TMUCKLESHOOTCASINOCASINO K E N TKENT K I N GKINGCOUN T YCOUNTY P I E R C EPIERCECOUNTYCOUNTY P A C I F I CPACIFIC S U M N E RSUMNEREDGEWOODEDGEWOOD A L G O N AALGONA Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy. Printed On: 10/3/2016Map ID:Pavement Ride Quality Map 3- Citywide Ride Quality Map 0 - 20 Very Poor // Uncomfortable with constant bumps or depressions 20 - 40 Poor // Uncomfortable with frequest bumps or depressions 40 - 60 Fair // Comfortable with intermittent bumps or depressions 60 - 80 Good // Smooth with a few bumps or depressions 80 - 100 Excellent // Very SmoothDI.J Page 167 of 181 L A K ELAKETAPP STAPPS TS18 TS18 S 277TH ST 24TH ST E SE 2 7 4 T H S T PACIFIC AVE SJOVITABLVDE 132ND AVE SEELLINGSON RD SW SE 272ND ST 8TH ST E WESTVALLEYHWY140TH AVE E136TH AVE ES 272ND ST WEST VALLEY HWY S108TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY NWM ILIT A R Y R D S STEWART RD SWWEST VALLEYHWYEVALENTINE AVE SE68TH AVE S124TH AVE SE116TH AVE SE142NDAVEESTEWART RD SE A ST SEWESTVALLEYHWYSSE 272ND ST WEST V A L L EYHWYSS 2 7 7 T H S T 124TH AVE SE12TH ST EMILITARY RD S182ND AVE EAUBURN-BLACKDIAMONDRDSE9THST E S 288TH ST 2 1 0 T H A V E E 16 TH S T E S2 72N D WAY 214TH AVE EA U B U R N-E N U M C L A W R D SAUBURN WAY NMILITARYRDSTS167 TS167 A ST SEI ST NEAUBURN W AY SB ST NWC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE51ST AVE S124TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY N132ND AVE SES 277TH ST C ST NW15TH ST SW W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW SE 304TH ST E M A IN S T LAK E T A P P SPKW YS E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST KER SEYWAYSE 8T H S T N E 37TH ST NW LA K E L A NDHI LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSESE 320TH ST P E A S L EYCANYON RD S DSTNW104THAVESEWESTVALLEYHWYSS 316TH ST 321ST ST S AUBURN-BLACKDIAMOND RD SED ST NE112TH AVE SEEAST VALLEY HWY ESE304THWAYSE 281ST ST 17TH ST SE 6TH ST SE SE30 4 T H ST112TH AVE SEA ST SEC ST NE2ND ST E STUCK RIVER DR SE 53RD ST SE SE 288TH ST 37TH ST SE M ST NE4 1 ST ST S E 22ND ST NE 17TH ST SE S 296TH ST 25TH ST SE 12TH ST SE R ST NEPERIMETERRDSWD ST SE55TH AVE SEAST BLVDA C A D E M Y DRSE110TH AVE SEPACIFIC AVE S51ST AVE S118TH AVE SEGRE E N RIVERRDSE N ST NEW ST NWS 287TH ST SCENIC D R S E 62NDST SE56TH AVE SA ST NE4 9 T H ST NE K ST SE58TH AVE S144THAVESEEVERGRE E N W A Y S EF ST SET ST SEDOGWOOD ST SEMONTEVISTADRSEPIKE ST NEBRIDGET AVE SEH ST SEG ST SEB ST SEFOSTER AVE SEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNE1 0 5 THPLSE140TH AVE SEMILLPONDDRSE52ND AVE S47TH ST SE 56TH ST SE S 305TH ST 57THPLSUSTNW54TH AVE S28TH ST NE E MAIN ST 30TH ST NE 51S T S T N E 26TH ST SE 3 5 T H W A Y S E S 3 0 0 T H S T B ST NE36T H STSEOL I VEAVESES E 3 1 8 T H W A Y 29TH ST NW ASTE 24TH ST SE SE 298TH PL HEMLOCK ST SEFOREST R ID G E DR SE23RD ST SE22ND ST SE85TH AVE SS 288TH ST O ST SESE 282ND S T 64TH AVE S111THPLSE20TH ST SE SE 286TH ST 108THAVESEHICR EST D RNW1 0 4 T H P L S E 16TH ST SE 148TH AVE SE42ND ST NE 7 3 R D S T S E 3 7 T H W A YSET ST NW57TH ST SES292NDST SE 285TH ST ELM ST SESE312T H W AY61ST STSE GINKGOSTSE15TH ST SET ST NE45TH S T NE S 303RD PL 19TH ST SE S 302ND PL 21ST ST SE 33RD ST SE 55TH ST SE RANDALL AVE SE63R D PL S E WARD AVE SE107TH PL SE55THWAYSE 43RD ST NE 63RD PL S59TH AVE S133RD AVE SEFIR ST SE66TH AVE SSE 314TH PL S 328TH ST S 3 21 ST ST S ST SE65TH ST SEJ PL NE4 9 T H S T N E R ST NES 292ND ST SE 282ND ST B ST SE118TH AVE SEN ST NE56TH AVE SGSTSE57TH ST SEK ST SE56TH AVE S17T H S T S E F ST SEEVERGREENWAYSEM U C K L E S H O O TMUCKLESHOOTCASINOCASINO T H E T H E O U T L E T O U T L E T C O L L E C T I O N C O L L E C T I O N K E N TKENT K I N GKINGCOUN T YCOUNTY P I E R C EPIERCECOUNTYCOUNTY P A C I F I CPACIFIC S U M N E RSUMNEREDGEWOODEDGEWOOD A L G O N AALGONA Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy. Printed On: 10/4/2016Map ID: 4762 Map 4 - Citywide Pavement Rut Map All Street Classification Average Rut Depths 0.25" - 0.49" 0.0" - 0.25" 0.75" + 0.50" - 0.75" DI.J Page 168 of 181 L A K ELAKETAPP STAPPS TS18 TS18 S 277TH ST 132ND AVE SEJO V ITABLVDE WESTVALLEYHWYS24TH ST E SE 2 7 4 T H S T EASTVALLEYHWYSE 272ND ST PACIFIC AVE SMI LI TARY R D S SE KENT-KANGLEY RD ELLINGSON RD SW WESTVALLEYHWY68THAVES124TH AVE SE116TH AVE SE8TH ST E 142ND AVE E140TH AVE E136TH AVE ES 272ND ST 108TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY NW38TH AVE SSTEWART RD SW VALENTINE AVE SECENTRAL AVE SA ST SE124TH AVE SEWEST VAL L E YHWYSSE 272ND ST S 2 7 7 T H S T 12TH ST E182ND AVE ES 288TH ST AUBURN-BLACKDIAMONDRDS E 9THST E 214TH AVE EFORES T CANYON RD E SUMNER-TAPPSHWYE2 1 0 T H A V E E 16 TH S T EMI L I T A RYRDSA U B U R N-E N U M C L A W RDS S2 7 2N D WAY S 272ND ST MILITARYRDSMILITARYRDSTS167 TS167 A ST SEI ST NEAUBURN WAY SB ST NWC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE51ST AVE S124TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY N132ND AVE SEC ST NW15TH ST SW W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW SE 304TH ST E M A IN S T LAKE T A P P SPKW YS E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST KER SEYWAYSE 8T H S T N E 37TH ST NW LAK E L A NDHI LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSESE 320TH ST P E A S L E YCANYON RDS DSTNW104THAVESEWESTVALLEYHWYSS 316TH ST 3 2 1 ST ST S AUBURN-BLACKDIAMOND RD SEDSTNE112TH AVE SEEAST VALLEY HWY ESE 281ST ST 17TH ST SE 6TH ST SE 112TH AVE SEA ST SEC ST NE2ND ST E STUCK RIVER DR SE 53RD ST SE SE 288TH ST 37TH ST SE M ST NE41ST ST S E 22ND ST NE 17TH ST SE S 296TH ST 25TH ST SE 12TH ST SE R ST NEPERIMETERRDSWD ST SE55TH AVE SEAST BLVD110TH AVE SEPACIFIC AVE S51ST AVE S118TH AVE SEGRE ENRIVERRDSE N ST NEW ST NWS 287TH ST SCENIC D R S E 62ND S T SE56TH AVE S44TH ST NW A ST NE4 9 T H ST NE K ST SE58TH AVE S144THAVESEF ST SETSTSEDOGWOOD ST SEBRIDGET AVE SEG ST SEFRONTAGERDB ST SEFOSTER AVE SEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNE1 0 5 THPLSE140TH AVE SEMILLPONDDRSE52ND AVE S47TH ST SE 56TH ST SE S 305TH ST 57THPLSUSTNW54TH AVE S30TH ST NE 51ST S T N E 3 5 T H W A Y S E S 3 0 0 T H S T 6 4 T H S T S E OL I VEAVESE29TH ST NW AST E HEMLOCK ST SEFOREST R ID G ED R SE2 3 R D S T S E85TH AVE S36 TH STSES 288TH ST OSTSE42ND ST NW 111THPLSEHICR E S T D RNW16TH ST SE 148TH AVE SE42ND ST NE 7 3 R D S T S E 37 T H W A Y SE57TH ST SES292NDST ELM ST SESE312T H W AYGINKGOSTSET ST NE45TH S T NE S 303RD PL 104TH AVE SE19TH ST SE S 302ND PL 21ST ST SE 33RD ST SE SE 307TH ST 55TH ST SE RANDALL AVE SEWARD AVE SESE 3 06T H S T 43R D S T NE 63RD PL S59TH AVE S66TH AVE SS 328TH ST 65TH ST SEU ST NEB ST SE56TH AVE SF ST SEN ST NER ST NE118TH AVE SE56TH AVE S4 9 T H S T N E 57TH ST SE M U C K L E S H O O TMUCKLESHOOTCASINOCASINO K E N TKENT K I N GKINGCOUN T YCOUNTY P I E R C EPIERCECOUNTYCOUNTY S U M N E RSUMNER P A C I F I CPACIFIC E D G E W O O DEDGEWOOD A L G O N AALGONA Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy. Printed On: 11/3/2016Map ID: Map 5- Planned Arterial & Collector Projects- 2016 to 2020 Project Year S 277th St CorridorCapacity & Non- Motorized TrailImprovement Project Auburn Way N to Green River Work: Improve Roadway, Drainage, Water, Sidewalk, ITS B St NWReconstruction Project SR 18 East Ramp to 15th St SW Work: Rebuild Roadway, Sewer Improvements Auburn Way NorthPreservation Project Phase 1 22nd St NE to 45th St NE Work: Patch, Grind & Overlay, Intersection Improvements Auburn Way NorthPreservation Project Phase 2 8th St NE Vic to 22nd ST NE Work: Patch, Grind & Overlay, Intersection Improvements 15th Street NW/NEAnd Harvey Rd Preservation Project SR167 to 18th St NE Work: Patch, Grind & Overlay, Intersection Improvements M Street SEImprovement Project East Main St to 3rd St SE Work: Patch, Grind & Overlay, Utilities Auburn Way NorthPreservation Project Phase 3 SR 18 to 8th ST NE Vic Work: Patch, Grind & Overlay, Intersection Improvements West Main St Multi-ModalCorridor and ITS Imporvement Project West Valley Highway to Interurban Trail Work: Rebuild, ITS, Sidewalks, ETC A Street SEPreservation Project East Main St to 17th St SE Work: Patch, Grind & Overlay, Intersection Improvements Lake TappsPreservation Project City Limits to Lakeland Hills Way SE Work: Grind & Overlay 2016 Projects2017 Projects*2018 Projects*2019 Projects*2020 Projects**Other Projects will be identified through a street selection process in Summer 2016 DI.J Page 169 of 181 L A K ELAKETAPP STAPPS TS18 TS18 S 277TH ST 132ND AVE SEJO V ITABLVDE WESTVALLEYHWYS24TH ST E SE 2 7 4 T H S T EASTVALLEYHWYSE 272ND ST PACIFIC AVE SMI LI TARY R D S SE KENT-KANGLEY RD ELLINGSON RD SW WESTVALLEYHWY68THAVES124TH AVE SE116TH AVE SE8TH ST E 142ND AVE E140TH AVE E136TH AVE ES 272ND ST 108TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY NW38TH AVE SSTEWART RD SW VALENTINE AVE SECENTRAL AVE SA ST SE124TH AVE SEWEST VAL L E YHWYSSE 272ND ST S 2 7 7 T H S T 12TH ST E182ND AVE ES 288TH ST AUBURN-BLACKDIAMONDRDS E 9THST E 214TH AVE EFORES T CANYON RD E SUMNER-TAPPSHWYE2 1 0 T H A V E E 16 TH S T EMI L I T A RYRDSA U B U R N-E N U M C L A W RDS S2 7 2N D WAY S 272ND ST MILITARYRDSMILITARYRDSTS167 TS167 A ST SEI ST NEAUBURN WAY SB ST NWC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY NR ST SE51ST AVE S124TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY N132ND AVE SEC ST NW15TH ST SW W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW SE 304TH ST E M A IN S T LAKE T A P P SPKW YS E 29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST KER SEYWAYSE 8T H S T N E 37TH ST NW LAK E L A NDHI LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSESE 320TH ST P E A S L E YCANYON RDS DSTNW104THAVESEWESTVALLEYHWYSS 316TH ST 3 2 1 ST ST S AUBURN-BLACKDIAMOND RD SEDSTNE112TH AVE SEEAST VALLEY HWY ESE 281ST ST 17TH ST SE 6TH ST SE 112TH AVE SEA ST SEC ST NE2ND ST E STUCK RIVER DR SE 53RD ST SE SE 288TH ST 37TH ST SE M ST NE41ST ST S E 22ND ST NE 17TH ST SE S 296TH ST 25TH ST SE 12TH ST SE R ST NEPERIMETERRDSWD ST SE55TH AVE SEAST BLVD110TH AVE SEPACIFIC AVE S51ST AVE S118TH AVE SEGRE ENRIVERRDSE N ST NEW ST NWS 287TH ST SCENIC D R S E 62ND S T SE56TH AVE S44TH ST NW A ST NE4 9 T H ST NE K ST SE58TH AVE S144THAVESEF ST SETSTSEDOGWOOD ST SEBRIDGET AVE SEG ST SEFRONTAGERDB ST SEFOSTER AVE SEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNE1 0 5 THPLSE140TH AVE SEMILLPONDDRSE52ND AVE S47TH ST SE 56TH ST SE S 305TH ST 57THPLSUSTNW54TH AVE S30TH ST NE 51ST S T N E 3 5 T H W A Y S E S 3 0 0 T H S T 6 4 T H S T S E OL I VEAVESE29TH ST NW AST E HEMLOCK ST SEFOREST R ID G ED R SE2 3 R D S T S E85TH AVE S36 TH STSES 288TH ST OSTSE42ND ST NW 111THPLSEHICR E S T D RNW16TH ST SE 148TH AVE SE42ND ST NE 7 3 R D S T S E 37 T H W A Y SE57TH ST SES292NDST ELM ST SESE312T H W AYGINKGOSTSET ST NE45TH S T NE S 303RD PL 104TH AVE SE19TH ST SE S 302ND PL 21ST ST SE 33RD ST SE SE 307TH ST 55TH ST SE RANDALL AVE SEWARD AVE SESE 3 06T H S T 43R D S T NE 63RD PL S59TH AVE S66TH AVE SS 328TH ST 65TH ST SEU ST NEB ST SE56TH AVE SF ST SEN ST NER ST NE118TH AVE SE56TH AVE S4 9 T H S T N E 57TH ST SE M U C K L E S H O O TMUCKLESHOOTCASINOCASINO K E N TKENT K I N GKINGCOUN T YCOUNTY P I E R C EPIERCECOUNTYCOUNTY S U M N E RSUMNER P A C I F I CPACIFIC E D G E W O O DEDGEWOOD A L G O N AALGONA Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy. Printed On: 11/3/2016Map ID: Map 6 - Planned Local Street Program Projects Project Year Auburn Way NorthPreservation Project Phase 3 SR 18 to 8th ST NE Vic Work: Patch, Grind & Overlay, Intersection Improvements 2016 Proposed Rebuild Streets (0.59 Miles)2016 Proposed Overlay Streets (0.70 Miles)2017 Proposed Rebuild Streets (0.65 Miles)2017 Proposed Overlay Streets (0.49 Miles) 26th St SE, 27th St SE, 28th St SE, S St SE, T St SE, AndU St SE Work: Rebuild Street, Improve Drainage, Water system Improvement, & LID for Sewer Length of Reconstruciton 0.42 Miles (2,420 feet) 25th Street SE M St SE to R St SE Work: Rebuild Street, Rebuild Drainage, Rebuild Water Length of Reconstruction 0.25 Miles (1,330 feet) 19th St SE and G St SE F St SE to H St And 17th St SE to 19th St SE Work: Rebuild Street, and Improve Drainage Length of Reconstruction 0.19 Miles (1,010 feet) F Street SE East Main St to 4th St SE Work: Rebuild Street, Rebuild Drainage, and Imporve Water System Length of Reconstruction 0.24 Miles (1,245 feet) 21st Street NE Auburn Way N to I St NE Work: Rebuild Street and Rebuild Drainage Length of Reconstruction 0.10 Miles (564 feet) 53rd Ave S, S 302nd Pl AndCul De Sacs Work: Thin Overlay and Curb Ramp Upgrades Length of Overlay 0.49 Miles (2,565 feet) 52nd Pl S, 55th Ave AndCul De Sacs Work: Thin Overlay and Curb Ramp Upgrades Length of Overlay 0.70 Miles (3,695 feet) DI.J Page 170 of 181 L A K ELAKETAPP STAPPS TS18 TS18 S 277TH ST JO VITA BLVDE 132ND AVE SEWESTVALLEYHWYS24TH ST E SE 2 7 4 T H S T SE 272ND ST PACIFIC AVE SEASTVALLEYHWYMI LI TARY R D S ELLINGSON RD SW WESTVALLEYHWYSEKENT-KANGLEY R D68TH AVE S8TH ST E 124THAVESE116TH AVE SE140TH AVE E136TH AVE ES 272ND ST 142ND AVE E108TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY NW38TH AVE SSTEWART RD S W VALENTINE AVE SECENTRAL AVE SA ST SE124TH AVE SEWEST VAL L E YHWYSSE 272ND ST S 27 7 T H S T 12TH ST E182ND AVE ES 288TH ST AUBURN-BLACKDIAMONDRDS E 9THST E FORES T C ANYON RD E 214TH AVE ESUMNER-TAPPSHWYE2 1 0 T H A V E E 16 TH S T EMI L I T A RYRDSA U B U R N-E N U M C L A W RDS S2 7 2N D WAY S 272ND ST MILITARYRDSMILITARYRDSTS167 TS167 A ST SEI ST NEAUBURN WAY SB ST NWC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY N124TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY N132ND AVE SES 277TH ST C ST NW15TH ST SW W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW SE 304TH ST E M A IN S T LAKE T A P P SPKW YS ER ST SE29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST 51ST AVE SKER SEYWAYSE 8T H S T N E 37TH ST NW LA K E L A NDHI LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSESE 320TH ST P E A S L E YCANYON RD S 104THAVESEWESTVALLEYHWYSAUBURN-BLACKDIAMOND RD SEDSTNE112TH AVE SEEAST VALLEY HWY ETERRACEDRNW SE 281ST ST 17TH ST SE 6TH ST SE 112TH AVE SEA ST SERSTSEC ST NE2ND ST E STUCK RIVER DR SE 53RD ST SE SE 288TH ST 37TH ST SE M ST NE4 6 TH P L S 22ND ST NE 17TH ST SE S 296TH ST 25TH ST SE 12TH ST SE R ST NEPERIMETERRDSWD ST SEEAST BLVD110TH AVE SEPACIFIC AVE S51ST AVE S118TH AVE SEGRE ENRIVERRDSE N ST NEW ST NWS 287TH ST SCENIC D R S E 62ND S T SE56TH AVE SS300T H P L 44TH ST NW A ST NE4 9TH ST NE K ST SE58TH AVE S144THAVESEF ST SEDOGWOOD ST SEBRIDGET AVE SEG ST SEB ST SEFOSTER AVE SEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNE1 0 5 THPLSE140TH AVE SEMILLPONDDRSE52ND AVE S47TH ST SE 56TH ST SE S 305TH ST 57THPLSUSTNWE MAIN ST 30TH ST NE 51ST S T N E 35 T H W A Y S E S 3 0 0 T H S T 6 4 T H S T S E OL I VEAVESE29TH ST NW AST E S 297THPL HEMLOCK ST SEFOREST R ID G ED R SE2 3 R D ST S E85TH AVE SS 288TH ST 42ND ST NW 111THPLSE16TH ST SE 13TH ST SE 148TH AVE SE42ND ST NE 2ND ST SE 7 3 R D S T S E 57TH ST SES292NDST ELM ST SESE312T H W AY52NDPLSGINKGOSTSE15TH ST SE T ST NE45TH S T NE S 303RD PL 14TH ST SE 104TH AVE SE19TH ST SE S 302ND PL 21ST ST SE 33RD ST SE SE 307TH ST 55TH ST SE RANDALL AVE SEWARD AVE SESE 3 06T H S T 3 5 T H S T S E 43R D S T NE 63RD PL S59TH AVE S66TH AVE S1ST ST SE S 328TH ST 65TH ST SE S 292ND ST R ST NEF ST SEN ST NE56TH AVE S4 9 T H S T N E 59THAVES118TH AVE SE57TH ST SE56TH AVE SM U C K L E S H O O TMUCKLESHOOTCASINOCASINO K E N TKENT K I N GKINGCOUN T YCOUNTY P I E R C EPIERCECOUNTYCOUNTY P A C I F I CPACIFIC S U M N E RSUMNEREDGEWOODEDGEWOOD A L G O N AALGONA Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy. Printed On: 11/8/2016Map ID: Map 7 - CP1402 - 2014 Citywide PavementPatching and Overlay Project Work Type Patch (105 Fund)Grind & Overlay (105 Fund)Thin Overlay (103 Fund) S 288th St 55th Ave S to 51st Ave S Work: Grind & Overlay ADT = No Recent Record 15th St NW/NE SR 18 Ramps to A St NE Work: Patch ADT = 30,950 VPD Harvey Rd Auburn Way to 8th St NE Work: Patch ADT = 19,450 VPD 112th Ave SE SE 304th St to SE 281st St, Except 294th St to 290th St Work: Patch ADT = 4,700 VPD 116th Ave SE SE 312th St to SE 304th St Work: Grind & Overlay ADT = 2,500 VPD Marchini Meadows 132nd Ave SE Work: Thick Overlay 105th & 107th Work: Grind & Overlay ADT = 4,600 VPDEast Main St J St to R St Work: Patch ADT = 5,550 VPD 29th St SE A St SE to R St SE Work: Patch ADT = 8,350 VPD R St SE Oravetz Rd to Bridge Work: Patch & Overlay ADT = 11,950 VPD 54th St SE & 57th St SE Mill Pond Dr to Lakeland Hills Way Work: Thin Overlay SOS Streets LegendADT = Average Daily TrafficVPD = Vehicles Per Day DI.J Page 171 of 181 L A K ELAKETAPP STAPPS TS18 TS18 S 277TH ST JO VITA BLVDE 132ND AVE SEWESTVALLEYHWYS24TH ST E SE 2 7 4 T H S T SE 272ND ST PACIFIC AVE SEASTVALLEYHWYMI LI TARY R D S ELLINGSON RD SW WESTVALLEYHWYSEKENT-KANGLEY R D68TH AVE S8TH ST E 124THAVESE116TH AVE SE140TH AVE E136TH AVE ES 272ND ST 142ND AVE E108TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY NW38TH AVE SSTEWART RD S W VALENTINE AVE SECENTRAL AVE SA ST SE124TH AVE SEWEST VAL L E YHWYSSE 272ND ST S 27 7 T H S T 12TH ST E182ND AVE ES 288TH ST AUBURN-BLACKDIAMONDRDS E 9THST E FORES T C ANYON RD E 214TH AVE ESUMNER-TAPPSHWYE2 1 0 T H A V E E 16 TH S T EMI L I T A RYRDSA U B U R N-E N U M C L A W RDS S2 7 2N D WAY S 272ND ST MILITARYRDSMILITARYRDSTS167 TS167 A ST SEI ST NEAUBURN WAY SB ST NWC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY N124TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY N132ND AVE SES 277TH ST C ST NW15TH ST SW W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW SE 304TH ST E M A IN S T LAKE T A P P SPKW YS ER ST SE29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST 51ST AVE SKER SEYWAYSE 8T H S T N E 37TH ST NW LA K E L A NDHI LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSESE 320TH ST P E A S L E YCANYON RD S 104THAVESEWESTVALLEYHWYSAUBURN-BLACKDIAMOND RD SEDSTNE112TH AVE SEEAST VALLEY HWY ETERRACEDRNW SE 281ST ST 17TH ST SE 6TH ST SE 112TH AVE SEA ST SERSTSEC ST NE2ND ST E STUCK RIVER DR SE 53RD ST SE SE 288TH ST 37TH ST SE M ST NE4 6 TH P L S 22ND ST NE 17TH ST SE S 296TH ST 25TH ST SE 12TH ST SE R ST NEPERIMETERRDSWD ST SEEAST BLVD110TH AVE SEPACIFIC AVE S51ST AVE S118TH AVE SEGRE ENRIVERRDSE N ST NEW ST NWS 287TH ST SCENIC D R S E 62ND S T SE56TH AVE SS300T H P L 44TH ST NW A ST NE4 9TH ST NE K ST SE58TH AVE S144THAVESEF ST SEDOGWOOD ST SEBRIDGET AVE SEG ST SEB ST SEFOSTER AVE SEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNE1 0 5 THPLSE140TH AVE SEMILLPONDDRSE52ND AVE S47TH ST SE 56TH ST SE S 305TH ST 57THPLSUSTNWE MAIN ST 30TH ST NE 51ST S T N E 35 T H W A Y S E S 3 0 0 T H S T 6 4 T H S T S E OL I VEAVESE29TH ST NW AST E S 297THPL HEMLOCK ST SEFOREST R ID G ED R SE2 3 R D ST S E85TH AVE SS 288TH ST 42ND ST NW 111THPLSE16TH ST SE 13TH ST SE 148TH AVE SE42ND ST NE 2ND ST SE 7 3 R D S T S E 57TH ST SES292NDST ELM ST SESE312T H W AY52NDPLSGINKGOSTSE15TH ST SE T ST NE45TH S T NE S 303RD PL 14TH ST SE 104TH AVE SE19TH ST SE S 302ND PL 21ST ST SE 33RD ST SE SE 307TH ST 55TH ST SE RANDALL AVE SEWARD AVE SESE 3 06T H S T 3 5 T H S T S E 43R D S T NE 63RD PL S59TH AVE S66TH AVE S1ST ST SE S 328TH ST 65TH ST SE S 292ND ST R ST NEF ST SEN ST NE56TH AVE S4 9 T H S T N E 59THAVES118TH AVE SE57TH ST SE56TH AVE SM U C K L E S H O O TMUCKLESHOOTCASINOCASINO K E N TKENT K I N GKINGCOUN T YCOUNTY P I E R C EPIERCECOUNTYCOUNTY P A C I F I CPACIFIC S U M N E RSUMNEREDGEWOODEDGEWOOD A L G O N AALGONA Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy. Printed On: 11/8/2016Map ID: Map 8 - CP1506 - 2015 Pavement Patching &Overlay Project Streets Work Type Patch (105 Fund)Grind & Overlay (105 Fund)Thin Overlay (103 Fund) S 300th St 58th Pl S to 64th Ave S Work: Deep Patch & Overlay B St NW 30th St NW to 37th St NW Work: Grind & Overlay Green River Road City Limits to 104th Ave S Work: Deep Patch & Overlay SE 304th St 124th Ave SE to 132nd Ave SE Work: Patching 104th Ave SE Lea Hill Rd to Green River Rd Work: Grind & Overlay 316th, 315th, 113th & 114th Work: Thin Overlay Mt. View DriveApprox 350 feet from West Valley Highway Work: Deep Patch & Overlay M St SE 8th St SE to 12th St SE Work: Grind & OverlayC St SW SR 18 East Ramp to 15th St SW Work: Patch F St SE 25th St SE to 29th St SE Work: Deep Patch & Overlay Lakeland Hills Rd SE A St SE to Oravetz Rd SE Work: Deep Patch & Overlay Deep Patch & Overlay (105 Fund) DI.J Page 172 of 181 L A K ELAKETAPP STAPPS TS18 TS18 S 277TH ST JO VITA BLVDE 132ND AVE SEWESTVALLEYHWYS24TH ST E SE 2 7 4 T H S T SE 272ND ST PACIFIC AVE SEASTVALLEYHWYMI LI TARY R D S ELLINGSON RD SW WESTVALLEYHWYSEKENT-KANGLEY R D68TH AVE S8TH ST E 124THAVESE116TH AVE SE140TH AVE E136TH AVE ES 272ND ST 142ND AVE E108TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY NW38TH AVE SSTEWART RD S W VALENTINE AVE SECENTRAL AVE SA ST SE124TH AVE SEWEST VAL L E YHWYSSE 272ND ST S 27 7 T H S T 12TH ST E182ND AVE ES 288TH ST AUBURN-BLACKDIAMONDRDS E 9THST E FORES T C ANYON RD E 214TH AVE ESUMNER-TAPPSHWYE2 1 0 T H A V E E 16 TH S T EMI L I T A RYRDSA U B U R N-E N U M C L A W RDS S2 7 2N D WAY S 272ND ST MILITARYRDSMILITARYRDSTS167 TS167 A ST SEI ST NEAUBURN WAY SB ST NWC ST SWM ST SEAUBURN WAY N124TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY N132ND AVE SES 277TH ST C ST NW15TH ST SW W MAIN ST 15TH ST NW SE 304TH ST E M A IN S T LAKE T A P P SPKW YS ER ST SE29TH ST SE SE 312TH ST 51ST AVE SKER SEYWAYSE 8T H S T N E 37TH ST NW LA K E L A NDHI LLSWAYSEORAVETZRDSESE 320TH ST P E A S L E YCANYON RD S 104THAVESEWESTVALLEYHWYSAUBURN-BLACKDIAMOND RD SEDSTNE112TH AVE SEEAST VALLEY HWY ETERRACEDRNW SE 281ST ST 17TH ST SE 6TH ST SE 112TH AVE SEA ST SERSTSEC ST NE2ND ST E STUCK RIVER DR SE 53RD ST SE SE 288TH ST 37TH ST SE M ST NE4 6 TH P L S 22ND ST NE 17TH ST SE S 296TH ST 25TH ST SE 12TH ST SE R ST NEPERIMETERRDSWD ST SEEAST BLVD110TH AVE SEPACIFIC AVE S51ST AVE S118TH AVE SEGRE ENRIVERRDSE N ST NEW ST NWS 287TH ST SCENIC D R S E 62ND S T SE56TH AVE SS300T H P L 44TH ST NW A ST NE4 9TH ST NE K ST SE58TH AVE S144THAVESEF ST SEDOGWOOD ST SEBRIDGET AVE SEG ST SEB ST SEFOSTER AVE SEJOHNREDDINGTONRDNE1 0 5 THPLSE140TH AVE SEMILLPONDDRSE52ND AVE S47TH ST SE 56TH ST SE S 305TH ST 57THPLSUSTNWE MAIN ST 30TH ST NE 51ST S T N E 35 T H W A Y S E S 3 0 0 T H S T 6 4 T H S T S E OL I VEAVESE29TH ST NW AST E S 297THPL HEMLOCK ST SEFOREST R ID G ED R SE2 3 R D ST S E85TH AVE SS 288TH ST 42ND ST NW 111THPLSE16TH ST SE 13TH ST SE 148TH AVE SE42ND ST NE 2ND ST SE 7 3 R D S T S E 57TH ST SES292NDST ELM ST SESE312T H W AY52NDPLSGINKGOSTSE15TH ST SE T ST NE45TH S T NE S 303RD PL 14TH ST SE 104TH AVE SE19TH ST SE S 302ND PL 21ST ST SE 33RD ST SE SE 307TH ST 55TH ST SE RANDALL AVE SEWARD AVE SESE 3 06T H S T 3 5 T H S T S E 43R D S T NE 63RD PL S59TH AVE S66TH AVE S1ST ST SE S 328TH ST 65TH ST SE S 292ND ST R ST NEF ST SEN ST NE56TH AVE S4 9 T H S T N E 59THAVES118TH AVE SE57TH ST SE56TH AVE SM U C K L E S H O O TMUCKLESHOOTCASINOCASINO K E N TKENT K I N GKINGCOUN T YCOUNTY P I E R C EPIERCECOUNTYCOUNTY P A C I F I CPACIFIC S U M N E RSUMNEREDGEWOODEDGEWOOD A L G O N AALGONA Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy. Printed On: 11/8/2016Map ID: Map 9 - CP1414 - 2015 Local Street Reconstruction Project 7th St SE A St SE to Auburn Way S Work:Rebuild Street and Improve Drainage and Water Line Improvement Length of Reconstruciton: 2 Blocks - 907 Feet D St SEAuburn Way S to 12th St SE Work: Rebuild Street and Improve Drainage Water Line Improvement Length of Reconstruction: 3 Blocks - 1107 feet K St SE17th St SE to 21st St SE Work: Rebuild Half Street, Water Line Improvement, Improve Sewer Length of Reconstruction: 4 Blocks - 1322 Feet D St SE37th St SE to 41st St SE Work: Rebuild Street and Improve Drainage Improve Sewer Length of Reconstruction: 4 Blocks - 130 Feet Project Street DI.J Page 173 of 181 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Homelessness Taskforce Update (10 Minute Presentation) Date: November 22, 2016 Department: Administration Attachments: Homelessness Taskforce Update Budget Impact: $0 Administrative Recommendation: Background Summary: In response to community concerns about the growing number of homeless individuals in the City, Mayor Nancy Backus created the "Auburn Mayor’s Homelessness Task Force" in November 2015. The Task Force was composed of 17 individuals representing a diversity of residents, businesses, service providers and faith community stakeholders in Auburn. The mission of the Task Force was to: "… seek to better understand the scope and causes of homelessness in Auburn, the systems in place to address homelessness, and…consider the range of concerns and ideas identified by the community. The Task force will identify and recommend a set of short-term and longer-term actions that our community can undertake to address these issues." The task force completed their requested action plan in April 2017. This information will update the City Council and citizens on the progress towards the action plan that was presented to the Mayor and City Council on May 23, 2016 and to also share the feedback from the reconvening of the task force for six month check in. Attached is the updated action plan and progress towards the task force recommendations. Reviewed by Council Committees: Councilmember: Staff:Hinman Meeting Date:November 28, 2016 Item Number:DI.K AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINEDDI.K Page 174 of 181 Task Force Recommendations 08/12/15 Summary of Recommendations Results Progress (As of Nov 2016) Category Item Action Public Safety A.1 More patrol and control of parks and library area to ensure safe access for famlies and kids R The City has police on bicycles patrolling the Les Gove campus regularly. The police Community Response team has established a relationship with the library, AYR and Parks and Rec staff to increase safety in the area. Public Safety A.2 Outreach and education to homeless people to encourage good conduct (obey laws, respect other’s property) and environmental stewardship in order to improve community sense of safety, reduce impacts to the environment and improve public health.R City of Auburn police makes efforts to inform all members of the community, including those experiencing homelessness, of the laws are in Auburn. PD strives to connect anyone in crisis to local resources, although officers are often met with resistance they will continue to provide assistance to those needing resources. Public Safety A.3 Create a program where homeless are hired daily to help clean the community C Strategy around the formation of a program of this sort has been discussed among City staff and has potential. Public Safety A.4 Increase police patrols in vicinity/around the times of church meal programs and other areas where homeless individuals congregate PD swore in one new Officer in October, and City Council has approved 6 new officers: (3) Proactive, (1) Bicycle, (1) K-9 and (1) Detective Public Safety A.5 Ensure police have information to provide service and shelter referrals to homeless individuals C Police have access to the City of Auburn’s Community Resource Guides and meet with Community Services staff monthly. Expand emergency shelter B.1 Partner with agencies (businesses, governments, churches, etc.) that have parking lots to make them available for overnight for "safe parking" that is time limited, policed, kept clean and has a restroom facility R Expand emergency shelter B.2 Find a location to host a Tent City in Auburn, to offer community to homeless. Provide showers and laundry facilities The city is currently in the planning stages of a mobile laundry and shower facility. Expand emergency shelter B.3 Provide short-term Shelter Housing in the City by partnering with - motels willing to reduce price with open rooms, and with Landlords with unrented apartments R The City of Auburn has executed an MOU with local hotels to ensure those that are utilizing City-funded vouchers will be allowed access. We will be having a convening of landlords to work through affordability issues and also to reduce source of income discrimination. Expand emergency shelter B.4 Provide additional outdoor restroom facilities at existing available parking lots at businesses like gas stations R Expand emergency shelter B.5 Open additional Shelter in City –more than just the existing winter shelter for cold nights C The city is in the planning stages of extending the winter shelter beyond its current capacity. Expand emergency shelter B.6 Provide transitional housing in immediate Auburn area R The City of Auburn operates two transitional homes using third party agencies for case management and is seeking more housing solutions Expand emergency shelter B.7 City should provide support for the siting and construction of the proposed Arcadia House project (transitional housing and shelter, with services, for young adults)R The City of Auburn is allocating CDBG funding towards the construction of the AYR Arcadia project Expand emergency shelter B.8 Expand shelter services to youth under the age of 18 R The AYR Aracdia project will Expand emergency shelter B.9 utilize school and other public facilities as overnight shelters for the currently underserved groups, including families with children Expand emergency shelter B10* Increase the supply of low-barrier shelter beds in the City (currently there are no shelter beds, excepting the winter shelter open during the extreme weather)C Phoenix Rising (Valley Cities) opened 24 SRO units for homeless young adults (18-25) in April; facility will also include a job training component (Phoenix Rising Café) and inlcudes room for future development Expanding Services C.1 Hygiene center / Day center with storage, showers, laundry and access to resources. Explore siting in an existing vacant building C The city is in the planning stages of a mobile shower and laundry facility. Expanding Services C.2 Engage owners of private but vacant buildings in City to host locations for needed services C The City of Auburn has partnered with Mary's Place to oversee this type of activity. Mary's Place will operate a transitional home for families that are surviving domestic violence. We will continue to work with property owners with vacant buildings to offer temporary shelters 1DI.K Page 175 of 181 Task Force Recommendations 08/12/15 Summary of Recommendations Results Progress (As of Nov 2016) Category Item Action Expanding Services C.3 Coordinate meal programs for each day of the week to ensure homeless have a hot meal, a place for companionship, and safety each and every day. (Currently 5 of 7 days of the week are covered by such programs in Auburn.) Promote best practices in the operation of these programs to mitigate impacts on neighboring properties/residents.C Free meals or Community Suppers are offered 6 days a week in Auburn. Sponsors of meal programs are encouraged to connect with other program sponsors to learn best practices. We will be convening other services to be available at local feeding programs in order to better get those in need connected to services. The Auburn Police Department works closely with those that sponsor feeding programs to mitigate potential community impacts. Expanding Services C.4 Expand Health Care services available for homeless - Basic and beyond with follow-up and case management C The City of Auburn funds numerous organizations that offer free or reduced cost medical services to those in need. The Affordable Health Care Act has been a useful tool in this endeavor. Expanding Services C.5 Expand programs, facilities and services available to address behavioral health issues of homeless (Behavioral health = substance abuse, addiction, mental health). C MultiCare Auburn Hospital opened a new20-bed psychiatric unit in March;The City of Auburn is part of the Behavioral Health Coalition to build a 120 bed psychiatric hospital in Tacoma; Expanding Services C.6 Work with other cities and agencies to create Diversion/Crisis solution centers in South King County.C City of Auburn staff is working with King County Court system and others to explore diversionary programs Expanding Services C.7 Expanded wrap-around services for homeless that will assist them in addressing their barriers to stable housing. C We will be convening other services to be available at local feeding programs in order to better get those in need connected to services. Most current and planned programs offer wrap around services for their clients. Expanding Services C.8 Enhance collaboration and communication between service agencies to better ensure a “warm handoff” of individuals from agency to agency -- so people don’t get lost in the system. Include city in these efforts.C The City will lead a convening of agencies, service providers, schools, public safety, landlords and other stakeholders to work towards prevention of those getting lost in the system Expanding Services C.9 Periodically update brochure providing information about resources in the community (city, professional, nonprofit, etc.) available to help homeless. (At least annual updates)R The City’s Community Resource Guide is updated every six months to reflect any program updates available to our homeless population. Expanding Services C.10 Transportation – provide a free bus for Valley floor area, with service centralized around Auburn to help get from one end to the other Expanding Services C.11 Expand number of bus passes available for homeless individuals.R The City and other agencies will seek to advocate for expansion of low cost transportation options Expanding Services C.12 Find a private laundromat willing to be open for free for homeless residents one day a week (City of Burien project) C The city is in the planning stages of partnering with a local laundry facility to open for homeless residents as well as a mobile laundry facility. Expanding Services C.13 Create Storage facilities for homeless individuals to place their belongings: secure, accessible and locked C Expanding Services C.14* Provide short-term transitional housing for those coming out of jail or foster care to help transition people to longer term housing and employment C The City of Auburn operates two transitional homes using third party agencies for case management and is seeking more housing solutions Expanding Services C.15 Provide a central place well known in the community where homeless can come and be connected to resources.C We will be convening other services to be available at local feeding programs in order to better get those in need connected to services. Expand permanent housing (& service capacity) D.1 Expand the supply of permanent “Housing First” low barrier housing in and around Auburn. R Mayor Backus and City of Auburn staff work closely with King County and other government municipalities on the local and regional answers to these questions Expand permanent housing (& service capacity) D.2 Support efforts of South King County (SKC) regional planning/homelessness advisory group in their efforts to: (1) Assess what housing and services currently exist and are currently available to homeless populations; (2) Determine gap between need and available resources; and (3) Coordinate where and housing will be located. Each city should agree to R The City of Auburn along with several other SKC cities have met and are beginning conversations to formally collaborate on our efforts to address homelessness and affordable housing. 2DI.K Page 176 of 181 Task Force Recommendations 08/12/15 Summary of Recommendations Results Progress (As of Nov 2016) Category Item Action Expand permanent housing (& service capacity) D.3 Provide housing for everyone who would like it-- not temporary housing-- a permanent place to call home. Expand permanent housing (& service capacity) D.4 Build new low-income/subsidized housing located close to resources and services. R The City is working with King County on possible housing solutions for homeless veterans and then will seek to expand to other populations Expand permanent housing (& service capacity) D.5 Organize shared housing placement and services. Make list or audit of all existing, available or potentially available housing that could be used to house the homeless. R The City of Auburn real estate services is compiling this inventory Expand permanent housing (& service capacity) D. 6 Provide additional subsidized housing for Single adults w/o disabilities, children, or Veteran status. Currently, there are very limited resources for this population. C Current options exist with Valley Cities (Landing and Phoenix Rising) with options to expand; the City of Auburn will seek to support and advocate for more Expand permanent housing (& service capacity) D.7 Build communal / micro-housing: i.e. dormitory-like apartment, private rooms for sleeping, individuals or couples with shared kitchen and living rooms. 4-6 people to a pod. R Auburn Youth Resources is currently working to fund and build such a facility in Auburn (Arcadia House) Expand permanent housing (& service capacity) D.8 Create a fund to help offset costs of rent or purchase of housing for qualified homeless. Expand permanent housing (& service capacity) D.9 Landlord assistance for damages as well as rent guarantee / support countywide Landlord Liaison Program C The City of Auburn will convene local landlords and work with other agencies on this issue Advocacy E.1 Find funding to provide more services. C The City of Auburn as well we other SKC cities and nonprofits are preparing for the upcoming legislative session to preserve and increase funds for services supporting our homeless population. Advocacy E.2 Advocate for more state funding for all types of behavioral health services-- mental health, substance abuse, detox beds, etc.C The City of Auburn as well we other SKC cities and nonprofits are preparing for the upcoming legislative session to preserve and increase funds for services supporting behavioral health services-- mental health, substance abuse, detox beds, etc. 3DI.K Page 177 of 181 Task Force Recommendations 08/12/15 Summary of Recommendations Results Progress (As of Nov 2016) Category Item Action Advocacy E.3 Advocate for funding for individuals without state insurance/on disability to access mental health and substance abuse treatment C The City of Auburn and numerous other jurisdictions will make this one of our top local, state and federal priorities Advocacy E.4 Encourage the state legislature to act next session to authorize a “Medicaid Supportive Housing Services Benefit” that will allow those providing services to residents in permanent supportive housing to bill more of the costs of those services to Medicaid rather than have the service providers absorb these costs.R The City of Auburn and numerous other jurisdictions will make this a top state priority Advocacy E.5 Provide training or tools to homeless individuals to share their story during legislative session. Advocacy E.6 Advocate to require utilities to expand subsidy for low income customers.C City of Auburn is working actively towards source of income discrimination Advocacy E.7 Advocate for expanded funding available to transporting homeless students.C The City of Auburn and the Auburn School District are actively seeking a solution to this issue Advocacy E.8* Advocate for improved bus service within Auburn and between South King County cities to increase ease of access by the homeless to needed services.C The City of Auburn and numerous staff will continue to advocate and secure programs and funding for better transportation access Other F.1 The City should undertake a short term concerted effort to gather more accurate data on the number of homeless individuals in Auburn. Strategies could include using YourGOV app, first responders document all contacts, include photo.R In partnership with the University of Washington, The City will begin a program using our mapping programs to get better data on our homeless population. Officers currently collect as much voluntary data as possible (with permission) Other F.2 City should continue to strengthen partnerships with service providers whose programs serve homeless individuals C The City continues to work closely with our providers supporting our homeless population. Other F.3 Create best practice training for all systems. Employees trained together to build connections between agencies.C Improving public understanding, ability to assist G.1 Implement a program to help educate residents about homelessness— why people become homeless, the limits of police action, the rights of the homeless, and how the Police, other City Departments, and service providers are currently responding on the issue. Tactics could include a citizen’s academy, town halls, web-postings, news articles, etc. Being homeless doesn’t make you less of a person but rather just person who may need a hand up. C The city has had a handful of events that provide education on homelessness. Speakers at the Auburn Senior Center, artwork at the library and free films focusing homelessness were offered in the City. Improving public understanding, ability to assist G.2 Encourage residents to reach out to relatives, friends of the homeless to help identify underlying reason for homelessness and possibly direct help to the individual. Improving public understanding, ability to assist G.3 Encourage ministers to include discussion in parish sermons during worship services to help parishioners with understanding and helping the homeless R The City of Auburn convenes local faith-based groups to work through advocacy and service delivery Improving public understanding, ability to assist G.4 Continue to expand city's involvement with county, state and feds to better support money and awareness of homelessness in South King County as a whole. C Mayor Backus and City of Auburn staff work closely with King County and other government municipalities to support awareness of the homeless population in Auburn and the surrounding SKC region. 4DI.K Page 178 of 181 Task Force Recommendations 08/12/15 Summary of Recommendations Results Progress (As of Nov 2016) Category Item Action Improving public understanding, ability to assist G.5 Clarify availability of resources to help homeless on single website R Resources are available on King County 211 Resource Guide as well as the City of Auburn’s Community Services Site. Improving public understanding, ability to assist G.6 Fundraiser to build public awareness of issues, barriers, provide public opportunity to provide input. Use proceeds to fund programs Greater or equal to 80% voting 4-5 = consensus item (C) 60-79% voting 4-5 = recommendation item (R ) 5DI.K Page 179 of 181 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Emergency Management Winter Weather Preparation Update (10 Minute Presentation) Date: November 22, 2016 Department: Administration Attachments: No Attachments Available Budget Impact: $0 Administrative Recommendation: Background Summary: City staff will update the Council on the current situation with the infill of the White River. With the continued infill of the river channel and the projected weather this winter, we are concerned that we will face flooding along the river in the area of A St. SE. Staff from several departments have been working on the issues and wanted to brief the council in case any questions or issues are addressed to them in public. • Current situation on the WR • Winter weather outlook • Likely impacts should flooding occur • What we’re doing with our partners • Public outreach and communication plan • How staff is preparing to deal with the anticipated impacts The briefing will be provided by Kalyn Brady, Communications Coordinator, and Jerry Thorson, Emergency Manager Reviewed by Council Committees: Councilmember: Staff:Hinman Meeting Date:November 28, 2016 Item Number:DI.L AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINEDDI.L Page 180 of 181 AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINEDDI.L Page 181 of 181