Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDN 2018-04-10 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETCity of Tukwila Community Development & Neighborhoods Committee O Kate Kruller, Chair O Kathy Hougardy O Zak Idan AGENDA TUESDAY, APRIL 10, 2018 — 5:30 PM HAZELNUT CONFERENCE ROOM (At east entrance of City Hall) Distribution: K. Kruller K. Hougardy Z. Idan V. Seal D. Robertson Mayor Ekberg D. Cline C. O'Flaherty L. Humphrey Item Recommended Action Page 1. PRESENTATION(S) 2. BUSINESS AGENDA a. An update on the Ryan Hill neighborhood study. a. Discussion only. Pg.1 Moira Bradshaw, Senior Planner b. A resolution increasing the Change Fund level for b. Forward to 4/16 Consent Pg.63 Foster Golf Course. Agenda. Robert Eaton, Parks & Recreation Manager c. A grant agreement with the King Conservation District c. Forward to 4/16 Consent Pg.67 for Green Tukwila. Agenda. Robert Eaton, Parks & Recreation Manager d. A grant agreement with the National Recreation and d. Forward to 4/16 Consent Pg.89 Park Association for the 10 -Minute Walk. Agenda. Rick Still, Parks & Recreation Director 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS 4. MISCELLANEOUS Next Scheduled Meeting: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 SThe City of Tukwila strives to accommodate individuals with disabilities. Please contact the City Clerk's Office at 206-433-1800 (TukwilaCityClerk@TukwilaWA.gov) for assistance. To: City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM Community Development and Neighborhoods Cgmmittee From: Jack Pace, Director, Community Developmen Jay Wittwer, Chief, Fire Sy: Moira Bradshaw, Senior Planner Copy: Mayor Ekberg Date: April 3, 2018 Subject: Ryan Hill Neighborhood Study ISSUE Ryan Hill Neighborhood Update BACKGROUND A Comprehensive Plan/Zoning amendment request to change 15 acres in the neighborhood from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential was received for 2017. Staff recommended deferring consideration on that request until a study of the needs and future of the whole neighborhood could be performed. The concern was that this one request could trigger additional changes without a clear plan in place for the neighborhood. The City hired a consultant to help prepare a neighborhood -wide study and a public involvement process. A web page was created and a public open house was held in November 2017. An on- line and paper survey for property owners and residents was used to gather input. Alternative draft land use scenarios were prepared to generate discussion and opinion about the area's future. DISCUSSION The property owners/residents (50:50 own and live or own and don't live; 50% have been owners for 20 years or more followed by 25% of 5-9 years) liked the attention; they feel a certain amount of neglect by the City although the emergency services have always been good. Responses about quality of life are split between very good and fair. The neighborhood, which is divided north to south by the Seattle City Light 200 -foot -wide right of way, thinks differently about the future. The north half of the neighborhood is slightly more interested in change while the southern half prefers the neighborhood as is. The neighborhood is most in favor of sewer improvements and would potentially be willing to consider self-assessment to fund them. There are also some concerns about the safety of some intersections and the lack of sidewalks. Two items are currently listed in the City's Capital Facilities Plan for the neighborhood — a neighborhood park ($3 million) and a sewer system ($1.9 million) both of which are unfunded and beyond the current 6 -year CIP Seattle Fire Station 33 is less than half as far as Tukwila Station 53 from the neighborhood boundary. Negotiation have been underway to create mutual aid agreements with the City of Seattle, which would in particular benefit this neighborhood. Good operating practice is to have a looped water system, which does not exist in this neighborhood. The addition to the Capital Facilities Plan of a metered intertie with the City of Seattle Water system will be discussed with the Public Works Department. 1 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 FINANCIAL IMPACT The cost estimates in the study assume development driven infrastructure improvements. SUMMARY Community Input The study revealed a number of things that were unknown. The residents and property owners have differing opinions about the future of the neighborhood depending on where they live or own property. Higher density is more desirable to property owners north of the Seattle City Light right of way than south of the right of way. Likely Development Scenarios Except for the 15 acre Raisbeck property located along the west side of the neighborhood and bordering MLKJR Way S., future development is likely to be small scale (short plats) and incremental. Development of less than 4 lots does not require frontal improvements nor would the through connection be financially feasible for most short plat developers. In addition, the City is unable to require developers fix current deficiencies. Transportation network Enhancing and improving the circulation system is feasible from an engineering standpoint but not likely from a financial standpoint. The 1,200 -foot -long dead end (twice the length of the City's maximum standard) can be eliminated by connecting between the 109th/48th and 110th/49th Avenue S intersections. The cost of mitigating environmentally sensitive area impacts will be as expensive as the cost of the public and private infrastructure improvements because mitigation will likely be off-site. Boundary issues The irregular City limit boundary, which has existed for close to 30 years, will continue to cause additional coordination for private individuals and the Cities of Seattle and Tukwila. The existing boundary leaves the west half of the 51 Avenue S. as part of unincorporated King County and the east half of the right of way in the City of Seattle and three private parcels are in Seattle and Tukwila. Based upon the study, the following administrative actions will be implemented. o Coordination between Community Development and Public Works on the Study findings y relative to infrastructure. o Continue support for negotiations with area fire and emergency service providers for automatic aid; especially with the City of Seattle. o Continue processing the comp plan zoning/amendment requests. RECOMMENDATION Information only. ATTACHMENT Ryan Hill Neighborhood Study 2 City of Tukwila Nei hborhood 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS iii INTRODUCTION 1 Background 1 Study Objectives 1 How Will the Study be Used? 2 Contents 2 NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS 5 Existing Land Use 6 Critical Areas 8 Transportation 10 Utilities 12 DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS 15 Overview 15 Assumptions 15 Baseline / No Change Scenario 16 Scenario One 18 Scenario Two 20 Scenario Three 22 Land Use Types 24 Scenario Comparison 25 CONCLUSIONS 26 Overview 26 Opportunities for Change 26 Medium Residential Zone 28 APPENDIX A: COST ESTIMATES 29 APPENDIX B: NEIGHBORHOOD SURVEY RESULTS 38 5 6 iotel - 1•i, �, r S HAZEL ST ' S FOUNTAIN ST S113TfH ST rp 10114 "MIST x sir irjil 111145TH 5TH Sr Neighborhood Map • ■ Ryan Hill Study Area ■M • s f Tukwila City Limits Parcel Boundary 74111 Utility Right -of -Way C 400 800 Feet 1,600 t$r�i N kr ,4. , �1 rl ,0 I'. 8 INTRODUCTION Background The Ryan Hill neighborhood is located on the northeastern edge of the City of Tukwila. It is bordered by Interstate 5 on the west and by the City of Seattle on the north and east. The Ryan Hill neighborhood was annexed into the City of Tukwila in 1989 as part of the Fire District #1 annexation. Over the past 30 years, there have been small additions to the neighborhood but, as a whole, the neighborhood has remained relatively unchanged. The neighborhood is located on the eastern wall of the Duwamish River basin and contains extensive sensitive features such as wetlands, streams, and slopes. The neighborhood also has limited sewer, water, and transportation infrastructure and is dissected by a 200 -foot wide Seattle Power & Light utility easement. The neighborhood's existing character is predominantly single-family residential, with residents describing portions of the neighborhood as a rural oasis within the greater urban area. Development interest within the Ryan Hill neighborhood has gradually been increasing. The renewed interest in development has created the need for a comprehensive look at what, if any, land use changes should be made and what types of infrastructure improvements would be required to support potential redevelopment. The intentions of this study are to ensure that any development decisions work collectively to achieve neighborhood -driven goals and to ensure that development -driven infrastructure improvements, such as sewer, water, and roadways, are coordinated and maximized. Study Objectives Change is inevitable and, with our roaring regional economy, is happening very quickly. We may not be able to stop change, but we can certainly coordinate how and to what extent it happens. There are many areas of the Ryan Hill neighborhood that will likely remain the same, but there may be opportunities where development could support neighborhood goals. The primary objective of this study is to engage the neighborhood in an effort to determine what, if any, land use changes should be made and the types of water, sewer, roadway, and public facility improvements that would be required to support such changes, should they occur. This study is a proactive approach to understanding the realities of the area and the desires of its property owners and residents. RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Neighborhood Goals: • Land use patterns that encourage a strong sense of community • Physical features that preserve and strengthen neighborhood character and enhance neighborhood quality • Enhancement and revitalization that encourages long-term residency and environmental sustainability • High quality pedestrian character with a variety of housing options for residents in all stages of life • Supportive neighborhood commercial areas and protections from noise impacts Goals from Element 7, Residential Neighborhoods, in the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan 1 9 id How Will the Study be Used? The Ryan Hill Neighborhood study provides information that can be used to assist with the coordination of development - driven infrastructure improvements should any land use changes and development or redevelopment within the neighborhood take place. To that end, this study is different than a traditional neighborhood study that would typically examine design -related issues and would determine goals and objectives to guide future development and redevelopment. This study was commissioned to determine what, if any, land use changes could be made based upon input from residents and property owners and how infrastructure could be coordinated to ensure maximum benefit. While this study assesses new land use scenarios, it should also be noted that the purpose of this study is not to implicitly make any changes to the neighborhood — it is a "what if" assessment that analyzes existing conditions and constraints to develop scenarios that can be used during discussions regarding the neighborhood's future. Making minimal or no change to the neighborhood is reflected in the Baseline Scenario and is one of the future scenarios considered. This study can be used by city staff and leaders as a basis for decision-making regarding land use changes, capital facility planning, and quality of life enhancements. It is not, however, a stand-alone planning document intended to guide all decisions related to the future of the neighborhood but should be supplementary to those discussions. Contents The Ryan Hill Neighborhood Study has been divided into five sections that include: Neighborhood Input — A neighborhood input meeting and neighborhood survey were used to engage residents and property owners on what the future of the neighborhood should be. The general themes from the neighborhood meeting and survey are outlined in this section. Existing Conditions — This is the baseline analysis that assessed many of the physical, environmental, and infrastructure limitations to future development within the neighborhood. Maps and background information that served as the basis for scenario development is located within this section. Development Scenarios —This section outlines the various scenarios developed including opportunities, input received, challenges, and planning -level cost estimates for infrastructure improvements. Cost Estimate Matrix — This section provides a summary of the scenarios and an overview of the cost estimate breakdown for each. Conclusions — A summary of the opportunities and challenges for the neighborhood, property owners, and the City. RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT Major Change Scenario On November 15, 2017, a neighborhood input meeting for the Ryan Hill Neighborhood Study was held at the Tukwila Community Center from 5 to 7 pm. Approximately 30 individuals attended the meeting where input on the future of the neighborhood was solicited. In addition to numerous existing conditions maps, three future scenario maps, along with a summary on each, were provided for input. Overall themes from the neighborhood input meeting are summarized on the following page, but generally the key takeaways from the meeting include the following: • The rural atmosphere is an asset that many want to preserve and protect • Many residents & property owners wanted to see neighborhood change and new development • Many residents also expressed a desire to preserve and keep the neighborhood the same • Generally, attendees from the northern half of the neighborhood, near Ryan Hill Way, were more likely to support some degree of change where residents in the middle and southern portions of the neighborhood were more likely to support keeping the neighborhood the same, with a few exceptions • New sewer infrastructure is needed • New parks and recreation space is needed • Improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities are needed * f �Mbe„ What -na cnange-acenano 0 Ryan Hill Neighborhood Study: Baseline Scenario As part of neighborhood engagement, a mailer with a link to a survey was sent out to neighborhood residents and property owners. Additionally, a project webpagel was developed to host the survey and provide updates on the project's progress. Survey results depicted an even split in the neighborhood between those wanting to keep the neighborhood the same and those wanting some degree of change. The following are some of the most notable responses to the survey: • 50% of respondents lived in Ryan Hill and 50% of respondents owned property but did not live in Ryan Hill. • 75% of respondents indicated that they intended to keep living or owning property in Ryan Hill. • 43% of respondents want the neighborhood to remain the same, 14% would support minor changes, and 43% supported neighborhood -wide changes. • Generally speaking, respondents supported new single-family housing, were evenly divided on new townhomes, and were apprehensive to multifamily. • For those on septic, 57% indicated they were interested in connecting to public sewer, 29% indicated they were not interested in connecting, and 14% indicated they might be interested in connecting to public sewer. 1 Project Website: http://www.tukwilawa.gov/departments/community-development/community-planning/ryan-hill- neighborhood-study/. RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY 3 11 What the Neighborhood Said... Ryan Hill's Assets o Close to everything yet far enough away to be peaceful o Wooded, nice neighbors, proximity to transit and airport o Close proximity to the City o Convenient access to Interstate 5, Interstate 405, and Highway 167 Opportunities o More Retail o Preserving the neighborhood as it exists today o Safe bicycle & pedestrian access, especially to light rail and transit o More parks & greenspace o Sewer improvements & enhancements o More development, new neighbors, and activity Challenges o Maintaining the neighborhood's character and feel o Keeping areas of the neighborhood the same / no change o Impacts of additional traffic should growth occur EXISTING CONDITIONS Existing conditions within the Ryan Hill neighborhood are diverse. They range from traditional single-family neighborhoods served by public sewer to areas that remain largely untouched with large parcels and homes served by private septic systems. One multifamily senior living facility is located on 51St Avenue S. and a few retail/service uses are located on 51st Avenue S. at 107th Street. No significant public facilities are present within the neighborhood and no public parks currently exist; however, the City has identified a future park as part of its Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Plan. Most homes in the neighborhood were constructed prior to 1970, with a few infill homes constructed over the past 20 years. Recently, a new townhome development was completed on 51st Avenue S. directly adjacent to the senior living facility. The new townhome development represents the growing pressures for change. The following section outlines in greater detail the existing conditions that were evaluated as part of the neighborhood analysis, including the existing land use framework, critical areas, transportation network, and public utilities. The existing conditions analysis serves as a baseline from which planning -level decisions can be made and is a critical step in creating a framework for decision-making by neighbors and City leaders. RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY 49th Avenue S. Streetscape Townhome Development Along 51St Avenue S. S. Ryan Hill Way at Beacon Avenue S. Rural Characteristics along S. 109th Street 5 13 Existing Land Use The Existing Land Use Map on the adjacent page provides a visual on how land use within the neighborhood is currently being used. Land use is guided by the City's zoning ordinance and the current land use pattern generally coincides with existing zoning. The most predominant land use in Ryan Hill is single-family residential, shown in yellow, which represents traditional single-family detached homes. The area of high density residential along 51St Avenue S. represents the senior housing facility. The medium density residential in orange represents new townhomes recently constructed along 51' Avenue S. The largest commercial area in the neighborhood is the southeast corner of MLK R. Way S. at S. Ryan Way where Raisbeck Engineering is currently located, with other small service establishments located along 51' Avenue S. The figure below shows the existing land use breakdown for the neighborhood based on the Existing Land Use Map. Almost half of neighborhood parcels are currently vacant, largely coinciding with areas where steep slopes, critical areas, and limited infrastructure have hindered development potential. A total of 42 percent of the neighborhood land area contains detached single-family homes. The 200 -foot wide Seattle City Light easement that runs east -to -west through the neighborhood accounts for approximately 7 percent of the total land area. High and medium density residential uses along with commercial and public/semi-public uses account for the remaining 6 percent of the existing land use breakdown. Ryan Hill Neighborhood Existing Land Use Breakdown Commercial. Public/Semi-Public 2% 1% High Density 2% Medium Density 1% 14 Vacant 45% Utility Low Density 42% 1 RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY Figure 1 S107THST _ _--.SCRESTON.ST 5l.'I I ' ti p 1 tri 5 y 5'BAIYG�Q#ST i S HRZEL Sir - # 4s w S 113TH ST c L4.1 Existing Land Use Ryan Hill Study Area Tukwila City Limits Low Density Medium Density High Density Commercial Public/Semi-Public Vacant Open Space Utility Right -of -Way 0 400 800 Feet 1,600 lif,AS,„N RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY 7 15 16 Critical Areas The Ryan Hill neighborhood is located on the eastern wall of the Duwamish River basin, which creates many limitations and challenges for future development. There is a 300 -foot elevation change between the western and eastern portions of the study area as the terrain rapidly rises eastward from the Duwamish River. While there are many mitigation efforts that can be taken to facilitate development, should that be desired, encumbrances by streams, wetlands, and slopes will make any future development difficult across most of the neighborhood area — many vacant parcels depicted on the previous page directly coincide with areas where slopes, streams, or wetlands are present. Any future land use changes should seek to balance growth with the preservation of sensitive areas per City goals and policies. Wetlands There are several wetland areas within the study area, the largest of which is located across the west central portions of the neighborhood, near the southern end of 47th Avenue S. There are three additional wetland areas identified on iMAP, the City's GIS data and mapping system, and would require additional reconnaissance should a property owner seek to develop their property. Streams There are several identified streams located across the western half of the study area. These streams, and their buffers, also present challenges and limitations for future development. Based on available data, it does not appear that the identified streams within the Ryan Hill neighborhood are fish -bearing streams. Similar to wetlands, any development would require additional analysis to verify type and exact location. Development near or within streams and buffers would be required to mitigate development impacts in accordance with Washington State Department of Ecology and City of Tukwila standards. In many cases, these encumbrances limit future development. Slopes Steep slopes are the greatest development -related issue impacting the Ryan Hill neighborhood. The steep slopes present attractive views, including views of downtown Seattle from portions of the study area — they also create barriers and limitations. The Critical Areas Map on the adjacent page depicts pink and red areas where slopes over 15% are present. Steep slopes identified in red are those with impermeable soils likely composed of Vashon Till or other hard soils. While the impermeable surfaces would potentially be more conducive for structural development since the solid foundation reduces the landslide hazard risk, impermeable soils do not allow infiltration meaning that sites on impermeable soils would likely need to include detention facilities, an expensive addition. Steep slopes depicted in pink are those with permeable soils where stormwater infiltration is more likely. Typically, flat, permeable soils are the most attractive for development since they can infiltrate stormwater runoff. Infiltration is a cost advantage because some of the rainwater is able to be immediately infiltrated into the soils and that infiltration ability reduces the sizing of infiltration vaults which can preserve more buildable area. When infiltration is not feasible, all stormwater must be detained on site and released at a pre -development rate. The detention vaults are often significantly larger than infiltration vaults and the detention vaults can sometimes reduce the developable area of a site and are, at a minimum, costly to build. As mentioned above, impermeable soils generally indicate a solid foundation which is good for a structure but bad for infiltration. Permeable soils on slopes often lack this solid foundation and are therefore more prone to landslides. When there is any landslide risk, infiltration is not feasible because infiltration can further saturate and destabilize slopes that are already at risk. There is an interesting dichotomy between permeable soils on slopes being better for infiltration but less conducive for development and impermeable soils generally being better for structures but less conducive for infiltration. Different approaches to development would be required based upon the underlying soils of a site. RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY EXISTING CONDITIONS S WCTQR ST Figure 2 " • " S RUGGLES ST • I.° 110 G z ,111 S113fH ST -z Critical Areas f:A Ryan Hill Study Area =I Tukwila City Limits >15% Slope - Permeable immor >15% Slope - Impermeable Park Stream Stream Buffer Wetland Wetland Buffer Right -of -Way 5 ft Contours 10 ft Contours 0 400 800 1.800 Feet 41 • • -6 ,; ciC • ct _ C41 C 32. • „Ss "se ' kr. I Oil 4-4 *IA • • t . RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY 9 17 Transportation Existing Network S. Ryan Way is the primary east/west arterial through the neighborhood and provides access to Interstate 5. 51St Avenue S. is the primary north/south arterial through the neighborhood and also serves as the border between the City of Tukwila and the City of Seattle. While the roadway serves as the City limit boundary between the two cities, the roadway from the centerline eastward is within the City of Seattle's jurisdiction and the area from the centerline to the west property line is under King County's jurisdiction leaving no portion of the 51St Avenue S. ROW within the City of Tukwila's control. This has complicated efforts to make improvements to 51st Avenue S. 49th Avenue S. also provides an additional north/south connection and was recently resurfaced. With the exception of S. Ryan Way and 51' Avenue S., most of the existing roadways do not meet current City standards. They generally lack sufficient pavement widths, storm drainage infrastructure, and have little to no pedestrian or bicycle infrastructure. Gaps The Transportation Network Map, Figure 3, contains numerous connectivity gaps. As platting occurred in the past, right-of- way was provided, but much of the existing right-of-way set aside for future roadways has not been improved. The Transportation Network map on the adjacent page shows this connectivity gap well. Grey areas depict where current right- of-way exists. The grey areas form a great roadway grid, but steep slopes and critical areas significantly limit the ability for this roadway network to be achieved. Yellow areas highlight existing roadway pavement and the limited connectivity that has actually been realized. One outcome for scenario development is reviewing the existing roadway network and determining where additional connectivity can be achieved. In addition to roadways, connectivity and transportation also involves pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure. With the exception of 51ST Avenue S. and S. Ryan Way, no significant pedestrian or bicycle infrastructure exists. Neighborhood input identified these improvements as needed, particularly if any additional development occurs. S-VIC.TQR_S.T--- 1 • Figure 3 -5404TH PL 5 CR,ESTON ST S. B.ANGOR`ST r • r • ■ rp S: 'SEL S T rn - --S-FOUNTAIN-SF +r —S -913TH -i T --S-114TH s--1-174 Tit Si 6,5,41/6 :0=- AVTV ST Transportation Network - ■ Ryan Hill Study Area ■ a ■ . Tukwila City Limits Parcel Boundary Link Light Rail Ryan Hill Roads • Bus Stop Utility Right -of -Way 0 400 800 1,600 Feet W ci Q Cts' jin rri 11r�fl ' Jp RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY 11 19 2d2 Utilities Sewer Existing sewer service within the neighborhood is limited, as depicted on the Utility Map, Figure 4 on the adjacent page. Public sewer is primarily confined to MLK JR. Boulevard, S. Ryan Way (west of 47th Avenue S.), 47th Ave S. (north of S. Ryan Way), S. 114th Street, and along 51' Avenue S. Topography across the neighborhood has played a large part in limiting public sewer extensions. Elevations decreases rapidly west of 51St Avenue S. which limits the service potential from the existing sewer main at that location. All future sewer service will require additional sewer main extensions from mains located on MLK Jr. Way S., S. 114th Street, and S. Ryan Way. The condition of existing sewer mains within the neighborhood is unknown, but no capacity issues have been identified. Water The neighborhood water system is primarily served by the City of Seattle water main located along Beacon Avenue S. and a 12 -inch City of Tukwila water main along portions of S. Ryan Way. Public water mains within the interior of the neighborhood is extremely limited with several dead-end water mains (mains where no looping is available). The interior network of 8 -inch water mains serves several hydrants, primarily along 47th Avenue S., 48th Avenue S., and S. 107th Street. Should any future development occur, a key infrastructure objective would be the looping of the 8 -inch water main to support water quality and increase fire flow capacities. Additionally, many homes in the neighborhood are served by "spaghetti lines" which are private, two-inch service lines that extend from a water meter box placed off a public water main to the individual home. Spaghetti lines are private service lines owned and maintained by the individual property owner. As water mains are expanded and looped, many of the long private service lines will likely be reduced. Discussions with City Staff indicate that future capacity is needed and could be accomplished through construction of a costly reservoir, or through an agreement with the City of Seattle, in cooperation with the Cascade Water Alliance (Tukwila's water provider) for an intertie and Master Meter, ideally at the northern border with the City of Seattle at MLK Jr. Way S. Septic Due to the limited sewer infrastructure, a large number of neighborhood residents are currently on private septic systems. In most cases, septic systems can be designed and utilized without a significant impact to public health given percolating soils and sufficient room to infiltrate within designated septic drainfields. The Septic/Sewer Map, Figure 5, provides an overview of parcels that are either connected to sewer or are utilizing private septic systems. The map breaks down septic systems into two categories — functional septic systems and problematic septic systems. The Seattle/King County Department of Health data was analyzed to provide a high-level assessment of the current status of existing septic systems. Those identified as functional septic systems in yellow are currently shown as being in good condition by the Department of Health. The data indicates that an inspection has occurred and no issues were detected, or could mean that the septic system obtained required permits from the Department of Health and no issues have since been reported. Problematic septic systems in red are those where either no permit data for the system exists, potentially because the system was installed prior to 1970, or where issues have been reported. It's important to note that properties identified as problematic septic systems do not necessarily have failing septic systems. Input received through the neighborhood meeting and the neighborhood survey indicates that the sewer/septic situation in Ryan Hill is one of the most pressing needs. Many with septic systems expressed a desire to voluntarily connect to public sewer in the future. RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY Figure 4 4b5. RUGGLES ST -- M. '- --• Utility Map Ryan Hill Study Area Tukwila City Limits Sewer Main a Sewer Manhole 18" Water Main 12" Water Main 8" Water Main 6" Water Main 4" Water Main Seattle Water Main PRV Hydrant Valve Parcel Boundary Utility Right -of -Way © 400 800 1,600 Feet RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY 13 21 214 S VICTOR ST Figure 5 S;107TH ST S CRESTON ST S BANGOR ST Septic/Sewer Map .. :• Ryan Hill Study Area Tukwila City Limits Sewer Connection Functional Septic Questionable Septic Parcel Boundary Right -of -Way 0 400 800 1,600 Feet RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS Overview As part of the analysis, a total of four land use scenarios were developed. At the onset of the project, a baseline scenario and two land use scenarios were developed to promote neighborhood input on the possible future scenarios for their neighborhood. These initial scenarios were presented at the November 15th neighborhood input meeting and feedback on the options was solicited. The three scenarios included: • Baseline/No Change Scenario — Assumed no changes to the neighborhood's land use pattern and no significant infrastructure improvements. Certain infill development would occur, but the neighborhood would likely remain relatively unchanged. • Minor Change Scenario — Assumed new medium density residential near Ryan Hill Way where existing access and minor infrastructure improvements could support change, if desired. An expanded retail node was also shown along 51St Avenue S. at 107th Street. • Major Change Scenario — Depicted pockets of medium density residential, an area of high density residential along MLK Jr. Way S., and an area of new medium density residential along 49th Avenue S. served by a new roadway that connects 47th Avenue S. to 49th Avenue S within the city's existing roadway design standards. Neighborhood input on these three scenarios was received and was combined into the creation of a new scenario that attempted to blend neighborhood input into a consolidated approach. This final scenario adjusted new medium density residential to only be located north of the Seattle City Light utility easement, where residents were generally supportive of change, and kept all land use to the south of the utility easement the same in response to feedback from residents regarding the protection of the rural character in that portion of the neighborhood. A high-density area was depicted along MLK Jr. Way S. to facilitate the roadway connection between 47th Avenue S. and 49th Avenue S. This section outlines in greater detail the specifics related to each of these development options. Assumptions At the onset of the process, meetings were conducted with various City of Tukwila departments to determine whether infrastructure, planning, parks, police, and fire issues exist and what, if any, improvements are planned. Based upon those discussions, the following assumptions were used during the drafting of land use scenarios: • All water and sewer infrastructure improvements within the neighborhood would need to be development -driven. • There is only one source of water through the City of Seattle intertie and the lack of water main looping is a concern. Additional water storage/capacity would likely be needed with new development and this could be achieved with an additional intertie and master meter with the City of Seattle. • While right-of-way for future roadways exists, there is currently an overall lack of connectivity and nonmotorized facilities such as sidewalks. Improved connectivity is desired and should be examined. • There were no identified deficiencies or needs with police coverage, other than minor issues occasionally reported. • Concerns have been expressed by the Tukwila Fire Chief about being able to provide adequate emergency medical service for any increase in demand. Response times could be improved through a mutual aid agreement, which is currently being negotiated with the City of Seattle. The primary challenge for fire relates to fire flow for fighting fires and for sprinkler systems, upgrading hydrants as development occurs, and difficult access for fire trucks due to the lack of street connectivity. • The Parks, Open Space, and Recreation Plan identifies a future park for this neighborhood, but is not currently budgeted. RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY 15 23 246 Baseline / No Change Scenario Overview The first scenario assessed outcomes should no land use change or infrastructure improvements take place. The No Change/Baseline, Figure 6, on the adjacent page maintains the existing Future Land Use and Zoning designations and proposes no changes to land use. Additionally, the scenario depicts existing water and sewer infrastructure and also assumes no major changes or upgrades of public infrastructure. Given these assumptions, a parcel -by -parcel analysis was conducted to determine whether infill development on vacant parcels could occur. This review did not account for redevelopment on sites where existing homes are located — it only assessed vacant parcels for infill potential. On the No Change/Baseline Map, parcels with blue dashed lines are those where infill development could potentially occur. These are sites that have access to public sewer or are large enough to potentially support a private septic system and drainfield. Additionally, these sites could support a new single-family home and are located in areas where driveway access could reasonably be provided. All potential infill is assumed to be the type of development currently permitted by existing zoning. Parcels in the No change/Baseline Map with red dashed lines are those where infill development would be more challenging and less likely to occur. These are sites that are encumbered by critical areas, located on steep slopes, and are sites where new private septic systems would be challenging. It's important to note that a parcel identified as unlikely to receive infill development does not necessarily mean that infill development is impossible — these are sites where infill development would be considerably more challenging due to physical constraints and infrastructure limitations. Analysis Many residents have expressed a strong desire for the neighborhood to remain the same. The neighborhood is a rural oasis within the surrounding urban environment and contains many sensitive environmental areas, scenic views, and rural tranquility. Should no land use changes or infrastructure improvements be made, only limited development and redevelopment would likely occur and the neighborhood's existing characteristics would likely be preserved during this development cycle. Facility Improvement Costs This scenario assumes no major public facility improvements; therefore, no infrastructure improvements are depicted. RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS In Figure 6 S BZFINGIRP S CRESTON ST r r -r SBANGQR-ST` -1,14 trill -7-- 9 Na Change/Baseline r . . N. Ryan Hill Study Area Tukwila City Limits Low Density High Density Commercial Office Industrial Infill Possible Infill Unlikely Existing Sewer Main Sewer Manhole Tukwila Water Main Seattle Water Main PRV Hydrant Pressure Valve Parcel Boundary Utility Right -of -Way 0 400 800 I 1,600 Feet • w �.0 plop.S FOUNTAIN ST • • • - r TORN • i RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY 25 2d8 Scenario One Overview Scenario One, Figure 7, was presented at the Neighborhood Input Meeting as the "Minor Change Scenario." Scenario One proposed land use changes between S. Ryan Way and the Seattle City Light utility easement. While improvements would be needed, this portion of the neighborhood is generally more conducive for development and could be more directly served by S. Ryan Way reducing traffic impacts to areas of the neighborhood where the lack of roadway infrastructure would present traffic and cost challenges. An expanded area of commercial/retail was depicted along 51St Avenue S. at 107th Street where a node of neighborhood service retail could be situated to serve existing and future residents. Given the location of the land use changes, infrastructure improvements would be relatively minimal. Extension of public sewer eastward along S. Ryan Way and S. 107th Street would serve their respective surrounding areas. The most critical infrastructure piece in this scenario would be the extension of sewer main from MLK Jr. Way S eastward to 47th Avenue S. A ridge located to the south of S. Ryan Way limits the ability for areas along 47th Avenue S. to be served from S. Ryan Way which makes a public extension to 47th Avenue S. from MLK Jr. Way south a critical element for future sewer service to the entire center of the neighborhood. Without this extension in some capacity, the expansion of additional sewer service to the central portions of the neighborhood will remain unlikely. Many of the areas where medium density residential is shown are currently supported by existing water infrastructure. Water main looping within the interior areas of the neighborhood would occur in conjunction with any new development, particularly when internal looping might be required to obtain minimum fire flow requirements set by the fire marshal. Finally, the additional storage/capacity intertie with the City of Seattle would likely be necessary to support the full realization of this scenario. Analysis Scenario One proposes land use changes over approximately one third of the neighborhood area. Given the critical areas and slopes, a land use change to medium density residential would provide an incentive for redevelopment to occur and would help to drive the provision of infrastructure improvements. Input received on this scenario at the neighborhood input meeting was generally positive, with a lot of positive feedback on an expanded commercial/retail node. As with other scenarios, many also expressed a strong desire to keep the neighborhood the same. Neighborhood feedback on this scenario also referenced the need for bicycle and pedestrian improvements, especially across the Boeing Access Road. The majority of the neighborhood would remain unchanged in this scenario, but additional traffic would be generated. Facility Improvement Costs Due to most of the proposed improvements occurring near S. Ryan Way, facility improvement costs are limited. This cost estimate only includes anticipated public extensions, which in this scenario are confined to sewer extensions, including the wetland mitigation required with the proposed sewer extension. The details for cost estimates are included within Appendix A. Scenario One Cost Estimate Sanitary Sewer Segment Cost MLK to 47th Ave. S. S. Ryan Way & S. 107th Street Extension $632,250 $593,500 Scenario One Total $1,225,750 RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY Figure 7 S1RUGGL-ES ST s aoE!NG Ru S CRESTON ST Future Land Use Scenario 7 W Ryan Hill Study Area Tukwila City Limits Low Density Medium Density High Density Commercial Industrial Existing Sewer Main - - - Proposed Sewer Main ■ Sewer Manhole Tukwila Water Main - - - Proposed Water Main Seattle Water Main PRV Hydrant Pressure Valve Parcel Boundary Utility Right -of -Way 400 800 1,600 RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY 19 27 2d° 49th & 112th S. 114th Street to S. Wallace Street 48th Ave. S. to 49th Ave. S. Water Main Total $773,200 $109,100 $80,000 $962,300 Scenario Two Overview Future Land Use Scenario 2, Figure 8, was drafted based on feedback received from the Neighborhood Input Meeting. The primary themes at the meeting included keeping the neighborhood the same, supporting some neighborhood change, and/or encouraging the commercial/retail node along 51St Avenue S. Attendees from the area north of the Seattle City Light Utility Easement were generally more supportive of some degree of change where attendees from the central and southern portions of the neighborhood generally indicated a desire to keep the neighborhood the same. In order to blend this feedback, medium density land use changes are only shown north of the Seattle City Light easement and no land use changes are proposed south of the easement. In order to address connectivity elements, an area of high density residential has been shown along MLK Jr. Way S. High-density construction at this location could facilitate the new roadway connection between 47th Avenue S. and 49th Avenue S. and the construction of a new traffic signal at 47th Avenue S. Any development at the high-density location would need to extend sewer to 47th Avenue S. to support the higher density to the east. This extension would serve the entire central portion of the neighborhood assuming the sewer line would continue to be extended from this point in the future. Finally, a new roadway connection between S. 114th Street and S. Wallace Street is depicted to help improve connectivity and could be constructed with any future single-family development at that location, as currently allowed by zoning. An additional storage/capacity intertie with the City of Seattle, which would directly increase the neighborhood's storage capacity, would likely be necessary to support the full realization of this scenario. Analysis Sewer infrastructure expansions are incrementally proposed under this scenario, as depicted on the Scenario Two map. The two most critical sewer main extensions in this scenario are the extension eastward along S. Ryan Way to serve the area along Beacon Avenue S, and the extension through the high-density site which would bring sewer from MLK Jr. Way S. to 47th Avenue S. Sewer could temporarily terminate at 47th Avenue S. with future extensions eastward as development occurs. Water infrastructure improvements and expansions are also proposed under this scenario, with water main looping being a major priority. Water main looping along 49th Avenue S. is the most significant proposal in this scenario. Additionally, water main looping between 48th Avenue S. to 49' Avenue S. will significantly improve fire flow and will allow for additional hydrants to be placed throughout the central core of the neighborhood where deficiencies currently exist. As with sewer, even if fire flow requirements at the high-density location are able to be achieved without looping, water main would ideally be constructed in conjunction with the roadway improvement with some financial agreement likely required. Facility Improvement Costs Sanitary Sewer Segment Cost Estimate MLK to 49th Ave S. S. Ryan Way & 107th Street Extension 49th Ave. S. S. 114th Street to S. Wallace Street Sanitary Sewer Total $517,000 $593,500 $210,000 $84,250 $1,404,750 Water Main Segment Cost Estimate New Roadways Cost Estimate Hazel - 48th - Fountain (47th to 49th Spine) S. 114th Street to S. Wallace Street New Roadways Total $2,567,900 $1,191,880 $3,759,780 Scenario Two Total $6,126,830 RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY Figure 8 tn i rc-ii•cb _ SCRESTONST I 0 S BANGOR ST --` . to'r z w a t ) S HAZEL sT us 0lie )1 Future Land Use Scenario 2 ■ Ryan Hill Study Area I1 Tukwila City Limits Low Density Medium Density 1110 High Density Commercial Industrial Existing Sewer Main - - - Proposed Sewer Main • Sewer Manhole Tukwila Water Main Proposed Water Main Seattle Water Main PRV Hydrant Pressure Valve Parcel Boundary Utility Right -of -Way New Roadway 400 800 1,500 RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY 21 29 Scenario Three Cost Estimate Sanitary Sewer Segment MLK to 49th Ave S. S. Ryan Way & 107th Street Extension 49th Ave. S. Sanitary Sewer Subtotal Water Main Segment 49th & 112th 48th Ave. S. to 49th Ave. S. Water Main Subtotal New Roadways Hazel - 48th - Fountain (47th to 49th Spine) New Roadways Subtotal Cost Estimate $517,000 $593,500 $210,000 $1,320,500 Cost Estimate $773,200 $80,000 $853,200 Cost Estimate $2,567,900 $2,567,900 Scenario Three Total $4,741,600 3d2 Scenario Three Overview Scenario Three, Figure 9, was presented at the Neighborhood Input Meeting as the "Major Change" Scenario. This option was originally created to assess the option of extending public infrastructure through the central core of the neighborhood by creating a new roadway connection between 47th Avenue S. and 49' Avenue S with water and sewer infrastructure. This new infrastructure spine would dramatically increase sewer service potential, water main looping, and roadway connectivity. In order to achieve those objectives, an area of medium density residential was depicted near the existing high density zoned areas. Development -driven infrastructure improvements through the central core would be costly, and higher density would likely be the mechanism to help justify such improvements financially. Additional areas of medium density residential were added along S. Ryan Way and a high-density option was added along MLK Jr. Way S.to assist with the completion of needed infrastructure improvements through development -driven means. Analysis The primary purpose of the "Major Change" scenario was to create an option that provides significant infrastructure improvements within the neighborhood. As part of the objective of achieving development -driven improvements, this scenario depicts much higher densities, particularly in the central core of the neighborhood, to offset the costs of new infrastructure. Sewer infrastructure is extended into the central core at 47th Street through the high-density parcel which, from this location, could be extended to serve the vast majority of areas currently not able to be connected to gravity sewer due to ridges and topography. Additionally, significant water main looping is proposed, the most significant of which is located along 49' Avenue S. and along the proposed new roadway. The most significant issue with Scenario Three, and is also reflected in Scenario Two, is the wetland mitigation that would be required as part of the new roadway between 47th Avenue S. and 49' Avenue S. There are many variabilities associated with the wetland mitigation, but estimates put the wetland mitigation costs alone at approximately $1.25 million. Neighborhood input received on this scenario expressed concern over how Major Changes could impact the rural feel of the neighborhood and increase traffic congestion. In particular, several comments expressed concern over the medium density residential depicted south of the Seattle City Light easement. Other comments related to the desire for more parks and greenspace with higher densities and the desire for more pedestrian and bicycle connectivity, especially with linkages to transit. Facility Improvement Costs RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY Figure 9 4 5RUGGL-ES ST BANGOR-aST Future Land Use Scenario 3 . Ryan Hill Study Area Tukwila City Limits Low Density Medium Density High Density Commercial Industrial Existing Sewer Main - - Proposed Sewer Main • Sewer Manhole Tukwila Water Main Proposed Water Main Seattle Water Main PRV Hydrant ry Pressure Valve Parcel Boundary Utility Right -of -Way New Roadway 400 800 1,600 S LEO ST RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY 23 31 DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS Land Use Types The different scenarios developed used the land use categories from the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan. Should any changes occur, they would be required to be consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. The following are illustrative examples of the types of development depicted on the various land use scenarios. Low Density Low density represents single-family detached neighborhoods and is the predominant land use across the neighborhood. It includes more developed single-family detached neighborhoods and large -lot parcels with a more rural feel. Medium Density Medium density reflects areas where cottages, townhomes and similar products that generally have higher dwelling unit per acre allowances than low density areas. High Density High density reflects multifamily buildings such as apartments, condominiums, and senior living facilities. Commercial For purposes of this study, commercial areas are intended to provide neighborhood services. Areas depicted as commercial in the drafted scenarios are intended to provide a walkable, cohesive node of services for current and future residents. Industrial Only one area within the neighborhood is currently designated as Industrial. No additional industrial designates are depicted or anticipated. Raisbeck Engineering occupies the one industrial site within the study area. 314 Medium Density Residential Commercial (Neighborhood Services RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY Scenario Comparison Cost estimates prepared for each of the three scenarios were developed as planning -level estimates and are subject to a variety of different factors. The numbers developed used most recent data pertaining to costs within the Seattle metropolitan region. It is important to note that the primary purpose of cost estimate development is to weigh the significance of each of the proposed land use scenarios in light of what major public infrastructure improvements would likely be required for each of those scenarios to be realized. In some cases, no cost estimate is provided. In such cases, it is not being suggested that no improvements would be required, but rather that no major public infrastructure improvements were developed or identified as part of the scenario evaluation. Water utilities are not as dependent on topography and gravity as sewer systems. Water main scenarios focused on looping of water mains to improve fire flow pressure and alleviate water quality challenges. Public looping is depicted; however, there may be opportunities to accomplish looping objectives at different areas if a new development project presents such an opportunity. Sewer mains are much more critical due to its reliance on gravity flow for optimal operation. All sewer mains depicted on each of the scenarios accounted for topography and slope. The sewer system is conceptual and is intended for planning purposes only. As with all infrastructure planning, other alternatives or routing of sewer main may prove beneficial and are evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Sewer cost estimates accounted for the construction of new sewer mains but did not account for situations where additional measures must be included, such as in cases where deep sewer must be provided. New Roadway cost estimates assumed the construction of an entirely new roadway with curb and gutter, storm sewer, and pedestrian facilities. The new spine roadway across the central part of the neighborhood is seen to be the most critical should any new development occur. The scenario considered grades and proposed a route that can be constructed within the City's current roadway design parameters, including maximum slope. As with all other cost estimates, unknown circumstances may change the actual costs of construction, but these estimates provide an overview for planning decision- making. * All numbers provided are planning -level estimates for public infrastructure only Ryan Hill Scenario Cost Estimate Scenario One Summary* Utility Baseline/No Change Scenario Two Scenario Three Water $0 $0 $962,300 $853,200 Sewer $0 $1,225,750 $1,404,750 $1,320,500 New Roadways $0 $0 $3,759,780 $2,567,900 Total $0 $1,225,750 $6,126,830 $4,741,600 * All numbers provided are planning -level estimates for public infrastructure only CONCLUSIONS Overview The scenarios drafted within this report are intended to portray a different array of change opportunities as well as the major public infrastructure components that would likely be needed to support those changes. While the intent of this project is to examine growth scenarios, a no -change scenario is entirely possible. Should a no -change path forward be selected, information contained within this report can still be used to guide the provision of infrastructure through an incremental, case-by-case evaluation of proposed projects. Opportunities for Change The greatest opportunity identified as part of this study pertains to the extension of public sewer mains. There are opportunities to continue to extend sewer in the northern and southern portions of the neighborhood, areas where public sewer already exists. The central portion of the neighborhood, however, currently lacks public sewer and, due to topography, is not able to be served from the existing sewer on Ryan Way. The only way that sewer service can be provided to the entire central portion of the neighborhood is through a sewer extension from MLK Jr. Blvd. Regardless of what type of development occurs, it is critical to bring public sewer from MLK JR. Blvd. to 47th Avenue S. From this point, sewer can be extended to serve the portion of the neighborhood not currently able to be served by gravity sewer. The second biggest opportunity is the provision of a new roadway connection through the neighborhood. This new roadway connection is depicted in Scenarios Two and Three. The vacant right-of-way within the neighborhood was assessed to determine if an east -to -west roadway connection through the central portion of the neighborhood was viable, especially considering the significant slopes. Of all the scenarios assessed, the roadway connection depicted in Scenarios Two and Three is feasible from a buildable perspective. The roadway grading performed as part of the analysis indicated that the roadway connection could be provided at grades less than 15 percent and with limited retaining walls. The greatest challenge to construction of the roadway connection pertains to the required wetland mitigation. Planning -level estimates for wetland mitigation are $1.25 million'. The specifics of mitigation require an in-depth assessment, but the costs are significant compared to the overall roadway cost estimate. Water main looping is another opportunity within the neighborhood area. The current system of water mains is extremely disconnected leaving many dead-end water mains. Dead-end water often presents a maintenance hassle as they require the use of blowoffs and fire hydrants to keep water from stagnating, unless a high-water user is located at the dead-end of the main. Water main looping helps to keep water continuously moving within the water mains and also increases fire flow pressure. In areas where no adjacent water main is present, "spaghetti lines" are being used by property owners to get water to their homes. As described earlier, the spaghetti lines are private water lines that extend from the water main (and water meter) to the actual home. Long spaghetti lines are often a maintenance problem for the property owner, especially due to leaks. Water system improvements would help to limit water quality issues, increase fire flow pressures, and reduce the water waste issues associated with spaghetti lines and blow -offs. Finally, there is an opportunity to establish additional water ties with the City of Seattle to increase water supply and capacity within the Ryan Hill area. Building a reservoir, as recommended by the State Department of Health to provide back-up capacity, is an extremely expensive undertaking and is not likely to be feasible from a development -driven perspective. A new reservoir is also not depicted within the City's capital facilities plan. Establishing additional interties 2 Estimates are based upon a $30-$50 per square foot cost to buy wetland mitigation through King County's Wetland Mitigation Bank (https://www.kingcounty.gov/about/policies/rules/utilities/put811pr.aspx ). Stream mitigation would likely be higher and, due to many variabilities, is difficult to estimate and are not applicable to this roadway since only wetland disturbance would be required. The high end of $50 per square foot was used for this mitigation estimate due to the many variabilities and unknowns. 26 34 RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY with the City of Seattle with a master meter would help to support additional capacity without the need for the building of a capacity reservoir. Challenges There are many challenges to development within the study area. The most significant challenge to future development within the study area is the prevalence of critical areas and steep slopes. While steep slopes are the most visible barrier, portions of the neighborhood also contain wetlands, streams, and their respective buffers. Wetland and stream impact with mitigation is permitted under certain circumstances; however, the mitigation of these areas will pose significant costs, which might impede the realization of development -driven improvements through such areas. Specific mitigation costs and approaches would need to be assessed in detail. The area currently lacks service by a regional detention facility. This is a significant impediment to development because without a regional detention facility stormwater would need to be retained on individual development sites. The building of on-site storm facilities is a common practice in this region due to the focus on improving run-off flowing into streams, wetlands, and Puget Sound. Many development sites incorporate storm facilities through detention or infiltration vaults, which minimize visual appearance and are often able to be counted as on-site open space if designed for active or passive use. Infiltration, in particular, would be complicated in many areas of the Ryan Hill neighborhood due to steep slopes. Geotechnical assessments would be required to verify whether or not a site on a slope is suitable for development and to what extent on-site infiltration is possible, although infiltration is not typically optimal in areas where steep slopes are present. There are no plans for a regional detention facility in the Ryan Hill neighborhood. As expressed throughout the report and analysis, the limited sewer infrastructure is a significant barrier for development. Portions of Ryan Hill are served by public sewer or are able to be served by public sewer with an extension from an existing sewer main. The entire central portion of the neighborhood, however, is not able to be served by public sewer without an extension of sewer from the main along MLK Jr. Blvd. Any development that would occur in the central portion of the neighborhood would be required to extend sewer from MLK Jr. Blvd in order to be served by gravity sewer. It is not likely that any smaller development would be able to justify the costs of such an extension and the use of a latecomers agreement for potential reimbursement is not a feasible option for a small development project as there is no guarantee that the costs would be recouped — latecomers are generally used if the builder is able to pencil the project with the infrastructure extension making any reimbursement received additional profit. A developer cannot rely on a reimbursement through a latecomers since such a reimbursement is typically only good for a set time period and is not guaranteed. At the neighborhood meeting, residents expressed a desire to increase parks and open spaces within the neighborhood. If new residents were added, there would likely be the need to add additional parks and open spaces. There are many challenges with expanding parks and open spaces within the neighborhood as the City's financial obligations are spent operating and maintaining existing facilities. The 200 -foot wide Seattle City Light utility easement that extends east to west through the neighborhood does present an opportunity. In the Seattle City Light easement to the north and east within the City of Seattle, the Chief Sealth trail, a major recreational amenity and nonmotorized transportation facility, has been developed. The biggest challenge to providing recreation or park facilities within the easement is the steep slopes and attempting to make facilities ADA compliant. Roadway, pedestrian, and bicycle infrastructure would need significant upgrades if additional residents were to be added to the Ryan Hill area. The neighborhood is generally within one mile of the Rainier Beach light rail system. An additional light rail station is planned in Tukwila to the west of Interstate 5 near E. Marginal Way S. In order to mitigate increased traffic, new pedestrian and bicycle facilities would need to link the Ryan Hill area with these transit facilities. Within the neighborhood itself, roadways would need to be widened as development occurs. These frontage improvements would RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY 27 35 368 need to incorporate sidewalks and certain roadways would need to provide bicycle facilities. Depending on the size of the site, frontage improvements could be quite costly further complicating the ability for already tough sites to "pencil out" from a development perspective. The most significant development challenges pertain to infrastructure — water, sewer, roads, pedestrian, bicycle, and stormwater. Without some investment in public infrastructure by the City, it is not likely that significant reinvestment in Ryan Hill will likely occur. Development -driven improvements are a common practice and it is expected that development should pay for the impacts that the development is imposing on the existing infrastructure system, but due to the significant deficiencies within the neighborhood, it is highly likely that some public investment will likely be needed in some capacity. The best approach for change, should that be desired, is to focus on key areas where incremental change can start. Medium Residential Zone All development scenarios depict an expansion of Medium Density zoning which would fall under the requirements of Chapter 18.12 - Medium Density Residential (MDR) District. Overall, the requirements specified within Chapter 18.12 are relatively consistent with other jurisdictions in regards to townhome development. The one requirement that might impact redevelopment within the Ryan Hill area in particular is the lot area calculations of 3,000 sq. ft. per unit as part of the density calculations for townhomes. Many jurisdictions allow for medium density calculations of 2,000 sq. ft. per unit for townhomes within medium density zoned areas, as is the standard within the City of Tukwila's High Density Residential (HDR) District. Much of the recent townhome construction within the City has occurred within HDR areas. In regards to townhomes, the MDR and HDR bulk regulations are very similar, but the HDR Zone allows for lot area/density calculations of 2,000 sq. ft. where the MDR zone requires a lot area/density calculation of 3,000 sq. ft. Due to the similar requirements between the two, developers are much more likely to build within the HDR zone due to the additional units they are able to achieve within that zone. Should zoning changes be made to the Ryan Hill area, developers will likely face many challenges, such as providing new water, sewer, and storm infrastructure and assembling smaller lots to make development feasible. The topographical constraints and new water, sewer, and stormwater infrastructure will be an added cost that might not be seen as economically viable in areas where lots must be assembled in order to build enough units to justify costs. The 3,000 sq. ft. lot area/density calculation within the MDR zone could be assessed to determine if a different standard might facilitate change. Townhome developers will likely continue to favor HDR zones due to the immediate economic gains with MDR areas being left to a later development cycle. RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY APPENDIX A: COST ESTIMATES Scenario One Cost Estimates Sewer Ryan Hill Neighborhood Scenario I Engineer's Estimate LDC Tel: [425) EJ6-1 U8 Project Name: Description: Ryan Hilq Neighborhood Engineers Estimate Project No.: Date: Calc. By: 17-149 Zf19/Zl18 JCS Sanitar Sewer MLK - East Unit Price Unit quantity Gast Clearing and Grubbing $ 40,004.00 AC 0.8 $ 32,000.00 8" Sanirry Sewer $ 85.080 LF 850 5 72,2.50.00 Sanitary NCanhoIes $ 3,004.00 EA 4 $ 12,000.00 Netlanil Mitigation $ 50.00 ' 10000 $ Sg70,cloo.00 Restore Native $ 20,004,00 AC 0.8 $ 16,000.00 SaabtotaI $ 632,250.00 S. Ryan Way '& 107th Unit Price Unlit Quantity Cost 8" Sanitary Sewer $ 85.44 LF 1700 $ 144,500.00 Sanitary Manholes $ 3,004110 EA 8 S 24,000.00 Restore Existing Roadway $ 250.00 LF 1700 $ 425,000.00 Subtotal $ 593,500.00 Summary M LIC - 49th S. Ryan Way & 107th 29 $ 632,2S0-00 5 593,500-0] Total: 51,225,7501.04 Page of RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY 37 Scenario Two Cost Estimates Sewer Ryan Hill Neighborhood - Scenario 2 Engineer's Estimate LDC Tel: {425} 806-1869 Project Name: Description: Ryan Hill Neighborhood Engineer's Estimate Project No.: Date: Calc. By: 17-149 1/19/2018 JCS Sanitary Sewer MLK - 49th Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Clearing and Grubbing $ 40,000.00 AC 1 $ 40,000.00 8'' Sanitary Sewer 5 85,00 LF 2600 $ 221,000,00 Sanitary Manholes $ 3,000.00 EA 12 $ 36,000.00 Restore Native $ 20,000.00 AC 1 $ 20,000.00 Restore Existing Roadway 5 250.00 LF 800 $ 200,000.00 Total $ 517,000,00 S. Ryan Way & 107th Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost 8" Sanitary Sewer $ 85,00 LF 1700 $ 144,500.00 Sanitary Manholes $ 3,000,00 EA 8 $ 24,000,00 Restore Existing Roadway $ 250,00 LE 1700 $ 425,000.00 Subtotal $ 593,500.00 49th from 114th to 112th Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost 8" Sanitary Sewer $ 85.00 LE 600 $ 51,000.00 Sanitary Manholes $ 3,000:00 EA 3 $ 9,000.00 Restore Existing Roadway $ 250.00 LF 600 $ 150,000.00 Subtotal $ 210,000.00 Page 1 of 2 3go RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY Ryan Hill Neighborhood - Scenario 2 Engineer's Estimate LDC Tel: (425) 806-1869 Project Name: Description: Ryan Hill Neighborhood Engineer's Estimate Project No.: Date: Calc. By: 17-149 1/19/2018 JCS Unnamed - From 114th - Wallace Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost 8" Sanitary Sewer $ 85.00 LF 850 $ 72,250.0D Sanitary Manholes $ 3,000.00 EA 4 $ 12,000.00 Subtotal $ 84,250.00 Summary MLK - 49th $ 517,000.00 S. Ryan Way & 107th $ 593,500.00 49th from 114th & 112th $210,000.00 Unnamed - From 114th - Wallace $84,250.00 Total: $1,404,750,04 Page 2 of 2 RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY 31 39 4d2 Water Ryan Hill Neighborhood - Scenario 2 Engineer's Estimate LDC Tel: 1425) 806-1869 Project Name: Description: Ryan Hill Neighborhood Engineer's Estimate Project No.: Date: Calc. By: 17.149 1/2112018 JCS Water Main 49th & 112th Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost 8°° D.I. Water Main $ 70.00 LF 2600 $ 182,000.00 8°' Gate Valve $ 2,500.00 EA 10 $ 25,000.00 Fire Hydrant $ 3,000.00 EA 10 $ 30,000.00 Blow Off $ 600.00 EA 2 $ 1,200.00 Clear & Grub $ 40,000.00 AC 1 $ 40,000.00 Restore Existing Roadway $ 250.00 LF 1900 $ 475,000.00 Restore Native $ 20,000.00 AC 1 $ 20,000.00 Total $ 773,200.00 S. Wallace to 5. 114th Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost 8°° D.I. Water Main $ 70.00 LF 1200 $ 84,000.00 8°° Gate Valve $ 2,500.00 EA 5 $ 12,500.00 Fire Hydrant $ 3,000.00 EA 4 $ 12,000.00 Blow Off $ 600.00 EA 1 $ 600.00 Subtotal $ 109,100.00 Summary 49th & 112th $773,200.00 5, Wallace to 5. 114th $109,100.00 Total: $882,300.00 Page 1 of 1 RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY New Roadways Ryan Hill Neighborhoods - Scenario 2 Engineer's Estimate LDC Tel X425) BJr-18 8 Project Marne: Description_ Ryan Hill Neighborhood Engineer's Estimate Projekt No.: Date: Calc. B : 17-10 2!19/201! JCS New Road Construction Hazel - 43th - Fountain unit Mice Unit Quantity Cost Asphalt Pavement 5 14_00 SF 2SO00 $ 35E1,000.O0 Concrete Curb & u't?r 3 36,00 IS 7300 $ $2,61 1.Qrl 5" Concrete Sidewalk $ 110.00 LF 2000 $ 220,000.00 12" Storm Drain $ 64.40 LF 1500 $ 90,010.00 StG m Structures $ 2,1030_00 EA 11 $ 23400.00 Imported Fill $ 75,00 CY 1300 $ 97,510.00 Earth Moving 3 45.00 CY 5100 $ 271,300.0u Clearing & Grubbing $ 40,000.40 AC 3 $ 120,400.00 Wetland Mitigation 3 5Q_fQ SF 25005 $ 1,250,000.00 Restore Native $ 20,000_00 AC 3 $ 50;000.00 Total $ 2,567.900.00 Page lnf2 RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY 33 41 Ryan Hill Neighborhood - Scenario 2 Engineer's Estimate LDC TM: (425] 805-1899 ProIect Name; Description_ Ryan Hill Neighbir odl Engineers Estimate Pro]ect No,: Date: Calc. €�y: 17-141 Cr't9/ZO1B JCS 114th-W1rl{ ►....Init. Price Unit Quantity Cost. Asp#ralt Pavement 11.00 SF 21250 $ 297,549,00 Concrete Curb & Gutter 3E030 IF 19SS $ 74,384700 5' Concrete S±dewgitk $ 110-00 jF 17 $ 167,01)000 12" Sturm Drain 60=0O 1}F 850 $ 51,000.40 Storm Structurem -. 2,100.00 EA 8 $ 1E,8DO.00 Imported Fill S 75.00 CY 1105 $ 82,E75.00 Earth Mowing $ 45.10 CY 5185 $ 233,325.00 Clearing & Grubbing $ 40,004,00 AC 2.55 5 102..000.04 ReStOre Native $ 20,004.00 Al- 2,55 $ 51,000,04 Rockery Retaining W3,Its $ 25-0O Si- 4000 $ 100,000.00 Total $ 1,191r&80.00 Summary Hazel -4Eth - Fountain 114th -Wallace S 2.567,900.00 $ 1,191,860.00 Total 53,759,780.00 Page 2 of 2 414 RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY Scenario Three Water Ryan 1-1111 Neighborhood - Scenario 3 Engineer's Estimate LDC Tet (15r-1HI69 ProJect Name: Description: Ryan NW NeIghtourhutio Engineer's Estimate Prv]ect No,: [date: Calc. By: 17-149 2119f2018 JCS New Road Construction i1.a?rl-4RSh-Fountain Unit Pr! r^e UnIt Quantity Cost AsphaiI Pavement S 11.00 SF 2E000 S 3500000.00 Concrete Curb Si. Gutter $ 36.00 LF 2300 $ 92,800:00 5' Concrete Sidewalk $ 110.00 LF 200D 5 2210,010a110 12" Storm Drain $ 60.00 LF 1504 $ 90,00100 Storm Strucures $ 2.100.00 EA I1 $ 23300.00 Imported Fill $ 75.00 CY 1300 5 97$00_00 Earth Ming $ 45,04 EY 6100 $ 274,500-00 Clearing &E,rubbing $ 90,000.00 AC 3 $ 120,000.00 Wetland Mitigation $ 50.0 25000 $ 1.250,004-40 Restore Native 5 20,000.00 AC 3 $ 600000.00 Total 5 2rS67,900.00 Mniarif Hazel -lath - Fountain RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY $ 2,567;900.00 TOW; $3547.900,00 Page 1 of 1 35 43 Sewer 446 Ryan Hill Neighborhood - Scenario 3 Engineer's Estimate LDC Tel: (425) 806-1869 Project Name: Description: Ryan Hill Neighborhood Engineer's Estimate Project No.; Date: Calc. By: 17-149 1119/2018 JCS Sanitary Sewer MLK - 49th Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost Clearing and Grubbing $ 40,000.00 AC 1 $ 40,000.00 8" Sanitary Sewer $ 85.00 LF 2600 $ 221,000.00 Sanitary Manholes $ 3,000.00 EA 12 $ 36,000,00 Restore Native 5 20,000.00 AC 1 $ 20,000.00 Restore Existing Roadway $ 250.00 LF S00 $ 200,000.00 Total $ 517,000.00 5. Ryan Way & 107th Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost 8" Sanitary Sewer $ 85.00 LF 1700 $ 144,500.00 Sanitary Manholes $ 3,000.00 EA 8 $ 24,000,00 Restore Existing Roadway $ 250.00 LF 1700 $ 425,000.00 Subtotal $ 593,500.00 49th from 114th to 112th Unit Price Unit Quantity Cost 8' Sanitary Sewer $ 85.00 LE 600 $ 51,000.00 Sanitary Manholes 5 3,000.00 EA 3 $ 9,00000 Restore Existing Roadway $ 250.00 LE 600 $ 150,00.00 Subtotal $ 210,000.00 Summary MLK - 49th $ 517,000.00 S. Ryan Way & 107th $ 593,500.00 49th from 114th & 112th $210,000.00 Total: $1,320,500.00 Page 1 of 1 RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY New Roadways Ryan Hill Neighborhood - Scenario 3 Engineer's Estimate LDC Tel: (425) 806-1869 Project Name: Description: Ryan Hill Neighborhood Engineer's Estimate Project No.: Date: Catc. By: 17-149 1/19/2018 JCS New Road Construction Hazel - 48th - Fountain Unit Price Unit Quantity Cast Asphalt Pavement $ 14.00 SF 25000 $ 350,000.00 Concrete Curb & Gutter $ 36.00 LF 2300 $ 82,800.00 5' Concrete Sidewalk $ 110.00 LF 2000 $ 220,000.00 12" Storm Drain 5 60.00 LF 1500 $ 90,000.00 Storm Structures $ 2,100.00 EA 11 $ 23,100.00 Imported Fill $ 75.00 CY 1300 $ 97,500.00 Earth Moving S 45.00 CY 6100 $ 274,500.00 Clearing & Grubbing $ 40,000.00 AC 3 $ 120,000.00 Restore Native S 20,000.00 AC 3 $ 60,000.00 Total $ 1,317,900.00 Summary Hazel -48th - Fountain $ 1,317,900.00 Total: $1,317,900.00 Page 1 of 1 RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY 37 45 Appendix B: Neighborhood Survey Results 38 46 RYAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY Ryan Hill Neighborhood Survey SurveyMonkey Q1 Which of the following best describes you? I own my property and... I rent a home in the Ryan... I own property in the Ryan... I do not live or own prope... Answered: 8 Skipped: 0 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES I own my property and live in the Ryan Hill neighborhood I rent a home in the Ryan Hill neighborhood I own property in the Ryan Hill neighborhood but do not live there I do not live or own property in the Ryan Hill neighborhood TOTAL 1/15 RESPONSES 50.00% 4 0.00% 0 50.00% 4 0.00% 0 8 47 Ryan Hill Neighborhood Survey SurveyMonkey Q2 How long have you lived or owned property in the Ryan Hill neighborhood? Answered: 8 Skipped: 0 Less Than 5 years 5 to 9 Years 10 to 14 Years 15 to 19 Years Greater Than 20 Years Not Applicable -Idonot L... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES Less Than 5 years 5 to 9 Years 10 to 14 Years 15 to 19 Years Greater Than 20 Years Not Applicable - I do not live or own property in the neighborhood TOTAL 48 2/15 RESPONSES 12.50% 1 25.00% 2 0.00% 0 12.50% 1 50.00% 4 0.00% 0 8 Ryan Hill Neighborhood Survey SurveyMonkey Q3 How would you rate the quality of life in the Ryan Hill Neighborhood? Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor ANSWER CHOICES Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor TOTAL Answered: 8 Skipped: 0 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% RESPONSES 37.50% 3 12.50% 1 37.50% 3 12.50% 1 0.00% 0 8 # IF YOU'D LIKE, PROVIDE COMMENTS ON WHY DATE 1 Quiet 11/22/2017 3:56 PM 2 Nice and quiet neighborhood. No traffic, noise, or parking problems. 11/22/2017 2:53 PM 3 It's not safely walkable. There are not community parks...if there are I don't know where they are. 11/8/2017 2:00 PM We have septic tanks. 3/15 49 Ryan Hill Neighborhood Survey SurveyMonkey Q4 Overall, how safe do you feel in the neighborhood? Extremely Safe Very Safe Somewhat Safe Not Very Safe Not Safe at All Not Applicable Answered: 8 Skipped: 0 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES Extremely Safe Very Safe Somewhat Safe Not Very Safe Not Safe at All Not Applicable TOTAL 50 4/15 RESPONSES 0.00% 37.50% 50.00% 12.50% 0.00% 0.00% 0 3 4 1 0 0 8 Ryan Hill Neighborhood Survey SurveyMonkey Q5 Do you see yourself continuing to live in the neighborhood for the foreseeable future? Answered: 8 Skipped: 0 Yes No Not Applicable ANSWER CHOICES Yes No Not Applicable TOTAL 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% RESPONSES 75.00% 6 0.00% 0 25.00% 2 8 IF "NO," PLEASE TELL US WHY DATE 1 just own property, don't actually live there 11/22/2017 3:56 PM 5/15 51 Ryan Hill Neighborhood Survey SurveyMonkey Q6 What would you say is the neighborhood's greatest asset? Answered: 7 Skipped: 1 RESPONSES DATE 1 Location 11/27/2017 2:20 PM 2 accessibility to Seattle 11/22/2017 3:56 PM 3 not crowded. No parking, traffic or noise problems. Great neighbors! 11/22/2017 2:53 PM 4 rural, country yet in the city. quiet not overcrowded close to freeway and shopping, etc 11/19/2017 1:49 PM 5 The reason we hope to retire there is the rural feeling so close in. We also love the economic 11/19/2017 11:00 AM racial and cultural diversity. 6 Close to everything yet far enough away to feel like you have privacy 11/8/2017 2:00 PM 7 Proximity to Seattle 11/6/2017 1:18 PM 52 6/15 Ryan Hill Neighborhood Survey SurveyMonkey Q7 What changes, if any, are needed in the neighborhood? Answered: 7 Skipped: 1 # RESPONSES DATE 1 Higher density zoning 11/27/2017 2:20 PM 2 NONE 11/22/2017 3:56 PM 3 None!!!! 11/22/2017 2:53 PM 4 too many vehicles parked onto the street and often times rental cars which take up neighborhood 11/19/2017 1:49 PM parking 5 Increase walkability Increase parks 11/8/2017 2:00 PM 6 Sewer line installed 11/6/2017 5:16 PM 7 Sewer 11/6/2017 1:18 PM 7/15 53 Ryan Hill Neighborhood Survey SurveyMonkey Q8 Which of the following best describes your view on the future of the neighborhood? Answered: 7 Skipped: 1 I do not support any... I support minor change... I support neighborhood... Other (please specify) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES I do not support any changes - keep the neighborhood the same I support minor changes in appropriate areas I support neighborhood -wide changes Other (please specify) TOTAL 54 RESPONSES 42.86% 3 14.29% 1 42.86% 3 0.00% 0 7 OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE There are no responses. 8/15 Ryan Hill Neighborhood Survey SurveyMonkey Q9 How appropriate would the inclusion of the following development types be within the Ryan Hill neighborhood? Answered: 8 Skipped: 0 Single -Family Housing Townhomes Apartments/Mutt ifamily Neighborhood Services... No Additional Development ... 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 VERY APPROPRIATE APPROPRIATE NEUTRAL NOT APPROPRIATE VERY INAPPROPRIATE TOTAL WEIGHTEC AVERAGE Single -Family Housing 57.14% 0.00% 14.29% 0.00% 28.57% 4 0 1 0 2 7 2.4: Townhomes 25.00% 12.50% 25.00% 12.50% 25.00% 2 1 2 1 2 8 3.0( Apartments/Multifamily 25.00% 0.00% 12.50% 25.00% 37.50% 2 0 1 2 3 8 3.5C Neighborhood Services 14.29% 28.57% 14.29% 14.29% 28.57% (Restaurants, 1 2 1 1 2 7 3.14 Entertainment, and Shopping) No Additional Development is Needed 33.33% 2 16.67% 33.33% 1 2 9/15 0.00% 16.67% 0 1 6 2.5( 55 Ryan Hill Neighborhood Survey SurveyMonkey Q10 Of the following city services, which would you consider to be the greatest neighborhood need? Answered: 8 Skipped: 0 Public Sewer Public Water Better First Responder... Parks or Traits Better Street or Sidewalk... No Additional Services Needed Other (please specify) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES Public Sewer Public Water Better First Responder Coverage (i.e., Police or Emergency Medical, Fire) Parks or Trails Better Street or Sidewalk Access No Additional Services Needed Other (please specify) TOTAL OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) There are no responses. 56 10 / 15 RESPONSES 50.00% 4 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 12.50% 1 0.00% 0 37.50% 3 0.00% 0 8 DATE Ryan Hill Neighborhood Survey SurveyMonkey Q11 How concerned are you about any of the following issues within the neighborhood? Answered: 8 Skipped: 0 Flooding/Runoff from Rainfall Septic System Issues Safety Code Compliance... Police & Fire Coverage 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 EXTREMELY SOMEWHAT CONCERNED NEUTRAL NOT TOTAL WEIGHTED CONCERNED CONCERNED AVERAGE / NOT AN ISSUE Flooding/Runoff from Rainfall 12.50% 12.50% 25.00% 50.00% 1 1 2 4 8 3.13 Septic System Issues 25.00% 12.50% 25.00% 37.50% 2 1 2 3 8 2.75 Safety 0.00% 50.00% 12.50% 37.50% 0 4 1 3 8 2.88 Code Compliance (i.e., 0.00% 37.50% 25.00% 37.50% Weeds, Graffiti, Junked Cars, 0 3 2 3 8 3.00 Trash) Police & Fire Coverage 0.00% 0.00% 50.00% 50.00% 0 0 4 4 8 3.50 OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE There are no responses. 11 / 15 57 Ryan Hill Neighborhood Survey SurveyMonkey Q12 Should changes be made to increase the likelihood of development within the neighborhood, such as rezones or incentives? Answered: 8 Skipped: 0 Yes No Maybe ANSWER CHOICES Yes No Maybe TOTAL 58 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 12 / 15 RESPONSES 37.50% 3 50.00% 4 12.50% 1 8 Ryan Hill Neighborhood Survey SurveyMonkey Q13 If you are currently served by a private septic system, is connecting to a public sewer system something you would be interested in? Answered: 7 Skipped:1 Yes No Maybe 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Yes No Maybe 57.14% 28.57% 14.29% 4 2 1 TOTAL 7 13/15 59 Ryan Hill Neighborhood Survey SurveyMonkey Q14 Would you support a self-assessment on your property taxes to pay for water, sewer, and/or roadway improvements within the neighborhood? Answered: Skipped: 0 Yes No Maybe ANSWER CHOICES Yes No Maybe TOTAL 60 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 14 / 15 RESPONSES 12.50% 1 37.50% 3 50.00% 4 8 Ryan Hill Neighborhood Survey SurveyMonkey Q15 Do you have any additional comments regarding the future of the Ryan Hill neighborhood? Answered: 6 Skipped: 2 # RESPONSES DATE 1 No Changes! 11/22/2017 3:56 PM 2 No further development needed!!!! 11/22/2017 2:53 PM 3 i love the quiet rural neighborhood we have more traffic than the roads can adequately hold now 11/19/2017 1:49 PM and am not interested in having more which would be generated by apartments 4 We hope any opportunity to connect the area for pedestrians and bicycles to the planned Boeing 11/19/2017 11:00 AM Access Road lightrail station is pursued. Connecting the existing bike trail along the river to the Chief Sealth trail or an eastward path would be a cause we would be happy to support financially. Given proximity to the existing trails as well as the light rail, any further development of the area would necessarily involve pursuing non auto dependent transportation to make sense. This is a unique opportunity that should not be missed, and would continue to bolster the diversity and sense of place for the neighborhood, as well as ease the dependence on Ryan Way and 1-5. Anecdotally, my family (9 and 11 year olds) can currently bike to an evening at southcenter within 30 minutes, but we have to drive the section over the freeway and MLK. The light rail station will never be able to build enough parking spaces if other modes of travel than the car are allowed. I believe the benefits to the neighborhood's sense of safety, cohesion, and economic diversity, as well as its residents' appreciation of its open spaces won't be fully realized without developing ways of competing with the car. (True for Seattle generally, but even more so in Ryan Hill, as one is forced to leave it for work and shopping, and as it is so close to light rail and excellent bike routes.) 5 Thanks for the opportunity to weigh in 11/8/2017 2:00 PM 6 No 11/6/2017 1:18 PM 15/15 61 62 City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Community Development & Neighborhoods Committee FROM: Rick Still, Parks & Recreation Director BY: Robert Eaton, Parks & Recreation Manager CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: April 10, 2018 SUBJECT: Foster Golf Links Change Fund Increase ISSUE Resolution to amend the Foster Golf Links Change Fund. BACKGROUND The existing Foster Golf Links Change Fund is set at $1,200.00 and has been at that level for several years. Recently, staff have identified several areas to improve operational efficiencies related to daily transactions and managing the change fund. Specifically, they identified adding a third till and increasing the change amount for each till will both provide more timely custom service and cut down transaction time thereby providing quicker turnaround time for patrons. This is a crucial area of focus during the very busy summer months when multiple golfers are registering and making payments for tee times every four minutes. Quick transaction management is essential. DISCUSSION Staff have been reviewing operations and best management practices to improve customer service. There is great potential to improve customer service through operational efficiencies by increasing the change fund balance. This resolution will increase the Foster Golf Links Change Fund from $1,200.00 to $2,500.00. FINANCIAL IMPACT No additional expenditure. RECOMMENDATION The Council Committee is being asked to consider forwarding this item to the Consent Agenda at the April 16, 2018 Regular Meeting. ATTACHMENTS Draft Resolution 63 64 Lj�Ir1j, �, L i�,. iU A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, INCREASING THE FOSTER GOLF LINKS CHANGE FUND TO IMPROVE OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCIES, AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 1890. WHEREAS, the Tukwila City Council previously established Change Fund and Petty Cash Fund levels by Resolution No. 1890, passed on September 6, 2016; and WHEREAS, there is a need to increase the Change Fund level from the General Fund -000 from $1,200.00 to $2,500.00 for Foster Golf Links to process daily cash transactions between three tills and to increase operational efficiency; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Change Fund levels are hereby set as follows: Finance Department General Fund 000 $ 300.00 Finance Department Water Fund 401 400.00 City Clerk's Office General Fund 000 100.00 Municipal Court General Fund 000 300.00 Parks and Recreation General Fund 000 350.00 Golf Course Foster Golf Course Fund 411 1,200.00 2,500.00 (or less as needed) W:\Word Processing\Resolutions\Change Fund increase -Foster Golf strike-thru 3-30-18 RE.bjs Page 1 of 2 65 Section 2. The Petty Cash Fund levels are hereby set as follows: Finance Department General Fund 000 $ 300.00 Finance Dept. Witness/Juror Fees General Fund 000 1,000.00 Police Investigation/Tukwila General Fund 000 10,000.00 Fire Department General Fund 000 350.00 Parks and Recreation General Fund 000 300.00 Public Works Division I General Fund 000 350.00 Section 3. Resolution No. 1890 is hereby repealed. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2018. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Verna Seal, Council President APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Resolution Number: Rachel B. Turpin, City Attorney W:\Word Processing\Resolutions\Change Fund increase -Foster Golf strike-thru 3-30-18 RE.bjs 66 Page 2 of 2 City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Community Development & Neighborhoods Committee FROM: Rick Still, Parks & Recreation Director BY: Robert Eaton, Parks & Recreation Manager CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: April 10, 2018 SUBJECT: King Conservation District Jurisdictional Funds Grant ISSUE Contract agreement with King Conservation District for expending jurisdictional funds on the Green Tukwila program via their grant process. BACKGROUND Every year, Tukwila receives approximately $10,000 from King Conservation District (KCD) in jurisdictional funds. If these funds are not expended, they roll over to the next year. Currently, Tukwila has approximately $51,000 in jurisdictional funds. The city's Green Tukwila (GT) management team (comprised of staff from Parks & Recreation, Public Works, and Department of Community Development) agree it could benefit the city to utilize the jurisdictional funds to implement the Green Tukwila program by increasing staff capacity. Currently, Olena Perry, .75 FTE Recreation Specialist, dedicates .25 FTE of her job to GT and the jurisdictional funds could be used to temporarily increase her hours another ten hours a week to focus on implementing the Green Tukwila plan. Additional funds are included in the proposal for supplies and contracted professional crews as well. KCD is in support of the funds being used this way and other local agencies have expended their jurisdictional funds on Green Cities work as well. DISCUSSION KCD uses a grant process to track and monitor the expenditures of jurisdictional funds. Staff met with KCD personnel and were encouraged to submit a project workplan defining how the jurisdictional funds would be used (attachment A). The KCD Board approved this project and requires the city to sign an agreement (attachment B). The project scope will allow for the dedicated staff time required to implement the GT program. The grant project is for a two-year scope of work and will include the temporary increase in staff hours (10hrs/week), supplies, and contracted professional crews. Funds from Parks Maintenance ($20,000) and the Recreation division ($10,000) budgets along with staff time (10hrs/week) will be used for the matching portion of the grant. With the approval of this agreement, Tukwila will be allocating a total of 20hrs/week (.5FTE) of time over the next two years for implementing the Green Tukwila program. FINANCIAL IMPACT The total expense of the grant project is $117,400 apportioned over 2018 and 2019. The Parks & Recreation general fund budget will cover $70,000 of the expense as the matching portion of the grant (60%). This is comprised of staff time already allocated to the program and contracted professional restoration crews. The remaining $47,400 are grant funds that will be reimbursed to the city by KCD over the next two years. Below is a table summarizing this. 67 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 Tukwila P&R Budget KCD Funds $ 70,000 $ 47,400 PROJECT TOTAL $ 117,400 Below is a table categorizing the grant funds and how they will be expended and reimbursed. 2018 2019 Salaries & Benefits I $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Field Supplies $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Professional Services $ 2,700 $ 2,700 Annual Totals $ 23,700 $ 23,700 GRANT TOTAL `- 474nn KCD Reimbursement $ 23,700 $ 23,700 TOTAL REIMBURSEMENT $ 47,400 This is a reimbursement grant; therefore, the initial expenditures will have to be from the Parks & Recreation general fund budget then be reimbursed by the King Conservation District jurisdictional funds. Although there is no net increase to the budget because of the reimbursement, due to accounting procedures, the P&R budget will be overspent by the grant amount in 2018. Therefore, staff is seeking permission to overspend the Parks & Recreation budget by approximately $23,700 in 2018 which will be reimbursed by the KCD Jurisdictional Funds. This will be included in the 2018 year-end budget amendment and included in the 2019 budget. RECOMMENDATION The Council Committee is being asked to consider forwarding this item to the April 16, 2018 Regular Meeting Consent Agenda authorizing the Mayor to sign the grant agreement with King Conservation District for $47,400. ATTACHMENT Project Workplan Application KCD Grant Agreement 68 W 12018 Info Memos\KCD_Junsdictional_Funds_Green_Tukwiln_(4-4-18)-FINAL.doc Robert Eaton Tukwila Green Tukwila Implementation - 2018 & 2019 Member Jurisdiction Grant Program Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Robert Eaton 13900 Interurban Ave S Robert.Eaton@TukwilaWA.gov Tukwila, WA 98168 0: 206-433-7157 Printed On: 24 January 2018 Member Jurisdiction Grant Program 1 69 Robert Eaton Tukwila Application Form Summary Information Project Title* Green Tukwila Implementation - 2018 & 2019 Principal Partners (if any) Amount of KCD Funding Requested* You will need to upload a detailed budget document before you submit your application. Please make sure the amount requested and total project cost amounts you list here match the amounts in the uploaded budget document. $47,400.00 Total Project Cost* $117,400.00 Total Matching Funds (optional) $70,000.00 Project Start Date* 01/01/2018 Project End Date* 12/31/2019 Close Date Project Location* Address, Parcel #, OR L&L Points, for site specific projects only. If more than two locations, state "multiple" and explain. Multiple Sites: - Tukwila Park, 15460 65th Ave S - Crystal Springs Park, 15832 51st Ave S Printed On: 24 January 2018 Member Jurisdiction Grant Program 2 70 Robert Eaton Tukwila - S. 128th Parcel, corner of S. 128th St & 37th Ave S, Parcel #7345600722 (recently acquired vacant parcel, still unnamed) Jurisdiction If the applicant is not a city or jurisdiction, please type in the city or jurisdiction this project is located in. Is your project on public or private land?* Public State Legislative District #* Click here to find it on the web. If your project resides in more than one district, type in the primary district or type in zero. 11 King County District #* Click here to find it on the web. If your project resides in more than one district, type in the primary district or type in zero. 8 Natural Resource Improvement Actions- Criteria Checklist Please only select "yes" below the action that your project directly addresses Direct Improvement of Natural Resource Conditions* To improve landscape and natural resource conditions as a result of direct action that enhances water quality, protects and conserves soils, implements ecosystem restoration and preservation projects (examples include supporting private property owners with land stewardship, water quality, aquatic and wildlife habitat resources, removal of invasive weeds, stewardship on public land) Does your project directly address this issue? Yes Education and Outreach* To raise awareness, deepen knowledge, and change behaviors of residents, landowners, and other land managers and organizations to practice exemplary stewardship of natural resources (examples include education about storm water management; the value of farmland, local farms and food systems, shorelines, salmon habitat, forests and other ecosystems) Printed On. 24 January 2018 Member Jurisdiction Grant Program 3 71 Robert Eaton Tukwila Does your project directly address this issue? Yes Pilot and Demonstration Projects* To test and/or improve concepts and/or approaches in natural resource management that can be replicated by others (examples include low impact development or green infrastructure demonstration projects, development of new best management practices, distribution of local farm products, urban agriculture (e.g. farmers markets and backyard food production to promote or support social economic independence and healthy living); technological innovation for natural resource conservation) Does your project directly address this issue? Yes Capacity Building* To enhance the ability of organizations, agencies, residential landowners and other land owners and managers to have knowledge, skills, tools, support systems and technical resources to implement exemplary best management practices and deliver natural resource management actions on the ground (examples include urban agriculture development, assistance to and inclusion of private property owners, preservation, restoration, and/or expansion of urban and/or rural agricultural lands, rural and urban forest lands, riparian restoration and stewardship on private and public lands) Does your project directly address this issue? Yes Project Type Education Forestry, Urban Narratives, Budget, & Attachments Project Description - Short Provide a short, concise description of the project no more than two or three sentences. Project Description- Member Jurisdiction* Provide a description of the project that summarizes what you will do, how you will do it, and why you will do it. Describe target audience, outcomes, objectives and general timelines. The Green Tukwila Program was recently adopted by the Tukwila City Council on March 6, 2017. A 20 - Year Stewardship Plan was developed to guide the overall program. The first step in implementation is Printed On: 24 January 2018 Member Jurisdiction Grant Program 4 72 Robert Eaton Tukwila recruiting and developing Forest Stewards that will adopt parks or areas of parks and be the volunteer point person for that site. Although there is currently no staff time or funding allocated to this new program, it has risen to become a priority for the city. So much so, that the Parks & Recreation Department has reallocated workloads to enable an existing .75 Full -Time Employee to dedicate .25 FTE of time to this project beginning in 2018. The city is also desiring to utilize the KCD Funds to add an additional .25 FTE to this existing staff member for a total of .50 FTE dedicated to this project for the next two years. KCD Funds and existing city budget funds will also be used to contract professional crew days to support and augment this project. There is great need for this as well as developing the stewardship program. As this is a new program to the city, this grant project will focus on outreach, supporting and developing stewards, and beginning the boots on the ground work through volunteer events. With this allocation of staff time to the program, the city will be able to better implement an intentional plan, beginning with this project. This project will focus on three sites initially Tukwila Park, Crystal Springs Park, and S. 128th Parcel. It has just been confirmed in the last couple of months that there is now a local resident to steward the S. 128th St Parcel, a non-profit (Student Conservation Association) to steward Tukwila Park, and a local company, McKinstry, to steward Crystal Springs Park. The goal of the on site work is to take portions of all three sites (Tukwila Park, Crystal Springs Park, and S. 128th Parcel) through the four phases of restoration: All three sites are currently in crisis due to English ivy, Himalayan Blackberry and Knotweed. In 2018, the Green Tukwila Partnership lead by Tukwila Parks & Recreation will also start educating the public and inviting volunteers to participate in restoration of these three sites. Volunteers will be working in phase 1, invasive removal and phase 2, planting, of the 4 phases of restoration. Volunteers will be taught the impact of invasive species of plants on native plants, recognizing the invasive species, removal of invasive species, how to use tools, safe practices with equipment and why it is important to have healthy, sustainable forests in the urban landscape. Throughout this project, staff will continue to develop and grow the stewardship program and train actual stewards which promotes community and a sense of ownership. This program is the future of the Green Tukwila Partnership. Project Activities and Measurable Results* List specific project activities to be completed with KCD grant funds and the associated outcomes or measurable results, and timeline. 1. Hosting three main Green Tukwila events each year: MLK Day of Service/January, United Way Day of Caring/September, Green Tukwila Day/October that will focus on restoration work and stewardship development. Funds will be used to promote the events, provide supplies and tools. 2. Develop and strengthen partnerships with Green Tukwila Stewards. Provide support for them and the sites they adopt within this project. Help promote events, provide tools and outreach support, crew lead on volunteer events with and for them. This is an on-going aspect of the project. 3. Contract professional crew work days at the various sites for the more difficult and technical work that cannot be done by volunteers. This work will be coordinated with the stewards throughout the year. 4. As project progress is made it will be evident by the physical change in the sites or areas of the sites. There will be observable change in the work areas. The initial observable differences will be obvious in the specific work areas after volunteers events mentioned above. 5. Develop and grow stewardship program and train actual stewards: As volunteers become more invested in the Green Tukwila Partnership through restoration work parties, Forest Stewards will emerge. The Green Tukwila Partnership will be creating a Forest Steward program that will consist of: • What does it mean to be Forest Steward Printed On: 24 January 2018 Member Jurisdiction Grant Program 5 73 Robert Eaton Tukwila • Leading volunteers and volunteer groups • Using worklogs and reporting • Invasive and best practices • Basic native plant ID • Safety with tools • How the city can support Forest Stewards Each Forest Steward will be unique with scheduling volunteer work parties and transiting into a event lead. This program is the future of the Green Tukwila Partnership and is on-going throughout this project. Project Budget and Expenses* Fill out and upload separate Application Budget Form also available on the KCD Member Jurisdiction Grant Program website. Budget must be detailed with footnotes, appropriate and reasonable, meeting state auditor/GAAP guidelines. Please do not use forms from previous applications. Please only upload the form linked above. Thank you! Budget Form (1-2-18) - FINAL.xlsx Member Jurisdiction Authorization Letter If you are a nonprofit organization seeking Member Jurisdiction funding, you must upload written authorization from the Member Jurisdiction to apply for funding. This can be in the form of a letter or scanned copy of an email. Additional Attachments Upload any photos or maps of your project here. Only one file will be accepted. Please combine multiple files into one if possible. Support Materials (1-2-18) - FINAL.docx KCD Acknowledgement and Signature By signing below, the applicant agrees to acknowledge King Conservation District funding by placing the KCD- provided logo on signs, materials, and documents produced as part of the above proposal. In addition, the applicant will notify KCD of public events and activities funded by the KCD. Authorized Applicant Electronic Signature* Please enter your full name to sign and agree to the above. Robert Eaton Title Parks & Recreation Manager Printed On 24 January 2018 Member Jurisdiction Grant Program 6 74 Robert Eaton Tukwila Date* 01/02/2018 Printed On• 24 January 2018 Member Jurisdiction Grant Program 7 75 Robert Eaton Tukwila File Attachment Summary Applicant File Uploads • Budget Form (1-2-18) - FINAL.xlsx • Support Materials (1-2-18) - FINAL.docx Printed On: 24 January 2018 Member Jurisdiction Grant Program 8 76 King Conservation District Member Jurisdiction Grant Program Grant Application Project Budget Form Promoting sustainable uses of natural resources through responsible stewardship Project Name Green Tukwila Implementation - 2018 & 2019 Total Match Applicant City of Tukwila - Parks & Recreation Department $47,400 Contact Robert Eaton Mailing Address 12424 42nd Ave S, Tukwila WA 98168 E-mail Robert.Eaton@TukwilaWA.gov 'Project Start Date: 1 -Jan -18 Phone 206-767-2332 'Project End Date: I 31 -Dec -19 Please provide detailed budget information below. Itemize categories footnotes and detailed descriptions such as supplies, contracted services with below Budget Item rKCD Funds Other Funds Other Funds Total (identify source and status' of matching funds here ex. Rose Foundation - Pending) (identify source and status of matching funds here ex. DON Small and Simple - Secured) Salaries & Benefits $40,000 $40,000 $80,000 Travel/ Meals/ Mileage (for - volunteers. staff) ' _ $0 $0 $0 $0 Office Supplies, $0 $0 $0 Field Supplies $2,000 $2,000 Contracted/ Professional Services $5,400 $30,000 $35,400 Permits _ $0 Other: (specify) _ $0 Other: (specify) $0 Other: (specify) $0 Other: (specify) $0 Other: (specify) $0 TOTAL $47,400 $70,000 $01 $117,400 Total Project Cost $117,400 Total Match $70,000 Amount of KCD Funding Requested $47,400 77 Match Percentage 60% According to the newly adopted 20 -Year Green Tukwila Stewardship Plan, the estimated project expenses for 2018 are $88,704 and for 2019 are $104,077 totalling $192,781. We will not likely be able to implement the project at the that level but have made a modified and intentional implementation plan given our resources. This is defined above. Part of this includes reallocating .25 FTE of an existing ,75 FTE staff member to this project (920K Salaries in Other Funds) and by adding an additional .25FTE to their time ($20K Salaries KCD Funds) for a total of .50 FTC (.50 FTE of this staff members total time now) dedicated to this project per year. In 2017 there was nothing allocated to this. $2K Field Supplies: purchasing necessary hand tools & supplies for this new program. Currently nothing is allocated. $35,400 Professional Services: contracted crew days at the various sites. Currently limited city budget funds are allocated for crew days that will be intentionally used for this project and will be mathcing funds, however more days are needed as well. 78 Green Tukwila Implementation — 2018 & 2019 January 2, 2018 Tukwila Parks & Recreation Green Tukwila Map of all 138 acres and sites within the City of Tukwila included within the 20 -Year Stewardship Plan Cecil Moses a North Maa• a Par k Wind's m Weir ChinookWi SCL - Duwamish Hill Duwarnish Hill Preserve SCL - Ryan Hill SCL - Ryan Creek Allentown Fire Station Du emish Gardens 5 i 5th Sc Riverbank 5}ch Ave I Tra Hazel nu% Park & Fire Station 52 Tukryila Elementary School I Tukwila Fill sate gT11 5ictard'= Site Duwamish Park 42rdAve Sr S'15thSt Ri ercank 5. i 25th St Site Tukwil . Community Cenci,ir TIB & S 130th 5t v Riverton Park 711 adip Park S thgate- C Elementary Park E1eme ncary School Duwarnish Restoration Cha.'len&e Riverton '\ Mini Perk Poster Mernartai Faster High School and Par�r k Showalter Fiddle SeI o! Cascade View Com- nity Park Foster fire 5caaon Tukwila Pool MPD Tnorreyke Elementary School 5 152nd RO Interurban Hill Site Trail I For: Dent Business Loop ..Qr Trail junctiors Green River Foster Porn: Lookout Parc Lockout Pant Pamela Drive Site 57th Ave S Him; Park Macaca.— Wetlands acaca—Wetlands & i n to r Gar= e - Macadam R- S Site Gilliam Creek Detention Pond City Flail • Carpo us S. atith Sr. ROW & Piverbark Parcels Crystal Springs Par1c Cresr iew Park Tukw+la i' Nelsen Site Site yam_ :. Christenson Rd Site B.tentenn-:a' Park Strander ROW 111.4 Tukwila Pond T Park II West Valley Riverbank 79 Green Tukwila Implementation — 2018 & 2019 Tukwila Parks & Recreation Map of S. 128th St Parcel (Lower Left "Riverton Creek" on the map) I•tt4agt -141g)fotolg 4 w . 1:11 111 - a ;111 8 im,torltOtOOt 9 0-134 -• •N •I! .r mi./War ...4111. Duwamish Hilt uses Neosso..-o, - wog to -goo.: • eSir n_ - • ▪ ZW.IntriC ....WI/ • VIC Ind le soingod ,otg• go 211,•&-O:r• =ex V" I f -ax „gr-..00ro-gor January 2, 2018 Duwa ['fish lull Preserve Ett r.:7t Allentown E Fire •-- Station. 2,5. 115th ',Street Riverbank dk, .12nei Awe Si S 115th St Fbverbenk Sicca rdi Site Dur.varnish Park 42nd Ave Si S 115th St R:verbank 11.1.2811b..".i oma 80 1, 42nd Ave Si S 115th St Riverbank Riverton Tukwila Community Center Duwamish Hill Preserve S. 125th Street Site Duwamish Restoration Challenge Creek tg, Codiga Park Green Tukwila Implementation - 2018 & 2019 Tukwila Parks & Recreation 59th Ave 5Shawl rn \i Trail Map of Tukwila Park January 2, 2018 Map 6 Interurban Hill Site Hazelnut Park & Fire Station 52 Trail I Tukwila Elementary School Tukwila —r Hill Reservoir —I-7 Tukw11.1 IYJ Hill II Site Fort Dent Park AI Trail 4 Fort Dent Business Loop Green River and Interurban Trail Junction City Hall Campus 1. c Tukwila Park Tr@A •i.c]• CifirG0r141, MEM Westfield CID UDE Southcenter '— •so+ar .rr_.� THREAT 1— Nar+Ares rAtasi Arai •ttatasa Mararsrr+r Une ir+''L11 adlr+4spn rt ScAneseid It, a tun . v. o dW' . Lac. d.v 'r�F ▪ pirczrto rat, a. 0 cpir, C*r-cErcar4png m Trtr aqs -- cory Cat hoax tt:ra k and a hand .dit n `derafotor iqe*,' ra.W :o ti -at ^Nti or sts Styatthcanter Libr rry Mall z 3 Ts�favaeFkwr Tukwila Parkway Site Tultvrda rrarriat Castor 9alr Sed Bled/Cif zr� tietsea tiistorira4 Nelsen Site Christenson Rd Si tc C.L!Tukwila • Past offices F Bicentennial Z Strand I Park o Feet 4 5El41 i.0001- 1500 A Strander ROW 81 Green Tukwila Implementation — 2018 & 2019 Tukwila Parks & Recreation — - m _ Map of Crystal Springs Park January 2, 2018 1)\\‘\ Macadam Road S Site S 152nd ROW Thorndyke Elementary C sr St Gilliam Creek Detention Pond �.� 5°uthc�trr9�vd , r Map S 82 idea .nsf ar stn-Ctea+' tars Green Tukwila Implementation - 2018 & 2019 Tukwila Parks & Recreation Project Budget from 20 -Year Stewardship Plan January 2, 2018 3reen Tukwila Partnership projections of program costs and volunteer match value for figure 1.4 on page 52 of the draft 20 -Year Plan Year Estimated number of NEW acres to enroll each year Total Estimated Program and Field Costs Volunteer Match Value ($28.99/h4 Estimated number of volunteer hours each year 2017 LEO $76,932 $86,970 3,000 2018 2.00 $88,704 $86,970 3,000 2019 3.00 $104,077 $92,765 3,200 2020 3.00 $113,161. $1.01,465 3,500 2021 4.00 $127,639 $110,162 3,800 2022 5.00 $161,336 $115,960 4,000 2023 6.00 $180,709 $1.15 560 4,000 2024 I 7.00 $200,675 $115,960 4,000 2025. 8.00 _ $225,466 $115,960 4,000 202E 8.00 $235,964 $1.15,960 4,000 2027 8.00 $243,596 $115,960 4,000 2028 8.00 $249,366 $115,960 4,000 2029 8.00 $253,559 $1.15,960 4,000 2030 8.00 $255,944 $115,960 4,000 2031 6.00 $240,997 $11.5,960 4,000 2032 2.00 $198,583 $86,970 3,000 2033 4.00 $157,178 $86,970 3,000 2034 0.00 5133,384 $86970 3,000 2035 0.00 $118,942 $86,970 3,000 203E 0.00 $108,653 $86,970 3.000 Total 87.50 $3,474,859 $ rt,98.5,815 71,500 Overall cost to maintain all 87 acres and a smaller volunteer program beyond the 20 years is estimated at $75,000 to $80,000/year. 83 84 AGREEMENT FOR AWARD OF KING CONSERVATION DISTRICT MEMBER JURISDICTION GRANT City of Tukwila This Agreement is made between the King Conservation District Number 9, a municipal corporation in King County, Washington, located at 1107 SW Grady Way, Suite 130, Renton, WA 98057 (referred to herein as "District"), and the City of Tukwila, a municipal corporation in King County, Washington, located at 13900 Interurban Ave S. Tukwila, WA 98168 (referred to herein as "Recipient"), for the purposes set forth herein. SECTION 1. RECITALS 1.1 Whereas, the District is a special purpose district organized and existing under authority of Chapter 89.08 RCW which engages in certain activities and programs to conserve natural resources, including soil and water, which activities are declared to protect and promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the people of the state of Washington; and 1.2 Whereas, pursuant to RCW 89.08.400 and/or RCW 89.08.405, King County has authorized and imposed a system of assessments and/or a system of rates and charges to finance the activities and programs of the District; and 1.3 Whereas, pursuant to RCW 89.08.220 and RCW 89.08.341 the District is authorized to enter into agreements with, or to furnish financial or other aid to, municipal entities and agencies (governmental or otherwise), or their designees, or any occupier of lands within the District, in order to carry out and facilitate the activities and programs of the District to conserve natural resources; and 1.4 Whereas, the District has reviewed the grant application submitted by Recipient and has determined that the application meets the requirements of Chapter 89.08 RCW and the District's policies and procedures for awarding grants; and 1.5 Whereas, the District and Recipient desire to enter into this Agreement for the purpose of establishing the terms and conditions relating to the District's award of a grant to Recipient. SECTION 2. AGREEMENT 2.1 The District agrees to award Recipient a grant in the total amount Forty -Seven Thousand Four Hundred and No/100 Dollars ($47,400.00) from KCD-Tukwila 2012-2017 Collections. Grant funds shall be used by Recipient solely for the performance of the work described in Exhibit A which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. The District shall pay the grant funds to Recipient in accordance with the District's policies and procedures, or as otherwise provided herein, including but not limited to, the policies and procedures contained in the grant program guidelines, provided that such funds have been collected and received by the District. 2.2 Recipient represents and warrants that it will only use the grant funds for the work described in Exhibit A, which may be amended by the parties pursuant to Paragraph 3.3 of the Agreement. Recipient shall be required to refund to the District that portion of any grant funds which are used for unauthorized work. Further, Recipient agrees to return to the District any grant funds that are not expended or remain after completion of the work covered by this Agreement. Page 1 of 4 85 2.3 Recipient acknowledges and agrees that the grant funds may only be expended on work which shall be entirely within the District's jurisdictional boundaries. The following municipal entities are not within the District's jurisdictional boundaries: Enumclaw, Federal Way, Milton, Pacific, and Skykomish. Recipient shall be required to refund to the District that portion of any grant funds which are used for work performed outside the District's jurisdictional boundaries. 2.4 In the event the scope of work authorized by this Agreement includes the use of grant funds to purchase houses located on real property within a flood hazard area, Recipient acknowledges and agrees that grant funds may only be used for such purposes if the houses to be purchased were constructed before floodplain mapping or sensitive areas regulations were in place for that area. Recipient shall be required to refund to the District that portion of any grant funds which are used for unauthorized purposes. 2.5 Recipient shall be required to provide the District with regular financial and project progress reports for the duration of the project. Grant funds are remitted to the Recipient on a reimbursement payment basis. Project progress reports must be submitted with each reimbursement request. Project progress and financial reports, along with the final narrative and financial summary reports shall be submitted through the District's online grant portal.The Recipient shall be required to submit to the District a final report which documents the Recipient's completion of the work in conformance with this Agreement within thirty (30) days after the completion of the work. The final report shall, among other things, summarize the project's successes and shall address the regional benefits accomplished by the work. The final report shall also identify any obstacles or challenges which were encountered during the work, along with general recommendations regarding ways to avoid such obstacles or challenges in the future. If requested, Recipient agrees to provide the District with additional financial or progress reports from time to time, at reasonable intervals. 2.6 Recipient's expenditures of grant funds shall be separately identified in the Recipient's accounting records. If requested, Recipient shall comply with other reasonable requests made by the District with respect to the manner in which project expenditures are tracked and accounted for in Recipient's accounting books and records. Recipient shall maintain such records of expenditures as may be necessary to conform to generally accepted accounting principals and to meet the requirements of all applicable state and federal laws. 2.7 If the Recipient is a Washington municipal agency, Recipient shall be required to track project expenses using the Budget Accounting and Reporting System for the State of Washington ("BARS"). 2.8 The District or its representative shall have the right from time to time, at reasonable intervals, to audit the Recipient's books and records in order to verify compliance with the terms of this Agreement. Recipient shall cooperate with the District in any such audit. 2.9 Recipient shall retain all accounting records and project files relating to this Agreement in accordance with criteria established in the Revised Code of Washington and the Washington State Archivist. 2.10 Recipient shall ensure that all work performed by Recipient or its employees, agents, contractors or subcontractors is performed in a manner which protects and safeguards the environment and natural resources and which is in compliance with local, state and federal laws and regulations. Recipient shall implement an appropriate monitoring system or program to ensure compliance with this provision. 2.11 Recipient agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the District, its elected or appointed officials, employees and agents, from all claims, alleged liability, damages, losses to or death of person or damage to property allegedly resulting from the negligent or intentional acts of the Recipient or any of its employees, agents, contractors or subcontractors in connection with this Agreement. Page 2 of 4 86 2.12 Recipient agrees to acknowledge the District as a source of funding for this project on all literature, signage or press releases related to said project. 2.13 Recipient shall notify the District if Recipient intends to sell, salvage, or otherwise dispose of any equipment purchased with grant funds. The proceeds received by Recipient from any sale, salvage or disposition, or the value of the equipment if proceeds were not received from any such action, must be: (a) re -invested back into the originally awarded project; (b) invested in a similar project with District approval; or (c) returned to the District. SECTION 3. GENERAL PROVISIONS 3.1 This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. 3.2 This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. No prior or contemporaneous representation, inducement, promise or agreement between or among the parties which relate to the subject matter hereof which are not embodied in this Agreement shall be of any force or effect. 3.3 No amendment to this Agreement shall be binding on any of the parties to this Agreement unless such amendment is in writing and is executed by the parties. The parties contemplate that this Agreement may from time to time be modified by written amendment which shall be executed by duly authorized representatives of the parties and attached to this Agreement. 3.4 Each party warrants and represents that such party has full and complete authority to enter into this Agreement and each person executing this Agreement on behalf of a party warrants and represents that he/she has been fully authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of such party and that such party is bound by the signature of such representative. DISTRICT: RECIPIENT: By By Name Name Title Title Date Date Approved as to Form: Approved as to Form: DISTRICT LEGAL COUNSEL: RECIPIENT'S ATTORNEY: By r t k r By Name a Name Date j .�3 Date Page 3 of 4 87 88 City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Community Development & Neighborhoods Committee FROM: Rick Still, Parks & Recreation Director CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: March 7, 2018 SUBJECT: 10 -Minute Walk Planning Grant Agreement ISSUE Seeking authorization for the Mayor to sign for the "NRPA 10 -Minute Walk Planning Grant and Technical Assistance Grant Agreement" in the amount of $40,000 to engage with our community so that we can better meet residents' park needs and to implement the 10 -Minute walk pledge. BACKGROUND On February 13, 2018, Mayor Allan Ekberg "signed on" to promote the 10 -Minute Walk to a Park campaign (See Attachment A). This action allows the City of Tukwila to be eligible for the grant funds and technical assistance to work with The Trust for Public Lands (TPL) to engage with our community so that we can better meet their park needs. At their March 13th meeting, the Community Development and Neighborhoods Committee reviewed and provided permission for the City to apply for the "10 -Minute Walk Planning Grant and Technical Assistance Application" grant to engage with our community so that we can better meet residents' park needs and to implement the 10 -Minute walk pledge. The Parks and Recreation Department is excited to find new methods to reach our community and engage with them on how parks could play a bigger role in their quality of life. The third goal of the City's Equity Policy is that "All residents and visitors receive equitable delivery of City Services." Further defined, the goal states that "The City will identify strategies that facilitate the equitable access to current and future City services and facilities, regardless of race/ethnicity, language, ability, gender, age, family status, geography, and mode of transportation." The 10 -Minute Walk campaign will help realize this goal by assisting in identifying issues and additional locations for open space to help achieve equitable access to open space for our residents. Also, the information gathered through the 10 -Minute Walk campaign process will serve as a great basis for updating our Parks, Recreation, and Open Space (PROS) plan in 2019. Closely related with the 10 -Minute Walk campaign, the City is simultaneously partnering with King County to implement their Land Conservation Initiative (LCI) which also includes achieving open space equity for all residents. DISCUSSION The National Parks and Recreation Association (NRPA) has selected the City of Tukwila as one of the twelve cities across the country to receive the 10 -Minute Walk grant. The Grant Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is due to the NRPA office by May 1, 2018. There are 89 90 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 scheduled phone calls, In -Person training in Chicago, Illinois and preliminary assignments that the Tukwila 10 -Minute Walk Team are committing to as part of this MOU. As described in question number 18 Project Description of the grant application (Attachment B), City Staff and our partners will be engaging with the community to better identify the needs of the community and to provide parks and open space equitably. FINANCIAL IMPACT This is no grant match required. There is a grant allotment to pay for required three Tukwila 10 -Minute Walk Team members to attend the training in Chicago and for the same or other staff to engage with the community to meet the goals of the grant. This is a reimbursement grant; therefore, the initial expenditures will have to be from the Parks & Recreation general fund budget then be reimbursed by the NRPA grant. Although there is no net increase to the budget because of the reimbursement, due to accounting procedures, the P&R budget will be overspent by the grant amount in 2018. Therefore, staff is seeking permission to overspend the Parks & Recreation budget by $40,000 in 2018 which will be reimbursed by the NRPA grant. This will be included in the 2018 year-end budget amendment. RECOMMENDATION The Council Committee is being asked to consider forwarding this item to the April 16, 2018 Regular Meeting Consent Agenda to authorize the Mayor to sign the NRPA 10 -Minute Walk Planning Grant and Technical Assistance Grant Agreement for $40,000 to engage with our community so that we can better meet residents' park needs and to implement the 10 -Minute walk pledge. ATTACHMENTS A. Mayor's Pledge for "10 -Minute Walk to a Park Campaign" B. Application for the10-Minute Walk Planning Grant and Technical Assistance Grant C. NRPA 10 -Minute Walk Planning Grant and Technical Assistance Grant Agreement Z. Council Agenda Items \Parks and Recreauon110-Minute Walk MOU110-Minute Walk Grant MOU CDN MEMO 4-10-18.docx Na.ian { 7 creation a[ d Park Associationrici 1111 Urban Land Institute Campaign to Celebrate America's Cities and Civic Leaders Who Actively Promote the 10 - Minute Walk to a Park The Trust for Public Land, National Recreation and Park Association, and Urban Land Institute launched the 10 -Minute Walk Campaign in October 2017 to celebrate, recognize, and highlight cities, mayors, and other civic leaders that promote the 10 -minute walk to a park goal. This goal leads to equitable, economically thriving, safe, and healthy communities. To date, more than 150 bipartisan mayors have endorsed the vision that everyone deserves a park or open space within a 10 -minute walk of home. Your support of this initiative would involve the following: • Recognition in public materials that spotlight park champions, including the 10minutewalk.org, campaign materials, and press stories. • Access to campaign programming and best practices made available to cities who support the campaign. These include a technical assistance opportunity, Park Serve®, ULI Advisory Service Panels, and more. More information on this programming is available on the supplemental "10 - Minute Walk to a Park Campaign 2018 Programming" document. • Designation of a member of your team to serve as the primary point of contact for this initiative and who will receive communications about the campaign. We would be honored to have your involvement with this effort. By signing below, this document will formalize your support of this campaign and demonstrate your commitment to improving park quality and access. Signature: Full Name And City: Mayor Allan Ekberg, City of Tukwila Date: February 13. 2018 If you have any additional questions, please to not hesitate to contact our team through Patrick Phillippi. He can be reached at 202-748-2793 or by email at o hillippi@civitaspublicaffairs.com. 91 10-iMinate Walk PlanitThlg an: .and Fecimical Assistance „Application Response ID:288 1. Are you a local, municipal, or regional government agency (e.g., park and recreation department) or federally recognized tribal community? Yes 2. Has your Mayor (or highest city official) signed on to the 10 -Minute Walk Campaign? Yes 3. Please provide your contact information. First Name Rick Last Name Still Email Address rick.still@tukwilawa.gov Title Director of Parks and Recreation Organization Name City of Tukwila Parks and Recreation Street Address 12424 42nd Avenue South Apt/Suite/Office City Tukwila State WA Zip 98168 Phone Number 92 2067672344 ,�P2�<�r������/��0�/���r��v �D(rQ��.; 4. Department Name Parks and Recreation 5. Is this a city or county park and recreation agency? City Please list the cities you will be working with and indicate if they have a city park and recreation agency thatwill be partnering with you. 6. Lead Park and Recreation Contact Information Federal Identification Number 91-6001519 Head of Organization (Director, Executive Director, CEO, etc..) Rick Still Head of organization Email Addrym Head of Organization Phone Number 2067672344 Twitter Handle @TukwilaParks Facebook Website 7. Please list up to four upcoming policy, plan, or funding change opportunities in your city or close agency partners. (200 characters max per opportunity) For example: comprehensive plans, park master plans, bond measures, transportation plans, code revisions, etc.) 1. : King County, together with city partners, is advancing a groundbreaking Land Conservation Initiative (LCI) to protect remaining high conservation value lands throughout the county within one generation. The LCI calls for protecting 65,000 acres of natural areas, farmland, forests, river valleys, urban green space, and trail corridor within the next 30 years before they are permanently lost to development (https://kingcounty.gov/land-conservation). 2. : Equity is an over -arching theme in the LCI. The Open Space Equity implementation plan (LCI Equity) sets a base amount of $160 million to eliminate park access disparities in communities with acute needs. Weighing lack of park access within1/4 a mile, low-income households, and rates of chronic diseases, King County has selected the City of Tukwila as a priority area and pilot from which to scale to other cities. 93 3. : As part of LCI, King County seeks to change the King County Conservation Futures Tax Levy policies to increase the total funding available and remove the 1:1 local funding match requirement for equity priority area cities, including Tukwila (see attached map). 4. : Tukwila's 2014 Parks. Recreation, and Open Space Plan is scheduled to be updated in 2019 in accordance with state policies to remain eligible for state recreation funding. The update will incorporate the 10 -minute walk commitment and feedback from community engagement from this planning project. 8. What were the total operating expenditures for your agency during the most current fiscal year? $4.803/452 9. How many full time (non -seasonal) stafwork at your park and recreation agency? 25.25 FTE 10. Please select all the associations your organization is a member of *Note: You do not need to be a member to be eligible for this grant opportunity. National Recreation and Park Association American Planning Association National League of Cities U.S. Conference of Mayors Local or National Equity Collaborative Other: Washington Parks & Recreatioin Association 11. City Tukwila 12, Mayor Allan Ekberg 13. Number of Years in Office 2 14. End of Current Term 12-31-2019 15.1s your mayor eligible for re-election or planning to run? Please note any other anticipated transitions in leadership, or plans to ensure continued support for the project throughout any such transitions. Yes, the mayor is eligible to run and plans to run for another term. However, if there were a mayoral change, the city administrator would provide continued support. 16. Form of Governmen *Click for detailed descriptions Mayor- Council 94 17. Summary Description: Please describe your city and the focus of your 10 -Minute Walk Campaign riorities in 200 characters or less. This will be used in promotions where there is limited text space, so please summarize your city and goals to be as clear and concise as possible. (200-cha[acte[ limit) A small King County city with a diverse population, Tukwila's 10 -minute walk vision is to engage the community to create new parks serviced by pedestrian -friendly routes in underserved neighborhoods. 18. Project Description: Please describe in more detail your vision for the 10-MiDute Walk Campaign and how this funding and technical assistance will advance this vision. Include the main challenges your city faces, existing assets that could be leveraged, how this fits into your department and Mayor's agenda, and how this will allow you to do something new. (400 -word limit) Tukwila's 10 -minute walk vision is to engage the community to re -focus on creating new parks serviced by pedestrian -friendly routes throughout underserved neighborhoods. To do so, our plan is to expand community engagement efforts with innovative methods to gather greater input on increasing access to parks. King County and Tukwila are partnering on the Land Conservation Initiative Open Space Equity (LCI Equity) pilot, which has incorporated 10 -minute walk measures. Tukwila will serve as a model, so King County can incorporate successful engagement methods and direct regional conversations on open space equity. Despite a growing population and need for more parks and safer routes, the City has stagnated on new parkland acquisitions in recent years. King County's skyrocketing real estate market has stymied public agencies' efforts to outbid developers on vacant lands. Meanwhile, tenants whose children have no place to play except in parking lots and hallways are being evicted. Tukwila's median household income is just 40% of King County's, 23% of households live below the poverty line, and 10% of students experience homelessness. Since renovation is easier than acquisition, the City has focused on park quality. However, creating new parks best reflects the mayor's and city council's desires. If awarded the planning grant and technical assistance, Tukwila will invest in new engagement methods to advance the civic participation of underrepresented and historically marginalized communities to develop our 10 -minute walk commitment. With The Trust for Public Land (TPL), community engagement will explore perceptions of pedestrian infrastructure, unearth the community's vision for the city and how parks play a role, and compile a list of short-term park priorities that would further the 10 -minute walk goal. Tukwila will fully integrate equity into the planning process by dedicating more resources to engaging communities that are the most difficult to reach, including immigrants and non-English speakers. Currently, the City tries to meet people where they are but finds it difficult to reach people who wouldn't normally attend public planning meetings. With this effort, we envision testing innovative and non-traditional engagement methods, including creative placemaking events and new connections with community groups, to gather more feedback. In addition to being the first LC I pilot city, Tukwila's assets are its robust partnerships, Tukwila partners with King County, the school districts, the library, community centers, health organizations, and community connector nonprofits for park programming. We plan to leverage these and establish new ones during outreach. 19. Background: Please describe your agency's past accomplishments related to park access and quality. Include any plans, policies, or funding from the last 5 years. (200 -word limit) Tukwila completed a Parks, Recreation, and Open Space (PROS) plan in 2014 and a bicycle and pedestrian plan in 2009. Tukwila City Councilmember De'Sean Quinn participated in the LCI planning process and served as the LCI's Advisory Board co-chair throughout 2016-2017. King County and Tukwila partnered on the Duwamish Gardens, a mitigation project that restored shallow water salmon habitat and established a new park along the Duwamish River. The park provides a new way for residents to access and appreciate the hidden beauty of the region's urban river. The County and City are also partnering on the Lake to Sound trail, which will be a 16 -mile multi -use recreational trail connecting communities between the south end of Lake Washington to the Puget Sound shoreline in Des Moines. Most recently, Tukwila acquired land for a new fire station and will establish a park and community gathering area on the surrounding land, The park will most likely have new community gardens and partnering with Global to Local,a nonprofit that works to address health disparities by working to create a healthier, more welcoming community for the underserved through better parks and trails. 20. Park and Recreation Agency Goals: Provide a brief description of your park and recreation 95 agency's top goals for the next 1-3 yeays- (200 -word limit) 1. Expand programming throughout the city to meet people where they are through partnerships with the school district and community centers. For example, the new Rec Time program offers physical education and play time for children in elementary school summer classes. 2. Increase the number of parks in low-income neighborhoods. 3. Improve amenities in existing parks to better serve communities. 21.City Goals: Provide a brief description of your city's top goals for the next 1-3 years. (200 -word limit) The City's main priority is to increase public safety by establishing a new justice center that will house the Police Department and Municipal Court, construct three new fire stations, acquire a new facility for Public Works, and renovate existing city hall buildings all to comply with seismic building codes and to right size facilities for new and future growth. However, the City is also committed to increasing equity. The City will assess a baseline, develop an implementation plan, and report measurable progress in meeting each policy goal in the 2017 Equity Policy within one year. Adopting the 10 -minute walk standardis an important step forward. 22. Equity Background: Equity is a majorfocugofthe1Q-Minute Walk Campaign.Please describe how you define equity in your city and what your park and recreation agency or city is currently doing or has done regarding equity. This should include any plans, policies, partnerships, or funding priorities and any specific actions regarding park access and/or park quality. If you do not have a history of addressing equity, please explain why you have not done so (lack of funding, capacity, etc..). (200-VVoyd limit) Tukwila values its rich diversity. A majority of residents are people of color, 40% were born outside the United States, and half of residents speak a language other than English at home. The City's 2017 Equity Policy defines equity as "eliminating systemic barriers and providing fair access to programs, services, and opportunities to achieve social, civic, and economic justice." Policy goals include a City workforce reflective of the community; relevant and inclusive community outreach; and capacity building within the government and community. The City's 2012 Strategic Plan formed the basis for the Equity Policy. KinQCounty'uEqui1yandSooia|JuetioeOMoado6neoequkyan'lhehuUandequa|acoexaVzopportnnidea.puwa/.and resources, so that all people achieve their full potential and thrive." The County recognizes that equity is the journey toward well-being as defined by those most negatively affected. With the commitment that the benefits of parks must accrue to all, equity is an over -arching theme of King County's LCI. Priority areas based on a lack of accessible parks and greenspaces within t/ of a mile; lowest incomes; highest rates of chronic diseases; and additional factors of language diversity, racial diversity, and neighborhood greenness. 23. Equity Plans: Please describe your vision for incorporating equity into your 10 -Minute Walk efforts. (200 -word limit) Equity would be at the core of this planning effort. Through partnerships with community centers and schools, the City is trying to meet people where they are; but struggles to reach people who aren't typically reached by public planning meetings. We envision testing innovative and non-traditional engagement methods to expand outreach to the most underserved and disenfranchised members of the community. Ideas include hosting creative placemaking events, working with community o»@aniz*m, and forging new connections with community-based groups. In addibon, we could incorporate perceptions of safety in the engagement process to gain a more complete picture of walkability issues. In partnership with TPL and King County, community engagement successes will serve as a model for the LCI Equity plan. Tukwila and King County will also be able to integrate the language and goals of the 1 0 -minute walk campaign into the LCI pilot process, thereby serving as a model for regional open space equity. 24. Prject Management: Please describe how the 10 -Minute Walk Campaign and technical ���istaPcevvi||benlanaged by your city. For exa[nDle:VVhovxi[!bethe lead contact and/or vxiBthere �k� be a team working on this project? How is that person or team positioned within the department or city? How much time will be devoted to the project? (300 -word limit) Both Tukwila and King County will commit the staff time required for this community engagement and planning effort. Rick Still, the Tukwila Parks and Recreation Director, will be the lead contact and project manager. Rick leads a team of 26 staff. Parks and Recreation Managers, Robert Eaton and Tracy Gallaway would participate in the program and provide support as project leads as well. Coordination with the County would be managed by Darren Greve. the LCI Strategic Policy Advisor for the King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks in the Open Space Acquisition group. Although this is a joint application, all grant funds would support Tukwila. 25. Partners: Through this project, you will be required to work with at least two partners outside of the park and recreation agency. Please list those partners below and attach letters of support. *If there is a TPL or ULI office in your region we strongly encourage you to partner with these offices. In addition, we encourage you to think about partners that would help ensure under- represented populations (people of color, low-income individuals, LGBTQ community, individuals with physical/cognitive disabilities, and immigrants and refugees) are part of the 10 -Minute Walk efforts. Cary Simmons I Northwest Program Director— Parks for People Northwest Office: 901 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1520. Seattle, WA 98164 Darren Greve Land Conservation Initiative Director's Office King County Department of Natural Resources Global to Local 2800 S 192nd St SeaTac, WA 98188 26. Partner Management: Please describe how your organization will manage these partnerships and build additional partnerships to advance your vision. (200 -word limit) The Seattle field office of The Trust for Public Land will partner with Tukwila to lead community engagement activities and help Rick make and manage new partnerships. TPL has been engaged in the LCI Equity planning process since its inception in 2016. GIS data from the Open Space Assessment Tool (OSAT), created by its local and GIS teams, helped identify the initiative's priority areas. Cary Simmons, TPL's Northwest Parks for People Program Director, also worked with Darren and others to increase the minimum equity set- aside amount from the originally proposed $60 million to its current level of $160 million. Both the City and TPL would contract with local community-based organizations, such as Global2Local, the International Rescue Committee, Got Green, Puget Sound Sage, and the Duwamish River Coalition for grassroots engagement. 27. List Itemized anticipated expenses to reflect how the amount of funding requested above would be implemented for your project. Grant funds may be used to cover items such as staffing, data analysis, consulting, community engagement, and staff professional development. "Your first item should be $3,600 for the in-person training, which will cover travel for at least three people. The budget items should total at least $40,000. 97 Item Budget Amount In-person Training In-person Training 3,600 2. Staff Time 10,000 3. Community Engagement Materials 2,400 4. Community Organizers 10,000 5. Translation Services 2,000 6. Event Supplies 4,000 7 Park Planning Consultant Services 8,000 8. 10. 28. Please attach statements (letters, emails, etc) of support. These should state the role of the partner in the 10 -Minute Walk campaign in your city. Up to 10 files may be uploaded with a file size not to exceed 50 MB. Mayor Head (director, commissioner etc.) of additional park and recreation agencies responsible for building and maintaining parks in your city (city, county, special district etc.). 2 or more partners outside of parks and recreation If you have a local ULI and/or TPL office in your area we strongly encourage you to gather letters of support from these offices. We also strongly encourage you to partner with organizations that will help you reach your 10 -Minute Walk Campaign equity goals. x r_._ i ., , av uiSign c i :C Tljt \N i•a s � €_F�,1wtlt i 0-idi €n I k..,_t-z7",tYll.,_,. n" o`sC rn n€€}. a r�'r Completion of Application Mar 09, 2018 17:25:10 Success: Email Sent to: rick.stili@tukwilawa.gov 98 N R PA 131 t i11;C1 r- ;� a. Gelation l 22377 [ _Ifnont Ridge Road As0.1urn, VA 2314E, ,!:80 30.C26.NRPA (8712.! NRPA 10 -Minute Walk Planning Grant and Technical Assistance Grant Agreement Grantee: City of Tukwila Parks and Recreation Grant Amount: $40,000 Project: 10 -Minute Walk Technical Assistance Term: 4/1/2018 through 3/31/2019 P 733,858.0784 P 703 855079., This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), 4/4/2018 (Effective Date), is made between National Recreation and Park Association, a Virginia-based not-for-profit 501(c)3 with a mailing address of 22377 Belmont Ridge Road, Ashburn, Virginia, 20148 (NRPA) and City of Tukwila Parks and Recreation a provider of park, recreation, or community services in 12424 42nd Avenue South, Tukwila, WA 98168 (Grantee). 1. Purpose The purpose of this MOU is to confirm approval of the terms governing the acceptance and use of Forty Thousand Dollars ($40,000) made available for the implementation of the 10 -Minute Walk Planning Grant and Technical Assistance program. This grant opportunity is a result of a partnership between NRPA and The JPB Foundation to reduce barriers to park access in underserved communities, improve environmental conditions and community health, and to expand access to nature in cities across the nation. Having been selected as a recipient of funding through this program, Grantee is required to accept the terms contained within this MOU in order to receive funding as a grant recipient. 2. Payment a) NRPA will pay the sum of $40,000 to the Grantee within [30] days after NRPA's receipt of the signed electronic copy or original of this MOU. b) Subject to the provisions of paragraphs c and d of this Section 2, NRPA will make the following payments to the Grantee: Schedule Date Payment Amount 04/01/2018 $25,000 09/01/2018 $15,000 c) The additional payment described in paragraph b of this section 2 will not be made if, prior to the tentative payment date, any of the following has occurred: 99 a. The Grantee has failed to satisfy all of the reporting requirements describe in Section 3 of this MOU. b. NRPA has not approved the Grantee's Progress Report. NRPA reserves the right to not approve the Grantee's Progress Report if NRPA determines, in its absolute discretion, that the Grantee (x) has failed to satisfy the activities timeline, benchmarks, and outcomes described in the Grantee's grant proposal dated March 9, 2018, a copy of which is attached to this MOU, or (y) has altered the goals, methods, or budget line items as described in the Grant Proposal in any material way, and NRPA has not approved such changes. The Grantee must immediately notify NRPA in writing of any such changes and must provide a detailed explanation of the reason for such changes. c. The Grantee has had any changes in key personnel or infrastructure of the organization or the project that might compromise the Grantee's ability to carry out the proposed activities, and NRPA has not approved such changes. The Grantee must immediately notify NRPA in writing of any such changes. d. The Grantee has failed to satisfy any other term or condition of this MOU. 3. Grant Requirements 1. Direct grant funds to: The 10 -Minute Walk Campaign a. Program objectives: Through this grant and technical assistance opportunity, cities will be responsible for several deliverables that result in a final 10 -Minute Walk plan and completion of Goal 2: Planning, Policy, and Funding, in the 10 -Minute Walk Framework. To accomplish this, we expect that cities will: i. Attend the in-person training on May 30 & 31, 2018 ii. Join and participate in monthly technical assistance calls with NRPA and other grantees. iii. Develop a specific 10 -Minute Walk goal and corresponding action plan to make progress towards your goal iv. Participate in evaluation efforts that will include submitting planning documents and completing pre -and post -surveys. 2. Provide a copy of your agency's W-9 along with this signed MOU by May 1, 2018. 3. Complete a mid-term report by August 31, 2018 and final report by April 30, 2019. 4. Utilize NRPA's marketing and communications toolkit to promote grant throughout the year— this includes a template for a press release, social media posts and connections to local media. 5. If requested, participate in a phone interview and/or site visit with NRPA, partners, and consultants to share information on successes, challenges and lessons learned. 6. Share success stories, press releases, photos, videos, quotes, local media coverage and highlights throughout the grant period. 7. Provide an end of grant Financial Report that should include a to -date accounting of the Fund in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and according to the line -item categories of the budget included in the Grant Proposal, and should be certified by the Grantee's responsible financial official. 8. All funds will be distributed by NRPA. No matching funds are required. 100 TIMELINE OF GRANT ACTIVITIES Activity Date of Completion Participate in monthly individual, group, and/or small group calls Each month Provide a copy of your agency's W-9 and signed MOU May 1, 2018 Complete NRPA's Park Metrics inventory May 1, 2018 Attend a in-person training in Chicago, IL May 30 &31, 2018 Submit a progress report with the provided August 31, 2018 template Submit a final report to NRPA April 30, 2019 4. Promotion NRPA and The JPB Foundation may use the Grantee and/or park names, photos, and/or information in connection with the program for promotional or other purposes, in any and all media, without limitation and without further payment, notification, or permission, except where prohibited by law. The Grantee may make public statements regarding the gift to be made hereunder, including the identity of NRPA and The JPB Foundation and the total amount of the gift, using pre -approved language from the communications toolkit or provided that any such statements have been approved in advance in writing by NRPA and The JPB Foundation. Such information may be used by the Grantee in its efforts to solicit additional contributions and for general information purposes. 5. Limits of Liability NRPA and The JPB Foundation or any of its respective parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, directors or employees shall not be liable to Grantee and/or its affiliates for any liability of any kind relating to or arising out of participation in this program hereunder. 6. Confidentiality During the term of this MOU, the parties may learn certain confidential information of each other. For purposes of this MOU, confidential information means the confidential and proprietary information, not generally known by non-party personnel, used by the disclosing party and which is proprietary to the disclosing party, and includes, without limitation, the disclosing party's trade secret or proprietary personnel, financial, marketing and business information, including strategic, operations and other business plans or forecasts, and confidential information provided by the disclosing party regarding its employees, customers, vendors, sponsors and other contractors. Confidential information shall not be disclosed to non-party personnel. 7. Term The term of this MOU will commence on the Effective Date and shall continue until 3/31/2019. 8. Use of Grant Funds The Grantee shall use the full amount of the grant for the purposes set forth in Section 3. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Grantor, the Grantee shall return any portion of the grant and the income earned thereon that is not expended for such purposes. 101 The Grantee agrees not to use any portion of the grant or any income derived from the grant for the following: A. To carry on propaganda or otherwise attempt to influence legislation (within the meaning of Section 4945(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"); B. To influence the outcome of any specific public election or to carry on, directly or indirectly, any voter registration drive within the meaning of Section 4945(d)(2) of the Code; C. To provide a grant to an individual for travel, study, or similar purpose within the meaning of Section 4945(g) of the Code, without prior written approval of Grantor. Payments of salaries, other compensation, or expense reimbursement to employees of the Grantee within the scope of their employment do not constitute "grants" for these purposes and are not subject to these restrictions; D. Except as expressly may be authorized in the Grant Description, to provide a grant to any other organization without prior written approval of the Grantor; or E. To promote or engage in criminal acts of violence, terrorism, hate crimes, the destruction of any state, or discrimination on the basis of race, national origin, religion, military and veteran status, disability, sex, age, or sexual orientation, or support of any entity that engages in these activities. F. To travel to NRPA's Annual Conference or any other conference travel, without prior written approval of Grantor. All unspent or uncommitted grant funds shall be invested in highly liquid investments (such as an interest- bearing bank account) with the primary objective being preserving the grant funds availability for the project. Any interest or other income generated by the grant funds must be applied to the purposes described in the Grant Description. 9. Audit NRPA has the right to audit the Grantee's financial records relating to this MOU. Grantee should maintain their financial receipts and must make the records available at any time as requested by NRPA for a period of no less than four (4) years after expiration of the Grant Term or if an audit has been initiated and audit findings have not been resolved at the end of such four-year period, the records shall be retained until resolution of all audit findings. If as a result of an audit, NRPA determines that funds were not spent in accordance with the purposes of this grant, the Grantee may be required to return any funds not substantiated. If NRPA determines that grant funds were used for fraudulent purposes, the grantee may be barred from participation in any further programs. 10. Termination Either party may terminate this MOU at any time effective upon receipt of written notice by the other party of failure to perform. The non-performing party shall have sixty (60) days to cure its obligation. If the non-performing party fails to satisfactorily cure its obligation within this time this MOU will be terminated. Neither party shall be liable to the other by reason of termination of this MOU for compensation, reimbursement or damages for any loss of prospective profits on anticipated sales or for expenditures, investments, leases or other commitments relating to the business or goodwill of any of the parties, notwithstanding any law to the contrary. No termination of this MOU shall release the obligation to pay any sums due to the terminating party which accrued prior to such termination. 102 Upon receipt of this signed form and your agency's W-9 a check will be issued for your grant funds. These parties have caused this MOU to be signed by their duly authorized representatives as of the date set forth below. National Recreation and Grantee Park Association By: W d?bAe By: Printed Name: Rebecca Wickline Printed Name: Title: Senior VP of Development Title: Date: 3/30/18 Date: EIN: 103 104