HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-29-2018 CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION AGENDACity Council Study Session HHS S FA
May 29, 2018 - 5:30 P M
Council Chambers - City Hall
A GE NDA
Watch the meeting L I V E !
Watch the meeting video
Meeting videos are not available until 72
hours after the meeting has concluded.
I .C A L L TO O R D E R
A .Roll Call
I I .A NNO UNC E ME NT S R E P O RT S A ND P R E S E NTAT I O NS
I I I .A G E ND A I T E MS F O R C O UNC I L D I S C US S I O N
A .S R167 and S R509 Gateway Project (Gaub) (20 Minutes)
B .2019-2024 Transportation I mprovement Plan Annual Update (Gaub) (15 Minutes)
C.Resolution No. 5370 - Massena P B R S A pplication (Tate) (10 Minutes)
P resentation of a Public Benefit Rating System application submitted to King County
(parcels 3421059044 and 3421059061)
I V.HE A LT H A ND HUMA N S E RV I C E S D I S C US S I O N I T E MS
A .B ehavioral Health F acility Update (Hinman) (20 Minutes)
P resenters:
I ngrid Gourley Mungia, Director of Government Relations for MultiCare Health S ystem
A nn McBride, President of C HI F ranciscan Post-Acute Care Services
Maureen Womack, C E O of Alliance for South S ound
B .One Table Update (Hinman) (20 Minutes)
V.O T HE R D I S C US S I O N I T E MS
V I .NE W B US I NE S S
V I I .MAT R I X
A .Matrix
V I I I .A D J O UR NME NT
Agendas and minutes are available to the public at the City Clerk's Office, on the City website
(http://www.auburnwa.gov), and via e-mail. Complete agenda packets are available for review
at the City Clerk's Office.
Page 1 of 72
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
SR167 and SR509 Gateway Project (Gaub) (20 Minutes)
Date:
May 21, 2018
Department:
CD & PW
Attachments:
City of Auburn Benefit Assessment
Memorandum of Understanding
Budget Impact:
Current Budget: $0
Proposed Revision: $0
Revised Budget: $0
Administrativ e Recommendation:
For discussion only.
Background Summary:
In July 2015, the Washington State Legislature and Governor Inslee acted to fund the SR167
and SR509 Gateway Program through the Connecting Washington revenue package. The
Gateway Program is comprised of two projects: the State Route 167 Completion Project
which connects the current SR167 to the Port of Tacoma and the State Route 509
Completion Project which connects SeaTac Airport/SR509 to the I-5 Corridor.
WSDOT is the lead project sponsor and is responsible for the planning, design and
construction of the Gateway Program, as well as for its overall financial management.
Funding for the Puget Sound Gateway Program has been approved to come from the state
gas tax, tolls, potential federal and state grants, and has a legislative mandate to secure local
funding contributions. Since the approval of the Program, WSDOT has been working with
several local agencies to create a plan to meet the local funding requirement. The
Legislature requires that a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the local agencies
involved be completed by July 1, 2018.
Agency contributions have been determined based upon the benefits that the various
agencies may receive from the Gateway Program. The analysis that was completed to
determine Auburns level of involvement is attached for information. At this time Auburn is
considered a Tier 3 City and as such our involvement includes supporting the local funding
strategy as identified in the MOU and reviewing the design of the project. Auburn is not being
asked to provide any direct funding to the Program.
WSDOT will provide a briefing of the Gateway Program and the proposal that has been
developed in coordination with the local agencies to meet the local funding requirement set
by the Legislature. It is anticipated that a Resolution approving the MOU will come before
Council for approval at the June 4, 2018 meeting in order to meet the July 1st deadline.
Rev iewed by Council Committees:
Page 2 of 72
Councilmember:Staff:Gaub
Meeting Date:May 29, 2018 Item Number:
Page 3 of 72
DRAFT: 23 February 2018
Puget Sound Gateway Partner Assessment City of Auburn
Overview
Population: 78,960 (2017 est.)
Employment: 45,489 (2016)
Operating Budget: $82.3 million (2017)
The City of Auburn is expected to receive low net local
benefits under the Puget Sound Gateway Program, based on
the characteristics summarized below:
, , , +1. Direct transportation linkages
, , , +2. Effects on local sales taxes
, , + +3. Travel time savings
, , + +4. Traffic diversion from local streets
, , + +5. Effects on local employment
, , + +6. Effects on developable residential lands
, , + +7. Effects on developable employment lands
, , + +8. Achievement of local policy goals
, , , +9. Environmental and social benefits
Auburn is located along SR 167, approximately 7 miles from
the new SR 167/I-5 interchange and 12 miles from the new
SR 509 alignment. The city is strongly linked to SR 167 for
regional transportation access, with the SR 18 / SR 167
interchange providing an important east-west link to I-5.
The benefits of the Puget Sound Gateway Program are
primarily related to reductions in traffic volume along SR 167
and SR 18, and associated improvements to congestion and
travel times for truck traffic. Benefits to commuting traffic in
the city are expected to be low.
For More Informati on
www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/gateway
Andrew Bjorn, BERK Consulti ng
andrew@berkconsulti ng.com
(206) 493-2384
Page 4 of 72
DRAFT: 23 February 2018
What Are the Net Benefits to the
City of Auburn?
The Puget Sound Gateway Program is expected to provide
the following net benefits to the City of Auburn:
Indirect Effects
• Strong local and regional transportation connections
are critical in maintaining economic competitiveness.
Manufacturing, warehousing, transportation, and
wholesaling amount to about 35% of the total
employment in Auburn, with a significant amount of
commercial and industrial land dedicated to these uses
along SR 167 and Auburn Way N in the center of the city.
Providing improved access by redirecting traffic volume
to I-5 and providing for regional connections can support
easier access and shorter trips to these locations for
cargo transportation. (5)
• Improving accessibility could support the development
of vacant and underutilized residential and employment
lands. Improving travel times over the “no build” scenario
can help to support efforts to attract new residential,
commercial, and industrial development. Given the
changes in access and traffic volumes indicated, the
effects of traffic changes may have the greatest potential
to affect areas for commercial and industrial development
located on SR 167 and Auburn Way N. (5, 6, 7)
• Negative impacts on retail sales taxes may be
possible, but the effects are dependent on the mix of
auto‑oriented retail uses on major corridors. Reductions
in the traffic volumes along major north-south arterials in
Auburn have the potential to reduce traffic frequenting
auto-oriented commercial uses in these areas. The level
of impacts will be dependent on the long-term mix of
uses in these areas. (2)
Social and Policy Effects
• Comprehensive Plan policies highlight the need for
coordination with the SR 167 Completion Project.
Auburn’s 2015 Comprehensive Plan update indicates
the need for coordination with WSDOT and surrounding
communities about planning for SR 167, and indicate the
SR 167 Completion Project as a major non-city project
included for analysis. (8)
• Promoting conversion to manufacturing and light
industrial uses. The economic development component
of the 2015 Comprehensive Plan indicates the need
to encourage conversion from existing warehousing
uses to more fiscally sustainable light industrial and
manufacturing activities. Providing for improved
regional accessibility can support infill development and
redevelopment in the area to support these efforts. (5, 7,
8)
Proposed Participation Level:
Tier Three
Per the Policy adopted by the Puget Sound Gateway
Funding and Phasing Subcommittee outlining three tiers of
participation, the City of Auburn commits to the following
responsibilities as a Tier 3 partner:
• Support project and grant requests. The City would
commit to supporting project and grant requests that
are included under the Gateway Program. This includes
providing letters of support to grant applications as
necessary, and coordinating applications for other
transportation funding to reduce conflicts.
• Participate in project meetings and reviews. The City
would commit to participating in project meetings
and project development reviews for the Puget Sound
Gateway Program and allocate sufficient staff time for
attendance and participation.
What Tiers are included under the assessments?
The Partner Assessments are structured around three
Tiers that classify the levels of benefi t received by each
community along a conti nuum, and defi ne the resource
commitments to the Puget Sound Gateway Project:
• Tier 1 communiti es are serviced directly by the new
highway alignments, and receive signifi cant direct
benefi ts due to improved accessibility.
• Tier 2 communiti es are located close to the new
highway alignments, and receive moderate to high
benefi ts due to improved accessibility.
• Tier 3 communiti es receive overall benefi ts from
improvements to regional accessibility, but only
receive nominal benefi ts directly.
Direct Effects
• Single and high‑occupancy vehicles will experience
low to moderate overall travel time savings. Compared
to the no-build scenario, there will be low to moderate
improvements in commuting travel time due to overall
system improvements. On average, total travel time
savings of 2–3% are expected for commuting trips to and
from Auburn. (3)
• There will be moderate overall travel time savings for
truck traffic. Expect to see 4–6% savings for commercial
and industrial areas within Auburn, with notable
time savings to both the Port of Tacoma and Sea-Tac
International Airport. (3)
• Significant truck traffic will be diverted from local
streets onto regional systems. Expect a 12% reduction
in truck traffic VMT on local streets during AM and PM
peak periods, primarily on north-south routes. Other
significant benefits include reduced maintenance,
capacity improvements, and local safety. (4)
Page 5 of 72
RATIFICATION FINAL Funding and Phasing MOU 1 5/21/2018
Puget Sound Gateway Program
SR 167 and SR 509 Completion Projects
Local Funding and Phasing
Memorandum of Understanding
1. Participating Parties
In addition to the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), the following Local
Agency Partners constitute those parties currently participating in this Memorandum of
Understanding pertaining to the local contribution requirement for the Puget Sound Gateway
Program (Gateway Program):
· Port of Seattle
· Port of Tacoma
· King County
· Pierce County
· City of Algona
· City of Auburn
· City of Des Moines
· City of Edgewood
· City of Federal Way
· City of Fife
· City of Kent
· City of Milton
· City of Pacific
· City of Puyallup
· City of SeaTac
· City of Sumner
· City of Tacoma
2. Background and Purpose of MOU
In July 2015, the Washington State Legislature and Governor Inslee acted to fund the Gateway
Program through the Connecting Washington revenue package. The Gateway Program is
comprised of two projects: the State Route 167 Completion Project and the State Route 509
Completion Project. These projects provide essential connections to the ports of Tacoma and
Seattle and will help ensure that people and goods move more reliably through the Puget Sound
region.
WSDOT is the lead project sponsor and is responsible for the planning, design and construction
of the Gateway Program, as well as for its overall financial management. The program has been
guided from its beginning by a Joint SR 167/SR 509 Executive Committee (Executive Committee),
comprised of elected and appointed representatives of local jurisdictions served by the Gateway
Program (Algona, Auburn, Burien, Des Moines, Edgewood, Federal Way, Fife, Kent, Milton,
Pacific, Puyallup, SeaTac, Sumner, Tacoma, King County, Pierce County, Port of Seattle, and Port
of Tacoma) as well as Federal Highway Administration, Washington State Transportation
Commission, Washington State Department of Transportation, Puget Sound Regional Council,
Sound Transit, Pierce Transit, and the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board.
Funding for the Gateway Program has been approved to come from the state gas tax, tolls, local
contributions, and potential federal and state grants. Total funding for the Gateway Program,
from the 2015 Connecting Washington transportation funding package, is $1.875 billion, which
includes local contributions of $130 million. The program has been funded over a 16-year
Page 6 of 72
RATIFICATION FINAL Funding and Phasing MOU 2 5/21/2018
timeline. Based on the legislative funding plan, major construction for a first stage would occur
from 2019 through 2025, and a second stage from 2026 through 2030. Local contributions will
be needed to construct both stage one and stage two projects.
In the 2017 Legislative session new language was enacted (Engrossed Senate Bill 5096 §
306(20)(b)) requiring development of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the
Local Agency Partners and WSDOT. The legislature directed that:
The secretary of transportation must develop a memorandum of understanding with
local project stakeholders that identifies a schedule for stakeholders to provide local
matching funds for the Puget Sound Gateway project. Criteria for eligibility of local
match includes matching funds and equivalent in-kind contributions including, but not
limited to, land donations. The memorandum of understanding must be finalized by July
1, 2018. The department must submit a copy of the memorandum of understanding to
the transportation committees of the legislature and report regularly on the status.
To this end, the Executive Committee of the Gateway Program convened a Funding and Phasing
Subcommittee (Subcommittee) to develop a MOU that summarizes their planned future
commitments and planned timing of those commitments to contribute to the SR 167 and SR 509
projects.
The Subcommittee goals include:
· Support efforts to build the Gateway projects on or ahead of schedule
· Create successful local partnerships
· Obtain sufficient local funding to build the Puget Sound Gateway projects
· Time grant-funding projects to support the project delivery schedule
The construct of local funding participation, when authorized by the legislative bodies of the
relevant agencies through a series of forthcoming interlocal agreements, is based on the
following projections:
SR 167 SR 509 TOTAL
Port contributions $30 million $30 million $60 million
Federal INFRA grant $10 million $10 million $20 million
Local agency partner
match
$10 million $10 million $20 million
Other Grants (PSRC,
FMSIB, TIB)
$20 million
$10 million $30 million
Total $70 million $60 million $130 million
3. Local Funding Strategy
A key element of the local funding strategy is to identify projects within the Gateway Program
that provide clear and measurable benefits to local jurisdictions. In the Gateway Program, these
are called “Local Nexus Projects,” designed to:
Page 7 of 72
RATIFICATION FINAL Funding and Phasing MOU 3 5/21/2018
· Create a positive business case for Local Agency Partners by focusing on the parts of the
program that are most relevant and important to local jurisdictions
· Leverage the potential to access significant grant funding to support local funding
assumptions
In support of the local funding strategy, Local Agency Partners shall:
· Participate, co-fund match, and submit grant applications with support from
Subcommittee staff, as identified in Section 6 of this MOU
· Combine local monetary and in-kind contributions and project funds to ensure fully-
funded applications, as identified in Section 6 of this MOU
· Support the grant effort and avoid competition with the local projects in the year of
application
The following Local Nexus Projects have been identified within the north (SR 509) and south (SR
167) segments of the Gateway Program:
Gateway North (SR 509) Gateway South (SR 167)
188th South Ramps Meridian West Ramps
SeaTac Access, with Ramps to 28th/24th
Avenue South
54th Avenue East Ramps
Veterans Drive Extension Interurban Trail
Lake to Sound Trail Valley Avenue West Ramps
Port of Tacoma Access/SR 509 Spur
70th Avenue E Bridge Relocation
If Local Nexus, INFRA, and any other pending grant projects become fully funded, these projects
will contribute substantially toward the Legislative requirement for local match. Funding
commitments will be achieved via an interlocal agreement from each signing party up to the
amounts presented in this MOU. Local Agency Partner signatories to this MOU understand that
once the local contribution requirements set forth in ESB 5096 ($130 million) is achieved, that
Local Agency Partners will not be required to commit to additional funds beyond what is
outlined in this MOU. If additional grant funding or additional funds from other sources are
obtained that fulfill the $130 million local contribution requirement, the Secretary of
Transportation and the Executive Committee will review and determine to either reduce local
agency partner match payments, or recommend expanding scope of the Gateway Program, and
amend each signing party’s interlocal agreement accordingly.
4. Local Participation Policy
The Joint Executive Committee has agreed to a funding and phasing policy that structures local
agency partner match requirements to be commensurate with the benefits accrued from the
project at a local level. This policy states that:
Page 8 of 72
RATIFICATION FINAL Funding and Phasing MOU 4 5/21/2018
All local agency partners accrue some benefit from the Puget Sound Gateway Program.
Partners receiving fewer benefits, however, are not expected to contribute as much as
partners who receive more benefits. Direct benefits are those that most quantifiable, but
there are other components of value that include indirect, strategic and policy/social
benefits. Both direct and indirect benefits will be assessed as part of the consideration of
local contributions, because they are more easily quantifiable than strategic and
policy/social benefits.
All Local Agency Partner signatories of this MOU expect to seek approval of interlocal
agreements to contribute a match to be applied to Local Nexus Projects at a level that reflects
their respective anticipated level of benefit, as identified in Section 6 of this MOU.
5. Benefit Assessment Methodology
The proposed financial participation by each partner is based on a general, qualitative
assessment of the net benefits expected to be received by full completion of the Gateway
Program. The assessment includes the following metrics, based on available project data and
transportation modeling outputs:
· Direct transportation linkages. The location of direct access points for new limited
access highways or other transportation infrastructure that benefits the community.
· Effects on local sales taxes. The impacts of the projects to sales tax receipts, both in
terms of one-time construction sales taxes for the project, and ongoing sales taxes from
impacts to commercial uses.
· Travel time savings. Overall travel time savings for local car and truck traffic associated
with the projects.
· Traffic diversion from local streets. The diversion of, or increase in, traffic on local
arterials due to the project, with associated positive impacts to traffic safety and local
road maintenance.
· Effects on local employment. The potential effects of improved accessibility are
reviewed, particularly in the context of access to new or potential employment uses.
· Effects on developable residential lands. The potential impacts of changes in traffic
flow and accessibility on residential land development, with a focus on areas within the
jurisdiction that are available for redevelopment.
· Effects on developable employment lands. The potential impacts of changes in traffic
flow and accessibility on the development or redevelopment of commercial and
industrial lands.
· Achievement of local policy goals. The alignment of the WSDOT Gateway Program with
local plans and policies.
· Environmental and social benefits. Environmental and social benefits specifically linked
to these projects, including upgrades to pedestrian and cycling infrastructure, and
wetlands and riparian restoration.
The approach and findings of the benefits assessments have been provided to the Local Agency
Partners.
Page 9 of 72
RATIFICATION FINAL Funding and Phasing MOU 5 5/21/2018
6. Local Jurisdiction Anticipated Contributions to the Program
Based on results from the benefit assessment described in Section 5, contributions for each of
the Local Agency Partners were determined by project stage in the tables below. Following
execution of this MOU, interlocal agreements will be drafted for subsequent approval.
Anticipated contributions only become binding commitments when embedded in interlocal
agreements, and the conditions therein are approved by the proposed funding entity. Interlocal
agreements between WSDOT and the respective Local Agency Partner must be in place for a
project prior to issuance of the Request for Proposals (RFP) for any proposed construction
contract. The Interlocal agreements will become binding commitments, within the statutory
authority of the Local Agency Partner, and will define the schedule of local match payments
expected over the duration of each construction project stage.
WSDOT will exercise due diligence to develop and construct each project on schedule within the
Gateway Program to the best of its abilities. Local Agency Partners will participate in project
development reviews and project meetings in support of the Gateway Program.
If grant pursuits identified in the Stage 1 and Stage 2 tables below are not achieved sufficient to
meet the $130 million local contribution, additional grants will be pursued from the funding
programs listed or from other funding programs that may become available over the life of the
Gateway Program. If Local Nexus Projects go to construction without planned grants, the Local
Agency Partner match funds will still be provided by agreement with WSDOT. If it is determined
that a Local Nexus Project cannot be fully funded, WSDOT will review options with the Executive
Committee. If an official decision is determined by the Executive Committee and the Secretary
of Transportation that the Local Nexus Project is not to be included in a construction project, the
Local Agency Partner match may be withdrawn.
Stage 1 Grant Pursuits for Local Nexus Projects
Project Estimated
Construction
Cost
Funding
Program
Grant Target
Amount
Target Due
Mo/Year
Anticipated
Construction
Expenditure
Local Agency
Partner
Match
Partner Nexus
70th Avenue
E/Interurban
Trail
$32,245,600 FMSIB $5,000,000 Mar 2018 2019-2021 $800,000
$500,000
$3,000,000
Fife
Tacoma
Port of Tacoma
TIB $5,000,000 Aug 2018 2019-2021
State
Capital &
Transpor
tation
$1,400,000 Mar 2018 2019-2021 Fife
Veterans
Drive/ SR516
Interchange
$33,800,000 PSRC $4,500,000 Apr 2018 2021-2025 $1,000,000 Kent
TIB $5,000,000 Aug 2020 2021-2025 $1,000,000
Kent
SeaTac Access
$176,883,500 PSRC $4,500,000 Apr 2018 2021-2025 $2,000,000
$500,000
SeaTac (ROW
in lieu)
Des Moines
Page 10 of 72
RATIFICATION FINAL Funding and Phasing MOU 6 5/21/2018
Port of Tacoma
Access/509
Spur
$323,042,000 PSRC $4,500,000 Apr 2018 2021-2025 $1,500,000
$3,000,000
$800,000
Tacoma
Port of Tacoma
Fife
FMSIB $5,000,000 Mar 2020 2021-2025
All Gateway
Program
INFRA $20,000,000* Nov 2017 2019-2021
SR 167 Stage 1 Port of
Tacoma
Jan 2021 2021-2025 $9,000,000 Port of Tacoma
SR 509 Stage 1 Port of
Seattle
Jan 2021 2021-2025 $15,000,000
Port of Seattle
(expected in
2023-2025)
Total Stage 1 $54,900,000 $38,100,000 $93,000,000
Stage 2 Future Grant Pursuits for Local Nexus Projects
Project Estimated
Construction
Cost
Funding
Program
Grant Target
Amount
Target Due
Mo/Year
Anticipated
Construction
Expenditure
Local Agency
Partner
Match
Partner Nexus
Meridian
Avenue
Interchange
TBD $3,000,000 2022 2026-2030 $2,000,000 Puyallup
Valley Avenue
Interchange
TBD $3,000,000 2022 2026-2030 $2,000,000 Pierce County
188th Street
Interchange
improvements
TBD TBD 2023 2026-2030 TBD
SR 167 Stage 2 TBD $4,000,000 2022 2026-2030 $500,000
$500,000
Edgewood
(ROW in lieu)
Sumner
Port of
Tacoma
Jan 2026 2026-2030 $15,000,000 Port of Tacoma
SR 509 Stage 2 TBD $4,000,000 2024 2026-2030
Port of
Seattle
Jan 2026 2026-2030 $15,000,000 Port of Seattle
Total Stage 2 $14,000,000 $35,000,000 $49,000,000
Total Stages
1 & 2
$68,900,000 $73,100,000 $142,000,000
* – If no INFRA, apply for FHWA BUILD grant for Port of Tacoma Access (SR 509 Spur)
TBD – grant funding program pursuit to be determined in future
7. Terms and Termination
7.1. Amendments
This MOU shall be periodically reviewed and evaluated regarding the need for modifications or
amendments by mutual determination of WSDOT and Local Agency Partners. Amendments to the
MOU shall be required if program funding assumptions need to be adjusted that affect the ability to
construct the identified Local Nexus Projects or the ability to achieve the $130 million local
contribution. Such amendments shall only be binding if they are in writing and signed by authorized
personnel from all of the Local Agency Partners. Except as set forth in an amendment, the MOU will be
unaffected and shall continue in full force and effect in accordance with its terms. If there is conflict
Page 11 of 72
RATIFICATION FINAL Funding and Phasing MOU 7 5/21/2018
between an amendment and the MOU or any earlier amendment, the terms of the most recent
amendment will prevail.
If there is a conflict between subsequent Interlocal Agreements and the MOU or any earlier
amendments, the terms of the Interlocal Agreements will prevail.
Changes that do not affect the ability to construct the identified Local Nexus Project or achieve the
$130 million local contribution shall be addressed through the Interlocal Agreement between WSDOT
and the relevant Local Agency Partner.
7.2. Dispute Resolution
Should any signatory to this MOU object at any time to any actions proposed or the manner in
which the terms of this MOU are implemented, the Executive Committee shall hear the dispute
first and if the disputant(s) is/are not satisfied with the Committee’s proposed decision, the
Committee will send to the Secretary of Transportation its proposed solution and all
documentation relevant to the dispute. The Secretary of Transportation shall provide the
Executive Committee with his/her advice on how to resolve the dispute within thirty (30)
calendar days of receiving adequate documentation. Prior to reaching a final decision on the
dispute, the Executive Committee shall prepare a written response that considers any timely
advice or comments regarding the dispute from the Secretary of Transportation, signatories
and other interested parties, and provide them with a copy of this written response. WSDOT
will then proceed according to this final decision.
7.3 Conditions for Termination of Participation
Subject to legislative appropriation and all applicable laws, each signatory shall ensure that the
Gateway Program is carried out in accordance with the terms of the MOU and subsequent
Interlocal Agreements. A signatory may terminate its participation in this MOU if its terms
cannot be met and by providing written notice to the Secretary of Transportation and the
Executive Committee a minimum of 180 calendar days before a project issues an RFP that relies
on that local agency partner funding. Prior to providing written notice terminating
participation, however, the signatories shall consult with WSDOT to determine whether an
amendment to the MOU might be feasible. If a signatory terminates its participation, WSDOT
will then consult with the Executive Committee to determine if project scope elements need to
be removed if contributions are not realized in accordance with this understanding.
8. Period of Agreement.
This MOU will commence on (July 1, 2018 proposed date) and will dissolve when the $130
million of local contribution have been secured, or when the Local Nexus Projects have been
constructed and are complete.
Page 12 of 72
RATIFICATION FINAL Funding and Phasing MOU 8 5/21/2018
9. Signatories
_______________________________________ ________________________________
Stephen P. Metruck Date
Executive Director
Port of Seattle
_______________________________________ ________________________________
John Wolfe Date
Chief Executive Officer
Port of Tacoma
_______________________________________ ________________________________
Dow Constantine Date
County Executive
King County
_______________________________________ ________________________________
Bruce Dammeier Date
County Executive
Pierce County
_______________________________________ ________________________________
David E. Hill Date
Mayor
City of Algona
_______________________________________ ________________________________
Nancy Backus Date
Mayor
City of Auburn
_______________________________________ ________________________________
Michael Matthias Date
City Manager
City of Des Moines
Page 13 of 72
RATIFICATION FINAL Funding and Phasing MOU 9 5/21/2018
_______________________________________ ________________________________
Daryl Eidinger Date
Mayor
City of Edgewood
_______________________________________ ________________________________
Jim Ferrell Date
Mayor
City of Federal Way
_______________________________________ ________________________________
Pat Hulcey Date
Councilmember
City of Fife
__________________________________ ________________________________
Dana Ralph Date
Mayor
City of Kent
_______________________________________ ________________________________
Shanna Styron-Sherrell Date
Mayor
City of Milton
_______________________________________ ________________________________
Leanne Guier Date
Mayor
City of Pacific
_______________________________________ ________________________________
Kevin Yamamoto Date
City Manager
City of Puyallup
_______________________________________ ________________________________
Joseph Scorcio Date
City Manager
City of SeaTac
Page 14 of 72
RATIFICATION FINAL Funding and Phasing MOU 10 5/21/2018
_______________________________________ ________________________________
William L. Pugh Date
Mayor
City of Sumner
______________________________________ ________________________________
Elizabeth A. Pauli Date
City Manager
City of Tacoma
_______________________________________ ________________________________
Roger Millar Date
Secretary of Transportation
Washington State Department of Transportation
Page 15 of 72
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
2019-2024 Transportation Improvement Plan Annual Update
(Gaub) (15 Minutes)
Date:
May 21, 2018
Department:
CD & PW
Attachments:
2019-2024 TIP Update Memo
Budget Impact:
Current Budget: $0
Proposed Revision: $0
Revised Budget: $0
Administrativ e Recommendation:
For discussion only.
Background Summary:
The Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is required to be amended annually
as required by RCW 35.77.010. The primary importance of the TIP is that, in most instances,
projects must be included on the TIP to be eligible for state and federal grant programs. The
TIP identifies secured or reasonably expected revenues and expenditures for each of the
projects included in the TIP. Typically, projects listed in the first three years of the document
are shown as having secured funding while projects in years 4, 5, and 6 can be partially or
completely un-funded.
The T I P is a multiyear planning tool and document for the development of transportation
facilities within the C ity and does not represent a financial commitment by the City. Once the
T I P is approved, projects are budgeted and funded through the City’s biennial budget. T he
T I P sets priorities for the acquisition of project f unding and is a prerequisite of most grant
programs. Staf f also uses the T I P to coordinate f uture transportation projects with needed
utility improvements.
Rev iewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember:Staff:Gaub
Meeting Date:May 29, 2018 Item Number:
Page 16 of 72
Page 1 of 3
Memorandum
To: Mayor Backus and City Council
From: James Webb, Traffic Engineer, PE, PTOE
Date: May 29, 2018
Re: 2019-2024 Transportation Improvement Program – Annual Update
Background Summary
The Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is required to be amended annually as
required by RCW 35.77.010 by June 30. The primary importance of the TIP is that, in most
instances, projects must be included on the TIP to be eligible for state and federal grant programs.
The TIP identifies secured or reasonably expected revenues and expenditures for each of the
projects included in the TIP. Typically, projects listed in the first three years of the document are
shown as having secured funding while projects in years four, five, and six can be partially or
completely un-funded.
The TIP is a multiyear planning tool and document for the near term development of transportation
facilities within the City and does not represent a financial commitment by the City. Once the TIP
is approved, projects are budgeted and funded through the City’s biennial budget. The TIP sets
priorities for pursuing project funding and is a prerequisite of most grant programs. Staff also uses
the TIP to coordinate future transportation projects with needed utility improvements.
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE TIP
Deletions: The following projects are planned to be removed from the updated TIP:
TIP 2: A St Traffic Signal Improvements ($1.20M) – This project was combined with TIP 19
(Auburn Way N/1st St NE Signal Improvements) to become I-1 (Signal Replacement
Program) to address the ongoing need to replace signal infrastructure as it reaches the end
of its service life.
TIP 12: Grade Separated Crossing of the BNSF Railyard ($32.1M) – This project was
removed from the TIP as it is not anticipated to be started within the next six years. The
project remains in the Comprehensive Transportation Plan.
TIP 14: A Street SE Signal Safety and Traffic Operations ($0.46M) – Will be completed in
2018.
Page 17 of 72
Page 2 of 3
TIP 15: 8th Street NE Widening (Pike St NE to R St NE ($1.45M) – The scope of this project
was combined with R-20 (Lea Hill Rd Segment 1).
TIP 19: Auburn Way N/1st St NE Signal Improvements ($0.60M) - This project was
combined with TIP 2 (A St Traffic Signal Improvements) to become I-1 (Signal Replacement
Program) to address the ongoing need to replace signal infrastructure as it reaches the end
of its service life.
TIP 21: W Main St & C St NW Traffic Signal Upgrade ($0.49M) - Will be completed in 2018.
TIP 24: Academy Drive Multi-Use Trail ($0.85M) - This project was removed from the TIP
as it is not anticipated to be started within the next six years. The project remains in the
Comprehensive Transportation Plan.
TIP 53: Auburn Way S & 12th St SE Intersection Improvements ($0.20M) – Will be
completed in 2018.
TIP 55: Auburn Way S Sidewalk Improvements ($0.67M) - Will be completed in 2018.
TIP 71: 15th St NE/NW Preservation (SR-167 to 8th St NE) ($1.64M) - Will be completed in
2018.
Additions: The following projects are proposed to be added to the updated TIP (the draft TIP
sheet and a vicinity map is attached for each of these projects):
TIP I-1: Signal Replacement Program ($1.20M) – this project replaces TIP 2 (A Street SE
Traffic Signal Improvements) and TIP 19 (Auburn Way N and 1st Street NE Signal
Improvements). This will be an ongoing program to replace existing signal infrastructure as
it reaches its end of life.
TIP I-7: SE 320th St/116th Ave SE Roundabout ($1.73M) – the project will construct a new
roundabout along SE 320th Street at the intersection with 116th Avenue SE. The
intersection is currently stop controlled on the 116th Avenue SE approaches. This was
previously included as part of the scope for TIP #42 (SE 320th Street Corridor
Improvements).
TIP I-11: Auburn Way S/6th Street SE ($1.20M) – The project will construct a new
southbound right-turn lane on Auburn Way S at the intersection with 6th Street SE.
TIP N-7: Auburn Way S Sidewalk – Southside (17th Street SE to MIT Plaza south side)
($0.71M) – The project will construct a new sidewalk along the south side of Auburn Way S
between Howard Road to the west of the Muckleshoot Plaza signal. The City has received
funding from TIB for similar improvements along the north side of Auburn Way S in this
vicinity.
TIP N-11: Lea Hill Safe Routes to School ($1.83M) – the project will construct safe routes to
schools improvements in the vicinity of Hazelwood Elementary School, Lea Hill Elementary
School, and Rainier Middle School.
TIP P-10: A Street SE Preservation (37th Street SE to King/Pierce County Line) (S1.71M) –
the project will preserve the pavement and construct ADA improvements.
TIP P-11: C Street SW Preservation (W Main Street to GSA Signal) ($2.31M) - the project
will preserve the pavement and construct ADA improvements.
TIP P-12: Lakeland Hills Way Preservation (57th Drive SE to Lake Tapps Pkwy) ($1.20M) -
the project will preserve the pavement and construct ADA improvements.
TIP R-15: Auburn Way S at Poplar Street Safety Improvements ($0.27M) – the project will
install improvements to improve safety along Auburn Way S in the vicinity of the curve
adjacent to Poplar Street.
Page 18 of 72
Page 3 of 3
Other Modifications:
The development of a new numbering system for the projects has been implemented as part of
this year’s annual update. The TIP number for each project now identifies the project type, making
individual projects easier to find, making future updates easier, and making the document more
user friendly. The new numbering convention is as follows:
I-X: Intersection, Signal and ITS projects
N-X: Non-Motorized and Transit projects
P-X: Preservation projects
R-X: Roadway projects
S-X: Study and Monitoring projects
Other changes proposed to be made as part of the annual update are to revise certain project
descriptions, cost estimates, and anticipated funding sources to be more representative of project
scopes and available funding sources.
CURRENT STATUS AND NEXT STEPS:
Staff will continue to develop the 2019-2024 TIP update in coordination with the City Capital
Facilities Plan update process and the 2019-2020 budget development. The Transportation
Advisory Board and City Council comments will be addressed and adoption is anticipated as
follows in the schedule below.
MARCH 13, 2018: FIRST TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD DISCUSSION
MAY 29, 2018: FIRST COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
JUNE 4, 2018: RESOLUTION TO SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING
JUNE 11, 2018: SECOND COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
JUNE 12, 2018: SECOND TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD DISCUSSION
JUNE 18, 2018: PUBLIC HEARING & RESOLUTION FOR ADOPTION
Page 19 of 72
Six Year Transportation Improvement PlanARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Project Title: Signal Replacement ProgramSTIP# AUB-N/AProject No:cpxxxxProject Type:Non-CapacityProject Manager:TBDLOS Corridor ID# N/AActivity:2018 YEFunding Sources:Prior to 2018Estimate201920202021202220232024Beyond 2024Total Project CostUnrestricted Street Revenue- - - - 75,000 525,000 - 75,000 525,000 1,200,000 Unsecured Grant- - - - - - - - - - Traffic Impact Fees- - - - - - - - - - REET2- - - - - - - - - - Total Funding Sources: - - - - 75,000 525,000 - 75,000 525,000 1,200,000 Capital Expenditures:Design- - - - 75,000 - - 75,000 - 150,000 Right of Way- - - - - - - - - - Construction- - - - - 525,000 - - 525,000 1,050,000 Total Expenditures: - - - - 75,000 525,000 - 75,000 525,000 1,200,000 TIP# I-1Description:This program will replace existing traffic signals as they reach the end of their serviceable life span. Replacement signals will match the City's current design standards, meet ADA accessiblity requirements, and include battery backup power supplies. The signal anticipated to be replaced in 2022 is the Auburn Way N/1st Street NE signal which was constructed in 1968. The signal anticipated to be replaced in 2024 is the E Main Street/Auburn Avenue signal which was also constructed in 1968.Progress Summary:Future Impact on Operating Budget:This project will have no additional impact on the operating budget for street maintenance.BudgetForecast Project Cost1Page 20 of 72
Page 21 of 72
Six Year Transportation Improvement PlanARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Project Title: SE 320th Street/116th Avenue SE RoundaboutSTIP# AUB-N/AProject No:cpxxxxProject Type:Capacity, SafetyProject Manager:TBDLOS Corridor ID# 25Activity:2018 YEFunding Sources:Prior to 2018Estimate201920202021202220232024Beyond 2024Total Project CostUnrestricted Street Revenue- - 35,000 5,000 - - - - - 40,000 Unsecured Grant- - 290,000 25,000 1,370,000 - - - - 1,685,000 Traffic Impact Fees- - - - - - - - - - Other- - - - - - - - - - Total Funding Sources: - - 325,000 30,000 1,370,000 - - - - 1,725,000 Capital Expenditures:Pre-Design- - - - - - - - - - Design- - 325,000 - - - - - - 325,000 Right of Way- - - 30,000 - - - - - 30,000 Construction- - - - 1,370,000 - - - - 1,370,000 Total Expenditures: - - 325,000 30,000 1,370,000 - - - - 1,725,000 TIP# I-7Description:This project will fund the design, right-of-way acquisition, and construction of a modern roundabout at the SE 320th Street intersction with 116th Avenue SE. The intersection currently has stop control on the 116th Avenue SE approaches. Progress Summary:Grant funding was applied for in 2018. If awarded, the design phase would begin in 2019, with construction anticipated to be completed in 2021.Future Impact on Operating Budget:The annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $1,000.BudgetForecast Project Cost2Page 22 of 72
Page 23 of 72
Six Year Transportation Improvement PlanARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Project Title: Auburn Way S and 6th Street SESTIP# AUB-N/AProject No:cpxxxProject Type:Capacity, SafetyProject Manager:TBDLOS Corridor ID# 3Activity:2018 YEFunding Sources:Prior to 2018Estimate201920202021202220232024Beyond 2024Total Project CostUnrestricted Street Revenue- - - - - - - - - - Unsecured Federal Grant- - - - - 80,000 80,000 800,000 - 960,000 Traffic Impact Fees- - - - - 20,000 20,000 200,000 - 240,000 Other- - - - - - - - - - Total Funding Sources: - - - - - 100,000 100,000 1,000,000 - 1,200,000 Capital Expenditures:Design- - - - - 100,000 - - - 100,000 Right of Way- - - - - - 100,000 - - 100,000 Construction- - - - - - - 1,000,000 - 1,000,000 Total Expenditures: - - - - - 100,000 100,000 1,000,000 - 1,200,000 TIP# I-11Description:This project will fund the design, right-of-way acquisition, and construction of a new southbound right-turn pocket on Auburn Way S at the intersection with 6th Street SE/SR-18 EB ramps. Progress Summary:The project phases will be completed when grant funding is secured.Future Impact on Operating Budget:This annual maintenance cost for this project is estimated to be $2,500.BudgetForecast Project Cost3Page 24 of 72
Page 25 of 72
Six Year Transportation Improvement PlanCAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDS (328)Project Title: Auburn Way S (SR-164) - Southside Sidewalk ImprovementsSTIP# AUB-xxProject No:cpXXXXProject Type:Non-motorized, SafetyProject Manager:TBDLOS Corridor ID# 4Activity:2018 YEFunding Sources:Prior to 2018Estimate201920202021202220232024Beyond 2024Total Project CostCap. Imp. Fund Balance- - - - - - - - - - Unsecured Grant- - - 80,000 525,300 - - - - 605,300 Traffic Impact Fees- - - - - - - - - REET2- - - 15,000 92,700 - - - - 107,700 Other- - - - - - - - - - Total Funding Sources: - - - 95,000 618,000 - - - - 713,000 Capital Expenditures:Design- - - 95,000 - - - - - 95,000 Right of Way- - - - - - - - - - Construction- - - 618,000 - - - - 618,000 Total Expenditures: - - - 95,000 618,000 - - - - 713,000 TIP# N-7Description: The project will construct missing sidewalk along the south side of Auburn Way S. The existing sidewalk along the south side currently ends at the intersection with Howard Road and restarts to the west of the intersection with Muckleshoot Plaza. The sidewalk gap extends for approximately 1,700 feet. The project also includes a Rapid Flashing Rectangular Beacon (RRFB) across Howard Road to provide a connection from the existing non-motorized facilities to the proposed improvements. TIB awarded funding to design and construct the missing sidewalk along the north side of Auburn Way S, with construction anticipated to be completed by the end of 2018.Progress Summary:Grant funding for the project was applied for in 2018. If awarded, the design phase would occur in 2020 with construction of the improvements in 2021.Future Impact on Operating Budget:There is no impact to the street maintenance budget.BudgetForecast Project Costs4Page 26 of 72
Page 27 of 72
Six Year Transportation Improvement PlanARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Project Title: Lea Hill Safe Routes to SchoolsSTIP# AUB-N/AProject No:cpxxxxProject Type:Non-MotorizedProject Manager:TBDLOS Corridor ID# N/AActivity:2018 YEFunding Sources:Prior to 2018Estimate201920202021202220232024Beyond 2024Total Project CostUnrestricted Street Revenue- - 3,000 213,000 58,050 - - - - 274,050 Unsecured State Grant- - 17,000 1,207,000 328,950 - - - - 1,552,950 Traffic Impact Fees- - - - - - - - - - Other- - - - - - - - - - Total Funding Sources: - - 20,000 1,420,000 387,000 - - - - 1,827,000 Capital Expenditures:Design- - 20,000 70,000 - - - - - 90,000 Right of Way- - - - - - - - - - Construction- - - 1,350,000 387,000 - - - - 1,737,000 Total Expenditures: - - 20,000 1,420,000 387,000 - - - - 1,827,000 TIP# N-11Description:The project will design and construct non-motorized improvements along SE 304th St from Hazelwood Elementary School extending east to 124th Ave SE and continuing south along 124th Ave SE to Lea Hill Elementary School. The project will complete multiple gaps in the existing non-motorized network. The elements of work include construction of approximately 2,400 linear feet of sidewalk to match adjacent widths. The project will also construct curb and gutter, ADA compliant curb ramps, driveways aprons and retaining walls associated with the new sidewalks. Utility poles will need to be relocated to accommodate the proposed sidewalk alignment in some locations. Where sidewalks are installed the bike network will be extended in most locations along the project to include the connection to and from the existing bicycle improvements constructed as part of the SE 304th St/124th Ave SE roundabout. Additional lighting is proposed for pedestrian safety and will be incorporated onto existing/relocated utility poles. Ancillary work, including but not limited to, property restoration, grading, storm upgrades, school zone beacon relocation, channelization, fencing, landscaping and mailbox relocation will be addressed with the project. Progress Summary:Grant funding application was submitted in 2018. If secured the design phase will be started in 2019 and construction completed during 2021.Future Impact on Operating Budget:This project will have no impact on the operating budget for street maintenance.BudgetForecast Project Cost5Page 28 of 72
Page 29 of 72
Six Year Transportation Improvement PlanARTERIAL PRESERVATION FUND (105)Project Title: A Street SE Preservation (37th Street SE to King/Pierce County Line)STIP# AUB-XXProject No:cpxxxxProject Type:Non-Capacity, PreservationProject Manager:TBDLOS Corridor ID# 10Activity:2018 YETotal ProjectFunding Sources:Prior to 2018Estimate201920202021202220232024Beyond 2024CostArterial Preservation Fund- - - - 67,500 788,000 - - - 855,500 Unsecured Grant- - - - 67,500 788,000 - - - 855,500 Traffic Impact Fees- - - - - - - - - - Other- - - - - - - - - - Total Funding Sources: - - - - 135,000 1,576,000 - - - 1,711,000 Capital Expenditures:Design- - - - 135,000 - - - - 135,000 Right of Way- - - - - - - - - - Construction- - - - - 1,576,000 - - - 1,576,000 Total Expenditures: - - - - 135,000 1,576,000 - - - 1,711,000 TIP# P-10Description:The project will grind and overlay A Street SE from 37th Street SE to the Auburn/Pacific City Limit and from the Pacific/Auburn City Limit to the King /Pierce County Line (approximately 1,800 feet to the south of Lakeland Hills Way). The project also includes ADA upgrades to curb ramps and replacement of vehicle detection loops.Progress Summary:An application for grant funding for this project was submitted in 2018. If awarded, design would occur in 2021 and construction in 2022.Future Impact on Operating Budget:There is no impact to the street maintenance budget.BudgetForecast Project CostPage 30 of 72
Page 31 of 72
Six Year Transportation Improvement PlanARTERIAL PRESERVATION FUND (105)Project Title: C Street SW Preservation (W Main St to GSA Signal)STIP# AUB-XXProject No:cpxxxxProject Type:Non-Capacity, PreservationProject Manager:TBDLOS Corridor ID# 13Activity:2018 YETotal ProjectFunding Sources:Prior to 2018Estimate201920202021202220232024Beyond 2024CostArterial Preservation Fund- - - 182,000 871,500 - - - - 1,053,500 Unsecured Grant- - - - 1,254,000 - - - - 1,254,000 Traffic Impact Fees- - - - - - - - - - Other- - - - - - - - - - Total Funding Sources: - - - 182,000 2,125,500 - - - - 2,307,500 Capital Expenditures:Design- - - 182,000 - - - - - 182,000 Right of Way- - - - - - - - - - Construction- - - - 2,125,500 - - - - 2,125,500 Total Expenditures: - - - 182,000 2,125,500 - - - - 2,307,500 TIP# P-11Description:The project will grind and overlay C Street SW from W Main Street to the GSA signal (approximately 2,000 feet to the south of 15th Street SW). The project also includes ADA upgrades to curb ramps and pedestrian push buttons, and replacement of vehicle detection loops.Progress Summary:An application for grant funding for the construction phase of this project was submitted in 2018. If awarded, design would occur in 2020 and construction in 2021.Future Impact on Operating Budget:No impact.BudgetForecast Project CostPage 32 of 72
Page 33 of 72
Six Year Transportation Improvement PlanARTERIAL PRESERVATION FUND (105)Project Title: Lakeland Hill Way Preservation (57th Drive SE to Lake Tapps Pkwy)STIP# AUB-XXProject No:cpxxxxProject Type:Non-Capacity, PreservationProject Manager:TBDLOS Corridor ID# 26Activity:2018 YETotal ProjectFunding Sources:Prior to 2018Estimate201920202021202220232024Beyond 2024CostArterial Preservation Fund- - - 100,000 352,000 - - - - 452,000 Unsecured Grant- - - - 748,000 - - - - 748,000 Traffic Impact Fees- - - - - - - - - - Other- - - - - - - - - - Total Funding Sources: - - - 100,000 1,100,000 - - - - 1,200,000 Capital Expenditures:Design- - - 100,000 - - - - - 100,000 Right of Way- - - - - - - - - - Construction- - - - 1,100,000 - - - - 1,100,000 Total Expenditures: - - - 100,000 1,100,000 - - - - 1,200,000 TIP# P-12Description:The project will grind, patch, and overlay Lakeland Hills Way from 57th Drive SE to Lake Tapps Pkwy. The project also includes ADA upgrades to curb ramps and replacement of vehicle detection loops.Progress Summary:An application for grant funding for the construction phase of this project was submitted in 2018. If awarded, design would occur in 2020 and construction in 2021.Future Impact on Operating Budget:No impact.BudgetForecast Project CostPage 34 of 72
Page 35 of 72
Six Year Transportation Improvement PlanARTERIAL STREET FUND (102)Project Title: Auburn Way S (SR-164) Poplar Curve Safety ImprovementsSTIP# AUB-N/AProject No:cpxxxxProject Type:SafetyProject Manager:TBDLOS Corridor ID# 4Activity:2018 YEFunding Sources:Prior to 2018Estimate201920202021202220232024Beyond 2024Total Project CostUnrestricted Street Revenue- - 5,500 - - - - - - 5,500 Unsecured Grant- - 49,500 213,200 - - - - - 262,700 Traffic Impact Fees- - - - - - - - - - Other- - - - - - - - - - Total Funding Sources: - - 55,000 213,200 - - - - - 268,200 Capital Expenditures:Design- - 55,000 - - - - - - 55,000 Right of Way- - - - - - - - - - Construction- - - 213,200 - - - - - 213,200 Total Expenditures: - - 55,000 213,200 - - - - - 268,200 TIP# R-15Description:This project will complete design and construct safety improvements at teh curve along Auburn Way S in the vicinity of the intersection with Poplar Street. The imrpvements would include, illumination, electronic curve ahead warning signage, a high-friction surface treatment for the pavement, guardrail and driveway improvements.Progress Summary:Grant funding application was submitted in 2018. If secured the design phase will be started in 2019 and construction completed during 2020.Future Impact on Operating Budget:There is no impact to the street maintenance budget.BudgetForecast Project Cost9Page 36 of 72
Page 37 of 72
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
Resolution No. 5370 - Massena PBRS Application (Tate) (10
Minutes)
Date:
May 23, 2018
Department:
Community Development &
Public Works
Attachments:
Attachment 1
Attachment 2
Res olution 5370 Messena
Budget Impact:
Current Budget: $0
Proposed Revision: $0
Revised Budget: $0
Administrativ e Recommendation:
Background Summary:
PUBLIC BENEFIT RAT ING SYST EM (PBRS) OVERVIEW
The Public Benefit Rating System (PBRS) is an open space property tax program allowed
under RCW 84.34 and administered by the County. In King County, administration is carried
out by the Department of Natural Resources and Parks. The intent of the program is to
encourage preservation of open space lands, agricultural lands and forested lands that are in
private ownership by offering property tax reductions for land owners who are willing to
preserve their land above and beyond the minimum requirements established within adopted
land use regulations.
Private property owners may submit a PBRS application request to the County who then
reviews the request against adopted King County code provisions in order to determine
eligibility in the program. The program establishes a number of different open space
resources that a property owner can seek to preserve (e.g. agricultural land, surface water
quality buffer, forest stewardship, public access). Each resource is assigned a point value or
range of point values. The more points that a property earns the more property tax reduction
that may be awarded.
Property tax reductions that are awarded to an owner carry land management obligations that
are recorded against the property. A reduction in property tax revenue from a single property
results in a shift whereby all other property tax payers within the County share in making up the
lost revenue. Removal of a property from the PBRS open space program (whether
intentional or unintentional) causes the payment of back taxes, penalties, and interest.
MASSENA APPLICAT ION
The Massena property consists of 2 separate parcels that total 10.08 acres. The owner is
seeking enrollment in the PBRS program under the farm and agricultural conservation land
category. The Massena’s utilize the property as farmland for the purpose of raising sheep.
King County is recommending that 8.35 acres of the total property be enrolled in the program
Page 38 of 72
subject to preparation and submittal of a Farm Management Plan in consultation with the King
Conservation District by October 31, 2018. County staff has recommended awarding a total
of 5 points which would result in a 50% reduction in the taxable value for the portion of the
land enrolled in the program.
PROCESS AND ACT ION:
While the PBRS program is administered by the King County Department of Natural
Resources and Parks, the granting authority for PBRS requests that are located within
incorporated areas is both the County and the City. RCW 84.34.037(1) includes the following
passage:
“Application for classification of land in an incorporated area must be acted upon by: (a)
A granting authority composed of three members of the county legislative body and
three members of the city legislative body in which the land is located in a meeting
where members may be physically absent but participating through telephonic
connection; or (b) separate affirmative acts by both the county and city legislative
bodies where both bodies affirm the entirety of an application without
modification or both bodies affirm an application with identical modifications.”
The above passage requires that both the City of Auburn City Council and the Metropolitan
King County Council approve the application request. Subsection (b) that is in bold is the
provision that pertains to this request. Resolution 5370 is tentatively scheduled to come
before the Auburn City Council for action on June 4, 2018. A similar action is tentatively
scheduled to come before the Metropolitan King County Council’s Planning, Rural Service
and Environment Committee for public hearing on June 5, 2018.
The King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks has prepared a staff report
(Attachment 1) that includes detailed information about the property, the County policies that
the request is evaluated against, the findings pertaining to this request, conditions of approval,
and a recommendation for acceptance into the program.
Rev iewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember:Staff:TATE
Meeting Date:May 29, 2018 Item Number:
Page 39 of 72
KING COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND PARKS
WATER AND LAND RESOURCES DIVISION
Report to the City of Auburn for Property
Enrollment in the Public Benefit Rating System (PBRS)
May 15, 2018
APPLICANTS: William and Sharon Massena File No. E17CT021A
A. GENERAL INFORMATION:
1. Owners: William and Sharon Massena
5502 Jordan Avenue SE
Auburn, WA 98092
2. Property location: same as above
3. Zoning: RC
4. STR: SW-34-21-05
5. PBRS category requested by applicants and recommended by program staff:
Open space resource
Farm and agricultural conservation land
6. Parcel: 342105-9044 342105-9061
Total acreage: 6.08 4.00
Requested PBRS: 6.08 4.00
Home site/excluded area: 1.05 0.68
Recommended PBRS: 5.03* 3.32*
NOTE: The attached map (2017 aerial photo) outlines in yellow the parcel boundaries
and in blue the areas proposed to be excluded from PBRS. The portion
recommended for enrollment in PBRS (8.35 acres) is the entire property (10.08
acres) less the excluded areas as measured (1.73 acres). In the event the
Assessor’s official parcel size is revised, PBRS acreage should be
administratively adjusted to reflect that change.
*Recommended PBRS acreage is dependent upon the property’s
qualification for the farm and agricultural conservation land category,
which requires the enrolled acreage be farmed according to an approved
Page 40 of 72
E17CT021A Massena report 2
farm management plan. Without award of this category, the property is
not eligible to participate in PBRS.
B. FACTS:
1. Zoning in the vicinity: Properties in the vicinity are zoned RC, RA5 and RA10.
2. Development of the subject property and resource characteristics of open space area: The
property contains a single family residence on each parcel, each with a septic system,
well, barn, access driveway, landscaping and additional personal use areas. The open
space portion of the property consists mostly of maintained pasture areas and associated
farm related structures used for sheep farming.
3. Site use: The property is used as single family residences and a sheep farm.
4. Access: The property is accessed from 55th Street SE.
5. Appraised value for 2017 (based on Assessor’s information dated 5/14/2018):
Parcel #342105-9044 Land Improvements Total
Assessed value $166,000.00 $449,000.00 $615,000.00
Tax applied $2,436.98 $6,591.56 $9,028.54
Parcel #342105-9061 Land Improvements Total
Assessed value $137,000.00 $121,000.00 $258,000.00
Tax applied $2,011.23 $1,776.35 $3,787.58
NOTE: Participation in PBRS reduces the appraised land value for the portion of the
property enrolled resulting in a lower taxable value.
C. REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED BY KING COUNTY CODE (KCC):
KCC 20.36.010 Purpose and intent.
It is in the best interest of the county to maintain, preserve, conserve and otherwise
continue in existence adequate open space lands for the production of food, fiber and forest
crops, and to assure the use and enjoyment of natural resources and scenic beauty for the
economic and social well-being of the county and its citizens.
It is the intent of this chapter to implement RCW Chapter 84.34, as amended, by
establishing procedures, rules and fees for the consideration of applications for public benefit
rating system assessed valuation on "open space land" and for current use assessment on
"farm and agricultural land" and "timber land" as those lands are defined in RCW 84.34.020.
Page 41 of 72
E17CT021A Massena report 3
The provisions of RCW chapter 84.34, and the regulations adopted thereunder shall govern
the matters not expressly covered in this chapter.
KCC 20.36.100 Public benefit rating system for open space land – definitions and eligibility.
A. To be eligible for open space classification under the public benefit rating system,
property must contain one or more qualifying open space resources and have at least five
points as determined under this section. The department will review each application and
recommend award of credit for current use of property that is the subject of the
application. In making such recommendation, the department will utilize the point
system described in section B. and C. below.
B. The following open space resources are each eligible for the points indicated:
1. Public recreation area – five points
2. Aquifer protection area – five points
3. Buffer to public or current use classified land – three points
4. Equestrian-pedestrian-bicycle trail linkage – thirty-five points
5. Active trail linkage – fifteen or twenty-five points
6. Farm and agricultural conservation land – five points
7. Forest stewardship land – five points
8. Historic landmark or archaeological site: buffer to a designated site – three points
9. Historic landmark or archaeological site: designated site – five points
10. Historic landmark or archaeological site: eligible site – three points
11. Rural open space – five points
12. Rural stewardship land – five points
13. Scenic resource, viewpoint, or view corridor – five points
14. Significant plant or ecological site –five points
15. Significant wildlife or salmonid habitat – five points
16. Special animal site – three points
17. Surface water quality buffer – five points
18. Urban open space – five points
19. Watershed protection area – five points
C. Property qualifying for an open space category in subsection B. of this section may
receive credit for additional points as follows:
1. Resource restoration - five points
2. Additional surface water quality buffer - three or five points
3. Contiguous parcels under separate ownership - two points
4. Conservation easement of historic easement – fifteen points
5. Public access - points dependent on level of access
a. Unlimited public access - five points
b. Limited public access - sensitive areas - five points
c. Environmental education access – three points
d. Seasonal limited public access - three points
e. None or members only – zero points
Page 42 of 72
E17CT021A Massena report 4
6. Easement and access – thirty-five points
D. 2016 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND TEXT:
E-101 In addition to its regulatory authority, King County should use incentives to
protect and restore the natural environment whenever practicable. Incentives
shall be monitored and periodically reviewed to determine their effectiveness in
terms of protecting natural resources.
NOTE: Monitoring of participating lands is the responsibility of both department PBRS
staff and the landowner. This issue is addressed in the Resource Information
document (page 4) and detailed below in Recommendation #B10.
E-112a The protection of lands where development would pose hazards to health,
property, important ecological functions or environmental quality shall be
achieved through acquisition, enhancement, incentive programs and appropriate
regulations. The following critical areas are particularly susceptible and shall be
protected in King County:
a. Floodways of 100-year floodplains;
b. Slopes with a grade of 40% or more or landslide hazards that cannot be
mitigated;
c. Wetlands and their protective buffers;
d. Aquatic areas, including streams, lakes, marine shorelines and their
protective buffers;
e. Channel migration hazard areas;
f. Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas;
g. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas; and
h. Volcanic hazard areas.
E-421 Terrestrial and aquatic habitats should be conserved and enhanced to protect and
improve conditions for fish and wildlife.
NOTE: PBRS is an incentive program provided to encourage voluntary protection of open
space resources and maintain high quality resource lands.
E-429 King County should provide incentives for private landowners who are seeking
to remove invasive plants and noxious weeds and replace them with native
plants, such as providing technical assistance or access to appropriate native
plants.
NOTE: Participation in PBRS requires landowners address invasive plant and noxious weed
control and removal within enrolled portions of a property. Replacement with
native vegetation is also encouraged via the implementation of approved forest
stewardship, rural stewardship or resource restoration plans.
Page 43 of 72
E17CT021A Massena report 5
E-443 King County should promote voluntary wildlife habitat enhancement projects by
private individuals and businesses through educational, active stewardship, and
incentive programs.
E-476 King County should identify upland areas of native vegetation that connect wetlands
to upland habitats and that connect upland habitats to each other. The county should
seek protection of these areas through acquisition, stewardship plans, and incentive
programs such as the Public Benefit Rating System and the Transfer of Development
Rights Program.
E-504 King County should protect native plant communities by encouraging management
and control of nonnative invasive plants, including aquatic plants. Environmentally
sound methods of vegetation control should be used to control noxious weeds.
NOTE: Lands participating in PBRS provide valuable resource protection and promote the
preservation or enhancement of native vegetation. Addressing nonnative vegetation
(invasive plant species), through control and eradication is a PBRS requirement.
E-449 King County shall promote retention of forest cover and significant trees using a mix
of regulations, incentives, and technical assistance.
R-605 Forestry and agriculture best management practices are encouraged because of
their multiple benefits, including natural resource preservation and protection.
NOTE: The implementation of an approved forest stewardship, farm management or rural
stewardship plan benefits natural resources, such as wildlife habitat, stream buffers
and groundwater protection, as well as fosters the preservation of sustainable
resources.
E. PBRS CATEGORIES REQUESTED and DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS:
Open space resource
Farm and agricultural conservation land
More than eight acres of the property consists of farmland actively managed for raising
sheep. In order for the property to qualify for this category and enroll in PBRS, an
approved farm management plan must be implemented. The owners are working with
the King Conservation District to develop a farm management plan. Credit for this
category is recommended dependent upon this plan being received by the department
on or before October 31, 2018.
NOTE: It is important to note that enrollment in the PBRS program requires the control and
removal of invasive plant species. This issue is addressed in the Resource
Information document (page 3) and below in Recommendation #B7.
Page 44 of 72
E17CT021A Massena report 6
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. CONCLUSIONS:
1. Approval of the subject request would be consistent with the specific purpose and intent
of KCC 20.36.010.
2. Approval of the subject request would be consistent with policy E-101 of the King
County Comprehensive Plan.
3. Of the points recommended, the subject request meets the mandatory criteria of KCC
20.36.100 as indicated:
Open space resource
Farm and agricultural conservation land 5*
TOTAL 5 points
NOTE: *Without award of this category, the property would not be eligible to participate
in PBRS.
B. RECOMMENDATION:
APPROVE the request for current use taxation "Open space" classification with a Public
Benefit Rating of 5 points, subject to the following requirements:
Requirements for Property Enrolled in the
Public Benefit Rating System Current Use Taxation Program
1. Compliance with these requirements is necessary to continue to receive the tax benefits
from the King County Public Benefit Rating System (PBRS) current use taxation
program for the property enrolled in the program (Property). Failure to abide by these
requirements can result in removal of current use designation and subject the property
owner (Owner) to the penalty, tax, and interest provisions of RCW 84.34 and assessment
at true and fair value. The County Assessor and the King County Rural and Regional
Services Section or its successor may re-evaluate the Property to determine whether
removal of the open space designation is appropriate. Removal shall follow the process
in RCW 84.34.108.
2. Revisions to these requirements may only occur upon mutual written approval of the
Owner and granting authority. These conditions shall apply so long as the Property
retains its open space designation. If a conservation easement acceptable to and approved
PUBLIC BENEFIT RATING
For the purpose of taxation, 5 points result in 50% of market value and a 50% reduction in
taxable value for the portion of land enrolled.
Page 45 of 72
E17CT021A Massena report 7
by the City of Auburn and King County is granted by the Owner or the Owner’s
successors in interest to the Department of Natural Resources and Parks, King County or
a grantee approved by King County, these requirements may be superseded by the terms
of such easement, upon written approval by King County.
3. The open space classification for this Property will continue so long as it meets the open
space purposes for which it was initially approved. Classification as open space will be
removed upon a determination by King County that the Property no longer meets the
open space purposes for which it was initially approved. A change in circumstances
which diminishes the extent of public benefit from that approved by the City of Auburn
and King County Council in the open space taxation agreement will be cause for removal
of the current use assessment classification. It is the Owner's responsibility to notify the
Assessor and the King County Rural and Regional Services Section or its successor of a
change in circumstance with regard to the Property.
4. When a portion of the open space Property is withdrawn or removed from the program,
the King County Rural and Regional Services Section or its successor and the Assessor
shall re-evaluate the remaining Property to determine whether it may continue to qualify
under the program. If the remaining portion meets the criteria for priority resources, it
may continue under current use taxation.
5. Except as provided for in sections 6, 7 and 9 below, no alteration of the open space land or
resources shall occur without prior approval by the City of Auburn and the King County
Rural and Regional Services Section or its successor. Any unapproved alteration may
constitute a departure from an approved open space use and be deemed a change of
use, and subject the Property to the additional tax, interest, and penalty provisions of
RCW 84.34.080. "Alteration" means any human-induced action that adversely impacts
the existing condition of the open space Property or resources including but not limited to
the following: (Walking, horseback riding, passive recreation or actions taken in
conjunction with a resource restoration plan, or other similar approved activities are
permitted.)
a. erecting structures;
b. grading;
c. filling;
d. dredging;
e. channelizing;
f. modifying land or hydrology for surface water management purposes;
g. cutting, pruning, limbing or topping, clearing, planting, introducing, relocating or
removing vegetation, however, selective cutting may be permitted for firewood;
h. applying herbicides or pesticides or any hazardous or toxic substance;
i. discharging pollutants excepting stormwater;
j. paving, construction, application of gravel;
k. storing of equipment, household supplies, play equipment, or compost;
l. engaging in any other activity that adversely impacts the existing vegetation,
hydrology, wildlife, wildlife habitat, or other open space resources.
Page 46 of 72
E17CT021A Massena report 8
6. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 5 trees posing a hazard to structures or major
roads may be removed. Any trees removed must be replaced.
7. If an area of the Property becomes or has become infested with noxious weeds, the
Owner may be required to submit a control and enhancement plan to the City of
Auburn and the King County Rural and Regional Services Section or its successor in
order to remove such weeds. If an area of the Property becomes or has become
invaded by non-native species, the Owner may be required to submit, or may
voluntarily submit, an enhancement plan to the King County Rural and Regional
Services Section or its successor, in order to replace such species with native species
or other appropriate vegetation.
8. There shall be no motorized vehicle driving or parking allowed on the open space
Property, except for the purpose of farm and agriculture and in areas of the Property
being used as farm and agricultural conservation land.
9. For land designated as farm and agricultural conservation land, activities that are
consistent with farm or agriculture uses and that are consistent with the approved farm
management plan shall be permitted as long as those activities do not cause a significant
adverse impact to the resource values of other awarded categories.
10. An owner of property receiving credit for farm and agricultural conservation land, forest
stewardship land, or rural stewardship land, all of which require a stewardship or
management plan, must annually provide a monitoring report that describes progress of
implementing the plan. The owner must submit this report, which must include a brief
description of activities taken to implement the plan and photographs from established
points on the property, to the department by email or by other mutually agreed upon
method. An environmental consultant need not prepare this report.
11. Enrollment in PBRS does not exempt the Owner from obtaining any required permit or
approval for activity or use on the Property.
TRANSMITTED to the parties listed hereafter:
William and Sharon Massena, applicants
Jeff Tate, Community Development Services Assistant Director, City of Auburn
Debra Clark, King County Department of Assessments
Emily Webster, King Conservation District
Page 47 of 72
Page 48 of 72
----------------------------
Resolution No. 5370
May 15, 2018
Page 1 of 3
RESOLUTION NO. 5 3 7 0
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, EXPRESSING
SUPPORT FOR ENROLLMENT OF PARCELS
3421059044 AND 3421059061 INTO THE KING
COUNTY PUBLIC RATING SYSTEM.
WHEREAS, RCW 84.34 authorizes counties in Washington State to
establish a Public Benefit Rating System (PBRS) that enables property owners to
be awarded with property tax reductions when they are able to demonstrate
adherence to adopted King County criteria and standards; and
WHEREAS, William and Sharon Massena are the owners of record of
parcels 3421059044 and 3421059061 where they actively utilize a portion of their
land for raising sheep; and
WHEREAS, the Massena’s two properties have a combined size of 10.08
acres of which 8.35 acres are utilized as part of their agricultural operation; and
WHEREAS, the Massena’s submitted an application to King County
requesting enrollment in the PBRS program and the County has reviewed and
recommended approval of enrollment subject to adherence to a number of
conditions, including removal and control of invasive plants, and development of
and adherence to a Farm Management Plan prepared in conjunction with King
Conservation District; and
WHEREAS, RCW 84.34.037 requires that applications for classification of
land in an incorporated area shall be acted upon by a granting authority
composed of three members of the county legislative body and three member of
the city legislative body; and
Page 49 of 72
----------------------------
Resolution No. 5370
May 15, 2018
Page 2 of 3
WHEREAS, the King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks
has recommended that the City of Auburn and the Metropolitan King County
Council’s Planning, Rural Service and Environment Committee approve
enrollment of the subject parcels into the PBRS program.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES as follows:
Section 1. Approval of Recommendations. The Auburn City Council
hereby approves and endorses King County File No E17CT021A, which would
enroll King County tax parcels 3421059044 and 3421059061 – consisting of 8.35
acres of land located within the City of Auburn, owned by William and Sharon
Massena – into the Public Benefit Rating System.
Section 2. Implementation. The Mayor is hereby authorized to
implement such administrative procedures as necessary to notify the King
County Department of Natural Resources and Parks, and the Metropolitan King
County Council’s Planning, Rural Service and Environment Committee of such
endorsement.
Section 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect and be in full
force upon passage and signatures.
Dated and Signed this _____ day of _________________, 2018.
CITY OF AUBURN
__________________________
NANCY BACKUS, Mayor
Page 50 of 72
----------------------------
Resolution No. 5370
May 15, 2018
Page 3 of 3
ATTEST:
_________________________
Danielle E. Daskam, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
Daniel B. Heid, City Attorney
Page 51 of 72
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
One Table Update (Hinman) (20 Minutes)
Date:
May 23, 2018
Department:
Administration
Attachments:
Mayor's Task Force on Homelessnes s
One Table
Budget Impact:
Current Budget: $0
Proposed Revision: $0
Revised Budget: $0
Administrativ e Recommendation:
For discussion.
Background Summary:
King County Executive Dow Constantine, Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan, and Auburn Mayor
Nancy Backus today announced the formation of One Table, a comprehensive effort made up
of business, service providers, healthcare, faith community, philanthropy, labor, academia,
community members and people who have experienced homelessness.
The group has been assessing the region’s current response to homelessness, including
root causes such as escalating home prices, inequality and the need to expand mental health
and addiction services.
The attached DRAFT report is intended to update the city council on the progress and gain
feedback from the Auburn city council on which strategies Auburn can participate in as part of
the regional homelessness response and to show the current alignment with Auburn's
Homeless Task Force Action Plan.
Rev iewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember:Staff:Hinman
Meeting Date:May 29, 2018 Item Number:
Page 52 of 72
Task Force Recommendations 08/12/15
Summary of Recommendations Results Progress (As of MAY 2018)
Category Item Action ONE TABLE ALIGNMENT
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 four (4) 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. Library has a full time social worker
in the buillding to assist homeless individuals and others find resources. Library has hired
off duty police officers for extra security
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.
Public Safety A.3 Create a program where homeless are hired daily to help clean
the community C Auburn staff are working on developing a relationship with several day work programs
Public Safety A.4
Increase police patrols in vicinity/around the times of church
meal programs and other areas where homeless individuals
congregate N/A (already being done)
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 to make connections with agencies and resources
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 Currently in conversation with some churches on safe lot programs
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 N/A (tent cities not supported, hygeine and laundry widely supported)
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 Auburn currently funds a voucher program for short term shelter
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 partnering with Valley Cities and the Auburn Food Bank on a day/night shelter
project
Expand emergency
shelter B.6 Provide transitional housing in immediate Auburn area R Auburn has approximately 70 units of transitional housing run by non-profit agencies.
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 fully supports this project and in partnership with King County will
financially support up to $400,000 pending council approval.
Expand emergency
shelter B.8 Expand shelter services to youth under the age of 18 R King County assisted Nexus to reopen SKYS under 18 shelter. SKYS has reopened.
Expand emergency
shelter B.9
utilize school and other public facilities as overnight shelters for
the currently underserved groups, including families with
children N/A
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
The city is partnering with Valley Cities and the Auburn Food Bank on a day/night shelter
project
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 partnering with Valley Cities and the Auburn Food Bank on a day/night shelter
project
1Page 53 of 72
Task Force Recommendations 08/12/15
Summary of Recommendations Results Progress (As of MAY 2018)
Category Item Action ONE TABLE ALIGNMENT
Expanding Services C.2 Engage owners of private but vacant buildings in City to host
locations for needed services C
Auburn has contracted with Mary's Place to investigate potential family sheltering in
vacant buildings as modeled in their Seattle shelters
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
Community Suppers are offered 6 days a week in Auburn. Sponsors of meal programs
have various services and resources available at each site.
Expanding Services C.4 Expand Health Care services available for homeless - Basic and
beyond with follow-up and case management C
Mobile medical vans service several non-profits, community suppers at churches as well
as Christ Community Free Clinic
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 has opened a 20 bed psychiatric unit. MultiCare and Fransiscan are partnering
to build a 200 bed behavioral health hospital in Tacoma (will serve Auburn residents).
The Auburn Homestead project has been funded to expand to house containing 11 units
of permanent affordable housing for 19 chronic mentally ill adults, plus one resident
manager.
Expanding Services C.6 Work with other cities and agencies to create Diversion/Crisis
solution centers in South King County.C Working with King County courts on diversion/community court program
Expanding Services C.7 Expanded wrap-around services for homeless that will assist
them in addressing their barriers to stable housing. C Wrap around services will be available at new day/night shelter at Valley Cities
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
Auburn agencies continue to work together and relationship build to best serve the
needs of Auburn residents in need
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 Hyde Shuttle has added a third vehicle and rides are free for all Auburn residents
Expanding Services C.11 Expand number of bus passes available for homeless individuals.R
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 A storage shed will be available at the Valley Cities site for those utilizing services
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
Expanding Services C.15 Provide a central place well known in the community where
homeless can come and be connected to resources.C
The Valley Cities/Auburn Food Bank day/night shelter would be the place for homeless
individuals to connect to services
Expand permanent
housing (& service
capacity)
D.1 Expand the supply of permanent “Housing First” low barrier
housing in and around Auburn.
R
Current supply of permanent supportive housing is being planned by several non-profit
agencies. Completion of projects is several years out.
2Page 54 of 72
Task Force Recommendations 08/12/15
Summary of Recommendations Results Progress (As of MAY 2018)
Category Item Action ONE TABLE ALIGNMENT
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. Mayor Backus serves on several regional committees addressing this
specific issue.
Expand permanent
housing (& service
capacity)
D.3 Provide housing for everyone who would like it-- not temporary
housing-- a permanent place to call home.N/A
Expand permanent
housing (& service
capacity)
D.4 Build new low-income/subsidized housing located close to
resources and services.
R
Auburn has about 1,000 units of affordable housing opening in the next year. Staff will
continue to work on affordable housing solutions.
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
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
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.N/A
Expand permanent
housing (& service
capacity)
D.9 Landlord assistance for damages as well as rent guarantee /
support countywide Landlord Liaison Program
C
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.
3Page 55 of 72
Task Force Recommendations 08/12/15
Summary of Recommendations Results Progress (As of MAY 2018)
Category Item Action ONE TABLE ALIGNMENT
Advocacy E.3
Advocate for funding for individuals without state insurance/on
disability to access mental health and substance abuse
treatment C Currently being done at county, state and federal levels
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 Currently being done
Advocacy E.5 Provide training or tools to homeless individuals to share their
story during legislative session.N/A
Advocacy E.6 Advocate to require utilities to expand subsidy for low income
customers.C
Auburn currently offers utility discounts for low income customers with no plans to
change this practice
Advocacy E.7 Advocate for expanded funding available to transporting
homeless students.C
Auburn staff works closely with the Auburn School District to address
transportation needs of McKinney Vento students
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
Auburn works closely with Metro, Pierce Transit and Sound Transit to increase and
maintain transit availability to underserved areas
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
Partership with Police, Code Enforcement, Parks, Real Estate Services work closely to
address the needs of those needing help, encampment clean up and other related issues
with homeless individuals
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 hosted a number of events that provide education on homelessness: utilized
homeless or formerly homeless guides as part of the one night count, provided
numerous video interviews with Auburn's homeless or formerly homeless persons;
hosted a town hall meeting to discuss opioid abuse, artwork at the library and free films
focusing homelessness were offered recently, and much more is planned.
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.N/A
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
Numerous churches in Auburn have responded to assisting the homeless population:
community suppers, assisting with connection to resources or providing direct service
programs
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.
4Page 56 of 72
Task Force Recommendations 08/12/15
Summary of Recommendations Results Progress (As of MAY 2018)
Category Item Action ONE TABLE ALIGNMENT
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 N/A
Greater or equal to 80% voting 4-5 = consensus item (C) 60-79% voting 4-5 = recommendation item (R )
5Page 57 of 72
ONE TABLE
Purpose, Roles, Process
Addressing root causes
of homelessness
CONTEXT
Seattle/King County has experienced and continues to experience significant increases in homelessness.
The annual point-in-time count continues to show increased numbers, with the recent count in January
2017 identifying 11,643 people experiencing homelessness. Over the course of a year, far more people
become homeless than are homeless on any one night. At the same time, the number of households
exiting to permanent housing has also continued to increase with a 50% increase from 2013-2016). Over
the course of a year, nearly 30,000 people experienced homelessness in Seattle/King County in 2016,
and over 20,000 exited homelessness. The need is outpacing the system’s ability to respond, therefore
requiring a different approach and a new focus on upstream strategies and root causes.
Homelessness is a broad societal issue that results from the failure of many systems and
disproportionately affects people of color. Many community efforts to address homelessness have been
focused on helping people after they have become homeless. If we are truly going to address
homelessness, we need to prevent people from becoming homeless in the first place.
PURPOSE
On Dec. 1, 2017, King County Executive Dow Constantine, Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan and Auburn Mayor
Nancy Backus announced One Table, a regional effort to bring together leaders from the business,
nonprofit, philanthropic, faith, government and community sectors to create solutions to prevent
homelessness.
One Table participants will address the root causes of homelessness through broad, scalable, multi-
sectored community actions that harness community resources.
One Table’s efforts to address these root causes of homelessness will also strive to undo the racial
disparities and disproportionality that result from these system failures. All participants will share in the
responsibility to identify and commit resources to implement the actions identified to address the causes
of homelessness.
Systemic factors contributing to homelessness
AFFORDABLE
HOUSING
Rising housing
costs make it
difficult to find
appropriate
housing.
BEHAVIORAL
HEALTH
Individuals lack
access to
necessary mental
health and
substance use
treatment.
CHILD WELFARE
SYSTEM
One-third of
homeless youth in
King County have
been in the child
welfare system.
CRIMINAL
JUSTICE
Interaction with
this expensive
system inhibits
individuals’ ability
to obtain housing
and employment.
EMPLOYMENT
Inability to access
employment and
regional wage gaps
make it difficult for
some to afford
housing costs.
Page 58 of 72
One Table Work Group Members
Page 1 of 2
Updated: February 5, 2018
First
Name
Last
Name Affiliation Workgroup
Hamdi Abdulle Somali Youth and Family Club Affordable Housing
Sally Bagshaw Councilmember, City of Seattle Affordable Housing
Don Blakeney Downtown Seattle Association Affordable Housing
Kesha Brandon Community Member Affordable Housing
John Chelminiak Mayor, City of Bellevue Affordable Housing
Frank Chopp Speaker, Washington State House of
Representatives
Affordable Housing
Debbie Christian The Auburn Food Bank Affordable Housing
Rod Dembowski Councilmember, King County Affordable Housing
Colleen Echohawk Chief Seattle Club Affordable Housing
Alison Eisinger Seattle/King County Coalition on
Homelessness
Affordable Housing
Nick Hanauer Civic Ventures Affordable Housing
Patricia Hayden YWCA Seattle-King-Snohomish Affordable Housing
Paul Lambros Plymouth Housing Group Affordable Housing
Andrew Lofton Seattle Housing Authority Affordable Housing
Joe McDermott Chair, King County Council Affordable Housing
Kollin Min Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Affordable Housing
Denise Moriguchi Uwajimaya Affordable Housing
Teresa Mosqueda Councilmember, City of Seattle Affordable Housing
Ariyetta Nelson Community Member Affordable Housing
Stephen Norman King County Housing Authority Affordable Housing
Ed Prince Council President, City of Renton Affordable Housing
John Schoettler Amazon Affordable Housing
Dave Stewart Vulcan Affordable Housing
César Torres Northwest Justice Project Affordable Housing
John Arthur Wilson King County Assessor Affordable Housing
Caleb Banta-Green University of Washington Behavioral Health
Jan Bolerjack Riverton United Methodist Church Behavioral Health
Doug Bowes United Healthcare Behavioral Health
Molly Carney Evergreen Treatment Services Behavioral Health
Dan Dixon Providence St. Joseph Health Behavioral Health
John Gilvar Public Health - Seattle/KC Behavioral Health
Rex Hohlbein BLOCK Project Behavioral Health
Jane Hopkins SEIU1199 Behavioral Health
Lisa Howard Alliance for Pioneer Square Behavioral Health
Jeanne Kohl-Welles Councilmember, King County Behavioral Health
Julie Lindberg Molina Healthcare of Washington Behavioral Health
Esther Lucero Indian Health Board Behavioral Health
Sharon Nelson Majority Leader, Washington State Senate Behavioral health
David Rodriguez Washington Recovery Alliance Behavioral Health
Milena Stott Valley Cities Counseling Behavioral Health
Page 59 of 72
One Table Work Group Members
Page 2 of 2
Updated: February 5, 2018
Laura Van Tosh Seattle Area Support Groups Behavioral Health
Joshua Wallace Seattle Area Support Groups Behavioral Health
Sally Watkins WA State Nurses Association Behavioral Health
Joanne Alcantara API Chaya Child Welfare
Connie Ballmer Ballmer Group Child Welfare
Bridgette Davis All Home Consumer Advisory Committee Child Welfare
Natalie Green Children's Administration Child Welfare
Mike Heinisch Kent Youth and Family Services Child Welfare
Helen Howell Building Changes Child Welfare
Sharayah Lane All Home Consumer Advisory Council Child Welfare
Laurie Lippold Partners for our Children Child Welfare
Shelly Pricco Nexus Youth and Families Child Welfare
Mark Putnam YMCA Accelerator Child Welfare
Mary Snapp Microsoft Child Welfare
Amy Walen Mayor, City of Kirkland Child Welfare
Dr. Calvin Watts Kent School District Child Welfare
Danielle Winslow All Home Child Welfare
Kelle Brown Plymouth Church United Church of Christ Criminal Justice
Chris Cates REACH Criminal Justice
Deanna Dawson Sound Cities Association Criminal Justice
Katie Hong Raikes Foundation Criminal Justice
Steve Hooper Kigo Kitchen Criminal Justice
Laura Inveen King County Superior Court Judge Criminal Justice
Annie Lee TeamChild Criminal Justice
Gordon McHenry Solid Ground Criminal Justice
Tony Mestres Seattle Foundation Criminal Justice
Shari Wade All Home Consumer Advisory Council Criminal Justice
Hilary Young Pioneer Human Services Criminal Justice
Ana Mari Cauce University of WA Employment
Maud Daudon Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of
Commerce
Employment
Richard de Lazaro Expedia Employment
Frank Foti Vigor Industrial Employment
Molly Hancock FareStart Employment
Terry Jackson Community Member Employment
Sara Levin United Way of King County Employment
Daniel Pitasky Schultz Family Foundation Employment
Dana Ralph Mayor, City of Kent Employment
Spencer Rascoff Zillow Employment
Sheila Sebron Community Member Employment
Kenny Stuart Seattle Firefighters Union IAFF #27 Employment
Jean Paul Yafali Community Member Employment
Page 60 of 72
Page | 1
Updated: April 30, 2018
One Table: Addressing the Root Causes of
Homelessness
Recommended Action Statements
PRIORITY ACTIONS
1. Having a current county-wide gap of approximately 90,000 housing units that are affordable
to very low income households is a major risk factor for these households becoming
homeless. The community should increase financial resources for housing solutions,
preserve existing low income housing, utilize public land whenever possible, adopt
innovative solutions to utilize existing housing supply, implement effective policy
tools and incentives to better utilize the private market, reduce displacement, and
intentionally serve individuals exiting jail, foster care, and behavioral health treatment
facilities with a race and equity lens.
2. Create a housing stabilization fund to achieve 0 exits into homelessness (including 0
inappropriate evictions), with a focus on those with the most acute need.
3. Provide on-demand behavioral health services that are racially, ethnically and culturally
appropriate, flexible, person-centered, mobile, peer-focused, and trauma-informed.
4. Offer a comprehensive service package for all foster youth aging out of care to
increase stability throughout their transition.
5. Strive to achieve 0 bookings for charges that are a direct result of homelessness and
behavioral health crises, through diversion and compliance requirement reform done
through a racial justice lens. Study cost offsets from reduced jail use and redistribute
savings to fund diversion programs.
6. Ensuring access to employment opportunities that can cover market rate housing costs in
King County reduces the risk for homelessness. The community should scale employment
programs across the county over 2 years to train and employ people who are
disproportionately at-risk of homelessness and secure private and public sector
commitments to hire program graduates. Employment programs to be scaled will include
government, community-based, and social enterprise programs and will be designed to
accommodate the needs of all individuals at risk of homelessness and provide them with
employment and wages that support them and their families.
Page 61 of 72
CAW 3_Cumulative Strategy Document
Modified 3/9/18
Updated May 22, 2018 Pg. 1
One Table Community Action Workgroup Strategy Development (Draft)
These are a compilation of the strategies each Community Action Workgroup generated from
their discussions on 2/22/2018 and refined as of 3/9/2018. They are representative of
contributions from all members of these groups, and are still in draft form.
One Table –
Behavioral Health
About one in four adults experience a diagnosable mental disorder in a given year, yet most do not
experience homelessness. Similarly, far more people have a substance use disorder than the number of
people who have a substance use disorder who experience homelessness. The CAW determined that
lack of a person‐centered behavioral health system was a factor that resulted in some people who have
a behavioral health condition becoming homeless and is a factor in the racial disproportionality in
homelessness.
The following strategies would lead to a person‐centered approach.
Downward Factors on Adequate Behavioral Health
1. Lack of Treatment on Demand/Access
Strategies
Same Day Access for In Patient treatment (mental health, substance use and detox)
must be made available. (Currently, King County has launched a pay for success model
for same day access to outpatient treatment in partnership with the Ballmer Group).
Bring treatment to people. Incentive pool needed so that behavioral health providers
provide treatment in permanent supportive housing, shelters, encampments and other
places where people experiencing homelessness congregate.
Incentive pool needed for same day access to inpatient mental health, substance use
disorder and detox.
Expand the crisis clinic line and services so that people don’t call 911 if a crisis is
occurring because that usually makes the crisis worse
Additional Mobile Crisis Teams are needed throughout the county to respond to people
in crisis without police or EMS involvement.
2. Lack of Person‐Centered Care
Strategies
The Washington State Medicaid plan needs to be amended so that the definition of peer
bridger (Certified Peer Support Specialist) includes people who work with people with
substance use disorder as well as mental health challenges. (Peer Bridgers are people with
lived experience, who share their experience openly and build a relationship with the
person in treatment to help their peer reduce internal stigma, understand recovery, have an
advocate, and provide trusted support both in and out of treatment).
Peer Bridgers should also be located in agencies outside of treatment facilities and should
be expanded in treatment facilities that do not currently have peer bridgers so that they
are independent of the clinicians providing treatment and can truly advocate for the patient
Develop more substance use disorder programs that do not have abstinence based
requirements (What substances people are addicted to varies by race and ethnicity. While
opioid addiction is described as a public health crisis, addiction to alcohol or crack are not.
This has racially disproportionate impacts)
Page 62 of 72
CAW 3_Cumulative Strategy Document
Modified 3/9/18
Updated May 22, 2018 Pg. 2
Develop more substance use treatment programs that treat addictions to multiple
substances at the same time.
Develop peer respite centers so that one has a safe place to go before a crisis occurs
Develop “the Club House Model” in all neighborhoods across King County so that people
with a mental health condition have a safe place to go to develop community and peer
support and obtain services that are not crisis services. (A cost effective solution could be
to open Club Houses in Churches across the county). https://clubhouse‐intl.org/what‐we‐
do/what‐clubhouses‐do/
Most behavioral health treatment is mandated at or limited to a certain amount of time,
e.g. 15 day stay for inpatient treatment. However, one size does not fit all. Treatment
should be outcome based and flexible to meet the needs of each individual. Policy changes
need to occur at federal and state level to change these requirements.
Develop more treatment for people with co‐occurring disorders (both mental health and
addictions) so that treatment can be at the same facility.
Create crisis respite centers so that someone who is beginning to experience a crisis and is
disruptive in their housing can have a time‐out from their housing and not be evicted.
3. Lack of Workforce to Meet Demand and Type of Care
Strategies
At state level, student loan forgiveness needs to be expanded to all behavioral health
providers.
Training
o Race, equity and inclusion
o Trauma Informed care
o Clinical training that is not based or biased toward abstinence
o Stigma reduction
o Whole person care and not just a focus on aspect of a person, e.g. their mental
illness
Workforce should reflect the people being served by race and ethnicity
Hiring and Retention Strategies including increased wages, pipelines for people with
lived experience to become credentialed, etc.
4. Lack of Care Coordination Between Systems (behavioral health, physical health, homelessness
system)
Strategies
People should not be discharged from in patient behavioral health treatment into
homelessness
People should not lose their housing or jobs when they go into treatment
Work with the federal government so that people do not lose their public benefits if
they go into in‐patient treatment
Create a funding source to pay people’s rent or help support their families when they
enter treatment, since people avoid treatment if they will lose their housing or family
won’t be able to survive
Care Coordination between different types of treatment and levels of treatment
5. Lack of access to adequate resources (housing with services)
Strategies
Page 63 of 72
CAW 3_Cumulative Strategy Document
Modified 3/9/18
Updated May 22, 2018 Pg. 3
Patients and tenants need to have a greater ability to reduce rules that are barriers to
treatment or being successful in housing
People should not be evicted for a behavioral health crisis
Housing that is low barrier, but not focused on abstinence needs to be available.
People should not lose their housing if they are not able to stay sober because recovery
is not a straight line.
Housing needs to be created so that people can be directly discharged from inpatient
treatment to safe, stable and appropriate housing and not be discharged into
homelessness
People who need permanent supportive housing need a way to access it that is not
solely through the homeless system
A facility needs to be created to house people with high physical health and high
behavioral health needs, e.g. adult family home.
Create additional tier case rates that so that agencies are paid based on the needs of
the individual. Having two tier levels A and B is not sufficient.
One Table –
Affordable Housing
Downward Factors on Affordable Housing
1. Rising Rent
Strategies:
Rent Control
Regulate Short Term Rentals (Air BnB Example)
Low Interest Loan for Rehab in Return for Regulated Affordable Housing
Targeted Rent Assistance to P.O.C.
County or State Funded Housing Voucher Program Targeted to P.O.C.
Extend MFTE Beyond 12 Years
Create Preservation Tax Exemption for Older Buildings
Prevention, including short term subsidies, to stop people from becoming homeless
2. Housing Production Cost
Strategies:
Increase Access to Underutilized Public Land (Discounted Rate Targeted to Affordable
Housing)
Bridge Loan for Land Acquisition
Use Public Land for Public/Private Partnership
3. Land Use and Zoning
Strategies:
Equitable Zoning (Target Upzone to Account For Existing Cultural Communities)
Require Affordable Housing At High Capacity Transit Locations
Use Zoning to Incentivize Creation of Larger Units
Use Zoning Incentives to Create ADU/DADU
Expand MHA Policies for Alternative Housing Types and/or Populations
Establish Mandatory Housing Affordability county‐wide linked to Growth Management Act
4. Permitting Time
Page 64 of 72
CAW 3_Cumulative Strategy Document
Modified 3/9/18
Updated May 22, 2018 Pg. 4
Strategies:
State Authority over Permitting
Dedicated Affordable Housing Permit Staff (Streamlining)
Technical Assistance on permitting process for Non‐Experienced Entities (particularly for
POCs)
Design review reform with prioritization for affordable housing
Upward Factors Affecting Affordable Housing
1. Expansion of Housing Type
Strategies:
Condominium Act Reform to Increase Production
Prioritize Production of Larger Units (3‐4 bedrooms)
Create/Promote Shared Housing
Create Program to Fund / Construct ADU/DADU
Create Opportunities for Co Housing and Co‐Op Housing (Support Tenant Ownership)
Allow In Home Businesses in Housing to Increase Income (e.g., child care)
PSH in Suburban King County
Creative and flexible Housing Types including SROs, Modular with toilet and shower and
Trauma aware housing addressing white supremacy via shared and recovery housing,
including 3‐4 bedroom units for families
Support the Block Project (DADU + Community)
Short‐term strategies to get people off street
Services paired to need
Increase market development of affordable units
2. Equitable Access to Affordable Units
Strategies:
Increase Tenant Protections
o Just Cause Eviction
o Source of Income Description
o Third Party Rental Housing Inspection to address substandard housing and
ensure/maintain housing quality and safety (Not Involve Tenant)
o Increase Access to Mediation for Landlord/Tenant Disputes
Endorsement and Enforcement of Existing and New Tenant Projections
Remove Screening Barriers
First In Time Leasing (Fair Access)
Improve Resources for Renters to Identify Units and Programs (Housing Resource Center,
Landlord Liaison Project)
Longer Term Rent Support to Assist POC and Address Structural and Institutional Racism
Provide technical assistance to and contract with POC led organizations to develop
affordable housing
Develop mobile home park strategy to address when sold
3. Increasing Financial Resources to Support Affordable Housing
Strategies:
Create Program to Incentivize Overhoused to Move Out (reverse mortgage, etc.)
Strong Advocacy by Elected Officials for Federal Resources
Page 65 of 72
CAW 3_Cumulative Strategy Document
Modified 3/9/18
Updated May 22, 2018 Pg. 5
Increase State, Regional and Local Funding for Affordable Housing
Non‐Traditional Mechanisms to Support Affordable Homeownership (Not Down Payment
Assistance)
State Voucher Program
Master Leasing Supported by Housing Resource Center
Increase resources for services in housing
Ensure resources are of scale and scope to address need for affordable housing
Multi‐Factor Strategies:
Build political will with general‐public and law makers to address affordable housing need
Establish and independent committee to monitor progress and ensure accountability
Target all strategies to POC
Focus on those who are experiencing homelessness and lowest income
Equitable development strategies for POC orgs
One Table –
Child Welfare
1. Factor: Implicit Bias Inherent in Decision Making (i.e. intake screening, placement, service
planning, etc.)
Strategies:
Increase placement options for youth in care
Increase placement options for youth exiting care.
Focusing on families who receive an initial intake that resulted in no findings. Provide
services to those families to prevent them from returning to the CW system.
Use an algorithm at intake to reduce bias
Eliminate need to make decisions out of desperation
Tools to assess biased decision to determine unintended impacts to youth of color before
decision
Add least restrictive and supportive to placement options
Add quality or supportive to placement options
Decrease stigma to accessing child welfare services
Intentional focus on leadership for people of color in child welfare
Workers need to be paid more
Racial matching efforts for families youth are placed with
2. Factor: Institutionalized Racism that Creates and Upholds Barriers (especially with AI/AN
populations)
Strategies:
Expand the “One Table” approach statewide to address the systemic barriers (including
institutional racism) contributing to youth entering the system and exiting to the streets.
Decrease the # of youth coming into the foster care system overall, especially youth of
color.
Study the increase in CPS Calls.
Add preventative services to decrease the number of youth in care and make services more
accessible and less stigmatizing
Increase family reunification
Address bias against renting to youth
Page 66 of 72
CAW 3_Cumulative Strategy Document
Modified 3/9/18
Updated May 22, 2018 Pg. 6
Re‐establish the adolescent unit
Address bias against transitioning refugee families and youth of color
3. Factor: Key Transition Points Compromise Stability (i.e. moves, reunification, aging out,
permanency placement)
Strategies:
Guaranteed housing for all kids who age out of foster care until the age of 21
Ongoing CM support for youth who have aged out of foster care to help them maintain
stable housing.
Make the 1st placement for youth ages 14‐17 more stable
Digitize resources for young people so they can access them
How do we link the 100‐200k vacant rooms across the county with youth aging out?
Targeted awareness of the need for foster care placements specifically for teenagers
Universal access to living wage job if aged out
Better transition planning from care that includes more information on options and starts
earlier
Direct access to behavioral health services
End aging out at 18
Provide incentives to participate in service until 25
Education and work training programs before aging out
Guaranteed access to quality supportive housing
One Table –
Criminal Justice
Factors and related strategies
1. Budgeting and Priorities—too much spent on criminal justice/corrections and too little spent
on services.
Strategies:
Conduct a fiscal, cost and power analysis of criminal justice investments. Some may be
things that the county is doing to create solutions to homelessness, but others may be
better redirected to other investments.
Redirect half all of all criminal justice (corrections) spending to early intervention and
diversion services.
2. Early intervention—not stopping before even starting. Timing of intervention is critical.
Strategies:
Develop and implement early interventions in the public school system—early warning
indicators like truancy, expulsion, suspensions, behavioral issues. Consider whether
housing instability is a root‐cause of these factors and work to stabilize housing instead
of punishing.
Communities of color mentorship, counseling and other opportunities such as outdoor
education, art, STEM classes etc.
3. Diversion—programs are successful but don’t hit enough people, may increase racial
disproportionality.
Strategies:
Divert all homeless related bookings to services rather than jail.
Page 67 of 72
CAW 3_Cumulative Strategy Document
Modified 3/9/18
Updated May 22, 2018 Pg. 7
Require training for all police officers in de‐escalation and motivational interviewing.
Create the technology and process for data sharing, including criminal justice data
systems and the Homeless Management Information System to reduce silo’ing.
Major Funding Investments need to be made in Mental Health/wellbeing/counseling.
Staffing community sited centers (residential/non‐residential/drop in) as transition hubs
staffed with psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health staff including staff of color.
4. Reentry—system set up for failure rather than success.
Strategies:
Educate criminal justice system to be homeless and housing informed (judges,
prosecutors, jail staff, etc.).
Create a checklist to evaluate how a judge considers housing needs and leads with race
(currently this is done to assess how much time a judge spends with each person—could
be modeled after that). Activity is an evaluation and the result is accountability.
Develop a center with short‐term housing and services for people experiencing
homelessness to go upon release—place of transition and triage while figuring out
longer‐term housing exit.
Human‐centered and racial explicit review and redesign of all compliance requirements.
Offer the choice of College/Trade School/Apprenticeship vs. jail time.
Keep those involved with mid‐to low level crimes connected to their families,
communities, jobs, schools while they work through meeting compliance requirements
and record quashing processes.
Provide people coming out of CJ system, especially youth/young‐adults, support on core
pathways (e.g. stable housing or vouchers plus enrollment and mentoring support to
achieve GED, vocational/trade, apprenticeship or college).
5. Housing – no variety of housing responses for people with CJ involvement.
Strategies:
Stop using the HUD definition of homelessness—expand to be more inclusive, ensuring
we do not use the HUD definition when we are not using HUD dollars for a housing
resource.
Create more PSH housing inventory (with full services including educational/ job
training, gardens for healthy food etc. ) for those leaving the criminal justice system.
One Table –
Employment
Top Three Factors
1. System failure to ensure people are ready for the jobs that are available with a focus on the
education system but including other systems that provide supportive services necessary for
people to thrive in education.
Strategies:
o Create understandable/scalable training pathways in high‐wage sectors (e.g.
tech/health care) that work for groups most at risk of homelessness (e.g. justice‐
involved individuals, high school dropouts), that include supportive services to help
sustain them training period
Page 68 of 72
CAW 3_Cumulative Strategy Document
Modified 3/9/18
Updated May 22, 2018 Pg. 8
o Change in policies for local government to allow more flexible funding so that case
managers can address customer needs (e.g. scaling of policies effective in BSK
homelessness initiative)
o Elevate training & employment plans as core offering alongside housing 1st policies in
the diversion system
2. Implicit bias inherent in employer’s hiring practices (examine filters, skill level requirements,
social networks, hiring managers who hire culturally similar to them, etc.)
Strategies:
o Call to action for employers to make changes to address racial equity in hiring—menu of
options such as paid internships, changing hiring screens, investments in education
pipeline, locating in economically disadvantaged areas. Could combine with
incentives/tax breaks.
o Design a program or training around hiring practices that address racial equity
3. Social capital and networks – segregation, redline, gentrification (note that most of these also
address Job‐Readiness/Education)
Strategies:
o Invest in organizations and case management programs led by community to give more
mentoring/counseling to young people of color, setting aspirations for future and
promoting racial equity
o Provide career awareness and mentoring opportunities to middle‐school youth at risk of
dropping out of high school. Train middle‐school counselors and other service providers
on career pathways to make sure students are getting information about education
required for living‐wage jobs.
Page 69 of 72
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
Matrix
Date:
May 23, 2018
Department:
Adminis tration
Attachments:
Matrix
Special Focus Areas
Budget Impact:
Current Budget: $0
Proposed Revis ion: $0
Revis ed Budget: $0
Adminis trative Rec ommendation:
Background Summary:
Reviewed by Counc il Committees :
Counc ilmember:Staff:
Meeting Date:May 29, 2018 Item Number:
Page 70 of 72
Updated 05-23-2018
NO.TOPIC Chair STAFF LEAD(S)STUDY SESSION REVIEW
DATE(S)
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
SUMMARY ACTION DATE
1
Capital Projects Update and
Featured Capital Project
Discussion
Chair DaCorsi
Vice Chair Deputy Mayor
Baggett
Asst. Director Gaub
2
Community Sustainability
Series: Economic and
Statutory Considerations for
Municipalities
Chair DaCorsi
Vice Chair Deputy Mayor
Baggett
Asst. Director Tate 6/25/2018
3 Sign Requierments
Chair DaCorsi
Vice Chair Deputy Mayor
Baggett
Asst. Director Tate 6/25/2018
4 Livable Cities Update
Chair DaCorsi
Vice Chair Deputy Mayor
Baggett
Asst. Director Tate 6/11/2018
5 Consolidated Court Fees Chair Brown
Vice Chair Peloza City Attorney Heid TBD
6 DV Model Firearms Program Chair Brown
Vice Chair Peloza Chief Lee 7/9/2018
7 Airport Advisory Board Update Chair Brown
Vice Chair Peloza Asst Director Gaub 8/27/2018
8 Homelessness Update Chair Trout-Manuel
Vice Chair Wales Director Hinman
9 Multicare Behavioral Health
Facility Update
Chair Trout-Manuel
Vice Chair Wales Director Hinman 5/29/2018
10 One Table Presentation Chair Trout-Manuel
Vice Chair Wales
Pat Bailey and City
Attorney Heid
5/29/2018
11
Cost of Service Study -
Planning and Development
Fees
Chair Holman
Vice Chair Brown Finance Director Coleman
TBD
12 Annexations (islands and
peninsulas)
Chair Holman
Vice Chair Brown City Attorney Heid TBD
13 Multi-year Budgets Chair Holman
Vice Chair Brown Finance Director Coleman 6/11/2018
COUNCIL MATRIX
Page 71 of 72
Revised 01-08-2018
HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES FINANCE & ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
PUBLIC WORKS & COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT MUNICIPAL SERVICES
HUMAN SERVICES FUNDING CITY BUDGET & AMENDMENTS UTILITIES POLICE
PUBLIC WELLNESS RISK MANAGEMENT ZONING, CODES & PERMITS SCORE JAIL
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES EQUIPMENT RENTAL INNOVATION & TECHNOLOGY DISTRICT COURT
HOMELESSNESS SERVICES FACILITIES TRANSPORTATION PARKS & RECREATION
AFFORDABLE HOUSING CITY REAL PROPERTY STREETS ANIMAL CONTROL
COMMUNITY SERVICES LEGAL ENGINEERING SOLID WASTE
HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES CAPITAL PROJECTS EMERGENCY PLANNING
MEDICAL COMMUNITY RELATIONS BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT SUSTAINABILITY AIRPORT
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AIRPORT BUSINESSES
CULTURAL ARTS & PUBLIC ARTS SISTER CITIES
PLANNING MULTIMEDIA
Councilmember Trout-Manuel, Chair Councilmember Holman, Chair Councilmember DaCorsi, Chair Councilmember Brown, Chair
Councilmember Wales, Vice Chair Councilmember Brown, Vice Chair Deputy Mayor Baggett, Vice Chair Councilmember Peloza, Vice Chair
2018 MEETING DATES 2018 MEETING DATES 2018 MEETING DATES 2018 MEETING DATES
January 22, 2018 February 12, 2018 February 26, 2018 January 8, 2018
March 26, 2018 April 9, 2018 April 23, 2018 March 12, 2018
May 29, 2018 June 11, 2018 June 25, 2018 May 14, 2018
July 23, 2018 August 13, 2018 August 27, 2018 July 9, 2018
September 24, 2018 October 8, 2018 October 22, 2018 September 10, 2018
November 26, 2018 December 10, 2018 December 24, 2018 November 13, 2018
SPECIAL FOCUS AREAS
Page 72 of 72