Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinal Agenda Packet CITY OF RENTON AGENDA - City Council Regular Meeting 7:00 PM - Monday, September 15, 2025 Council Chambers, 7th Floor, City Hall – 1055 S. Grady Way Please note that this regular meeting of the Renton City Council is being offered as a hybrid meeting and can be attended in person at the Council Chambers, 7th floor of City Hall, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, 98057 or remotely through Zoom. For those wishing to attend by Zoom: Please (1) click this link https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84938072917?pwd=TUNCcnppbjNjbjNRMWpZaXk2bjJnZz09 (or copy/paste the URL into a web browser) or (2) call-in to the Zoom meeting by dialing 253-215- 8782 and entering 849 3807 2917 Passcode 156708, or (3) call 425-430-6501 by 5 p.m. on the day of the meeting to request an invite with a link to the meeting. Registration for Audience Comment: Registration will be open at all times, but speakers must register by 5 p.m. on the day of a Council meeting in order to be called upon. Anyone who registers after 5 p.m. on the day of the Council meeting will not be called upon to speak and will be required to re-register for the next Council meeting if they wish to speak at that next meeting.  Request to Speak Registration Form: o Click the link or copy/paste the following URL into your browser: https://forms.rentonwa.gov/Forms/registertospeakform  You may also call 425-430-6501 or email counciladmin@rentonwa.gov to register. Please provide your full name, city of residence, email address and/or phone number, and topic in your message.  A sign-in sheet is also available for those who attend in person. Video on Demand: Please click the following link to stream Council meetings live as they occur, or to select previously recorded meetings: Renton Channel 21 Video on Demand 1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL 3. PROCLAMATION a) National IT Professionals Day - September 15, 2025 b) Work Force Development Month - September 2025 4. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT a) Administrative Report 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS  All remarks must be addressed to the Council as a whole, if a response is requested please provide your name and address, including email address, to the City Clerk to allow for follow-up.  Speakers must sign-up prior to the Council meeting.  Each speaker is allowed three minutes.  When recognized, please state your name & city of residence for the record. NOTICE to all participants: Pursuant to state law, RCW 42.17A.555, campaigning for or against any ballot measure or candidate in City Hall and/or during any portion of the council meeting, including the audience comment portion of the meeting, is PROHIBITED. 6. CONSENT AGENDA The following items are distributed to Councilmembers in advance for study and review, and the recommended actions will be accepted in a single motion. Any item may be removed for further discussion if requested by a Councilmember. a) Approval of Council Meeting minutes of September 8, 2025. Council Concur b) AB - 3929 Community & Economic Development Department recommends authorizing execution of a Purchase and Sales Agreement for King County Parcel 1723059026 (Stoneway Property), with SRMRenton LLC, in the amount of $22,000,000 plus additional closing costs; and approve additional budget appropriations in this amount. This parcel was identified in the Tri-Park Master Plan in 2006, 2011, and 2020. Refer to Finance Committee c) AB - 3930 Community & Economic Development Department recommends adoption of the Renton Regional Fire Authority Capital Facilities Plan 2026-2031; Renton School District 2025 Capital Facilities Plan, Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan 2024-2025 through 2030-2031; and Issaquah School District 2025 Capital Facilities Plan. Refer to Planning & Development Committee d) AB - 3928 Executive Services Department recommends adoption of an ordinance implementing a one-tenth of one percent (0.1%) sales and use tax, as allowed by ESHB 2015 (Section 201 of Chapter 350, Laws of 2025), for criminal justice purposes. Refer to Finance Committee 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Topics listed below were discussed in Council committees during the past week. Those topics marked with an asterisk (*) may include legislation. Committee reports on any topics may be held by the Chair if further review is necessary. a) Transportation Committee: 1) Professional Services Agreement between Parametrix, Inc. and the City of Renton for the Comprehensive Safety Action Plan b) Utilities Committee: 1) 2026 King County Wastewater Treatment Charge Adoption* 8. LEGISLATION Ordinances for first reading: a) Ordinance No. 6166: 2026 King County Wastewater Rates (See Item 7.b) Ordinance for second and final reading: b) Ordinance No. 6165: Release of Easement (First Reading 9/8/2025) 9. NEW BUSINESS (Includes Council Committee agenda topics; visit rentonwa.gov/cityclerk for more information.) 10. ADJOURNMENT COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING AGENDA (Preceding Council Meeting) CANCELED Hearing assistance devices for use in the Council Chambers are available upon request to the City Clerk CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE TELEVISED LIVE ON GOVERNMENT ACCESS CHANNEL 21 To view Council Meetings online, please visit rentonwa.gov/councilmeetings Armondo Pavone II Mayor WHEREAS,National II Professionals Day was created in 2015 and is celebrated the third Tuesday of September;and WHEREAS,we honor and appreciate experts in the Information Technology fietd;members of the Network and Security,Apptications,GIS,and Client Services teams who ensure our networks,applications,toots, technology,information,and the support thereof,are kept secure,accessibte,compliant,and up to date; and WHEREAS,the IT Division plays a vital rote in ensuring that the city is able to efficientty perform its duties in continuingto serve the Renton community;and WHEREAS,white technology continues to progress at a rapid pace,the City of Renton’s IT Division continues to stay at the forefront of technological advancements,informed of threats,and provide robust customer support to city staff;and WHEREAS,Renton’s ITTeam vatues Continuing Professional Education,providing employees with access to relative training and certification to facilitate the highest levels of support;and WHEREAS,the IT professionaLs that work in Renton make our city a better place to live,work,and play through the services,technology and accessibility they provide;and NOW THEREFORE,I,Armondo Pavone,Mayor of the City of Renton,do hereby proctaim September 16,2025,to be National IT Professionals Day in the City of Renton and further extend appreciation to all IT Professionals for the vital services they perform and their exemplary dedication to the communities they represent. IN WITNESS THEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seat of the City of Renton to be affixed this 15th day of September 2025. Mayor Armondo Pavone City of Renton,Washington PROCLAMATION 1055 S Grady Way,Renton,WA 98057 II rentonwa.gov AGENDA ITEM #3. a) Armondo Pavone II Mayor WHEREAS,this September celebrates 20 years of recognizing Workforce Development Month, established by the National Association of Workforce Development Professionals;and WHEREAS,this month is a time to honor the people,programs,and partnerships driving opportunity and economic mobility across the nation;and WHEREAS,we acknowledge the professionals,corporations,small businesses,teachers,and mentors that equip individuals with the skills,knowledge,and mindsetto succeed;and WHEREAS,the City of Renton recognizes the commitment and vitat role that our community partners have in strengthening Renton’s growing workforce;and WHEREAS,partnerships among government agencies,education,employers,and businesses are essentiat to building and preparing a workforce that meets the evotving needs of the modern economy;and WHEREAS,Renton’s workforce development opportunities and career training programs strengthen our community by fostering talent,offering opportunity,and strengthening the quality of the workforce;and WHEREAS,workforce development opportunities and career training programs continue to place Renton as the center of growth and opportunity in the Puget Sound Region;and NOW THEREFORE,I,Armondo Pavone,Mayor of the City of Renton,do hereby proctaim September 2025 to be Workiorce Development Month in the City of Renton,and I encourage all residents to join me in this special observance. IN WITNESS THEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the City of Renton to be affixed this j 5th day of September 2025. PROCLAMATION MayorArmondo Pavone City of Renton,Washington 1055 S Grady Way,Renton,WA 98057 II rentonwa.gov AGENDA ITEM #3. b) DATE: September 11, 2025 TO: James Alberson, Jr., Council President Members of the Renton City Council FROM: Armondo Pavone, Mayor Ed VanValey, Chief Administrative Officer SUBJECT: Administrative Report • Save the Date! The Senior 50+ Resource Fair is Friday, September 26 from 9 a.m.-1 p.m. at the Don Persson Renton Senior Activity Center (211 Burnett Avenue North). Take in presentations on health, wellness, housing and other topics and browse over 35 vendor exhibits. This is a great opportunity to explore options for yourself or helping out a parent or grandparent. Pre- registration is encouraged. To pre-register and for more information visit rentonwa.gov/events. • Join us Saturday, September 27 from 1-3 p.m. at Liberty Park to celebrate the beginning of fall with a day of free family fun. Enjoy a variety of exciting outdoor activities including jump rope, sack races, a balloon toss, an epic inflatable obstacle course, and much more! Register ahead of time to get entered into giveaway drawings at rentonwa.gov/register. • Information about preventative street maintenance, traffic impact projects, and road closures happening this week can be found at http://rentonwa.gov/traffic. All projects are weather permitting and unless otherwise noted, streets will always remain open.  Monday, September 15 through Friday, September 19, 8:00am-3:00pm. Intermittent lane closure on S 3rd St between Morris Ave S and Logan Ave S for construction work. Approve traffic control plans were issued for all work and will be followed. Questions may be directed to Joel McCann, 425-757-959.  Monday, September 15 through Friday, September 19, 8:00am-3:00pm. Intermittent lane closure on SE 172nd St from 122nd Ave SE to 127th Ave SE for construction work. Approved traffic control plans were issued for all work and will be followed. Questions may be directed to Rob Blackburn, 206-379-1489.  Tuesday, September 16 through Wednesday, September 17, 7:00am-4:00pm. Intermittent lane closure on SW Langston Rd between Stevens Ave SW and SW 3rd Ct for asphalt repairs. Questions may be directed to Public Works Shops, 425-430-7400.  Monday, September 15 through Friday, September 19, 9:00pm-5:00am. Intermittent lane closure at Rainier Ave N and Airport Way for construction work. Approved traffic control plans were issued for all work and will be followed. Questions may be directed to Joe Nerlfi, 425- 757-9657. AGENDA ITEM #4. a) September 8, 2025 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES CITY OF RENTON MINUTES - City Council Regular Meeting 7:00 PM - Monday, September 8, 2025 Council Chambers, 7th Floor, City Hall – 1055 S. Grady Way CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Pavone called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order at 7:00 PM and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Councilmembers Present: James Alberson, Jr., Council President Carmen Rivera, Council Position No. 2 Valerie O'Halloran, Council Position No. 3 Ryan McIrvin, Council Position No. 4 Ed Prince, Council Position No. 5 Ruth Pérez, Council Position No. 6 Councilmembers Absent: Kim-Khánh Vǎn, Council Position No. 7 MOVED BY ALBERSON, SECONDED BY PÉREZ, COUNCIL EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCILMEMBER VǍN. CARRIED. Councilmember Pérez asked that Councilmember Vǎn's reason for being absent be entered into the record. Council President Alberson stated he was unsure of her location but noted she likely has unstable Wi-Fi so she could not join the meeting virtually. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF PRESENT Armondo Pavone, Mayor Kristi Rowland, Deputy Chief Administrative Officer Shane Moloney, City Attorney Jason Seth, City Clerk Gina Estep, Community & Economic Development Administrator Martin Pastucha, Public Works Administrator Kari Roller, Finance Department Administrator Maryjane Van Cleave, Parks & Recreation Department Administrator Brianne Bannwarth, Engineering Development Director Amanda Free, Economic Development Director Young Yoon, IT Director AGENDA ITEM #6. a) September 8, 2025 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES Deb Needham, Emergency Management Director Eric Perry, Government Affairs Manager Stephanie Rary, Property Services Specialist Commander Chandler Swain, Police Department Attended Remotely: Judith Subia, Chief of Staff Ron Straka, Public Works Utility Systems Director PROCLAMATION Ready in Renton - September 2025: A proclamation by Mayor Pavone was read declaring September 2025 to be Ready in Renton Month in the City of Renton and encouraging all residents to join in this special observance. Emergency Management Director Deb Needham accepted the proclamation with appreciation. MOVED BY ALBERSON, SECONDED BY PÉREZ, COUNCIL CONCUR TO APPROVE THE PROCLAMATION AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. SPECIAL PRESENTATION State Auditors Stewardship Award (SASA) presented by the State Auditor’s Office: State Auditor Pat McCarthy introduced the following members of the State Auditor's Officer: Kelly Collins, Deputy State Auditor; Wendy Choy, Assistant Director of Local Audits; and Paul Griswold, Audit Manager. This team provided the Finance Department with the State Auditors Stewardship Award (SASA) for their exceptional financial practices. Finance Department Administrator Kari Roller accepted the award on behalf of the department with appreciation. PUBLIC HEARING Public Hearing - Release of Easement Request: This being the date set, and proper notices having been posted and published in accordance with local and state laws, Mayor Pavone opened the public hearing to consider the Release of Easement Request for Maple Highlands (Chambers) Plat. Economic Development Direct Amanda Free introduced Property Services Specialist Stephanie Rary. Ms. Rary reported that an easement had been granted by Bill Ruth, the original parcel owner, at no cost to the city. She explained that Mr. Ruth recently sold the property to Connor Homes at Maple Highlands, LLC. Connor Homes filed a valid petition requesting the easement be released. She reported that the parcel was approved in 2023 for 12-lot plat called Maple Highlands Plat and that a new sanitary sewer line serving the plat will be constructed by the developer and dedicated to the city after the plat is recorded with King County. Concluding, Ms. Rary reported that the staff recommendation is to adopt an ordinance that authorizes release of the old easement so that a new easement that aligns with the new sanitary sewer lines can be established. Mayor Pavone called for public comments. AGENDA ITEM #6. a) September 8, 2025 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES There being no correspondence or public comments, it was MOVED BY ALBERSON, SECONDED BY PÉREZ, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT CAO Ed VanValey reviewed a written administrative report summarizing the City’s recent progress towards goals and work programs adopted as part of its business plan for 2025 and beyond. Items noted were: • Join us Friday, September 12 from 4-8 p.m. at the Highlands Neighborhood Center (800 Edmonds Avenue NE) for the Kids Night Out Back to School Bash. The evening will be filled with arts and crafts, gym games, and includes a pizza party. Cost is $15 for residents and $19 for non-residents. Registration is required and may be done at rentonwa.gov/register, using event code 26834. • The final recycling event for 2025 will be held Saturday, September 13 from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. at Renton Technical College Parking Lot 3 (3000 NE 4th Street). This event is free, and we will be collecting Styrofoam, plastic bags, and have document shredding services available. Food bank donations will also be collected. Please visit rentonwa.gov/recycleevents for more information. • The Halloween Costume Swap is back for 2025! Drop off your clean, gently worn costumes, hats, masks, and accessories of all sizes between September 14 and September 26 during regular hours at the Renton Community Center, Renton Highlands Neighborhood Center, and Renton City Hall. Join us on Saturday, September 27 and pick up costumes and accessories for the whole family. A photo area for will also be available where you can capture and share your new looks. This is a free event and costume donations are not required to participate. Please visit rentonwa.gov/activities-events for more information. • Preventative street maintenance will continue to impact traffic and result in occasional street closures. AUDIENCE COMMENTS • Maria Hudson, Bellevue, stated she believed the Renton Police Department obstructed her ability to care for her disabled adult daughter. She submitted several sheets of paper that she says explain the situation. • Emily Wong, Renton, explained that the new management company operating The Reserve at Renton apartments towed her car costing her hundreds of dollars to retrieve. She stated she believes the management company is targeting elderly Asian Americans who live at the complex. • Michael Huddy, Renton, spoke on behalf of Ms. Wong and other residents of The Reserve at Renton apartments noting that several residents and customers to the businesses located at the complex have been towed recently with little warning. He stated that he believed this was a scam because the tow company will appear within minutes of being called. He urged city officials to review this issue. • Kam Puiyan, Renton, stated, through Xuan Binh "Sun" Nguyen as an interpreter, that he is also a resident at The Reserve at Renton and noted that his car was towed for the first time after nine years of living at the complex. He stated he had to pay AGENDA ITEM #6. a) September 8, 2025 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES $552.31 to retrieve his vehicle from the tow company which is a full paycheck for him. He urged city officials to assist the residents and business owners with this issue. • Thy Nguyen, Renton, stated he is a business owner at The Reserve at Renton apartment complex and noted that the new management company put up painted several parking stalls as "private" and noted that people need permits to park near the businesses. He also noted that he has to warn his customers not to park near the business or they will get towed. He said revenues for his business are down 15 to 20 percent since they new company took over. • Xuan Binh "Sun" Nguyen, Renton, stated that she is also a business owner at The Reserve at Renton apartment complex and has paid two tow bills for customers totaling over $1,600. She stated that she cannot continue to pay for these tow bills and asked city officials to help the residents and business owners with this issue. • Amanda Alexander, Renton, stated she lives as a caregiver to her mother at The Reserve at Renton apartment complex and stated from her experience as a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) that she believes the management company is abusing the elderly residents at the complex. She urged city officials to help residents at the complex. • Art Jenkins, Renton, thanked the mayor and other officials who visited his home. He listed the number of 9-1-1 calls for the unit above his, noting that 168 calls for service have occurred there since mid-2021. Her invited all city officials to visit his home and asked several questions related to how and why this issue is taking more than ten years to resolve. Councilmember Pérez asked what the city has done so far to assist Mr. Jenkins. Mayor Pavone noted that several code compliance notices have been sent to the property owner whose unit is affecting Mr. Jenkins' unit, and that staff from the city's Housing Repair and Assistance Program (HRAP) have visited and made repairs to hopefully stop the water leaking into Mr. Jenkins' property. He also noted that he has an upcoming meeting with Mr. Jenkins and hopes that this issue can be resolved soon. Mayor Pavone also thanked the residents of The Reserve at Renton apartment complex for speaking tonight and noted that the city would review the issue. CONSENT AGENDA The following items are distributed to Councilmembers in advance for study and review, and the recommended actions will be accepted in a single motion. Any item may be removed for further discussion if requested by a Councilmember. a) Approval of Council Meeting minutes of August 11, 2025. Council Concur. b) AB - 3920 Mayor Pavone reappointed Shane Carlson, Primary Airport Leaseholders group, and Harold (KC) Jones, Primary Highlands Community representative, to the Renton Airport Advisory Committee with terms expiring May 7, 2028. Council Concur. c) AB - 3919 Executive Services Department recommended execution of the Simple Possession Advocacy and Representation (SPAR) Program Funding Agreement No. GRT26028 to accept $8,800 in grant funds for partial reimbursement for the cost of providing high-quality indigent defense services for certain defendants. Refer to Finance Committee. AGENDA ITEM #6. a) September 8, 2025 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES d) AB - 3916 Parks & Recreation Department recommended execution of a Professional Services Agreement with Anchor QEA, in the amount of $500,207, for design and environmental permitting work for the Northeast Renton Park project. Refer to Finance Committee. e) AB - 3917 Police Department recommended execution of an agreement with the Washington State Criminal Justice Training Center (CJTC) to accept $24,342 for additional work related to the department's Wellness Program; and approval of a budget appropriation for the grant. Refer to Finance Committee. f) AB - 3918 Police Department recommended execution of a Cost Reimbursement Agreement with the King County Sheriff's Office in order to receive up to $19,599.28 for reimbursement of overtime costs associated with verifying addresses and residency status of registered sex and kidnapping offenders; and approval of a budget appropriation for the grant. Refer to Finance Committee. g) AB - 3887 Public Works Airport recommended execution of two Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) agreements (AIP Grants - 034 and 035), to accept a total of $17,159,212 for the Taxiway A Rehabilitation project. Council Concur. h) AB - 3911 Public Works Airport recommends approval to execute a grant agreement with the Federal Aviation Administration to accept $470,184 in grant funds for the Air Traffic Control Tower Siting Study project. Council Concur. i) AB - 3915 Public Works Airport reported bid opening on August 20, 2025, for the Taxiway A Rehabilitation project, and recommended awarding the contract to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder Scarsella Bros., Inc., in the amount of $18,960,797.06. This bid award recommendation is for Schedule 3 which includes schedules A-K of the bids contained in the attached bids tabs. This also includes two schedules (E & J) associated with work for Boeing as contained in their Notice of Intent to negotiate a reimbursement agreement with the city for the work on their leased areas. This proposed agreement with Boeing will be brought to City Council for approval when it is ready. Council Concur. j) AB - 3921 Public Works Airport recommended execution of agreement GCC 1275, with the Washington State Department of Transportation, to accept up to $279,701.52 for the Taxiway A Rehabilitation project. Council Concur. k) AB - 3922 Public Works Transportation Systems Division recommended execution of a Professional Services Agreement with Parametrix, Inc., in the amount of $431,665 to complete the Renton Comprehensive Safety Action Plan. Refer to Transportation (Aviation) Committee. l) AB - 3923 Public Works Utility Systems Division recommended adoption of an ordinance approving the 2026 King County Wastewater Treatment Charge pass through rate to match King County's adopted 2026 rate of $62.66 and an additional charge of $8.35 for every 100 cubic feet over 750 cubic feet of water used by multi-family, commercial, and industrial customers, effective January 1, 2026. Refer to Utilities Committee. MOVED BY ALBERSON, SECONDED BY PÉREZ, COUNCIL CONCUR TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PUBLISHED. CARRIED. AGENDA ITEM #6. a) September 8, 2025 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES UNFINISHED BUSINESS Topics listed below were discussed in Council committees during the past week. Those topics marked with an asterisk (*) may include legislation. Committee reports on any topics may be held by the Chair if further review is necessary. a) Committee of the Whole: Council President Alberson presented a report recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the resolution adopting the updated King County Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan, and that the resolution be presented for adoption at tonight’s Council meeting. MOVED BY ALBERSON, SECONDED BY PÉREZ, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION. CARRIED. b) Finance Committee: Chair Pérez presented a report recommending approval of the following payments: 1. Accounts Payable – total payment of $18,003,836.98 for vouchers 70325, 72325, 80125, 80625, 80825, 725250, 80225, 81525, 81825-81925, 82125-82225, 82525, 90325, 426694-426698, 426707-427132, 427141-427424; payroll benefit withholding vouchers 7745-7764, 426699-426706, 427133-427140; and 1 wire transfer. 2. Payroll – total payment of $4,652,432.93 for payroll vouchers that include 1,673 direct deposits and 37 checks. (07/16/25-07/31/25 and 08/01/25-08/15/25 pay periods). 3. Kidder Mathews vouchers 1980-1997 totaling $31,494.36. MOVED BY PÉREZ, SECONDED BY O'HALLORAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION. CARRIED. c) Finance Committee: Chair Pérez presented a report recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation to award the construction contract, CAG-25-098, to Scarsella Bros., Inc. for the Taxiway A Rehabilitation Project and authorize the mayor and city clerk to execute this contract in the amount of $18,960,797.06. MOVED BY PÉREZ, SECONDED BY O'HALLORAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION. CARRIED. d) Finance Committee: Chair Pérez presented a report recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation to authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the agreement with PCS Mobile/Route1, in the amount of $115,077.68, for software migration services and associated hardware. MOVED BY PÉREZ, SECONDED BY O'HALLORAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION. CARRIED. e) Finance Committee: Chair Pérez presented a report recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation to to approve the transfer of Pharmacy Benefit Manager services from Costco Health Solutions to MedImpact, as of January 1, 2026. The administrative transfer process from Costco Health Services to MedImpact will begin upon execution of the MedImpact contract in early September. The Finance Committee further recommends authorization for the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the agreement with MedImpact after the implementing documents are complete. MOVED BY PÉREZ, SECONDED BY O'HALLORAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION. CARRIED. AGENDA ITEM #6. a) September 8, 2025 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES f) Finance Committee: Chair Pérez presented a report recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation to authorize the Renton Municipal Court to accept funding of $212,345.00 from the Administrative Office of the Courts via an interagency agreement for Community Court funding for fiscal year 2026. MOVED BY PÉREZ, SECONDED BY O'HALLORAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION. CARRIED. g) Finance Committee: Chair Pérez presented a report recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation to authorize the Renton Municipal Court to accept Blake funding of $5,000 from the Administrative Office of the Courts via an interagency agreement. MOVED BY PÉREZ, SECONDED BY O'HALLORAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION. CARRIED. h) Planning & Development Committee: Chair Prince presented a report recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve a resolution adopting a work plan to revise the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, and that the resolution be presented for adoption at tonight’s Council meeting. MOVED BY PRINCE, SECONDED BY MCIRVIN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION. CARRIED. i) Utilities Committee: Vice Chair Rivera presented a report recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation to adopt an ordinance declaring an existing sanitary sewer easement contained and described under King County Recording No. 20171208000184 surplus and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute and record with King County a release of said easement. MOVED BY RIVERA, SECONDED BY O'HALLORAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION. CARRIED. LEGISLATION Resolutions: a) Resolution No. 4566: A Resolution of the City of Renton, Washington, adopting the 2025- 2030 King County Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan and Authorizing the City’s Annex thereto, and adopting the City of Renton Plan Annex. MOVED BY ALBERSON, SECONDED BY PÉREZ, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. b) Resolution No. 4567: A Resolution of The City of Renton, Washington, adopting a work plan to revise the Transportation Element of the City’s 2025 Comprehensive Plan, and setting a public hearing as laid out in the work plan. MOVED BY PRINCE, SECONDED BY MCIRVIN, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. Ordinance for first reading: a) Ordinance No. 6165: An Ordinance of the City of Renton, Washington, declaring an existing Sanitary Sewer Easement contained and described under King County Recording No. 20171208000184 surplus to the city’s needs, authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute AGENDA ITEM #6. a) September 8, 2025 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES and record with King County a release of said Easement, providing for severability, and establishing an effective date. MOVED BY RIVERA, SECONDED BY O'HALLORAN, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS (Includes Council Committee agenda topics; visit rentonwa.gov/cityclerk for more information.) EXECUTIVE SESSION & ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY ALBERSON, SECONDED BY PÉREZ, COUNCIL RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR APPROXIMATELY 30 MINUTES TO DISCUSS POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110.1.(I) AND THAT NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN, AND THE COUNCIL MEETING BE ADJOURNED WHEN THE EXECUTIVE SESSION IS ADJOURNED. CARRIED. TIME: 8:15 PM Deputy CAO Rowland announced the executive session required an additional 25 mins. Executive session was conducted, and no action was taken. The Council meeting adjourned when the executive session adjourned. TIME: 9:10 PM Jason A. Seth, MMC, City Clerk Jason Seth, Recorder 08 Sep 2025 AGENDA ITEM #6. a) Council Committee Meeting Calendar September 8, 2025 September 15, 2025 Monday 3:00 p.m. Utilities Committee, Chair Văn Location: Council Conference Room/Videoconference 1. 2026 King County Wastewater Treatment Charge Adoption 2. Emerging Issues in Utilities • Elliot Spawning Channel Project 4:00 p.m. Public Safety Committee, Chair Rivera Location: Council Conference Room/Videoconference 1. Presentation by the Regional Office of Gun Violence Prevention 2. Gun Violence Statistics 3. 5th/6th Streets and Park Avenue Update 4. RRFA Briefing 5. Emerging Issues in Public Safety • Public Safety Grants 5:15 p.m. Transportation Committee, Chair McIrvin Location: Council Conference Room/Videoconference 1. Professional Services Agreement between Parametrix, Inc. and the City of Renton for the Comprehensive Safety Action Plan 2. Emerging Issues in Transportation CANCELED Committee of the Whole, Chair Alberson 6:00 p.m. Workforce Development Month Reception Location: Conferencing Center 7:00 p.m. Council Meeting Location: Council Chambers/Videoconference AGENDA ITEM #6. a) AB - 3929 City Council Regular Meeting - 15 Sep 2025 SUBJECT/TITLE: SRMRenton, LLC; King County Parcel 1723059026 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Refer to Finance Committee DEPARTMENT: Community & Economic Development Department STAFF CONTACT: Amanda Free, Economic Development Director EXT.: x7369 FISCAL IMPACT SUMMARY: The total acquisition costs for the SRMRenton LLC property is estimated at $22,045,000. The purchase price of the property is $22,000,000. Additional transaction costs, including environmental review and title report are approximately $45,000. SUMMARY OF ACTION: The proposed acquisition King County parcel 1723059026 will provide opportunities to expand the property boundaries of the Renton Community Center and the Cedar River Park. This parcel was identified in the Tri-Park Master Plan in 2006 and included in the 2011 and 2020 updates. Public engagement will be conducted to hear from the community on best uses and what the public would like to see on the vacant land. The Purchase and Sales Agreement includes the opportunity for the seller to name 2 park features. EXHIBITS: A. Real Estate Purchase and Sale Agreement TPN 172305-9026 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the mayor and city clerk to sign a Purchase and Sales Agreement for King County Parcel 1723059026 with authorization to sign all documents to effectuate the sale. Sale price of $22,000,000 and other associated closing costs and authorize additional budget appropriations of this amount. AGENDA ITEM #6. b) 1 PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT THIS PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”), dated as of the date of the last signature herein (“Effective Date”), is made by and between SRMRenton, LLC, a Washington limited liability company (“Seller”) and City of Renton, a municipal corporation (“Purchaser”). RECITALS: A. Seller is the owner of certain real property located in Renton, Washington, tax parcel number 172305-9026, as depicted on Exhibit A-1; and B. Seller desires to sell, and Purchaser, having notified Seller in writing, of the imminent threat of exercising its power of eminent domain, desires to purchase, the Property (as defined below) in accordance with and upon the terms set forth in this Agreement. In consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt, sufficiency and delivery of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto hereby agree as follows: 1. AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE AND SELL. Seller hereby agrees to sell, and Purchaser hereby agrees to purchase, subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, all of Seller’s right, title and interest in and to the following real, personal and intangible property (collectively, the “Property”): 1.1. Real Property. Fee simple title in and to the land described on Exhibit A-2 attached hereto, together with all easements, rights, privileges and benefits appurtenant thereto and any land lying in the bed of any street, road, avenue, open or proposed, public or private, in front of or adjoining the said land or any portion thereof (collectively, the “Real Property”). 1.2. Intangible Property. All intangible property (the “Intangible Property”), if any, owned by Seller and pertaining to the Real Property, including, without limitation, all transferable permits, licenses, warranties, utility contracts, plans and specifications, engineering plans and studies, and landscape plans. 1.3. Appurtenant Rights. Any and all of Seller's right, title and interest in and to all rights of way, easements, licenses, privileges, reversions, tenements, hereditaments and all other appurtenances, including, without limitation, all minerals, oil, gas and other hydrocarbon substances on and under the Real Property as well as all development rights, air rights, water rights, in any way belonging or pertaining to the Real Property (collectively, the “Appurtenant Rights”). 2. PURCHASE PRICE AND PAYMENT. 2.1. Purchase Price. The purchase price for the Property (the “Purchase Price”) shall be the sum of Twenty-Two Million and No/100 Dollars ($22,000,000.00). Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Purchase Price shall be paid as provided below. 2.2. Deposit. 2.2.1. Deposit. Within five (5) business days after the Effective Date, Purchaser shall deliver a deposit in the form of cash in the amount of One Hundred and No/100 Dollars ($100.00) (together AGENDA ITEM #6. b) 2 with any interest earned thereon, the “Deposit”) to Stewart Title, Attn: Peter Johndrow (“Escrow Agent”). The Deposit shall be held and disbursed in accordance with this Agreement. 2.3. Payment. On the Closing Date, Purchaser shall deposit or cause to be deposited with the Escrow Agent sums sufficient to pay the Purchase Price and all other amounts necessary to satisfy Purchaser’s obligations with respect to closing the transactions contemplated herein. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, on the Closing Date, Purchaser shall cause the Purchase Price to be paid to Seller as follows: 2.3.1. Delivery of Deposit. Purchaser shall cause the Escrow Agent to pay to Seller the Deposit held by the Escrow Agent by federal wire transfer in immediately available funds to such bank account(s) as Seller may designate, and such amount shall be credited against the Purchase Price. 2.3.2. Payment of Balance. Purchaser shall timely fund to the Escrow Agent the remaining balance of the Purchase Price after application of the provisions of Section 2.3.1, as adjusted for the prorations and credits set forth in this Agreement, and shall cause the Escrow Agent to transfer to Seller such amount by federal wire transfer in immediately available funds to such bank account(s) as Seller may designate. 2.4. Closing. Payment of the Purchase Price and the closing hereunder (the “Closing”) will take place pursuant to an escrow closing, conducted by the Escrow Agent, on that date which is at least twenty-eight (28) days following expiration of the Inspection Period, or in the event that Purchaser elects to finance the acquisition of the Property via issuance of bonds or a similar financing mechanism, all as determined by Purchaser, than ten (10) days following issuance of such bonds, but in no event shall Closing occur later than December 19, 2025 (the “Closing Date”). On or prior to the Closing Date, and in accordance with Sections 8.1 and 8.2, the parties shall deposit in escrow with the Escrow Agent all documents, instruments and Closing funds required to be delivered by such party in order to consummate Closing pursuant to this Agreement. 3. INSPECTION PERIOD. 3.1. Inspection Period. During the period (the “Inspection Period”) that commences on the Effective Date and ends at 11:59 P.M. Pacific Standard Time on that day which is sixty (60) days following the Effective Date, Purchaser, its agents, employees and contractors, shall be entitled, subject to applicable law, to enter upon the Real Property, after not less than two (2) business days’ prior notice to Seller, to perform inspections and tests of the Real Property, including, without limitation, surveys, non-invasive environmental studies (including Phase I environmental testing), and studies of all other matters that Purchaser wishes to consider at Purchaser’s sole cost and expense, provided that (y) Purchaser shall not be allowed to perform any Phase II or other invasive testing without first obtaining Seller’s prior written consent, which consent Seller shall not unreasonably withhold, condition or delay; and (z) it shall be deemed unreasonable for Seller to withhold its consent to such invasive testing if Purchaser obtains a Phase I environmental report that recommends proceeding with invasive testing. All inspections shall occur at reasonable times agreed upon by Seller and Purchaser. Seller shall reasonably cooperate with Purchaser in its due diligence and shall be entitled to have a representative present during any entry onto the Real Property by Purchaser or its agents to conduct any inspections or tests. In connection with the right to enter upon the Real Property set forth in this Section 3, Purchaser agrees (i) to comply with all applicable laws and all exceptions to title disclosed by the Title Commitment, (ii) not to interfere with the operation of the Real Property, and (iii) to restore the Real Property to its prior condition after the performance of any such inspection. AGENDA ITEM #6. b) 3 3.2. Termination Option. Purchaser shall have the right to terminate this Agreement if it has determined in its sole discretion for any reason or no reason not to proceed with this transaction by giving written notice of such election to terminate to Seller by no later than 11:59 P.M. Pacific Standard Time on the last day of the Inspection Period, in which event (a) the Deposit shall be returned to Purchaser and (b) except as expressly provided for in this Agreement, neither Seller nor Purchaser shall have any further liability or obligation to the other under this Agreement. In the absence of such timely notice, Purchaser shall be deemed to have elected to terminate this Agreement and in such case this Agreement shall automatically terminate and be of no further force and effect except to the extent specifically provided herein and the Deposit shall be returned to Purchaser. 3.3. Purchaser’s Reports. At no cost to Seller, Purchaser shall deliver to Seller, as and when the same are received by Purchaser, copies of all third-party, non-proprietary reports and other information prepared by third parties, pursuant to this Section 3, for Purchaser relating to the Property, including, without limitation, the Title Commitment and Survey (as these terms are defined below), and engineering reports, provided that Seller shall be under no obligation to provide Purchaser with (i) any plans, drawings, permit applications and the like with respect to the project that Seller intended to pursue on the Real Property; and (ii) any environmental reports (it being acknowledged by Purchaser that all such relevant reports are on file with the Washington State Department of Ecology and can be reviewed by Purchaser at the following website: https://apps.ecology.wa.gov/cleanupsearch/site/2121#site-documents; such documentation, collectively referred to as the “DOE Closure Reports”). The provisions of this Section 3.3 shall survive the Closing or termination of the Agreement. 3.4. Title and Survey. Purchaser shall have the right to order (a) a title commitment relative to the Real Property (the “Title Commitment”) for a title policy from Escrow Agent (in its capacity as title insurer, the “Title Company”) and (b) an ALTA/ACSM survey of the Real Property (the “Survey”). 3.4.1. Title and Survey Objections. Purchaser shall have the right to object to any exceptions to the Title Commitment or matters shown on the Survey by giving written notice to Seller no later than fifteen (15) days following receipt of the last of the Title Commitment and Survey, if any, stating the matters to which Purchaser objects and the reasons therefor. If Purchaser timely objects to any matter affecting title or the Survey, then Seller shall, within five (5) business days after receipt of such written notice (but in any event, five (5) business day prior to expiration of the Inspection Period), notify Purchaser in writing of its election to Cure (as defined below) or not Cure Purchaser’s objections and, if Seller elects to Cure, Seller shall use reasonable efforts to Cure the same. Seller’s failure to timely notify Purchaser as set forth above shall be deemed an election not to Cure. If Seller elects not to Cure any such objections, Purchaser’s sole recourse shall be to exercise its right to terminate this Agreement during the Inspection Period as provided in Section 3.2 of this Agreement. In the event Purchaser does not terminate this Agreement during the Inspection Period, such objections shall become Permitted Exceptions hereunder. 3.4.2. New Title Matter. After the expiration of the Inspection Period, Purchaser shall have the right to object to any new title matters (i) that were not caused, requested by, or consented to by Purchaser, and (ii) that first appear in the land records of King County, Washington, after Purchaser’s receipt of the Title Commitment (a “New Title Matter”), by giving written notice to Seller no later than the date which is two (2) business days after Purchaser obtains knowledge of such New Title Matter. Within two (2) business days after Seller’s receipt of Purchaser’s objection to any New Title Matter, Seller shall notify Purchaser in writing of its election to Cure or not Cure Purchaser’s objections, and, if Seller elects not to Cure then Purchaser will have the same options as set forth above (i.e., to terminate this Agreement or to waive its objections and proceed to Closing, in which case such New Title Matters shall become Permitted Exceptions hereunder). If Seller receives a timely objection to a New Title Matter less than two (2) business days prior to Closing, then the Closing Date may be extended, at Seller’s option, to allow Seller a full two (2) business days to notify Purchaser of Seller’s election whether or not to Cure. If Seller elects AGENDA ITEM #6. b) 4 to Cure, then the Closing Date will be extended as provided in Section 3.4.4 to allow Seller the opportunity to effect such cure. 3.4.3. Cure. For purposes of this Section 3, the term “Cure” shall mean, at Seller’s election (i) the removal of such matter of record, (ii) the provision of information to the Title Company sufficient to remove such matter as a title exception in the Title Commitment, or (iii) the provision of a bond sufficient to cause the Title Company to remove such matter from the Title Commitment. 3.4.4. Seller’s Opportunity to Cure. If Seller elects to Cure any title or survey objection, Seller shall have a reasonable period of time, not to exceed sixty (60) days, to do so and the Closing Date shall be extended, if necessary, to the date such items are Cured. If such objections are not Cured within the foregoing time period, then Purchaser may either: (a) terminate this Agreement, in which event (i) the Deposit shall be returned to Purchaser, and (ii) except as expressly provided for in this Agreement, neither Seller nor Purchaser shall have any further liability or obligation to the other under this Agreement, or (b) proceed to Closing under this Agreement and take title to the Property subject to such unCured objections without any reduction in the Purchase Price, in which case such unCured objections shall become Permitted Exceptions. 3.4.5. Mandatory Cure Items. All deeds of trust, mortgages, and other monetary liens granted by Seller and all mechanic’s and materialmen’s liens filed in connection with work performed by Seller or Seller’s tenants (but excluding all liens caused by acts of Purchaser or its agents, employees, contractors or representatives) are deemed to be objections that Seller shall be obligated to Cure at or prior to Closing. 4. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF SELLER. 4.1. Representations and Warranties. Seller represents and warrants to Purchaser that the following are true and correct in all material respects as of the date hereof: 4.1.1. Authority. Seller is a limited liability company validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of Washington and qualified to do business in the State of Washington, and Seller has all requisite limited liability company power and authority to enter into this Agreement and all documents now or hereafter to be executed and delivered by Seller pursuant to this Agreement and to perform its obligations under this Agreement and under such documents. Seller shall have obtained by the Closing any consents necessary for it to enter into and perform this Agreement. 4.1.2. No Violation. The execution, delivery and performance by Seller of this Agreement will not result in a violation by Seller of its obligations under any of the following that are binding on Seller: (a) any judgment or order entered by any court or governmental body, (b) any governmental statute, ordinance, code, rule or regulation, or (c) any contract or agreement or indenture. 4.1.3. No Condemnation. Except with respect to the City of Renton, there are no pending or, to Seller’s knowledge, overtly threatened, condemnation, eminent domain or similar proceedings with respect to all or any portion of the Real Property. 4.1.4. Compliance. Seller has not received written notice from any governmental authority of any presently uncured material violations of any applicable governmental statute, ordinance, code, rule or regulation affecting the Real Property. 4.1.5. Litigation. There are no pending or, to Seller’s knowledge, overtly threatened, actions, suits or proceedings against or affecting Seller or the Property, or arising out of the ownership, AGENDA ITEM #6. b) 5 management or operation of the Property, this Agreement or the transactions contemplated by this Agreement that will bind or burden the Property after the Closing. 4.1.6. Leases. As of Closing, there will be no leases or rights of occupancy with respect to the Property. 4.1.7. FIRPTA. Seller is not a “foreign person” as defined in Section 1445(f)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. 4.1.8. Bankruptcy. Seller has not (a) commenced a voluntary case with respect to it or its assets, or to Seller’s knowledge had entered against it a petition, for relief under any federal bankruptcy act or any similar petition, order or decree under any federal or state law or statute relative to bankruptcy, insolvency or other relief for debtors, (b) caused, suffered or consented to the appointment of a receiver, trustee, administrator, conservator, liquidator, or similar official in any federal, state, or foreign judicial or non-judicial proceeding, to hold, administer and/or liquidate all or substantially all of its assets, or (c) made a general assignment for the benefit of creditors. 4.1.9. OFAC. Neither Seller nor, to Seller's current actual knowledge, any of its respective partners, members, shareholders or other equity owners, if any, is a person or entity with whom U.S. persons or entities are restricted from doing business under regulations of the Office of Foreign Asset Control (“OFAC”) of the Department of the Treasury (including those named on OFAC's Specially Designated and Blocked Persons List) or under any statute, executive order (including the September 24, 2001, Executive Order Blocking Property and Prohibiting Transactions with Persons Who Commit, Threaten to Commit, or Support Terrorism). 4.1.10. Notice of Violations. Seller has received no written notices of violations that are uncured at or by the Property of zoning, building, subdivision, fire, air pollution, business, occupancy, the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 12101, et seq., or Environmental Requirements (as defined below), rules or regulations relating to the Property or of other governmental action affecting the Property. 4.1.11. Environmental. Except to the extent disclosed in the DOE Closure Reports, (i) Seller has received no notice from any federal, state, county or municipal authority as to the existence of any Hazardous Materials (as defined below) at the Property in violation of law, (ii) Seller has no actual knowledge of the presence or release of Hazardous Materials on or from the Property during the time of Seller’s ownership thereof, and (iii) Seller has not used Hazardous Materials on the Property in violation of law during the time of Seller’s ownership thereof. 4.1.12. Property Rights. Seller is the owner of the Property. The Property is not subject to any outstanding agreement of sale, option, right of first refusal, or other right of any third party to acquire any interest therein, except this Agreement. 4.1.13. Utilities. All bills for services performed or materials furnished to the Real Property have been paid in full, or Seller will cause all such bills to be paid in full prior to the Closing Date, and there are no mechanic or materialman liens against the Real Property. Seller has not received any written notice of any proposed, planned or actual curtailment of service of any utility supplied to the Real Property. 4.2. Survival. Seller’s representations and warranties contained in Section 4.1 and 4.2 of this Agreement shall survive the Closing for a period (the “Survival Period”) of twelve (12) months and any action brought on Seller’s representations and warranties shall be commenced within said Survival Period or shall be forever barred and waived. Seller represents, warrants, and covenants to maintain its existence AGENDA ITEM #6. b) 6 and a minimum tangible net worth to cover any claims that may arise during the Survival Period (and thereafter until the final resolution of any claims of which Purchaser provides written notice to Seller within the Survival Period), which obligation shall survive Closing. Purchaser may not assert any claim for a breach of any representation or warranty pursuant to Section 4.1 or 4.2 of this Agreement unless valid claims for all such breaches collectively aggregate more than Twenty-Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000), in which event Purchaser must assert all its claims simultaneously. Seller’s aggregate liability to Purchaser by reason of a breach of one or more of Seller’s representations and warranties pursuant to Section 4.1 or 4.2 of this Agreement cannot exceed five percent (5%) of the Purchase Price. The foregoing notwithstanding, if the Closing occurs, Purchaser expressly waives, relinquishes and releases any rights or remedies available to it at law, in equity, under this Agreement or otherwise, for damages Purchaser may incur as the result of any of Seller’s representations or warranties contained herein being untrue, inaccurate or incorrect if Purchaser had actual knowledge that such representation or warranty was untrue, inaccurate or incorrect at the time of the Closing. 4.3. Definitions. 4.3.1. As used herein, the term “Hazardous Materials” shall mean any substance which is or contains (i) any “hazardous substance” as now or hereafter defined in 101(14) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (42 USC 9601 et seq.) (“CERCLA”) or any regulations promulgated under CERCLA; (ii) any “Hazardous Waste” as now or hereafter defined in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (42 USC 6901 et seq.) (“RCRA”) or regulations promulgated under RCRA; (iii) any substance regulated by the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 USC 2601 et seq.); (iv) gasoline, diesel fuel, or other petroleum hydrocarbons; (v) asbestos and asbestos containing materials, in any form, whether friable or non-friable; (vi) polychlorinated biphenyls; (vii) radon gas; and (viii) any additional substances or materials which are now or hereafter classified or considered to be hazardous or toxic under environmental requirements or the common law, state law or any other applicable laws relating to the Property. Hazardous Materials shall include, without limitation, any substance, the presence of which on the Property, (a) requires reporting, monitoring, investigation or remediation under environmental requirements; (b) causes or threatens to cause a nuisance on the Property or adjacent property or poses or threatens to pose a hazard to the health or safety of persons on the Property or adjacent property; or (c) which, if it emanated or migrated from the Property, could constitute a trespass. 4.3.2. As used herein, the term “Environmental Requirements” shall mean all laws, ordinances, statutes, codes, rules, regulations, agreements, judgments, orders, and decrees, now or hereafter enacted, promulgated, or amended, of the United States, the State of Washington, the counties, the cities, or any other political subdivisions in which the Property is located, and any other political subdivision, agency or instrumentality exercising jurisdiction over the owner of the Property, the Property, or the use of the Property, relating to (i) pollution, (ii) the protection or regulation of human health, natural resources, or the environment, or (iii) the emission, discharge, release or threatened release of pollutants, contaminants, chemicals, or industrial, toxic or hazardous substances or waste or hazardous materials into the environment (including, without limitation, ambient air, indoor air, surface water, ground water or land or soil). 5. COVENANTS. 5.1. Maintenance of Real Property. From and after the date of this Agreement through the Closing, the Real Property will be operated and managed by or on behalf of Seller in a manner substantially consistent with the way the Real Property is presently being operated and managed. 5.2. Leases. During the pendency of this Agreement, Seller shall not execute any new lease or occupancy agreement affecting the Real Property or any part thereof or modify or alter any existing lease (“Existing Lease”) other than to terminate such Existing Lease on or before Closing. AGENDA ITEM #6. b) 7 5.3. Contracts. During the pendency of this Agreement, Seller shall not: (a) execute any new contract or service agreement affecting the Real Property, or any part thereof which will be binding on Purchaser; or (b) materially amend or modify any existing contract or service agreement (“Existing Contract”) if such amendment or modification will be binding on Purchaser following Closing, other than to terminate such Existing Contract on or before Closing. 5.4. Termination of Existing Leases and Existing Contracts. Seller will terminate all Existing Leases and Existing Contracts prior to the Closing Date. 5.5. Negative Covenants. From the Effective Date until the Closing Date, Seller shall not take any of the following actions without the prior express written consent of Purchaser, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed: (a) make or permit to be made any material alterations to or upon the Real Property or any part of the Real Property; (b) grant any liens or encumbrances upon the Property that will not be discharged upon the Closing; or (c) remove or permit the removal from the Real Property of any fixtures, mechanical equipment, or any other item included in the Real Property. 6. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF PURCHASER. 6.1. Representations and Warranties. Purchaser represents and warrants to Seller as follows as of the date hereof: 6.2. Authority. Purchaser is a municipal corporation and Purchaser has all requisite power and authority to enter into this Agreement and all documents now or hereafter to be executed and delivered by Purchaser pursuant to this Agreement and to perform its obligations under this Agreement and under such documents. Purchaser has obtained any consents necessary for it to enter into this Agreement. 6.3. No Violation. The execution, delivery and performance by Purchaser of this Agreement will not result in a violation by Purchaser of (a) any judgment or order entered by any court or governmental body, (b) any governmental statute, ordinance, code, rule or regulation, or (c) any contract or agreement or indenture. 6.4. Bankruptcy. Purchaser has not (a) commenced a voluntary case with respect to it or its assets, or had entered against it a petition, for relief under any federal bankruptcy act or any similar petition, order or decree under any federal or state law or statute relative to bankruptcy, insolvency or other relief for debtors, (b) caused, suffered or consented to the appointment of a receiver, trustee, administrator, conservator, liquidator, or similar official in any federal, state, or foreign judicial or non-judicial proceeding, to hold, administer and/or liquidate all or substantially all of its assets, or (c) made a general assignment for the benefit of creditors. 7. CONDITIONS TO CLOSING. 7.1. Purchaser’s Conditions. Purchaser’s obligation to consummate Closing pursuant to this Agreement is conditioned upon the satisfaction (or waiver by Purchaser) of the following conditions on and as of the Closing Date: 7.1.1. Full Performance. Seller shall have performed and satisfied its obligations under this Agreement in all material respects. 7.1.2. Representations and Warranties. The representations and warranties of Seller shall be true and correct in all material respects as of the Closing. AGENDA ITEM #6. b) 8 7.1.3. Owner’s Policy. The Title Company’s issuance to Purchaser of an owner’s title insurance policy consistent with the provisions of Section 3.4 and Section 9.2. 7.1.4. Condemnation; Casualty. No portion of the Property shall have been taken or damaged by any public or quasi-public body, and Seller shall not have transferred any portion of the Property to any such body in lieu of condemnation. 7.2. Seller’s Conditions. Seller’s obligation to consummate Closing pursuant to this Agreement is conditioned upon the satisfaction (or waiver by Seller) of the following conditions on and as of the Closing Date: 7.2.1. Purchaser shall have performed and satisfied its obligations under this Agreement in all material respects. 7.2.2. The representations and warranties of Purchaser shall be true and correct in all material respects as of the Closing. 7.3. Failure of Condition. In the event that any condition set forth in Sections 7.1 or 7.2 is not satisfied or waived by Purchaser or Seller, as the case may be, on or as of the Closing Date, and the other party is not otherwise in default hereunder, the sole right of Purchaser and Seller, as applicable, shall be to either (a) terminate this Agreement by delivering written notice of such termination to the other party on or prior to the Closing Date, in which event the Deposit shall be returned to Purchaser and the parties shall have no further obligations or liabilities to the other hereunder, except as expressly provided for in this Agreement, or (b) waive the satisfaction of such condition or conditions and proceed to Closing in accordance with and subject to the terms of this Agreement; provided, however, that the foregoing shall not relieve either party of any liability to the other for the breach of any representation or warranty set forth in this Agreement if such party has no knowledge of such breach and elects to proceed to Closing. 8. CLOSING DELIVERIES. 8.1. Seller’s Closing Deliveries. At Closing, Seller shall deliver, or cause to be delivered, into escrow with the Escrow Agent the following with respect to the Property: 8.1.1. Deed. A Bargain and Sale Deed (the “Deed”) for the Real Property substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit B conveying to Purchaser title to the Real Property, free from all liens, encumbrances, easements, conditions and other matters affecting title except the Permitted Exceptions. 8.1.2. Assignment of Intangible Property. With respect to Intangible Property, execute the Assignment of Intangible Property substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit C (“Assignment of Intangible Property”). 8.1.3. FIRPTA. Execute and deliver an affidavit certifying that Seller is not a “foreign person” as defined in the Federal Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act of 1980, and the 1984 Reform Tax Act, as amended. 8.1.4. REETA. A Real Estate Excise Tax Affidavit (“REETA”) together with any transfer documents or certificates required by any applicable governing body or law to complete this transaction as a transfer under an imminent threat of the exercise of eminent domain by Purchaser. AGENDA ITEM #6. b) 9 8.1.5. Closing Statement. A closing and proration statement agreed to by the parties which reflects all adjustments to the Purchase Price contemplated by this Agreement (the “Closing Statement”). 8.1.6. Authorization; Owner’s Affidavit. In connection with the issuance of Purchaser’s title policy, Seller agrees to provide to the Title Company such evidence of authority and authorizations of Seller as Title Company may reasonably require, as well as such affidavits or indemnities as may be reasonably necessary for issuance of Purchaser’s title policy with extended coverage and to remove therefrom the standard pre-printed exception for mechanics liens. 8.1.7. Other Documents. All other documents reasonably required to effectuate this Agreement and the transaction contemplated by this Agreement. 8.2. Purchaser’s Closing Deliveries. At Closing, Purchaser shall deliver, or cause to be delivered, into escrow with the Escrow Agent the following with respect to the Property: 8.2.1. Purchase Price. The Purchase Price, adjusted in accordance with the provisions of Section 9 hereof. 8.2.2. REETA. A counterpart original of the REETA. 8.2.3. Closing Statement. A counterpart of the Closing Statement. 8.2.4. Other Documents. All other documents reasonably required to effectuate this Agreement and the transaction contemplated by this Agreement. 8.3. Possession. On the Closing Date, Seller shall deliver to Purchaser possession of the Property free and clear of monetary encumbrances, any Existing Leases or rights of possession in favor of third parties. 9. APPORTIONMENTS; EXPENSES. 9.1. Apportionments. The following matters shall be apportioned and adjusted between Seller and Purchaser as of the Closing Date. 9.1.1. Taxes. Applicable real estate and personal property taxes for the Property shall be apportioned as of the Closing Date (i.e., with Seller being responsible for all such amounts payable with respect to the period up to but not including the Closing Date and with Purchaser being responsible for all such amounts payable with respect to the period from and after the Closing Date). The term “real estate taxes” shall include any installments of special or similar assessments, assessments relating to a local improvement district or leasehold excise tax. Water and sewer charges, including any such charges that may be the subject of a municipal lien, whether or not due, shall be prorated. 9.1.2. Operating Expenses. All maintenance, management, electricity, water, gas, sewage and other utility and operating expenses, if any, applicable to the Real Property shall be prorated between Seller and Purchaser as of the Closing Date based on estimates of the amounts that will be due and payable on the next payment date, unless final readings or invoices therefor as of the Closing Date shall have been obtained, in which case such final readings shall be utilized as the basis for adjustment. Any and all deposits, if any, held by utility companies or with other providers of services to the Real Property shall remain the property of Seller and be returned to Seller by such companies and providers except to the extent that Purchaser elects to pay to Seller the amount of any such deposits and accruals, if any, thereon. AGENDA ITEM #6. b) 10 9.1.3. Declaration Reimbursements and Expenses. All common area maintenance reimbursements and other amounts due, if any, from Seller under any declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions, or other instrument of record or disclosed to Purchaser in writing and affecting the Property shall be prorated between Seller and Purchaser as of the Closing Date, with Seller being responsible for all such amounts payable with respect to the period up to but not including the Closing Date and with Purchaser being responsible for all such amounts payable with respect to the period from and after the Closing Date. 9.1.4. Calculations; Survival. Except as otherwise set forth herein, all items to be apportioned and adjusted pursuant to this Section 9.1 shall be prorated as of 11:59 p.m. of the day immediately preceding the Closing Date. All items of income and expense which accrue for the period prior to the Closing will be for the account of Seller and all items of income and expense which accrue for the period on and after the Closing will be for the account of Purchaser. All such prorations shall be made on the basis of the actual number of days of the month which shall have elapsed as of the day of the Closing and based upon the actual number of days in the month and a three hundred sixty-five (365) day year. The amount of such apportionments and adjustments shall be initially performed at Closing but shall be subject to adjustment in cash after the Closing as and when complete and accurate information becomes available, if such information is not available at the Closing; provided, however, that Seller and Purchaser agree that there shall be no further adjustments under this Section 9.1.4 9.1.4after the date that is four (4) months after the Closing Date. Any payment required in connection with any adjustments hereunder shall be made within ten (10) days after such adjustments. The provisions of this Section 9 shall survive the Closing. 9.2. Expenses. 9.2.1. Seller’s Expenses. Seller shall pay expenses incurred by Seller in connection with the transaction contemplated by this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the sale contemplated by this Agreement, being under an imminent threat of the exercise of eminent domain, shall be reported as exempt from imposition of real estate excise tax. 9.2.2. Purchaser’s Expenses. Purchaser shall pay: (a) all recording fees in connection with recording the Deed, (b) all premiums related to Purchaser’s title insurance policy, (c) expenses incurred by Purchaser in connection with the transaction contemplated by this Agreement and (d) fees charged by Escrow Agent. 10. DEFAULT AND REMEDIES. 10.1. Seller’s Remedies. If Purchaser defaults in its obligation to close under this Agreement, Seller shall be entitled to receive the entire Deposit as agreed liquidated damages (and not as a penalty) and as Seller’s sole remedy, in lieu of, and as full compensation for, all other rights or claims of Seller against Purchaser by reason of such default. Upon such payment to Seller of the Deposit, this Agreement shall terminate and, except as expressly provided for in this Agreement, neither Seller nor Purchaser shall have any further liability or obligation under this Agreement. Purchaser and Seller acknowledge that the damages to Seller resulting from Purchaser’s breach would be difficult, if not impossible, to ascertain with any accuracy, and that the liquidated damage amount set forth in this Section 10.110.1 represents both parties’ reasonable efforts to approximate such potential damages. 10.2. Purchaser’s Remedies. If Seller defaults in its obligation to close under this Agreement, Purchaser’s sole remedy therefor shall be to either (a) bring an action for specific performance of Seller’s obligation under this Agreement to deliver the documents required under Section 8.1 above, provided that any action for specific performance must be initiated no later than thirty (30) days after the date that Closing is otherwise required to occur under this Agreement; or (b) terminate this Agreement and receive the entire Deposit and reimbursement from Seller for Purchaser’s out-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection with AGENDA ITEM #6. b) 11 this Agreement and Purchaser’s due diligence activities contemplated in this Agreement in which event neither Seller nor Purchaser shall have any further liability or obligation under this Agreement except as expressly provided for in this Agreement. In the event that Purchaser elects to seek specific performance under this Section 10.2, Seller shall not be obligated to expend any money to change the condition of the Property or the state of title of the Property. 10.3. Remedies Exclusive. By the express agreement of Purchaser and Seller, the remedies set forth in this Section 10.3 constitute the sole remedies at law or in equity available to Purchaser and Seller, as the case may be, on account of the other party’s breach of its obligations to close under this Agreement, provided, however, to the extent any terms or provisions of this Agreement are specifically intended to survive the Closing and delivery of the Deed or the termination of this Agreement, either party shall have all remedies with respect thereto as may be available at law or in equity. In no event, however, shall either party to this Agreement be liable for any consequential, special, indirect or punitive damages. 11. AS-IS; RELEASE 11.1. As-Is. SUBJECT TO SELLER’S REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES EXPRESSLY SET FORTH IN SECTION 4.1 AND IN THE DOCUMENTS DELIVERED BY SELLER AT CLOSING (COLLECTIVELY, THE “SELLER REPRESENTATIONS”), AND ACKNOWLEDGING PURCHASER’S OPPORTUNITY TO INSPECT THE PROPERTY, PURCHASER AGREES TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY “AS IS”, “WHERE IS”, WITH ALL FAULTS AND CONDITIONS THEREON. ANY WRITTEN OR ORAL INFORMATION, REPORTS, STATEMENTS, DOCUMENTS OR RECORDS CONCERNING THE PROPERTY (“DISCLOSURES”) PROVIDED OR MADE AVAILABLE TO PURCHASER OR PURCHASER’S REPRESENTATIVES BY SELLER OR SELLER’S REPRESENTATIVES WILL NOT BE REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES, UNLESS SPECIFICALLY SET FORTH IN THE SELLER REPRESENTATIONS. IN PURCHASING THE PROPERTY OR TAKING OTHER ACTION HEREUNDER, PURCHASER HAS NOT AND WILL NOT RELY ON ANY SUCH DISCLOSURES (EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT COVERED BY THE SELLER REPRESENTATIONS), BUT RATHER, PURCHASER WILL RELY ONLY ON PURCHASER’S OWN INSPECTION OF THE PROPERTY. PURCHASER ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE PURCHASE PRICE REFLECTS THE FACT THAT THE PROPERTY IS BEING SOLD “AS IS,” “WHERE IS,” AND WITH ALL FAULTS. PURCHASER ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT EXCEPT FOR THE SELLER REPRESENTATIONS, SELLER HAS NOT MADE, DOES NOT MAKE AND SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS ANY REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES, PROMISES, COVENANTS, AGREEMENTS OR GUARANTIES OF ANY KIND OR CHARACTER WHATSOEVER, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ORAL OR WRITTEN, PAST, PRESENT OR FUTURE, OF, AS TO, CONCERNING OR WITH RESPECT TO: (I) THE VALUE, NATURE, QUALITY OR CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE WATER, SOIL AND GEOLOGY; (II) THE INCOME TO BE DERIVED FROM THE PROPERTY; (III) THE SUITABILITY OF THE PROPERTY FOR ANY ACTIVITIES AND USES THAT PURCHASER MAY CONDUCT THEREON; (IV) THE COMPLIANCE OF OR BY THE PROPERTY OR ITS OPERATION WITH ANY LAWS, RULES, ORDINANCES OR REGULATIONS OF ANY APPLICABLE GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITY; (V) THE HABITABILITY, MERCHANTABILITY, MARKETABILITY, PROFITABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OF THE PROPERTY; (VI) THE MANNER OR QUALITY OF THE CONSTRUCTION OR MATERIALS, IF ANY, INCORPORATED INTO THE PROPERTY; (VII) THE QUALITY, STATE OF REPAIR OR LACK OF REPAIR OF THE PROPERTY; (VIII) COMPLIANCE WITH ANY ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, POLLUTION OR LAND USE LAWS, RULES, REGULATIONS, ORDERS OR REQUIREMENTS; (IX) THE CONDITION OF THE SOILS OR GROUNDWATER OF THE PROPERTY OR THE PRESENCE OR AGENDA ITEM #6. b) 12 ABSENCE OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES ON, UNDER OR ABOUT THE REAL PROPERTY; OR (X) ANY OTHER MATTER WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY; AND PURCHASER HEREBY WAIVES ANY RIGHT TO MAKE ANY CLAIM BASED ON ANY OF THE FOREGOING, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY RIGHT TO MAKE ANY CLAIM AGAINST SELLER BASED ON THE VIOLATION OF ANY ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS. THE PARTIES ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT, UNLESS OTHERWISE REQUIRED BY LAW, SELLER IS UNDER NO DUTY TO MAKE ANY AFFIRMATIVE DISCLOSURES REGARDING ANY MATTER WHICH MAY BE KNOWN TO SELLER. 11.2. Release. Subject to the Seller Representations or any document executed and delivered by Seller at Closing, effective as of Closing, Purchaser on behalf of itself, any permitted assignees of Purchaser, and any other person claiming by, through, or under Purchaser, hereby waives its right to recover from, and forever releases and discharges, Seller, and its heirs, successors, personal representatives and assigns from any and all claims (including, without limitation, any right of contribution or private right that Purchaser may now or hereafter acquire), whether direct or indirect, known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, foreseen or unforeseen, that may arise on account of or in any way be connected with: (i) the physical condition of the Property, including, without limitation, all structural and seismic elements; the condition, valuation, or utility of the Property; title and survey matters with respect to the Property; and the environmental condition of the Property and the presence of any Hazardous Materials on, under or about the Property; and (ii) any law or regulation applicable to the Property, including, without limitation, any Environmental Requirements. To the extent permitted by law, Purchaser hereby agrees, realizes and acknowledges that factual matters now unknown to Purchaser may have given or may hereafter give rise to causes of action, claims, demands, debts, controversies, damages, costs, losses and expenses which are presently unknown, unanticipated and unsuspected, and Purchaser further agrees that it waives (and by Closing this transaction will be deemed to have waived) any and all objections and complaints concerning the physical characteristics and any existing conditions of the Property, and that the waivers and releases herein have been negotiated and agreed upon in light of that realization and that Purchaser nevertheless hereby intends to release, discharge and acquit Seller from any such unknown causes of action, claims, demands, debts, controversies, damages, costs, losses and expenses. The releases set forth in this Section will become effective upon the Closing. Purchaser further hereby assumes the risk of changes in applicable laws, including any relevant Environmental Requirements and regulations relating to past, present and future environmental conditions on the Property and the risk that adverse physical characteristics and conditions, including, without limitation, the presence of Hazardous Materials or other contaminants, may not have been revealed by its investigation. 12. FURTHER ASSURANCES. After the Closing, Seller and Purchaser agree to perform such other acts, and to execute, acknowledge and deliver, such other instruments, documents and other materials as the other may reasonably request (at no cost or liability to the performing party) and as shall be necessary in order to effect the consummation of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement or to provide further assurances of any transfer, conveyance or assignment made pursuant to this Agreement. The provisions of this Section 11 shall survive the Closing for a period of one year. 13. NOTICES. Except as may be otherwise provided in this Agreement, all notices, demands, requests or other communications required or permitted to be given under this Agreement must be delivered to the following addresses (a) personally, by hand delivery; (b) by Federal Express or a similar internationally recognized AGENDA ITEM #6. b) 13 overnight courier service; or (c) by email. All such notices, demands, requests or other communications shall be deemed to have been given for all purposes of this Agreement upon the date of receipt or refusal (or upon transmission if by email), except that whenever under this Agreement a notice is either received on a day which is not a business day or is required to be delivered on or before a specific day which is not a business day, the day of receipt or required delivery shall automatically be extended to the next business day. If to Seller: SRMRenton, LLC c/o SRM Development, LLC 111 N. Post Street, Ste. 200 Spokane, Washington 99201 Attn: James D. Rivard Email address: jim@srmdevelopment.com And to: SRMRenton, LLC c/o Merlino Properties 5050 1st Avenue S., Suite 102 Seattle, Washington 98134 Attn: Jimmy Blais Email address: jblais@gmccinc.net with a copy to: Lukins & Annis, P.S. 717 S. Sprague Avenue, Suite 1600 Spokane, Washington 99201 Attention: Tyler Black Email address: tblack@lukins.com If to Purchaser: City of Renton 1055 S Grady Way Renton, Washington 98057 Attention: Gina Estep, Community and Economic Development Administrator Email address: gestep@Rentonwa.gov with a copy to: Pacifica Law Group LLP 1191 Second Avenue, Suite 2000 Seattle, Washington 98101 Attention: John De Lanoy Email: john.delanoy@pacificalawgroup.com AGENDA ITEM #6. b) 14 And with a copy to: City Clerk 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Email: cityclerk@rentonwa.gov Notice given by counsel to a party to this Agreement shall be considered notice given by such party. Any party to this Agreement or its counsel may designate a different address for itself by notice given in the manner set forth above. 14. BROKERS. Purchaser and Seller each represent to the other that it has not dealt with any broker or agent in connection with this transaction. Each of Purchaser and Seller hereby indemnifies and holds harmless the other from all loss, cost and expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses) arising out of a breach of its representation or undertaking set forth in this Section 13. The provisions of this Section 13 shall survive Closing or the termination of this Agreement. 15. MISCELLANEOUS. 15.1. Assignability. Purchaser may not assign or transfer all or any portion of its rights or obligations under this Agreement to any other individual, entity or person without the prior written consent thereto by Seller. However, Purchaser may, without the consent of Seller but after written notice to Seller at least ten (10) days prior to Closing, (i) direct that the deed be granted to an entity under common control with Purchaser by notice to Seller or (ii) assign its rights under this Agreement to an entity under common control with Purchaser. No assignment or transfer by Purchaser will release Purchaser of its obligations under this Agreement. 15.2. Governing Law; Parties in Interest. This Agreement shall be governed by the law of the Washington without giving effect to its conflicts of law principles and shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties to this Agreement and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and permitted assigns. 15.3. Recording. No notice or memorandum of this Agreement shall be recorded in any public record. A violation of this prohibition shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement. 15.4. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of each and every provision of this Agreement. 15.5. Headings. The headings preceding the text of the sections and subsections hereof are inserted solely for convenience of reference and shall not constitute a part of this Agreement, nor shall they affect its meaning, construction or effect. 15.6. Counterparts; Signatures. This Agreement, and any amendments hereto, may be executed simultaneously in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. Electronic signatures or signatures delivered electronically (e.g. via pdf file) shall be deemed to be the equivalent of original signatures for purposes of this Agreement and any amendments hereto. 15.7. Exhibits. All Exhibits which are referred to in this Agreement and which are attached to this Agreement are expressly made and constitute a part of this Agreement. AGENDA ITEM #6. b) 15 15.8. Merger. Except as otherwise specifically provided in this Agreement, the acceptance of the Deed by the recordation thereof shall be deemed to be a full and complete performance and discharge of every agreement and obligation of Seller contained in this Agreement. 15.9. Entire Agreement; Amendments. This Agreement and the Exhibits to this Agreement set forth all of the covenants, representations, warranties, agreements, conditions and undertakings between the parties to this Agreement with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement, and supersede all prior and contemporaneous agreements and understandings, inducements or conditions, express or implied, oral or written. This Agreement may not be changed orally but only by an agreement in writing, duly executed by or on behalf of the party or parties against whom enforcement of any waiver, change, modification, consent or discharge is sought. 15.10. Jury Trial Waiver. To the extent permitted under applicable law, each party hereby waives trial by jury in any action, proceeding, claim or counterclaim brought by either party in connection with any matter arising out of or in any way connected with this Agreement and the relationship of Purchaser and Seller under this Agreement. This jury trial waiver provision shall survive the Closing or the termination of this Agreement. 15.11. Exclusive Jurisdiction. Any claim, counterclaim or other action arising under this Agreement shall be brought only in the state or cognizant federal courts in the Washington. This provision shall survive the Closing or the termination of this Agreement. 15.12. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is for the sole benefit of the parties to this Agreement (and their respective successors and permitted assigns), and no other person or entity shall be deemed to be a third-party beneficiary of this Agreement. 15.13. Business Day. For purposes of this Agreement, “business day” means any day on which business is generally transacted by banks in the state of Washington. If a date or the expiration date of any period that is set out in any paragraph of this Agreement falls upon a day that is not a business day, then, in such event, the date or expiration date of such period shall be extended to the next business day. 15.14. Severability. If any one or more of the provisions hereof shall for any reason be held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision hereof, and this Agreement shall be construed as if such invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision had never been contained herein. 15.15. 1031 or 1033 Exchange. Purchaser and Seller hereby acknowledge that it is possible that the other party may wish to complete a deferred tax-free exchange and qualify for treatment under Section 1031 or 1033 of the Internal Revenue Code. The exchange shall not delay the Closing. The exchanging party’s rights and obligations under this Agreement may be assigned to a Qualified Intermediary (as defined in IRS Regulation 1.1031(k)-1) of such party’s choice, for the purpose of completing the exchange. Each party agrees to cooperate with the other party and the Qualified Intermediary in a manner necessary to complete the exchanging party’s exchange, provided that the other party is not responsible for any additional cost or liability as a result of cooperation with the exchanging party and the Qualified Intermediary to consummate such transaction. 15.16. Confidentiality. Subject to public disclosure laws, Purchaser and Seller shall each maintain as confidential any and all non-public material obtained about the other and, in the case of Purchaser, about the Property, and shall not disclose such information to any third party, except as necessary for the performance of the parties’ obligations hereunder and the completion of the transactions described herein and except to its current and prospective members, managers, partners, owners, directors, officers, AGENDA ITEM #6. b) 16 employees, agents, lenders, investors, contractors, attorneys, and consultants. This provision shall survive Closing or any termination of this Agreement. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, the parties acknowledge that the Purchaser is a governmental agency subject to Chapter 42.56 RCW, Washington State’s Public Records Act. Any materials Seller deems to be confidential or proprietary pursuant to this agreement must be clearly identified as such by Seller. To the extent consistent with RCW 42.56, Purchaser shall maintain the confidentiality of all such information marked confidential or proprietary. If a request is made to view Seller’s confidential or proprietary information, Purchaser will notify Seller of the request and give Purchaser not less than ten (10) business days to allow Seller to seek a protective order or other remedy pursuant to RCW 42.56.540 that such information is exempt from public disclosure. If Seller fails to obtain a court order enjoining disclosure, Purchaser will release the requested information on the date required by applicable law. The provisions of this Section 14.16 shall survive any termination of this Agreement. 16. Threat of Condemnation. By separate action, Purchaser has approved the acquisition of the Property, including through use of eminent domain. In connection with the foregoing, Seller represents and covenants as follows: 16.1. Seller waives its right to require Purchaser to comply with the acquisition procedures under RCW 8.26.180; 16.2. Seller waives its right to notice of final action under RCW 8.25.290; 16.3. Seller waives its right to adjudication of the issue of public use and necessity; and 15.4 Seller affirms that no individual or business occupies the real property being acquired and therefore no individual or business will be displaced by the Purchaser’s project (as defined by RCW Chapter 8.26). 17. Naming Rights. Following Closing, subject to consultation with and approval by Purchaser (which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed), Seller shall have the right to select and name two (2) distinct and significant features of Seller’s choosing within the future park constructed by Purchaser on the Real Property. 18. SCHEDULE OF EXHIBITS. 18.1. Exhibit A-1 Depiction of the Real Property 18.2. Exhibit A-2 Legal Description of the Real Property 18.3. Exhibit B Form of Deed 18.4. Exhibit C Form of Assignment of Intangible Property [Signature Page Follows] AGENDA ITEM #6. b) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed and delivered this Agreement as of the date first above written. SELLER: SRMRenton, LLC, a Washington limited liability company By: SRM Development, LLC, a Washington limited liability company Its: Manager By: Name: James D. Rivard Its: Authorized Member Date: By: Maple Valley, LLC, a Washington limited liability company By: Name: Gary Merlino Its: Manager Date: PURCHASER: City of Renton, a municipal corporation By: Name: Its: Date: ATTEST: Jason A. Seth, City Clerk Date: Approved as to Legal Form By: Shane Moloney, City Attorney Date: [Signature Page to Purchase and Sale Agreement] AGENDA ITEM #6. b) EXHIBIT A-1 DEPICTION OF THE REAL PROPERTY AGENDA ITEM #6. b) 121176704v7 EXHIBIT A-2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE REAL PROPERTY THOSE PORTIONS OF GOVERNMENT LOTS 4, 6, AND 7, BEING A PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER AND THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 17; THENCE NORTH 89°45’17” WEST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 1325.66 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 7; THENCE SOUTH 01°08’15” WEST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF GOVERNMENT LOT 7, A DISTANCE OF 561.54 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THAT STRIP OF LAND CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 20070716001845, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID STRIP OF LAND THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES: NORTH 43°36’56” WEST A DISTANCE OF 45.84 FEET; THENCE NORTH 45°13’07” WEST A DISTANCE OF 162.69 FEET; THENCE NORTH 45°01’03” WEST A DISTANCE OF 71.93 FEET; THENCE NORTH 44°48’32” WEST A DISTANCE OF 43.14 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 44°34’17” WEST A DISTANCE OF 18.55 FEET; THENCE NORTH 45°25’13” WEST A DISTANCE OF 97.58 FEET; THENCE NORTH 44°37’55” EAST A DISTANCE OF 20.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 44°56’28” WEST A DISTANCE OF 34.44 FEET; THENCE NORTH 44°05’34” WEST A DISTANCE OF 53.75 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 45°14’28” WEST A DISTANCE OF 3.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 44°05’34” WEST A DISTANCE OF 10.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 45°14’28” EAST A DISTANCE OF 3.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 44°05’34” WEST A DISTANCE OF 58.64 FEET; THENCE NORTH 43°03’39” WEST A DISTANCE OF 81.48 FEET; THENCE NORTH 42°20’14” WEST A DISTANCE OF 9.80 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 47°24’25” WEST A DISTANCE OF 3.04 FEET; THENCE NORTH 42°28’13” WEST A DISTANCE OF 10.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 47°24’25” EAST A DISTANCE OF 3.02 FEET; THENCE NORTH 42°20’15” WEST A DISTANCE OF 30.15 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 47°56’38” WEST A DISTANCE OF 2.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 42°03’22” WEST A DISTANCE OF 15.04 FEET; THENCE NORTH 47°56’38” EAST A DISTANCE OF 2.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 41°42’44” WEST A DISTANCE OF 52.17 FEET; THENCE NORTH 86°11’31” WEST A DISTANCE OF 19.84 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY OF THAT PARCEL OF LAND CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 20060515000366, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL AND THE SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY OF THAT PARCEL OF LAND CONVEYED TO THE AGENDA ITEM #6. b) 121176704v7 CITY OF RENTON BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 20060515000380 RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, ALONG THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES: SOUTH 47°51’06” WEST A DISTANCE OF 34.62 FEET; THENCE NORTH 42°08’54” WEST A DISTANCE OF 10.48 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 47°51’06” WEST A DISTANCE OF 3.44 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWEST ALONG THE ARC OF A TANGENT CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 394.50 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 04°35’00”, A DISTANCE OF 31.56 FEET; THENCE NORTH 37°33’54” WEST A DISTANCE OF 4.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWEST ALONG THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE TO THE RIGHT THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 37°33’54” WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 390.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 18°08’11”, A DISTANCE OF 123.45 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARIES SOUTH 47°51’38” WEST A DISTANCE OF 31.45 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88°45’08” WEST A DISTANCE OF 251.95 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 39°43’43” WEST A DISTANCE OF 73.20 FEET; THENCE NORTH 78°45’32” WEST A DISTANCE OF 176.04 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 28°17’28” WEST A DISTANCE OF 410.47 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER LINE OF THE RIGHT BANK OF THE CEDAR RIVER; THENCE EASTERLY, ALONG SAID ORDINARY HIGH WATER LINE, TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 7 WHICH BEARS SOUTH 01°08’15” WEST FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 01°08’15” EAST A DISTANCE OF 204.49 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. TOGETHER WITH THAT PARCEL OF LAND THE BOUNDARY OF WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE NORTH 89°45’17” EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 17, 1325.66 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF GOVERNMENT LOT 7 OF SAID SECTION 17; THENCE SOUTH 01°08’15” EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 7, 699.60 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 86°05’30” EAST, 8.05 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 46°07’13” EAST, 10.07 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 32°15’04” EAST, 9.90 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 23°06’52” EAST, 20.37 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 20°04’33” EAST, 10.70 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 55°58’38” WEST, 9.81 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 60°06’50” WEST, 10.27 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 68°03’20” WEST, 9.72 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 67°57’27” WEST, 8.01 FEET TO SAID EAST LINE OF LOT 7; THENCE NORTH 01°08’15” EAST, 61.95 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 1,340 SQUARE FEET OF LAND, MORE OR LESS EXCEPT THAT PARCEL OF LAND THE BOUNDARY OF WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; AGENDA ITEM #6. b) 121176704v7 THENCE NORTH 89°45’17” EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 17, 1325.66 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF GOVERNMENT LOT 7 OF SAID SECTION 17; THENCE SOUTH 01°08’15” EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 7,561.54 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID EAST LINE, SOUTH 01°08’15” WEST, 138.06 FEET; THENCE NORTH 86°05’30” WEST, 3.63 FEET; THENCE NORTH 28°28’36” WEST, 31.94 FEET; THENCE NORTH 01°47’52” WEST, 32.22 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00°40’25” WEST, 56.39 FEET; THENCE NORTH 03°09’34” EAST, 24.54 FEET; THENCE NORTH 03°48’48” WEST, 21.14 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THAT STRIP OF LAND CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 20070716001845, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE SOUTH 43°36’56” EAST, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, 33.81 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 2,955 SQUARE FEET OF LAND, MORE OF LESS. AGENDA ITEM #6. b) EXHIBIT B FORM OF DEED FORM OF BARGAIN AND SALE DEED After recording, return to: City Clerk City of Renton 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 BARGAIN AND SALE DEED Recording number of documents modified, assigned or released by this document: None. Grantor: Grantee: Abbreviated legal description: Assessor’s Property Tax Parcel/Account Number(s): (“Grantor”), for good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, bargains, sells and conveys to (“Grantee”), the following described real estate, situated in King County, Washington: See Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; SUBJECT TO the exceptions set forth on Exhibit B attached hereto. AGENDA ITEM #6. b) [Signature page to Bargain and Sale Deed.] DATED this _____ day of ________, 2025. GRANTOR: ______________________________ By: Name: Title: STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) On this day personally appeared before me _____, the ______, of ______________, who executed the within and foregoing instrument on behalf of said company, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said individuals, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that they are authorized to execute said instrument and that the seal affixed, if any, is the corporate seal of said corporation. GIVEN under my hand and official seal this ____ day of __________, 2025. ________________________________________ (Print name of notary) NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at _____________________ My commission expires ____________________ AGENDA ITEM #6. b) EXHIBIT A TO BARGAIN AND SALE DEED Legal Description AGENDA ITEM #6. b) EXHIBIT B TO BARGAIN AND SALE DEED PERMITTED EXCEPTIONS AGENDA ITEM #6. b) EXHIBIT C FORM OF ASSIGNMENT OF INTANGIBLE PROPERTY THIS ASSIGNMENT OF INTANGIBLE PROPERTY (“Assignment”) is entered into this ___ day of ____, 2025, by and between ______________, a ___________ limited liability company (“Assignor”) and the City of ________ (“Assignee”). W I T N E S S E T H: 1. Definitions. (a) Property. The “Property” means the real property located at [___________], together with the building, structures and other improvements located thereon. (b) Intangible Property. The term “Intangible Property” shall have the meaning ascribed thereto in that certain Purchase and Sale Agreement dated as of _______, 2025 (“Agreement”) by and between Assignor, as Seller, and Aegis Assignee, as Purchaser, concerning the Property, and legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto. 2. Assignment. For good and valuable consideration received by Assignor, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Assignor hereby grants, transfers and assigns to Assignee the entire right, title and interest of Assignor in and to the Intangible Property, but only to the extent transferable without third party consent or any cost or liability to Assignor. 3. Assumption. Assignee hereby assumes the entire right, title and interest of Assignor in and to the Intangible Property as of the date of this Assignment. 4. Attorneys’ Fees. If either Assignee or Assignor, or their respective successors or assigns, file suit to enforce the obligations of the other party under this Assignment, the substantially prevailing party shall be entitled to recover the reasonable fees and expenses of its attorneys. 5. Successors and Assigns. This Assignment shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of Assignor and Assignee and their respective successors and assigns. 6. Counterparts. This Assignment may be signed in any number of counterparts each of which shall be deemed to be an original and all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument. [Signature Page Follows] AGENDA ITEM #6. b) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Assignor and Assignee have executed and delivered this Assignment the day and year first above written. ASSIGNOR: By: Name: Title: ASSIGNEE: By: Name: Title: AGENDA ITEM #6. b) EXHIBIT A TO ASSIGNMENT OF INTANGIBLE PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AGENDA ITEM #6. b) AB - 3930 City Council Regular Meeting - 15 Sep 2025 SUBJECT/TITLE: Adoption of School and Fire Impact Fees 2025-2026 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Refer to Planning & Development Committee DEPARTMENT: Community & Economic Development Department STAFF CONTACT: Maya Simon, Associate Planner EXT.: 7263 FISCAL IMPACT SUMMARY: Fire impact fees and Fire Marshal fees are collected by the City and remitted to the Renton Regional Fire Authority as outlined in the interlocal agreement between the City and the Renton Regional Fire Authority. The City will collect a 5% administrative fee for all fire impact fees to account for staff time dedicated to collecting, processing, and handling the impact fees. SUMMARY OF ACTION: The City of Renton needs to update its fee schedule to reflect the 2026 school impact fees requested by the Issaquah, Kent, and Renton School Districts (SDs). The fee schedule should also be updated to reflect 2026 fire impact fees and Fire Marshal fees for the Renton Regional Fire Authority (RFA). Associated Capital Facilities Plans need to be adopted by the City of Renton. EXHIBITS: A. Issue Paper - School and Fire Fees 2025 B. Renton RFA 2025 CFP C. Renton SD 2025 CFP D. Kent SD 2025 CFP F. Issaquah SD 2025 CFP STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the following plans: Renton Regional Fire Authority Capital Facilities Plan 2026-2031, Renton School District 2025 Capital Facilities Plan, Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan 2024-2025 through 2030-2031, and Issaquah School District 2025 Capital Facilities Plan. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: September 22, 2025 TO: James Alberson, Council President Members of Renton City Council VIA: Armondo Pavone, Mayor FROM: Gina Estep, Community and Economic Development Administrator STAFF CONTACT: Maya Simon, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Adoption of School and Fire Impact Fees ISSUE: The City of Renton needs to update its fee schedule to reflect the 2026 school impact fees requested by the Issaquah, Kent, and Renton School Districts (SDs). The fee schedule should also be updated to reflect 2026 fire impact fees and Fire Marshal fees for the Renton Regional Fire Authority (RFA). Associated Capital Facilities Plans need to be adopted by the City of Renton. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adopting the most current Capital Facilities Plans for the Renton RFA and SDs. Staff also recommends, through the budget process, updating the fire impact fees and Fire Marshal fees for the Renton RFA and collecting no impact fees for Issaquah, Kent, and Renton SDs. BACKGROUND: Washington’s Growth Management Act authorizes the collection of impact fees to help ensure that those responsible for growth pay a fair share for the cost of new facilities needed to support new growth. The fees may be used only for capital facilities that are addressed within a Comprehensive Plan’s capital facilities element. Renton’s Comprehensive Plan 2024 adopts by reference the Capital Facilities Plans for all three SDs and the RFA, but Council adopts the annual plan update for each entity. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) After the Planning and Development Committee reviews the annual Capital Facilities Plans, Finance Committee will review the fees during the 3rd quarter budget adjustment process. The SD and RFA fees from each plan are shown below for informational purposes. These will be incorporated into the City’s revised fee schedule and adopted by Council in October. School impact fees are assessed on newly built household units and can only be used to support the capital costs of expanded existing or building new school facilities to support anticipated growth. Past fees collected for each school district are shown in the table below. The Renton, Kent, and Issaquah SDs have each adopted their 2025 Capital Facilities Plan and, due to existing capacity and declining enrollment, none are collecting impact fees in 2026. School Impact Fees, adopted 2022 - 2025 Fire impact fees are based on, and vary according to, the type of land use. The fees are calculated to achieve and maintain adopted standards for levels of service given expected demand from new developments. Comparisons of recent years and current fire impact fees and Fire Marshal fees are shown in the tables below. The Renton RFA has adopted its 2025 Capital Facilities Plan and the associated 2026 Development Fees and Fire Marshal Fees, which are shown below. Fire Impact Fees, collected 2024-2026 Land Use Unit 2024 2025 2026 Residential – single family (detached dwelling & duplexes) Dwelling Unit (d.u.) $421.98 $421.98 $779.24 Residential – multi-family & accessory dwelling unit (ADU) Dwelling Unit (d.u.) $579.41 $579.41 $1,099.68 Hotel/Motel/Resort Room $346.22 $346.22 $669.37 Medical Care Facility Bed $1,052.00 $1,052.00 $2,173.16 Office Square Foot $0.14 $0.14 $0.28 Medical/Dental Office Square Foot $0.61 $0.61 $1.28 Retail Square Foot $0.66 $0.66 $1.19 Development Type 2022 2023 2024 2025 Renton SD Single-Family $2,911 $2,161 $1,003 -- Renton SD Multi-Family $3,697 $4,257 $3,268 -- Kent SD Single-Family -- -- -- -- Kent SD Multi-Family -- -- -- -- Issaquah SD Single-Family $11,377 $15,510 $4,728 -- Issaquah SD Multi-Family $4,718 $3,514 -- -- AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Land Use Unit 2024 2025 2026 Leisure Facilities Square Foot $0.42 $0.42 $0.90 Restaurant/Lounge Square Foot $1.44 $1.44 $2.32 Industrial/Manufacturing Square Foot $0.05 $0.05 $0.10 Church/Non-Profit Square Foot $0.24 $0.24 $0.49 Education Per student $28.02 $28.02 $63.96 Special Public Facilities Square Foot $0.13 $0.13 $0.27 Fire Marshal Fees, collected 2023-2026 Type 2023 to 2025 2026 Review & Inspection Fees (I) $0 - $249.99 $50 $60 (II) $250.00 - $999.99 $50 + 2% of the cost $75 + 2% of the cost (III) $1,000 - $4,999.99 $75 + 2% of the cost $100 + 2% of the cost (IV) $5,000 - $49,999.99 $200 + 1.5% of the cost $250 + 1.5% of the cost (V) $50,000 - $99,999.99 $450 + 1.2% of the cost $525 + 1.2% of the cost (VI) $100,000 and above $950 + .75% of the cost $1,100 + .75% of the cost (VII) Construction Re-Inspection. Fee is per hour with a 2 hour minimum. The minimum may will be assessed if the required inspection does not meet the approval of the inspector. $175 $200 reword “may” to “will” (VIII) Violation/Second Re-Inspection after 30-day period (whenever 30 days or more have passed since fire department notification of a violation, which required a first re-inspection, and such violation has not been remedied or granted an extension). $150 $175 (IX) Third and subsequent re-inspection/pre-citation follow-up inspection when re-inspections are required beyond the first and second re-inspections. $250 $300 (X) Preventable fire alarm fee: 1. First, second, and third preventable alarms 2. Fourth and fifth preventable alarms in a calendar year, fee is per each alarm 3. Sixth preventable alarm and successive preventable alarms in a calendar year, fee is per each alarm No Charge $75 $150 No Charge $75 $150 (XI) Late payment penalty $35 $35 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Type 2023 to 2025 2026 Fire Permit Fees (I) Operational fire code permit (issued in accordance with Section 105.6 of the IFC) fee is yearly (including items such as fire special events, covered stages, mobile food facilities, hot works, etc.) $150 $185 (II) Permits for mobile food facilities that have passed a fire and life safety inspection in another jurisdiction that has reciprocity with Renton RFA $75 $92.50 (III) Hazardous materials and HPM facilities yearly and High Piled Storage $250 $325 add “and High Piled Storage” (IV) Construction permit 20% of plan review fee; Min. $75 20% of plan review fee; Min. $100 (V) Hazardous production materials permit (for businesses storing, handling, or using hazardous production materials as regulated in the fire code) permit is yearly $250 $325 (VI) Underground tank removal permit (commercial) See fire plan review and construction permit fees See fire plan review and construction permit fees (VII) Underground tank removal or abandonment-in- place permit (residential) $200 $300 (VIII) Other requested inspection when not required by the fire code, or when requested for afterhours inspections. Fee is per hour with a minimum 2 hour when approved by the Fire Marshal, such as home daycares. $175 $200 (IX) Non-emergency Billable Services (i.e., boat assists, etc.) Rates published at: www.washingtonfirechiefs.com WFC Current Wage and Equipment Rate WFC Current Wage and Equipment Rate (X) NSF check fees $25 $25 (XI) RFA technology surcharge fee applied to Fire Department Fire Marshal Fees, subsection a. (I, II, III, IV, V, VI) 5% 5% AGENDA ITEM #6. c) FISCAL NOTE: Fire impact fees and Fire Marshal fees are collected by the City and remitted to the Renton Regional Fire Authority as outlined in the interlocal agreement between the City and the Renton Regional Fire Authority. The City will collect a 5% administrative fee for all fire impact fees to account for staff time dedicated to collecting, processing, and handling the impact fees. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt the following plans: Renton Regional Fire Authority Capital Facilities Plan 2026-2031, Renton School District 2025 Capital Facilities Plan, Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan 2024-2025 through 2030-2031, and Issaquah School District 2025 Capital Facilities Plan. Upon council approval, staff will include adoption of the fees and underlying Capital Facilities Plan within future proposed legislation approving the Renton Fee Schedule. Cc: Ed VanValey, Chief Administrative Officer Kari Roller, Finance Administrator Matt Herrerra, Planning Director Galina Burich, Senior Finance Analyst AGENDA ITEM #6. c) The Issaquah School District No. 411 hereby provides this Capital Facilities Plan documenting present and future school facility requirements of the District. The plan contains all elements required by the Growth Management Act and King County Council Ordinance 21-A. The Issaquah School District No. 411 hereby provides this Capital Facilities Plan documenting present and future school facility requirements of the District. The plan contains all elements required by the Growth Management Act and King County Council Ordinance 21-A. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 2 of 30 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................... 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................. 3 STANDARD OF SERVICE ............................................................................................................... 4 WHEN TO CONSTRUCT A NEW BUILDING .................................................................................. 5 ENROLLMENT METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................. 6-7 TABLE 1: ACTUAL STUDENT COUNTS & ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS ................................. 8 TABLE 1A: 10-YEAR LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH ENROLLMENT FORECAST .................................... 9 TABLE 2: ENROLLMENT HISTORY .............................................................................................10 TABLE 3: STUDENT FACTORS – SINGLE FAMILY & MULTI-FAMILY .......................................11 INVENTORY AND EVALUATION OF CURRENT FACILITIES .....................................................12 SITE LOCATION MAP ...................................................................................................................13 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY MAP ...........................................................................................14 SIX-YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN ..............................................................................................15 TABLE 4: PROJECTED CAPACITY TO HOUSE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS ............16 TABLE 5: PROJECTED CAPACITY TO HOUSE MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS .......................17 TABLE 6: PROJECTED CAPACITY TO HOUSE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS ...........................18 APPENDIX A: 6-YEAR FINANCE PLAN ........................................................................................19 APPENDIX B: 2024-25 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CAPACITIES ..................................................20 APPENDIX C: 2024-25 MIDDLE SCHOOL CAPACITIES .............................................................21 APPENDIX D: 2024-25 HIGH SCHOOL CAPACITIES ..................................................................22 APPENDIX E: 2024-25 TOTAL SCHOOL CAPACITIES ...............................................................23 NEED FOR IMPACT FEES AND GROWTH-RELATED CAPACITY NEEDS ........................ 24-25 BASIS FOR DATA USED IN SCHOOL IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS ......................................26 SCHOOL IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS .....................................................................................27 APPENDIX F: STUDENT GENERATION RATES MEMO ..................................................... 28-30 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 3 of 30 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") has been prepared by the Issaquah School District (the “District”) as the District’s primary facility planning document for the period 2025–2031. The Plan is prepared in compliance with the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) and King County Council Code Title 21A. The GMA, enacted in 1990, requires fast-growing counties and cities to develop comprehensive plans to manage population growth, protect natural resources, and coordinate land use with public infrastructure—including schools. Under the GMA, school districts are required to plan for future facility needs and demonstrate that adequate capacity exists to support projected development. This Plan incorporates enrollment projections, facility capacities, and known development trends using the most current data available as of April 2025. This Plan represents an update to previously adopted long-term Capital Facilities Plans. While it serves as the District’s primary planning document for the six-year period, it is not intended to provide a static or exhaustive response to all facility needs. The District actively monitors enrollment trends, development activity, facility utilization, and educational program changes, and adjusts planning efforts to respond to evolving conditions. As necessary, the District may develop interim or supplemental long-range Capital Facilities Plans consistent with Board policy and informed by updated data and forecasts. All such plans will align with the overall direction and framework provided in this Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan. In June 1992, the District first requested that King County impose and collect school impact fees on new developments in unincorporated areas. The King County Council adopted the District’s initial plan and implementing ordinance on November 16, 1992. This Plan represents the District’s annual update to the Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan. King County and the cities of Issaquah, Renton, Bellevue, Newcastle, and Sammamish currently collect school impact fees on behalf of the District. Most jurisdictions provide exemptions for senior housing and certain types of low-income housing. In accordance with the requirements of the Growth Management Act, the District will continue to update this Plan on an annual basis, with adjustments to the fee schedule(s) as needed to reflect current data and conditions. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 4 of 30 STANDARD OF SERVICE School facility and student capacity needs are dictated by the types and amounts of space required to accommodate the District’s adopted educational program. The educational program standards which typically drive facility space needs include State-mandated requirements and locally adopted programming decisions relevant to grade configuration, optimal facility size, class size, educational program offerings, as well as classroom utilization and scheduling requirements and use of re- locatable classroom facilities (portables). Class sizes vary by grade level and program to reflect the differing instructional needs of students, including those in special education and highly capable programs. The Issaquah School Board has established local class size standards, which are maintained through the use of local levy funds. The District uses an average class size of 20 students for grades K–5, 26 students for grades 6–8, and 28 students for grades 9–12 when calculating building capacities. Special education class sizes are based on an average of 12 students per classroom. The District has offered Full-Day Kindergarten since the 2016–2017 school year. For the purposes of capacity analysis, rooms designated for special use, consistent with King County Council Code Title 21A, are excluded from classroom counts. Invariably, some classrooms will have student loads greater in number than this average level of service and some will be smaller. Program demands, state and federal requirements, collective bargaining agreements, and available funding may also affect this level of service in the years to come. Due to these variables, a utilization factor of 95% is used to adjust design capacities to what a building may actually accommodate. Historically, in Capital Facilities Plans, the ISD has used a utilization rate of 95% which is very conservative. Other districts use utilization rates between 70% to 85%. Lower utilization rates have the effect of showing less capacity. Portables used as classrooms accommodate enrollment increases for interim purposes until permanent classrooms are available. In addition to serving temporary capacity needs, portables also provide flexible instructional space that can be adapted to changing programmatic or scheduling requirements. When permanent facilities become available, portables may be relocated to other school sites to address emerging needs or removed from service, depending on long-term facility planning. The District currently has one undeveloped site, planned for a new high school and future elementary school. The State does not provide funding for property purchases. The District’s voters approved the 2016 Bond to provide funding for a new high school, new middle school, two new elementary schools, a rebuild/expansion of an existing middle school and additions to six existing elementary schools. All of those projects are now complete with the exception of the new high school and one new elementary school. The new high school is discussed further in this Capital Facilities Plan and will require additional funding sources. The new elementary school is on indefinite hold until capacity at the elementary level is needed. In 2022 voters approved a capital levy in amount of $44,000,000 to help pay for the new comprehensive high school. Unfortunately, due to construction cost escalation from conditions surrounding the pandemic, this amount plus other capital funds the district already had, was still not sufficient to build the full comprehensive high school as planned and designed. The District is currently working through a plan to build a portion of the new high using the funds from the previously approved levy and other dedicated capital funds. This plan would help alleviate some of the overcrowding at the high school level but would not solve the issue entirely. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 5 of 30 WHEN TO CONSTRUCT A NEW BUILDING The Issaquah School District Capital Facilities Plan proposes construction of a new high school to meet capacity needs at the high school level related to recent enrollment growth. The District in recent years, funded by the 2016 Bond, completed construction of a new elementary school, Cedar Trails Elementary School, a new middle school, Cougar Mountain Middle School, as well as additions at several elementary schools, all to help address recent growth needs. The need for new schools and school additions is triggered by comparing our enrollment forecasts with our permanent capacity figures. These forecasts are by grade level and, to the extent possible, by geography. The analysis provides a list of new construction needed by school year. The decision on when to construct a new facility involves factors other than verified need. Funding is the most serious consideration. Factors including the potential tax rate for our citizens, the availability of state funds and impact fees, the ability to acquire land, and the ability to pass bonds and capital levies determine when any new facility can be constructed. New school facilities are a response, in part, to new housing which the county or cities have approved for construction. The District's Six-Year Finance Plan is shown in Appendix A. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 6 of 30 ENROLLMENT METHODOLOGY Development Tracking and Student Generation Rates In order to increase the accuracy and validity of enrollment projections, a major emphasis has been placed on the collection and tracking data of known new housing developments. This data provides two useful pieces of planning information. First, it is used to determine the actual number of students that are generated from a single family or multi-family residence. Secondly, it provides important information on the impact new housing developments will have on existing facilities and/or the need for additional facilities. Developments that have been completed or are still selling houses are used to forecast the number of students who will attend our schools from future developments. The District used a third-party consultant to review recent development data and provide updated student generation rates for elementary school, middle school and high school student per new single-family residence and new multi-family housing. Updated rates are shown in Table 3. Enrollment Methodology The District uses two primary methods to estimate future student enrollment. These projections are inherently variable and are influenced by local land use decisions, market conditions, economic factors, and regional infrastructure improvements, including major transit projects. As such, the District analyzes a range of scenarios and, for planning purposes, adopts the high-range projection to ensure adequate capacity is available to meet potential growth. 1. The student 3-2-1 cohort survival method. Examine Issaquah School District enrollments for the last 5 years and determine the average cohort survival for the consecutive five-year period. Because cohort survival does not consider students generated from new development it is a conservative projection of actual enrollment. For the same reason, these projections are also slow to react to actual growth. The cohort method is also hampered by the fact that it does not account for anomalies affecting enrollment (i.e., the Covid-19 pandemic, temporary remote learning and the variations in the transition back to in-person learning). 2. Based on information from King County, realtors, developers, etc., the District seeks to establish the number of new dwelling units that will be sold each year and converts those units to new students based on the following: a) The number of actual new students as a percentage of actual new dwellings for the past several years. (The student generation factors are shown in Table 3) b) Determine the actual distribution of new students by grade level for the past several years, i.e., 5% to kindergarten, 10% to first grade, 2% to 11th grade, etc. c) Based on an examination of the history shown by (a) and (b) above, establish the most likely factor to apply to the projected new dwellings. After applying these methods, current enrollment is moved forward year-by-year, with adjustments for anticipated new students. It is important to note that while new housing typically signals growth, enrollment may decline even as population increases. This occurs as communities mature, resulting in fewer young children per household. To address this, the District monitors the number of school-age children per dwelling and adjusts projections accordingly, particularly at the kindergarten level. However, no precise statistical formula currently exists to capture these shifts perfectly. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 7 of 30 ENROLLMENT METHODOLOGY (cont.) Past experience has shown that cohort-based projections tend to be more accurate over longer periods (e.g., 10 years), while development-based projections are more reliable in the short term. Recognizing this, the District examines both methods and adopts a projection range. For planning purposes, the high projection is used to ensure the District is prepared to meet growth-related facility needs (Table 1A). Enrollment projections for the 2025–26 through 2030–31 school years are provided in Table 1. Although modest increases are anticipated during this period, the District does not expect to return to historical peak enrollment levels in the near term. Several factors are expected to influence future enrollment, including: • Market conditions, such as housing supply and affordability • Regional labor trends that affect family relocation and job accessibility • Residential development activity within the District’s boundaries • Major infrastructure projects, particularly the planned Sound Transit light rail extension to the City of Issaquah, which is likely to: o Increase residential density near transit stations o Attract new families due to enhanced commuter access o Contribute to long-term enrollment growth beyond the current six-year planning horizon The City of Issaquah’s 2044 Comprehensive Plan anticipates zoning and infrastructure to support more than 14,000 new housing units, with 3,500 targeted by 2044. These units, concentrated in areas such as Central Issaquah and the Issaquah Highlands, are expected to impact school enrollment over the next two decades. While substantial increases in student population are not expected within the current six-year planning horizon, significant growth is projected in the 15-to-20-year timeframe. The District will continue to monitor local development activity, housing trends, and transit infrastructure plans to refine its projections and update future Capital Facilities Plans accordingly. Ongoing coordination with the City of Issaquah will be essential in planning for future school capacity, especially in areas of anticipated high-density development and transit access. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 8 of 30 TABLE 1: ACTUAL STUDENT COUNTS & ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS ACTUAL STUDENT COUNTS: 2024-25 ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS: 2025-26 THRU 2030-31 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 9 of 30 TABLE 1A: 10-YEAR LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH ENROLLMENT FORECAST The District uses the high enrollment forecast shown in the chart above as the basis for long-range facilities planning. While actual enrollment may align more closely with medium or low projections over the short term, relying on the high projection allows the District to proactively address potential capacity needs and avoid underbuilding in the face of uncertain future growth. This approach ensures that school facilities can accommodate increases in student population that may result from market conditions, housing development, or regional infrastructure projects. Using the high forecast reflects a conservative and responsible planning strategy that prioritizes preparedness and long-term flexibility. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 10 of 30 TABLE 2: ENROLLMENT HISTORY The 10-Year Enrollment History table provides critical context for interpreting the six-year enrollment projections presented in Table 1. These historical headcounts, based on October 1st data, illustrate key enrollment trends, including a peak in 2019–20, a decline during the COVID-19 pandemic, and modest stabilization in recent years. It is important to clarify that the high projection presented in Table 1 does not rely solely on a traditional cohort progression model, where student counts are advanced from grade to grade based strictly on historical trends. Instead, the high forecast incorporates additional factors such as projected housing development, updated student generation rates, and regional influences—including the planned Sound Transit light rail extension into Issaquah. This approach allows the District to plan proactively for potential enrollment increases that may arise from new residential growth and infrastructure investments, ensuring school facilities can accommodate a range of future scenarios. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 11 of 30 TABLE 3: STUDENT FACTORS – SINGLE FAMILY & MULTI-FAMILY Table 1 provides student generation rates (SGRs) based on recent housing development within the District. These rates quantify the average number of students generated per new single-family and multi-family housing unit by grade level and are a critical input for projecting future enrollment and assessing the impact of residential growth on school facility needs. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 12 of 30 INVENTORY AND EVALUATION OF CURRENT FACILITIES Currently, using the 95% utilization factor, the District has the capacity to house 18,630 students in permanent facilities and an additional 4,688 students in portables. While portables are critical for meeting short-term enrollment fluctuations, they are not considered a viable long-term solution for capacity planning. For that reason, the District relies on its adjusted permanent capacity when determining growth-related needs. The projected student enrollment for the 2025–26 school year is 18,355, leaving a modest districtwide surplus of 275 permanent seats. However, this overall surplus does not reflect the ongoing imbalance across grade levels. High school enrollment continues to exceed permanent capacity, and projections show that this pressure will persist throughout the six-year planning period. As a result, the District remains focused on identifying long-term solutions to address high school overcrowding, even as elementary and middle school capacity remains sufficient. Calculations of elementary, middle school, and high school capacities are provided in Appendices B, C, and D, respectively. These facility locations and sites are shown on the District Site Location Map. EXISTING FACILITIES LOCATION GRADE SPAN K-5: Apollo Elementary 15025 S.E. 117th Street, Renton Briarwood Elementary 17020 S.E. 134th Street, Renton Cascade Ridge Elementary 2020 Trossachs Blvd. S.E., Sammamish Cedar Trails Elementary 4399 Issaquah-Pine Lake Rd S.E. , Sammamish Challenger Elementary 25200 S.E. Klahanie Blvd., Issaquah Clark Elementary 335 First Ave. S.E., Issaquah Cougar Ridge Elementary 4630 167th Ave. S.E., Bellevue Creekside Elementary 20777 SE 16th Street, Sammamish Discovery Elementary 2300 228th Ave. S.E., Sammamish Endeavour Elementary 26205 S.E. Issaquah-Fall City Rd., Issaquah Grand Ridge Elementary 1739 NE Park Drive, Issaquah Issaquah Valley Elementary 555 N.W. Holly Street, Issaquah Maple Hills Elementary 15644 204th Ave. S.E., Issaquah Newcastle Elementary 8440 136th Ave S.E., Newcastle Sunny Hills Elementary 3200 Issaquah-Pine Lake Rd. S.E., Sammamish Sunset Elementary 4229 W. Lk. Sammamish Pkwy. S.E., Issaquah GRADE SPAN 6-8: Beaver Lake Middle School 25025 S.E. 32nd Street, Issaquah Cougar Mountain Middle School 1929 NW Talus Dr, Issaquah Issaquah Middle School 600 2nd Ave. Ave. S.E., Issaquah Maywood Middle School 14490 168th Ave. S.E., Renton Pacific Cascade Middle School 24635 SE Issaquah-Fall City Rd, Issaquah Pine Lake Middle School 3095 Issaquah-Pine Lake Rd., Sammamish GRADE SPAN 9-12: Issaquah High School 700 Second Ave. S.E., Issaquah Liberty High School 16655 S.E. 136th Street, Renton Skyline High School 1122 228th Ave. S.E., Sammamish Gibson Ek High School 379 First Ave. S.E., Issaquah SUPPORT SERVICES: Administration Building 5150 220th Ave S.E., Issaquah Holly Street Early Learning Center 565 N.W. Holly Street, Issaquah May Valley Service Center 16404 S.E. May Valley Road, Renton Transportation Center - Main 805 Second Avenue S.E., Issaquah Transportation Center - Satellite 3402 228th Ave. S.E., Sammamish AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 13 of 30 SITE LOCATION MAP AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 14 of 30 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY MAP AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 15 of 30 SIX-YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN The District's Six-Year Finance Plan is shown in Appendix A. State funding and impact fees are also not reliable sources of revenue for construction related projects. State funding is available only for certain qualifying school construction projects, with funds received only after the matched project is complete. Site acquisition and site improvements are not eligible to receive state matching funds. Impact fee revenue is dependent on growth activity and not always easy to predict. As a result, the District must also rely on voter-approved ballot measures to fund school construction. Table 6 presents the District’s projected capacity to accommodate high school students, including the addition of a new high school facility. In April 2016, voters approved a $533 million bond to fund a range of capital projects, including land acquisition and construction of a new high school, a new middle school, two new elementary schools, the rebuild and expansion of an existing middle school, and additions to six existing elementary schools. To support the high school project further, voters passed a $44 million capital levy in April 2022. These funds will be used to construct a new high school to alleviate overcrowding at existing campuses. The District also anticipates receiving State matching funds for the high school project, which will be applied back to the project. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 16 of 30 TABLE 4: PROJECTED CAPACITY TO HOUSE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 17 of 30 TABLE 5: PROJECTED CAPACITY TO HOUSE MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 18 of 30 TABLE 6: PROJECTED CAPACITY TO HOUSE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS As shown in Table 6, the District’s high school enrollment is projected to exceed existing permanent capacity beginning in 2025 and continuing through the 6-year planning period. In 2025 and 2026, the District is expected to operate with a permanent capacity deficit of over 1,000 students after accounting for a 95% utilization rate. To address this growing enrollment pressure, the District will add permanent capacity for 656 high school students in 2027 through the construction of a new high school facility. This added capacity significantly reduces the shortfall, bringing the permanent capacity deficit down to fewer than 400 students and continuing to narrow the gap through 2030. As needed to address capacity needs, before the high school addition is complete, the District may consider adjusting the building utilization factor to create additional interim capacity. With this new capacity in place, the District will be positioned to phase out its reliance on portable classrooms. While portables will still be required in the short term, the addition of permanent space sets the stage for a gradual reduction in their use. This transition will enhance the learning environment and promote more equitable access to core instructional spaces and amenities. The strategy aligns with the District’s long-term capital planning goals and its commitment to providing equitable, high-quality educational facilities across all attendance areas. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 19 of 30 APPENDIX A: 6-YEAR FINANCE PLAN AG E N D A I T E M # 6 . c ) Page 20 of 30 APPENDIX B: 2024-25 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CAPACITIES AG E N D A I T E M # 6 . c ) Page 21 of 30 APPENDIX C: 2024-25 MIDDLE SCHOOL CAPACITIES AG E N D A I T E M # 6 . c ) Page 22 of 30 APPENDIX D: 2024-25 HIGH SCHOOL CAPACITIES AG E N D A I T E M # 6 . c ) Page 23 of 30 APPENDIX E: 2024-25 TOTAL SCHOOL CAPACITIES AG E N D A I T E M # 6 . c ) Page 24 of 30 NEED FOR IMPACT FEES AND GROWTH-RELATED CAPACITY NEEDS The District historically relied on school impact fee revenue to help fund growth-related capacity needs. However, by law, impact fees can only be used to fund a portion of a growth-related capacity project. As demonstrated in Appendix B the District currently has a permanent capacity (at 95%) to serve 8,763 students at the elementary level. This leaves the District’s elementary enrollment under permanent capacity by 901 students (current enrollment is identified in Table 1). As demonstrated in Appendix C the District currently has a permanent capacity (at 95%) to serve 4,946 students at the middle school level. This leaves the District’s middle school enrollment under permanent capacity by 469 students (current enrollment is identified in Table 1). As demonstrated in Appendix D the District currently has a permanent capacity (at 95%) to serve 4,921 students at the high school level. This leaves the District’s high school enrollment over permanent capacity by 1,095 students (current enrollment is identified in Table 1). The capacity need is driven by historic and recent growth. However, the District’s six-year enrollment projections in Table 1 demonstrate that the District does not anticipate growth to occur over the six-year planning period. Thus, while the high school capacity need remains significant, it is not related to anticipated growth in the six-year period and, therefore, the project is no longer eligible as a basis for impact fees. Future updates to this CFP will consider growth-related eligibility for inclusion in the impact fee formula. Based on the District’s student generation rates (Table 3), the District expects that 0.615 students will be generated from each new single family home and 0.189 students will be generated from each new multi-family dwelling unit. Comparatively, the previous year SGR’s were 0.641 for single family home and 0.159 for a multi-family unit. Applying the enrollment projections contained in Table 1 to the District’s existing permanent capacity (Appendices A, B, and C) and if no capacity improvements are made by the year 2029-30, and permanent capacity is adjusted to 95%, the District elementary population will be under its permanent capacity by 659 students, under permanent capacity at the middle school level by 838 students, and over permanent capacity by 778 students at the high school level. Importantly, the above figures incorporate recently completed growth-projects at the elementary and middle school levels. The District recently opened the new Cougar Mountain Middle School, with permanent capacity of 828, and the new Cedar Trails Elementary School, with permanent capacity of 496 students. Both schools were funded by the April 2016 bond and provide capacity to serve new growth. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 25 of 30 NEED FOR IMPACT FEES AND GROWTH-RELATED CAPACITY NEEDS (cont) In those years when the District requests school impact fees for growth-related projects, the school impact fee formula ensures that new development only pays for the cost of the facilities nec essitated by new development. The fee calculations examine the costs of housing the students generated by each new single family dwelling unit or each new multi-family dwelling unit and then reduces that amount by credits for the anticipated state match and future tax payments. The resulting impact fee is then discounted as required by local ordinances. Thus, by applying the student generation factor to the school project costs, the fee formula only calculates the costs of providing capacity to serve eac h new dwelling unit. The formula does not require new development to contribute the costs of providing capacity to address existing needs. The King County Council and the City Councils of the cities of Bellevue, Issaquah, Newcastle, Renton and Sammamish have created a framework for collecting school impact fees and the District can demonstrate that new developments will have an impact on the District. Impact fees must be used in a manner consistent with RCW 82.02.050-110 and the adopted local ordinances. Engrossed Senate Bill 5923, enacted in the 2015 Legislative Session, requires that developers be provided an option to defer payment of impact fees to final inspection, certificate of occupancy, or closing, with no fees deferred longer than 18 months from building permit issuance. The District adopts the positions that: (1) no school impact fee should be collected later than the earlier of final inspection or 18 months from the time of building permit issuance; and (2) no developer applicant should be permitted to defer payment of school impact fees for more than 20 dwelling units in a single year. The District is not requesting school impact fees as a part of this 2025 Capital Facilities Plan update. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 26 of 30 BASIS FOR DATA USED IN SCHOOL IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS This section is not updated for the 2025 Capital Facilities Plan since the District is not requesting a school impact fee. Future updates to this CFP may include an impact fee. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 27 of 30 SCHOOL IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS This section is not updated for the 2025 Capital Facilities Plan since the District is not requesting a school impact fee. Future updates to this CFP may include an impact fee. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 28 of 30 APPENDIX F: STUDENT GENERATION RATES MEMO AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 29 of 30 APPENDIX F: STUDENT GENERATION RATES MEMO (cont) AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page 30 of 30 APPENDIX F: STUDENT GENERATION RATES MEMO (cont) AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan 2024-2025 through 2030-2031 June 2025 Kent School District No. 415 12033 SE 256th Street Kent, Washington 98030-6643 (253) 373-7526 BOARD of DIRECTORS Ms. Meghin Margel, President Mr. Donald Cook, Vice President Mr. Tim Clark, Legislative Representative Mr. Andy Song, Director Ms. Teresa Gregory, Director ADMINISTRATION Israel Vela Superintendent of Schools Dr. Wade Barringer, Deputy Superintendent Dave Bussard, Executive Director Operations Raul Parungao, Executive Director of Finance Gordon Cook, Director of Facilities Brett Scribner, Assistant Director Capital Projects AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table of Contents I - Executive Summary ................................................................................................. 1 II - Six - Year Enrollment Projection ............................................................................. 4 III - Current Kent School District “Standard of Service" ................................................. 7 Current Standards of Service for Elementary Students ................................................... 7 Current District Standards of Service for Secondary Students ........................................ 8 IV - Inventory and Capacity of Existing Schools ............................................................ 9 V - Six-Year Planning and Construction Plan .............................................................. 14 VI - Portable Classrooms ........................................................................................... 21 VII - Projected Six-Year Classroom Capacity ............................................................... 25 VIII - Finance Plan ..................................................................................................... 30 IX - Summary of Changes to June 2024 Capital Facilities Plan ..................................... 34 X - Appendices .......................................................................................................... 35 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) I - Executive Summary This Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan has been prepared by the Kent School District as the organization's capital facilities planning document, in compliance with the requirements of Washington's Growth Management Act, King County Code K.C.C. 21A.43 and Cities of Kent, Covington, Renton, Auburn, Black Diamond, Maple Valley, and SeaTac. This annual Plan update was prepared using data available in the spring of 2025 for the 2024-2025 school year. This annual update of the Plan reflects no new major capital projects. This Plan is consistent with prior long-term capital facilities plans adopted by the Kent School District. This Plan is not intended to be the sole planning document for all the District's needs. The District may prepare interim and periodic Long-Range Capital Facilities Plans consistent with Board Policies, considering a longer or shorter period, other factors and trends in the use of facilities, and other needs of the District as may be required. Prior Capital Facilities Plans of the Kent School District have been adopted by Metropolitan King County Council and Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn, and Renton and included in the Capital Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive Plans of each jurisdiction. This Plan has also been submitted to the cities of Black Diamond, Maple Valley, and SeaTac for their information and inclusion in their Comprehensive Plans. In order for impact fees to be collected in the unincorporated areas of Kent School District, the Metropolitan King County Council must adopt this Plan and a fee- implementing ordinance for the District. For impact fees to be collected in the incorporated portions of the District, the cities of Kent, Covington, Renton and Auburn must also adopt this Plan and their own school impact fee ordinances. This Capital Facilities Plan establishes a standard of service in order to ascertain current and future capacity. While the State Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes square footage guidelines for capacity, those guidelines do not account for local program needs in the District. The Growth Management Act, King County and City codes and ordinances authorize the District to make adjustments to the standard of service based on specific needs for students of the District. This Plan includes the standard of service as established by Kent School District. Functional capacity is based on an average capacity and updated to reflect changes to special programs served in each building. Portables in the interim capacity calculation use the same standard of service as the permanent facilities. 1 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) The capacity of each school in the District is calculated based on the District’s standard of service and the existing inventory of permanent facilities. The District's program capacity of permanent facilities reflects program changes and the state’s mandated reduction of class size to meet the standard of service for Kent School District. Portables provide additional interim capacity. Kent School District is the fifth largest (FTE basis) district in the state. Enrollment is electronically reported monthly to the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (“OSPI”) on Form P-223. Although funding apportionment is based on Annual Average Full Time Equivalent (AAFTE), enrollment on October 1 is a widely recognized “snapshot in time” that is used to report the District’s enrollment for the year as reported to OSPI (See Table 1). The District's standard of service, enrollment history and projections, and use of interim facilities are reviewed in detail in various sections of this Plan. The District plans to continue to satisfy concurrency requirements through the interim use of portables. This Plan currently represents projects in progress funded primarily by the Kent School District’s 2016 Bond, the 2018 Capital Levy, and our newly passed 2024 Capital and Tech Levy. Additional information about these projects can be found on the District’s capital projects homepage (link). Additionally, project updates sent to our community of stakeholders can be accessed on the KSD website (link). Based on revised student generation rates, our capacity and enrollment projections, the District will stay current with non-collection of student impact fee rate for the coming year. For a short overview, see Section IX (Summary of Changes to the June 2025 Capital Facilities Plan). 2 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Description/Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 King County Live Births 24,630 25,032 24,910 25,348 25,487 26,011 25,274 24,337 24,090 23,638 Increase/(Decrease)402 (122)438 139 524 (737)(937)(247)(452) Kindergarten/Birth (%)8.3%8.0%8.2%7.8%7.9%6.5%7.3%7.7%7.3%7.7% Source: https://doh.wa.gov/data-and-statistical-reports/washington-tracking-network-wtn/county-all-births-dashboard Grade/Fiscal Year 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 K 2,045 2,013 2,037 1,989 2,010 1,703 1,836 1,874 1,761 1,811 1 2,131 2,067 2,056 2,061 2,036 1,882 1,768 1,945 1,931 1,793 2 2,163 2,163 2,077 2,008 2,091 1,980 1,818 1,840 1,965 1,958 3 2,176 2,195 2,143 2,043 1,995 2,001 1,938 1,887 1,878 1,970 4 2,089 2,195 2,218 2,118 2,038 1,912 1,924 1,953 1,924 1,945 5 1,958 2,103 2,189 2,170 2,120 1,937 1,872 1,953 1,973 1,924 6 2,058 1,952 2,119 2,184 2,164 2,024 1,893 1,962 1,948 1,928 7 1,974 2,021 1,922 2,044 2,166 2,010 1,925 1,906 1,949 1,951 8 2,100 2,021 2,043 1,882 2,073 2,086 1,937 1,956 1,922 1,936 9 2,093 2,105 2,006 2,003 1,888 2,001 2,042 2,010 1,955 1,922 10 2,165 2,099 2,080 1,946 2,034 1,811 1,959 2,048 2,000 1,947 11 1,818 1,865 1,823 1,732 1,663 1,743 1,584 1,679 1,729 1,782 12 1,742 1,730 1,810 1,653 1,634 1,453 1,655 1,467 1,500 1,565 Total Enrollment 26,512 26,529 26,523 25,833 25,912 24,543 24,151 24,480 24,435 24,432 Yearly Increase/ (Decrease)(211)17 (6)(690)79 (1,369)(392)329 (45)(3) Cumulative Increase/ (Decrease)(211)(194)(200)(890)(811)(2,180)(2,572)(2,243)(2,288)(2,291) Source: https://ospi.k12.wa.us/policy-funding/school-apportionment/safs-report (1251H Headcount.pdf) King County Live Births Enrollment KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 ENROLLMENT HISTORY 26,512 26,529 26,523 25,833 25,912 24,543 24,151 24,480 24,435 24,432 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 Enrollment TABLE 1 3 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) II - Six - Year Enrollment Projection For capital facilities planning, enrollment projections are based on cohort survival and student yield from documented residential construction projected over the next six years (See Table 2). For this Plan, the District used data from OSPI Information and Condition of Schools (ICOS), Report 1049. King County live births and the District's relational percentage average were used to determine the number of kindergartners entering the system (See Table 2). 7.5% of 23,390 King County live births in 2021 is projected for 1,755 students expected in Kindergarten for October 1, 2025. This is a decrease of 248 live births in King County over the previous year. The District’s enrollment from 2025-26 to 2030-31 is projected to decrease by an average of 1.5% each year or a total of 2,089 students. The projected enrollment for 2030-31 is 22,343. Early Childhood Education students (also identified as “ECE”), “Early Childhood Special Education (“ECSE”) students are forecasted and reported to OSPI separately on Form P-223H for Special Education Enrollment. Capacity is reserved to serve students in the ECE programs at elementary schools. Within practical limits, the District has kept abreast of proposed developments. The District will continue to track new development activity to determine impact on schools. Information on new residential developments and the completion of these proposed developments in all jurisdictions will be considered in the District's future analysis of growth projections. The Kent School District serves eight permitting jurisdictions: unincorporated King County, the cities of Kent, Covington, Renton, and Auburn and smaller portions of the cities of SeaTac, Black Diamond, and Maple Valley. 4 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR "Student Generation Factor" is defined by King County code as "the number derived by a school district to describe how many students of each grade span are expected to be generated by a dwelling unit" based on district records of average actual student generated rates for developments completed within the last ten years. Following these guidelines, the student generation rate for Kent School District is as follows: Single Family Elementary 0.222 Middle 0.092 High 0.116 Total 0.430 Multi-Family Elementary 0.075 Middle 0.030 High 0.032 Total 0.137 The student generation factor is based on 1,927 new SFD (Single Family Detached) units built between 2018 and 2023. The student generation factor is based on 1,908 new MF (Multi- Family) units built during the same period. The multi-family units consisted of 1,590 apartment units and 318 townhome units. The District sees an average of 43 students for every 100 single family units that are built and an average of 14 students for every 100 multi-family units that are built. The rate for apartment units is higher than for townhome units. The rate for apartments can vary, depending on the affordability of the units and the number of bedrooms per unit for specific buildings. Many of the apartment units built between 2018 and 2023 have market rate rents and they tend to have fewer bedrooms per unit than some of the buildings that were completed in 2016 and 2017. The multi-family rate is lower this year than it was in March 2024 because the date range used in the analysis includes fewer affordable units and fewer multiple bedroom units. In preparing the 2024-2025 to 2030-2031 Capital Facilities Plan the District contracted with Educational Data Solutions, LLC led by Dr. Les Kendrick, a noted expert in demographic studies for school districts, to analyze and prepare the student generation factor. 5 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Description/Year 2021 2022 2023 2024 (Proj) 2025 (Proj) 2026 (Proj) King County Live Births 23,390 23,012 22,408 22,236 22,065 21,896 Increase/(Decrease)(248)(378)(604)(172)(171)(169) Kindergarten/Birth (%)7.5%7.5%7.6%7.6%7.5%7.5% Grade/Fiscal Year 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 2030-31 K 1,755 1,732 1,710 1,687 1,665 1,643 1 1,841 1,784 1,760 1,738 1,714 1,692 2 1,794 1,842 1,785 1,761 1,739 1,715 3 1,956 1,793 1,841 1,784 1,760 1,738 4 1,963 1,949 1,787 1,834 1,778 1,754 5 1,928 1,946 1,932 1,771 1,818 1,762 6 1,906 1,910 1,928 1,914 1,755 1,801 7 1,882 1,861 1,865 1,882 1,868 1,713 8 1,929 1,861 1,840 1,844 1,861 1,847 9 1,930 1,924 1,856 1,835 1,839 1,856 10 1,895 1,902 1,896 1,829 1,808 1,812 11 1,684 1,639 1,645 1,639 1,582 1,563 12 1,631 1,540 1,499 1,504 1,499 1,447 Total Enrollment 24,094 23,683 23,344 23,022 22,686 22,343 Yearly Increase/ (Decrease)(338)(411)(339)(322)(336)(343) Cumulative Increase/ (Decrease)(338)(749)(1,088)(1,410)(1,746)(2,089) Source: School Facilities Organization, Information and Condition of Schools (Report 1049) KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 ENROLLMENT PROJECTION King County Live Births Enrollment Projection Source: https://doh.wa.gov/data-and-statistical-reports/washington-tracking-network-wtn/county-all-births- dashboard TABLE 2 6 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) III - Current Kent School District “Standard of Service" In order to determine the capacity of facilities in a school district, King County Code 21A.06.1225 references a "standard of service" that each school district must establish to ascertain its overall capacity. The standard of service identifies the program year, the class size, the number of classrooms, students and programs of special need, and other factors determined by the district which would best serve the student population. This Plan includes the standard of service as established by Kent School District. The District has identified schools with significant special needs programs as “impact” schools and the standard of service targets a lower-class size at those facilities. Portables included in the capacity calculation use the same standard of service as the permanent facilities. The standard of service defined herein will continue to evolve in the future. Kent School District is continuing a long-term strategic planning process combined with review of changes to capacity and standard of service. This process will affect various aspects of the District's standard of service and future changes will be reflected in future capital facilities plans. Current Standards of Service for Elementary Students •Class size ratio for grades K - 3 is planned for an average of 24 students per class, not to exceed 26. •Class size ratio for grades 4 - 5 is planned for an average of 27 students per class, not to exceed 29. Some special programs require specialized classroom space and the program capacity of some of the buildings housing these programs is reduced. Some students, for example, leave their regular classroom for a short period of time to receive instruction in special programs and space must be allocated to serve these programs. Students may also be provided with music instruction and physical education in a separate classroom or facility. Some identified students will also be provided educational opportunities in classrooms for special programs such as those designated as follows: Career and Technical Education (CTE) – State Program Closing Educational Achievement Gaps (Title I – Part A) - Federal Program Highly Capable Students (HiCap) - State Program 7 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Learning Assistance Program (LAP) – State Program Multilingual Education (MLE) - State Program Inclusive Education Service for Elementary and Secondary students with disabilities may be provided in a separate or self-contained classroom sometimes with a capacity of 10-15 students, depending on the program. Current District Standards of Service for Secondary Students The standards of service outlined below reflect only those programs and educational opportunities provided to secondary students which directly affect the capacity of the school buildings per the negotiated collective bargaining agreement with KEA. •The average class size ratio for grades 6–8 is 28 students per class and 135 students per day, with a maximum daily class load/enrollment of 142 based on five class periods per day. •The average class size ratio for grades 9-12 is 32 students per class and 153 students per day, with a maximum daily class load/enrollment of 160 based on five class periods per day. Like Inclusive Education Programs listed above, many other secondary programs require specialized classroom space which can reduce the functional capacity of the permanent school buildings, such as technology labs, performing arts activities, a variety of career and technical education programs, and other specialized programs. Space or Classroom Utilization As a result of scheduling conflicts for student programs, the need for specialized rooms for certain programs, and the need for teachers to have a workspace during their planning periods, it is not possible to achieve 100% utilization of regular teaching stations at secondary schools. Based on the analysis of actual utilization of classrooms, the Kent School District has determined that the standard utilization rate is 64% for secondary schools. Functional capacity at elementary schools reflects 56% utilization at the elementary level. 8 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) IV - Inventory and Capacity of Existing Schools Currently, the District has a total functional capacity to house 39,705 students, which consists of a permanent functional capacity of 35,494 and interim (portable) capacity of 4,211. This capacity is based on the District's Standard of Service as set forth in Section III. Included in this Plan is an inventory of the District's schools by type, address and current capacity (See Table 3). The ratio between permanent capacity and portable capacity is 89% - 11%. The functional capacity is periodically updated for changes in the programs, additional classrooms, and new schools. Functional capacity has been updated in this Plan to reflect program changes implemented in the fall of 2024. Calculations of Elementary, Middle School and High School capacities are set forth in Table 3. Maps of existing schools are included. For clarification, the following is a brief description of some of the non-traditional programs for students in Kent School District: iGrad - Kent School District has developed the Individualized Graduation and Degree Program or “iGrad”. iGrad is an Open Door (Drop-out Reengagement) School that offers a second plus chance to students aged 16-21 who have dropped out of high school or are at risk of not earning a high school diploma by age 21. iGrad is not included in this Capital Facilities Plan, because it is served as a leased space at the Kent Hill Plaza Shopping Center. Over the past three years, enrollment in the iGrad program has averaged over 340 students. Kent Virtual Academy - The Kent Virtual Academy is open to grades 6-12 and is currently serving 167 students. The virtual school offers a flexible learning experience designed to engage students when and where they work best. Each school day includes a combination of live (synchronous) virtual instruction and on-demand (asynchronous) learning opportunities outside of a traditional bell schedule. Students can attend live virtual lessons with their teachers and classmates, participate in live virtual class or small group discussions, check-in or meet with teachers, watch recorded video lessons, work independently on projects and lessons, participate in learning experiences outside the school setting for credit or to meet competencies. Virtual school students may also attend their boundary school for select classes and services. 9 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Year Opened Carriage Crest Elementary 1990 CC 18235 - 140th Avenue SE, Renton 98058 626 Cedar Valley Elementary 1971 CV 26500 Timberlane Way SE, Covington 98042 541 Covington Elementary 2018 CO 25811 156th Avenue SE, Covington 98042 744 Crestwood Elementary 1980 CW 25225 - 180th Avenue SE, Covington 98042 602 1953 EH 9825 S 240th Street, Kent 98031 779 1999 EP 11800 SE 216th Street, Kent 98031 653 1969 FW 16600 - 148th Avenue SE, Renton 98058 528 East Hill Elementary Emerald Park Elementary Fairwood Elementary George T. Daniel Elementary 1992 DE 11310 SE 248th Street, Kent 98030 640 Glenridge Elementary 1996 GR 19405 - 120th Avenue SE, Renton 98058 591 Grass Lake Elementary 1971 GL 28700 - 191st Place SE, Kent 98042 595 Horizon Elementary 1990 HE 27641 - 144th Avenue SE, Kent 98042 634 Jenkins Creek Elementary 1987 JC 26915 - 186th Avenue SE, Covington 98042 641 Kent Elementary 1999 KE 24700 - 64th Avenue South, Kent 98032 760 Lake Youngs Elementary 1965 LY 19660 - 142nd Avenue SE, Kent 98042 725 Martin Sortun Elementary 1987 MS 12711 SE 248th Street, Kent 98030 768 Meadow Ridge Elementary 1994 MR 27710 - 108th Avenue SE, Kent 98030 706 Meridian Elementary 1939 ME 25621 - 140th Avenue SE, Kent 98042 793 Millennium Elementary 2000 ML 11919 SE 270th Street, Kent 98030 688 Neely-O'Brien Elementary 1990 NO 6300 South 236th Street, Kent 98032 864 Panther Lake Elementary 2009 PL 12022 SE 216th Street, Kent, 98031 744 1963 PO 11010 SE 232nd Street, Kent 98031 728 1967 PT 27825 - 118th Avenue SE, Kent 98030 732 1987 RW 18030 - 162nd Place SE, Renton 98058 661 2021 RR 22420 Military Rd. S., SeaTac, WA 98198 886 Park Orchard Elementary Pine Tree Elementary Ridgewood Elementary River Ridge Elementary Sawyer Woods Elementary 1994 SW 31135 - 228th Ave SE, Black Diamond 98010 549 1960 SH 837 1971 SC 591 1969 SB 730 1992 SR 719 20,055 1966 CR 1,110 1993 CH 1,140 1981 MA 1,020 1970 MK 1,230 1958 MM 1,110 2005 MC 1,200 Scenic Hill Elementary Soos Creek Elementary Springbrook Elementary Sunrise Elementary Elementary TOTAL 1996 NW 1,140 7,950 1951 KM 2,595 1997 KL 2,714 1968 KR 2,932 1981 KW 2,917 11,158 2021 KLA 542 Canyon Ridge Middle Cedar Heights Middle Mattson Middle Meeker Middle Meridian Middle Mill Creek Middle Northwood Middle Middle TOTAL Kent-Meridian High Kentlake High Kentridge High Kentwood High High TOTAL Kent Laboratory Academy DISTRICT TOTAL 39,705 2024-2025 Functional SCHOOL ABR ADDRESS 26025 Woodland Way South, Kent 98030 12651 SE 218th Place, Kent 98031 20035 - 100th Avenue SE, Kent 98031 22300 - 132nd Avenue SE, Kent 98042 11000 SE 264th Street, Kent 98030 19640 SE 272nd Street, Covington 98042 16400 SE 251st Street, Covington 98042 12600 SE 192nd Street, Renton 98058 23480 - 120th Avenue SE, Kent 98031 620 North Central Avenue, Kent 98032 17007 SE 184th Street, Renton 98058 10020 SE 256th Street, Kent 98030 21401 SE 300th Street, Kent 98042 12430 SE 208th Street, Kent 98031 25800 - 164th Avenue SE, Covington 98042 105 SE 208th St., Kent, WA 98031 Table 3 10 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Kent-Meridian High School Kentlake High School Kentridge High School Kentwood High School King County, WA State Parks GIS, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, USDA Kent School District 2024/2025 School Year High School Boundaries Legend High School Buildings Kent-Meridian High School Kentlake High School Kentridge High School Kentwood High School ± 0 4 82 Miles 11 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Cedar Heights Mattson Meeker MeridianMill Creek Northwood Canyon Ridge King County, WA State Parks GIS, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, USDA Middle Schools Cedar Heights Middle School Canyon Ridge Middle School Mattson Middle School Meeker Middle School Meridian Middle School Mill Creek Middle School Northwood Middle School Kent School District 2024/2025 School Year Middle School Boundaries 0 3.75 7.51.88 Miles Ü 12 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Carriage Crest Cedar ValleyCovington Crestwood East Hill Emerald Park Fairwood George T. Daniel Glenridge Grass Lake Horizon Jenkins Creek Kent Lake Youngs Martin Sortun Meadow Ridge Meridian Millennium Neely O Brien Panther Lake Park Orchard Pine Tree Ridgewood Sawyer Woods Scenic Hill Soos Creek Springbrook Sunrise River Ridge King County, WA State Parks GIS, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, USDA Carriage Crest Elementary Cedar Valley Elementary Covington Elementary Crestwood Elementary Daniel Elementary East Hill Elementary Emerald Park Elementary Fairwood Elementary Glenridge Elementary Grass Lake Elementary Horizon Elementary Jenkins Creek Elementary Kent Elementary Lake Youngs Elementary Martin Sortun Elementary Meadow Ridge Elementary Meridian Elementary Millennium Elementary Neely O Brien Elementary Panther Lake Elementary Park Orchard Elementary Pine Tree Elementary Ridgewood Elementary River Ridge Elementary Sawyer Woods Elementary Scenic Hill Elementary Soos Creek Elementary Springbrook Elementary Sunrise Elementary Elementary Schools Kent School District 2024/2025 School Year Elementary School Boundaries 0 3.75 7.51.88 Miles Ü 13 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) V - Six-Year Planning and Construction Plan In November 2016, the voters of the Kent School District approved a bond measure for $252 million. This bonding authority provided for the replacement of Covington Elementary school, which opened in August of 2018, the new River Ridge Elementary school, and our new Kent Laboratory Academy, which both opened in August 2021. As a critical component of capital facilities planning, county and city planners and decision- makers are encouraged to consider safe walking conditions for all students when reviewing applications and design plans for new roads and developments. This should include sidewalks for pedestrian safety to and from schools and bus stops, as well as bus pull-outs and turn- arounds. Included in this Plan is an inventory of potential projects and sites identified by the District which are potentially acceptable site alternatives in the future (See Table 4 & Sitemap). Voter approved bond issues have included funding for the purchase of sites for future schools and district use; the sites acquired to date are included in this Plan. Some funding is secured for the purchase of additional sites but may also be funded with impact fees as needed. Not all undeveloped properties meet current school construction requirements, and some property may be traded or sold to meet future facility needs. The Board will continue an annual review of standards of service and those decisions will be reflected in each update of the Capital Facilities Plan. The Kent School District continues to make improvements to the facilities through completion of the 2016 Bond, 2018 Levy, and the recent voter approved 2024 Levy. At this moment the standing of the current measures are as follows: Measure Complete In Progress Not Started 2016 Bond 85% 13% 2% 2018 Levy 72% 13% 15% 2024 Levy 0% 14% 86% The Kent School District anticipates and is planning to run a Bond in 2028 for additional emergent needs, differed maintenance, tenant improvement projects, and possible facility replacement. As a part of the planning process, the District has been tracking a few major development projects which have affected enrollment and will continue to increase students' forecasts. On Meeker Street in Kent, we have seen several major apartment complexes, ETHOS and Midtown 64 Apartments. These continue to have an impact on enrollment as they fill up their newly built facilities. The Alexian Gateway Project is located on the corner of Military Road 14 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) and Veterans Drive in Kent and began occupying its 283 units in 2023-2024. In Covington, we are tracking a multi-family house development which has been approved and construction has begun. The 1700-unit Lakepointe Urban Community will fall within our enrollment boundary and proposed completion of Phase 4 is shown to be 2027. Construction in the Kent School District boundaries have been steadily rising over the last five years and planned communities are now being recognized through the planning teams in multiple city and county jurisdictions we serve. 15 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 Site Acquisitions and Projects Planned to Provide Additional Capacity Projected Projected % for SCHOOL / FACILITY / SITE LOCATION Type Status Completion Program new Date Capacity Growth Approximate Approximate # on Map ELEMENTARY MIDDLE & HIGH TEMPORARY FACILITIES Additional Capacity # on Map 2 OTHER SITES ACQUIRED Land Use Designation Type 16 White House - Kent 11027 SE Kent-Kangley Kent, WA 98030 Commercial Purchased 16a Green Building - Kent 11109 SE Kent-Kangley Kent, WA 98030 Commercial Purchased Notes: None King County Land Use Jurisdiction King County Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 4 May 2022 16 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) © copyright KROLL MAP COMPANY, INC. This map has been modified by KSD 05/22 Sawyer Woods Elementary Jenkins Creek Elementary Fairwood Elementary Ridgewood Elementary Northwood Middle School Lake Youngs Elementary Glenridge Elementary Kentridge High School Springbrook Elementary Soos Creek Elementary Sunrise Elementary Meridian Middle School Kentwood High School Park Orchard Elementary Martin Sortun Elementary Daniel Elementary East Hill Elementary Mill Creek Middle School Kent Elementary Kent-Meridian High School Scenic Hill Elementary Kent School District Administration Center Meadow Ridge Elementary Pine Tree Elementary Horizon Elementary Covington Elementary Cedar Heights Middle School Cedar Valley Elementary Crestwood Elementary Mattson Middle School Kentlake High School Neely O’Brien Elementary Carriage Crest Elementary MeridianElementary Meeker Middle School Grass Lake Elementary Emerald Park Elementary Millennium Elementary iGrad Kent Valley Early Learning Center The Outreach Program (TOP) Panther Lake Elementary River Ridge Elementary Kent Laboratory Academy 17 AG E N D A I T E M # 6 . c ) cccc cc ccc cc c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c V E T E R A N S D R I V E O L D M I L I T A R Y R O A D S O U T H AMENITY SPACE TRASH ENCLOSURES TRASH ENCLOSURES TRASH ENCLOSURES TRASH ENCLOSURES TRASH ENCLOSURES 2 1 0 1 2 2 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 4 0 1 2 1 0 4 2 2 0 4 2 3 0 4 2 4 0 4 2 1 0 5 2 2 0 5 2 3 0 5 2 4 0 5 2 1 0 8 2 2 0 8 2 3 0 8 2 4 0 8 2 1 0 9 2 2 0 9 2 3 0 9 2 4 0 9 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 3 1 2 2 4 1 2 2 1 1 3 2 2 1 3 2 3 1 3 2 4 1 3 2 1 1 6 2 2 1 6 2 3 1 6 2 4 1 6 2 1 0 2 2 2 0 2 2 3 0 2 2 4 0 2 2 1 0 3 2 2 0 3 2 3 0 3 2 4 0 3 ------ 2 2 0 6 2 3 0 6 2 4 0 6 ------ 2 2 0 7 2 3 0 7 2 4 0 7 ------ 2 2 1 0 2 3 1 0 2 4 1 0 ------ 2 2 1 1 2 3 1 1 2 4 1 1 ------ 2 2 1 4 2 3 1 4 2 4 1 4 ------ 2 2 1 5 2 3 1 5 2 4 1 5 MAINTENANCE SHED M001 1. UNIT NUMBERS READ TOP TO BOTTOM (FLOOR 1-4) AS INDICATED ON THE UNIT STACK ONE BEDROOM UNITS TWO BEDROOM UNITS THREE BEDROOM UNITS LEGEND 3102 3202 3302 3402 3101 3201 3301 3401 3103 3203 3303 3403 3104 3204 3304 3404 3106 3206 3306 3406 3105 3205 3305 3405 3107 3207 3307 3407 3108 3208 3308 3408 3110 3210 3310 3410 3109 3209 3309 3409 3112 3212 3312 3412 3114 3214 3314 3414 3111 3211 3311 3411 3101 3201 3301 3401 TYPE A UNITS 3115 3215 3315 3415 3116 3216 3316 3416 ------ 3217 3317 3417 3118 3218 3318 3418 3119 3219 3319 3419 ------ 3220 3320 3420 ------ 3221 3321 3421 3122 3222 3322 3422 3123 3223 3323 3423 ------ 3224 3324 3424 1 1 0 5 1 2 0 5 1 3 0 5 1 4 0 5 NO UNIT - GARAGE ONLY----- * * * * * * *BUILDING SIGNAGE ------ 1 2 0 4 1 3 0 4 1 4 0 4 ------ 1 2 0 1 1 3 0 1 ------ ------ ------ 1 3 0 2 ------ ------ 1 2 0 3 1 3 0 3 1 4 0 3 1 1 0 6 1 2 0 6 1 3 0 6 1 4 0 6 1 1 0 7 1 2 0 7 1 3 0 7 1 4 0 7 1 1 1 0 1 2 1 0 1 3 1 0 1 4 1 0 1 1 0 8 1 2 0 8 1 3 0 8 1 4 0 8 1 1 0 9 1 2 0 9 1 3 0 9 1 4 0 9 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 3 1 2 1 4 1 2 1 1 1 5 1 2 1 5 1 3 1 5 1 4 1 5 1 1 1 6 1 2 1 6 1 3 1 6 1 4 1 6 1 1 1 7 1 2 1 7 1 3 1 7 1 4 1 7 ------ 1 2 1 8 1 3 1 8 1 4 1 8 ------ 1 2 1 5 1 3 1 5 1 4 1 5 ------ 1 2 1 4 1 3 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 2 2 0 1 3 2 0 1 4 2 0 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 3 2 1 1 4 2 1 1 1 2 4 1 2 2 4 1 3 2 4 1 4 2 4 1 1 2 5 1 2 2 5 1 3 2 5 1 4 2 5 1 1 2 8 1 2 2 8 1 3 2 8 1 4 2 8 1 1 2 9 1 2 2 9 1 3 2 9 1 4 2 9 1 1 3 2 1 2 3 2 1 3 3 2 1 4 3 2 1 1 3 3 1 2 3 3 1 3 3 3 1 4 3 3 1 1 3 6 1 2 3 6 1 3 3 6 1 4 3 6 1 1 3 7 1 2 3 7 1 3 3 7 1 4 3 7 ------ 1 2 1 9 1 3 1 9 1 4 1 9 ------ 1 2 2 2 1 3 2 2 1 4 2 2 ------ 1 2 2 3 1 3 2 3 1 4 2 3 ------ 1 2 2 6 1 3 2 6 1 4 2 6 ------ 1 2 2 7 1 3 2 7 1 4 2 7 ------ 1 2 3 0 1 3 3 0 1 4 3 0 ------ 1 2 3 1 1 3 3 1 1 4 3 1 ------ 1 2 3 4 1 3 3 4 1 4 3 4 ------ 1 2 3 5 1 3 3 5 1 4 3 5 1 1 3 8 1 2 3 8 1 3 3 8 1 4 3 8 APARTMENT PROJECTS WITH MULTIPLE BUILDINGS SHALL HAVE MONUMENT SIGNS ------- SHOWING THE STREET ADDRESSES OF EACH BUILDING AT EACH VEHICLE ENTRANCE TO THE SITE. EACH ETHICAL ENTRANCE SHALL ALSO HAVE AN ILLUMINATED SITE PLAN AND / OR DIRECTLY SIGNS. THE SIGNS SHALL SHOW THE LOCATION OF THE SIGN (THE VIEWER'S CURRENT LOCATION) AND ALL BUILDING ADDRESSES. DWELLING NUMBERS SHALL BE INCLUDED. THE MONUMENT SIGNS SHALL HAVE A CONTRASTING BACKGROUND COLOR. ALL SITE SIGNAGE TO BE PER OWNERS SPECIFICATION AND DESIGN AND UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT. * INDICATE APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ILLUMINATED BUILDING ADDRESS SIGNAGE. SIGNAGE FOR BUILDINGS MUST INCLUDE THE ENTIRE BUILDING ADDRESS AND STREET NAME. THE BUILDING ADDRESS SHALL BE NO LESS THAN SIX (6) INCHES IN HEIGHT. THE BUILDING SIGN SHALL HAVE A CONTRASTING BACKGROUND COLOR. 542 1st AVE. SOUTH, FLOOR 4 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104 © 2019 KATERRA ARCHITECTURE LLC © 2019 KATERRA ARCHITECTURE II LLC © 2019 KATERRA ARCHITECTURE III PLLC © 2019 KATERRA ARCHITECTURE IV LLC ALL DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS, PLANS, IDEAS, ARRANGEMENTS AND DESIGNS REPRESENTED OR REFERRED TO ARE THE PROPERTY OF AND ARE OWNED BY KATERRA INC. WHETHER THE PROJECT FOR WHICH THEY ARE MADE IS EXECUTED OR NOT. THEY WERE CREATED, EVOLVED, DEVELOPED AND PRODUCED FOR THE SOLE USE ON AND IN CONNECTION WITH THIS PROJECT AND NONE OF THE ABOVE MAY BE DISCLOSED OR GIVEN TO OR USED BY ANY PERSON, FIRM OR CORPORATION FOR ANY USE OR PURPOSE WHATSOEVER INCLUDING ANY OTHER PROJECT, EXCEPT UPON WRITTEN PERMISSION AND DIRECTION OF KATERRA INC. Owner Consultant BLDG. 1 BLDG. 2 BLDG. 3 Key plan Revisions Mark Date Description N 10/30/2020 UNIT NUMBERING/ ADDRESSING SHEET(1,2,3) G.00.014 ALEXAN GATEWAY APARTMENTS 23000 MILITARY RD S, KENT, WA 98032 RM RM 075-18001 12/13/19 IFC SET Drawn By Project Manager Job Number Date Of Original Professional Seal SCALE: 3/64" = 1'-0"1 UNIT NUMBERING PLAN NORTH 0 06/12/2019 PERMIT SET 2 01/09/2020 REV.3 ITCD UPDATES 6 05/22/2020 PC1 CORRECTIONS ''18 AG E N D A I T E M # 6 . c ) Phase 1B Phase 2 Phase 3 SE 260th St 18 9 t h A v e S E 1 8 8 t h A v e S E 19 1 s t P l S E SE 259th Pl 19 3 r d P l S E 19 6 t h A v e S E SE 2 5 9 t h S t SE 2 6 0 t h S t 19 9 t h A v e S E S E T i m b e r l a n e B l v d 198th Pl SE SE 2 5 6 t h S t SR 1 8 20 4 t h A v e S E 201s t A v e S E S E 2 5 8 t h S t 20 3 r d A v e S E S E 2 5 8 t h P l Phase 4 Phase 1A Phasing Legend Phasing MapLakepointe Urban Village Phasing MapLakepointe Urban Village 200 400 400' 0 100 SCALE: 1" = N NOTE: THE LOCATION OF DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDINGS ROADWAYS AND TRAILS, IS APPROXIMATE AND DOES NOT VEST TO THIER SPECIFIC LOCATION. THE LOCATION OF ALL DEVELOPMENT WILL BE BASED ON EXISTING CONDITIONS AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION AND THE TERMS OF THE PLANNED ACTION, THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, AND APPLICABLE LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL LAWS. January 30, 2017 Phase 1B - Approximate Years 2019-2024 Phase 2 - Approximate Years 2020-2025 Phase 3 - Approximate Years 2023-2028 Establishment of final grade, construction of Covington Connector to Southeast boundary, construction of first phase of commercial development. Establishment of final lake perimeter, construction of 191st Place SE extension and associated R-12 residential development, construction of second phase of commercial development on peninsula. Construction of third phase of commercial development. Preliminary Plat approval in third quarter 2021. Construction and Final Plat Recording 2022. Phase 1A - Maple Hills Division 5 Phase 4 - Approximate Years 2020-2027 Completion of gravel pit reclamation, construction of MR and R-12 residential development Updated September 15, 2021 11 9 10 8 8 19 AG E N D A I T E M # 6 . c ) 1 9 1 s t P l S E Jenkins Creek SE 260th St 18 9 t h A v e S E 1 8 8 t h A v e S E 19 1 s t P l S E SE 259th Pl 193 r d P l S E 19 6 t h A v e S E SE 2 5 9 t h S t SE 2 6 0 t h S t 19 9 t h A v e S E S E T i m b e r l a n e B l v d 198th Pl SE SE 2 5 6 t h S t SR 1 8 20 4 t h A v e S E 201s t A v e S E S E 2 5 8 t h S t 20 3 r d A v e S E S E 2 5 8 t h P l B RCMU PARKS 24,956 SF 0.57 AC RCMU PARKS 97,621 SF 2.24 AC MR PARKS 110,686 SF 2.54 AC R-12 PARKS 14,185 SF 0.33 AC R-12 PARKS 12,500 SF 0.29 AC MR PARKS 128,425 SF 2.95 AC R-12 PARKS 32,553 SF 0.75 AC R-6 PARKS 14,112 SF 0.32 AC R-12 PARKS 7,254 SF 0.17 AC R-6 OPEN SPACE 1,880,037 SF 43.16 AC R-12 OPEN SPACE 572,210 SF 13.14 AC R-12 OPEN SPACE 4,549 SF 0.10 AC R-12 OPEN SPACE 34,788 SF 0.80 AC RCMU OPEN SPACE 86,894 SF 1.99 AC R-6 PARKS 9,908 SF 0.23 AC MR PARKS 12,799 SF 0.29 AC MR OPEN SPACE 22,507 SF 0.52 AC R-12 OPEN SPACE 5,687 SF 0.13 AC R-6 OPEN SPACE 139,837 SF 3.21 AC R-6 OPEN SPACE 57,182 SF 1.31 AC P Covi n g t o n C o n n e c t o r Master Development PlanLakepointe Urban Village Master Development PlanLakepointe Urban Village January 30, 2017 Wetland Wetland Buffer Undisturbed Open Space Publicly Accessible Parks and Plazas Medium Density Residential (R-6) Central Pond Feature Covington Highlands Trail Trails / Offsite Trail Connections Stop Light Proposed Park and Ride Facility Transit Stop Proposed Truck and Bus Return Route Public Streets High Density Residential (R-12) Mixed Residential (MR) Mixed Use / Commercial (RCMU) Legend B Bike Route CENTRAL POND FEATURE Gateway Element Steep Slope and Buffer 200 400 400' 0 100 SCALE: 1" = N Proposed Trail Parking Focal Point / Public Gathering Spot Landscape Areas Jenkins Creek P Pedestrian / Wildlife Undercrossing NOTE: THE LOCATION OF DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDINGS ROADWAYS AND TRAILS, IS APPROXIMATE AND DOES NOT VEST TO THIER SPECIFIC LOCATION. THE LOCATION OF ALL DEVELOPMENT WILL BE BASED ON EXISTING CONDITIONS AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION AND THE TERMS OF THE PLANNED ACTION, THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, AND APPLICABLE LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL LAWS. Mix of Multi-Family and Commercial is Encouraged within Peninsula Area Updated September 15, 2021 Disturbed (Graded) Open Space SPECIAL PAVEMENT PARKS TABLE RCMU MR R-12 R-6 ZONE SQ FOOTAGE ACREAGE 122,577 SF 251,910 SF 66,492 SF 24,020 SF 2.81 AC 5.78 AC 1.53 AC 0.55 AC TOTAL 464,999 SF 10.67 AC POND TABLE RCMU MR R-12 R-6 ZONE SQ FOOTAGE ACREAGE 366,128 SF 106,040 SF 334,094 SF 0 SF 8.41 AC 2.43 AC 7.67 AC 0.00 AC TOTAL 806,262 SF 18.51 AC OPEN SPACE TABLE RCMU MR R-12 R-6 ZONE SQ FOOTAGE ACREAGE 86,984 SF 22,507 SF 617,234 SF 2,077,056 SF 1.99 AC 0.52 AC 14.17 AC 47.68 AC TOTAL 2,803,691 SF 64.36 AC COMBINED OPEN SPACE TABLE RCMU MR R-12 R-6 ZONE PARKS 2.81 AC 5.78 AC 1.53 AC 0.55 AC TOTAL 10.67 AC 91.25 AC 34.00 AC 35.34 AC 53.51 AC 214.10 AC OPEN SPACE* POND 8.41 AC 2.43 AC 7.67 AC 0.00 AC 18.51 AC *OPEN SPACE INCLUDES CRITICAL AREAS, BUFFERS, AND OTHER GREEN SPACES 13.21 AC 8.73 AC 23.37 AC 48.23 AC 93.55 AC NET ACRES** 78.03 AC 25.27 AC 11.98 AC 5.27 AC 120.55 AC 1.99 AC 0.52 AC 14.17 AC 47.68 AC 64.36 AC GROSS ACREAGE TOTAL AMENITIES WILDLIFE / PEDESTRIAN UNDER-CROSSING **NET ACRES EQUALS GROSS ACREAGE MINUS TOTAL AMENITIES FUTURE CONNECTION BEYOND PROPERTY BY OTHERS 3 6 4 6 1 2 5 7 20 AG E N D A I T E M # 6 . c ) VI - Portable Classrooms The Plan references use of portables as interim capacity for facilities. Currently, the District utilizes portables to house students in excess of functional capacity and for program purposes at some school locations (Please see Appendices A, B, C). Based on enrollment projections, implementation of full day kindergarten programs, lower state mandated class sizes, functional capacity, and no need for additional interim capacity, the District anticipates no need to purchase or lease additional portables during the next six- year period to ensure capacity requirement (Noted in section V. Six Yr. Planning Construction). During the time period covered by this Plan, the District does not anticipate that all of the District’s portables will be replaced by permanent facilities. During the useful life of some of the portables, the school-age population may decline in some communities and increase in others, and these portables provide the flexibility to accommodate the immediate needs of the community. Portables may be used as interim facilities: 1.To prevent overbuilding or overcrowding of permanent school facilities. 2.To cover the gap between the times of demand for increased capacity and completion of permanent school facilities to meet that demand. 3.To meet unique program requirements. Portables currently in the District’s inventory are continually evaluated and maintained. The District's goal is to reduce the number of portables so we may provide an equitable learning environment for all. The Plan projects that the District will use portables to accommodate interim housing needs for the next six years and beyond. The use of portables, their impacts on permanent facilities, life cycle and operational costs, and the interrelationship between portables, emerging technologies, and educational restructuring will continue to be examined. 21 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT FACTORS FOR ESTIMATED IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS Student Generation Factors - Single Family Student Generation Factors - Multi-Family Elementary (Grades K - 5)0.222 Elementary (Grades K - 5)0.075 Middle (Grades 6- 8)0.092 Middle (Grades 6- 8)0.030 Senior High (Grades 9 - 12)0.116 Senior High (Grades 9 - 12)0.032 Total 0.430 Total 0.137 Projected Increased Student Capacity OSPI - Square Footage per Student Elementary 0 Elementary 110 Middle 0 Middle 134 Senior High (Academy)0 Senior High 144 Special Education 153 Required Site Acreage per Facility Elementary (required)12 Average Site Cost / Acre Middle (required)25 Elementary $161,678 Senior High (required)40 Middle $0 Senior High $0 $68,000,000 Temporary Facility Capacity & Cost $155,000,000 Elementary @ 24 $315,000 $220,000,000 Middle @ 28 $315,000 Senior High @ 32 $315,000 State Funding Assistance Credit 123,702 District Funding Assistance Percentage 54.31% 10,256 21,296 155,254 Construction Cost Allocation CCA - Cost/Sq, Ft. $375.00 1,567,594 760,483 District Average Assessed Value 1,077,315 Single Family Residence $657,970 3,405,392 District Average Assessed Value 1,691,296 Multi-Family Residence $320,116 770,739 New Facility Construction Cost Elementary Middle Senior High Temporary Facility Square Footage Elementary Middle Senior High Total 4.4% Permanent Facility Square Footage Elementary Middle Senior High/Other Total 95.6% Total Facilities Square Footage Elementary Middle Senior High/Other 1,098,611 Total 3,560,646 Bond Levy Tax Rate/$1,000 $0.46 Current Rate / 1,000 Tax Rate 0.0005 Developer Provided Sites / Facilities Value 0 General Obligation Bond Interest Rate Dwelling Units 0 Current Bond Interest Rate 4.37% CPI Inflation Factor 5.80% Budget Preparations | OSPI (www.k12.wa.us) * Reflects current facility construction (APPENDIX A) 22 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT FACTORS FOR ESTIMATED IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS Site Acquisition Cost per Single Family Residence Formula: ((Acres x Cost per Acre) / Facility Capacity) x Student Generation Factor Required Site Acreage Average Site Cost/Acre Facility Capacity Student Factor A 1 (Elementary)12 $161,678 0 0.222 A 2 (Middle)25 $0 0 0.092 A 3 (Senior High)40 $0 0 0.116 Total 77 $161,678 0 0.430 A a $0.00 Permanent Facility Construction Cost per Single Family Residence Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Permanent/Total Square Footage Ratio) Construction Cost Facility Capacity Student Factor Footage Ratio B 1 (Elementary)$68,000,000 0 0.222 0.903 B 2 (Middle)$155,000,000 0 0.092 0.984 B 3 (Senior High)$220,000,000 0 0.116 0.998 Total $443,000,000 0 0.430 B a $0.00 Temporary Facility Cost per Single Family Residence (Portables) Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Temporary / Total Square Footage Ratio) Facility Cost Facility Capacity Student Factor Footage Ratio C 1 (Elementary)$315,000 24 0.222 0.097 $282.63 C 2 (Middle)$315,000 28 0.092 0.016 $15.99 C 3 (Senior High)$315,000 32 0.116 0.020 $23.57 Total $945,000 84 0.430 C a $322.20 State Funding Assistance Credit per Single Family Residence (formerly "State Match") Formula: Area Cost Allowance x SPI Square Feet per student x Funding Assistance % x Student Factor Construction Cost AllocationSPI Sq. Ft. / Student Assistance %Student Factor D 1 (Elementary)$375.00 110 0.5431 0.222 $4,973.44 D 2 (Middle)$375.00 134 0.5431 0.092 $2,510.75 D 3 (Senior High)$375.00 144 0.5431 0.116 $3,401.98 D a $10,886.17 Tax Credit per Single Family Residence Average SF Residential Assessed Value (AAV)$657,970 Net Present Value (per EQ) (NPV)8.32 Current Debt Service Rate / 1,000 ( r )0.05%TC a $2,534.98 (Below used to calculate NPV) Current Bond Interest Rate 4.37% Years Amortized (10 Years)- Used in NPV Calculation 10 Developer Provided Facility Credit Facility / Site Value Dwelling Units 0 0 FC a 0 Fee Recap ** A = Site Acquisition per SF Residence $0.00 B = Permanent Facility Cost per Residence $0.00 C = Temporary Facility Cost per Residence $322.20 Subtotal $322.20 D = State Match Credit per Residence $10,886.17 TC = Tax Credit per Residence $2,534.98 Subtotal $13,421.15 Total Unfunded Need ($13,098.95) 50% Developer Fee Obligation ($6,549) FC = Facility Credit (if applicable)$0 District Adjustment $6,549 Net Fee Obligation per Residence - Single Family $0.00 (APPENDIX B) 23 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT FACTORS FOR ESTIMATED IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS Site Acquisition Cost per Multi-Family Residence Unit Formula: ((Acres x Cost per Acre) / Facility Capacity) x Student Generation Factor Required Site Acreage Average Site Cost/Acre Facility Capacity Student Factor A 1 (Elementary)12 $161,678 0 0.075 A 2 (Middle)25 $0 0 0.030 A 3 (Senior High)40 $0 0 0.032 Total 77 $161,678 0 0.137 2 A $0.00 Permanent Facility Construction Cost per Multi-Family Residence Unit Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Permanent / Total Square Footage Ratio) Construction Cost Facility Capacity Student Factor Footage Ratio B 1 (Elementary)$68,000,000 0 0.075 0.903 B 2 (Middle)$155,000,000 0 0.030 0.984 B 3 (Senior High)$220,000,000 0 0.032 0.998 Total $443,000,000 0 0.137 B $0.00 Temporary Facility Cost per Multi-Family Residence Unit Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Temporary / Total Square Footage Ratio) Facility Cost Facility Capacity Student Factor Footage Ratio C 1 (Elementary)$315,000 24 0.075 0.097 $95.48 C 2 (Middle)$315,000 28 0.030 0.016 $5.21 C 3 (Senior High)$315,000 32 0.032 0.020 $6.50 Total $945,000 84 0.137 C $107.20 State Funding Assistance Credit per Multi-Family Residence (formerly "State Match") Formula: Area Cost Allowance x SPI Square Feet per student x Funding Assistance % x Student Factor Area Cost Allowance SPI Sq. Ft. / Student Equalization %Student Factor D 1 (Elementary)$375.00 110 0.5431 0.075 $1,680.22 D 2 (Middle)$375.00 134 0.5431 0.030 $818.72 D 3 (Senior High)$375.00 144 0.5431 0.032 $938.48 D $3,437.42 Tax Credit per Multi Family Residence Average MF Residential Assessed Value (AAV)$320,116 Net Present Value (per EQ) (NPV)8.32 Current Debt Service Rate / 1,000 ( r )0.05%TC $1,233.32 (Below used to calculate NPV) Current Bond Interest Rate 4.37% Years Amortized (10 Years)- Used in NPV Calcula 10 Developer Provided Facility Credit Facility / Site Value Dwelling Units 0 0 FC 0 Fee Recap ** A = Site Acquisition per Multi-Family Unit $0.00 B = Permanent Facility Cost per MF Unit $0.00 C = Temporary Facility Cost per MF Unit $107.20 Subtotal $107.20 D = State Match Credit per MF Unit $3,437.42 TC = Tax Credit per MF Unit $1,233.32 Subtotal $4,670.73 Total Unfunded Need ($4,563.53) 50% Developer Fee Obligation ($2,282) FC = Facility Credit (if applicable)0 District Adjustment $2,282 Net Fee Obligation per Residential Unit - Multi-family $0.00 (APPENDIX C) 24 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) VII - Projected Six-Year Classroom Capacity As stated in Section IV, the functional capacity study is periodically updated for changes in special programs and reflects class size requirements, class size fluctuations etc. As shown in the Inventory and Capacity chart in Table 3, the functional capacity is also reflected in the capacity and enrollment comparison charts (See Tables 5 & 5 a-b-c). Enrollment is electronically reported to OSPI on Form P-223 on a monthly basis and funding apportionment is based on Annual Average FTE (AAFTE). The first school day of October is widely recognized as the enrollment “snapshot in time” to report enrollment for the year. Kent School District continues to be the fifth largest district (both FTE and headcount basis) in the State of Washington. The P-223 Headcount for October 2024 was 24,432, excluding ECSE and college-only Running Start students. In October 2024, there were 1,159 students in 11th and 12th grade participating in the Running Start program at different colleges and receiving credits toward both high school and college graduation. Of these students, 629 attended classes only at the college (“college-only”) and are excluded from FTE and headcount for capacity and enrollment comparisons. Kent School District has one of the highest Running Start program participation rates in the State. Based on the enrollment forecasts, permanent facility inventory and capacity, current standard of service, portable capacity, and future additional classroom space, the District plans to continue to satisfy the required capacity through the interim use of portables (See Table 5 and Tables 5 a-b-c). While the District currently shows available capacity to address projected need on a purely statistical basis, there are a variety of extenuating factors that need to be considered. The Kent School District currently makes significant use of portables, which we do not consider as part of our permanent standard of service. We have included portable space in our interim capacity figures, and we do not count that as a permanent space solution. Kent School District is unusual in that it incorporates neighborhoods intersecting with 8 jurisdictions, including Kent, Covington, Auburn, Black Diamond, Maple Valley, Renton, unincorporated King County and SeaTac. The district covers 72 square miles and includes over 40 schools. Within this large geographic area, we expect to have pockets of localized capacity need that are not necessarily reflected in the aggregate figures. As one example, the Lakepointe Urban Village development in Covington may require new classroom capacity even as space may exist in schools on the far other end of the District’s boundaries. 25 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY TOTAL DISTRICT SCHOOL YEAR 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 2030-31 Actual Permanent Functional Capacity 1 35,494 35,494 35,494 35,494 35,494 35,494 35,494 Changes to Permanent Capacity 1 Capacity Increase (F) Additional Permanent Classrooms 0000000 Permanent Program Capacity Subtotal 35,494 35,494 35,494 35,494 35,494 35,494 35,494 Interim Portable Capacity Elementary Portable Capacity Required 3,228 3,228 3,228 3,228 3,228 3,228 3,228 Middle School Portable Capacity Required 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 High School Portable Capacity Required 608 608 608 608 608 608 608 Interim Portable Capacity Total 4,211 4,211 4,211 4,211 4,211 4,211 4,211 TOTAL CAPACITY 1 39,705 39,705 39,705 39,705 39,705 39,705 39,705 Total Enrollment/Projection 2 24,432 24,094 23,683 23,344 23,022 22,686 22,343 DISTRICT AVAILABLE CAPACITY 15,246 15,584 15,995 16,334 16,656 16,992 17,335 1 Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to reflect program changes. 2 Projection Source: School Facilities Organization, Information and Condition of Schools (Report 1049) P R O J E C T E D Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 May 2025 26 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY SCHOOL YEAR 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 2030-31 Actual Elementary Permanent Capacity 1 16,696 16,696 16,696 16,696 16,696 16,696 16,696 Additional Permanent Classrooms 2 0000000 Permanent Program Capacity Subtotal 16,696 16,696 16,696 16,696 16,696 16,696 16,696 Interim Portable Capacity 3,228 3,228 3,228 3,228 3,228 3,228 3,228 TOTAL CAPACITY 1 19,924 19,924 19,924 19,924 19,924 19,924 19,924 ENROLLMENT / PROJECTION 2 11,401 11,237 11,046 10,815 10,575 10,474 10,304 SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 8,496 8,660 8,851 9,082 9,322 9,423 9,593 1 Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to reflect program changes. 2 Projection Source: School Facilities Organization, Information and Condition of Schools (Report 1049) ELEMENTARY: Grades K - 5 Elementary Grade K-5 P R O J E C T E D Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 A May 2025 27 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY SCHOOL YEAR 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 2030-31 Actual Middle School Permanent Capacity 1 7,216 7,216 7,216 7,216 7,216 7,216 7,216 Changes to Middle School Capacity 0000000 Permanent Program Capacity Subtotal 7,216 7,216 7,216 7,216 7,216 7,216 7,216 Portable Interim Capacity 1 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 TOTAL CAPACITY 1 7,591 7,591 7,591 7,591 7,591 7,591 7,591 ENROLLMENT / PROJECTION 2 5,815 5,717 5,632 5,633 5,640 5,484 5,361 SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 1,776 1,874 1,959 1,958 1,951 2,107 2,230 1 Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to reflect program changes. MIDDLE SCHOOL: Grades 6 - 8 2 Projection Source: School Facilities Organization, Information and Condition of Schools (Report 1049) P R O J E C T E D Middle School Grade 6-8 Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 B May 2025 28 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY SCHOOL YEAR 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 2030-31 Actual Senior High Permanent Capacity 1 10,097 10,097 10,097 10,097 10,097 10,097 10,097 Changes to High School Capacity 0000000 Permanent Program Capacity Subtotal 10,097 10,097 10,097 10,097 10,097 10,097 10,097 Portables Interim Capacity 1 608 608 608 608 608 608 608 TOTAL CAPACITY 1 10,705 10,705 10,705 10,705 10,705 10,705 10,705 ENROLLMENT / PROJECTION 2 7,216 7,140 7,005 6,896 6,807 6,728 6,678 SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 3,489 3,565 3,700 3,809 3,898 3,977 4,027 1 Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to reflect program changes. HIGH SCHOOL: Grades 9 - 12 P R O J E C T E D 2 Projection Source: School Facilities Organization, Information and Condition of Schools (Report 1049) Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 C May 2025 29 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) VIII - Finance Plan The finance plan shown on Table 6 demonstrates how the Kent School District plans to finance improvements for the years 2024-2025 through 2030-2031. The financing components include secured and unsecured funding and impact fees. The plan is based on future bond issues, state school construction assistance, collection of impact fees under the State Growth Management Act and voluntary mitigation fees paid pursuant to State Environmental Policy Act. In November 2016, the District held a special election to approve the authorization of $252,000,000 in bonding authority. The projects described below are part of this authorization. The first series of bonds ($80 million) were issued in February 2017, which funded the Covington Elementary Replacement School, as well as other infrastructure projects. Impact fees were used at both River Ridge Elementary School and Kent Laboratory Academy projects due to escalation in construction pricing across the Pacific Northwest. According to RCW 82.02.090, the definition of an impact fee is ". . . a payment of money imposed upon development as a condition of development approval to pay for public facilities needed to serve new growth and development, and that is reasonably related to the new development that creates additional demand and need for public facilities, that is a proportionate share of the cost of the public facilities, and that is used for facilities that reasonably benefit the new development. `Impact fee' does not include a reasonable permit or application fee." Mitigation or impact fees can be calculated on the basis of "unhoused student need" or "the maintenance of a district's level of service" as related to new residential development. A mitigation/impact fee may be imposed based upon a determination of insufficient existing permanent and/or interim portable school space or to pay for permanent and/or newly acquired interim portable school space previously constructed as a result of growth in the district. A district's School Board must first approve the application of the mitigation or impact fees and, in turn, approval must then be granted by the other general government jurisdictions having responsibility within the district, counties, cities and towns (Kent, Covington, Renton, Auburn, Black Diamond, Maple Valley, SeaTac, and Unincorporated King County). Though the current enrollment projections increase for both elementary and secondary schools are relatively flat, the ongoing need to provide permanent instructional facilities to house students is a driving need as the shifts in our family populations continue, due to ongoing development. Previously collected impact fees may be used to support and address the challenges related to the number of interim instructional facilities currently in use, the replacement of some of these aged facilities, the maintenance of the district's level of services, and the potential expansions to existing facilities in future years. The Kent School District 2024-2025 CFP update includes continued execution of the 2016 Capital Bond Projects, the 2018 Levy Projects, and the data collection and review of our Facility Assessment Reports. The District Facilities and Capital Planning Teams had come together and joined the Capital 30 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Bond Planning Task Force (CBPTF) which included District personnel, design professionals, teaching staff, student voices, as well as community members who collaborated and discussed the District’s needs. The initial plan revealed priorities including school replacement due to age, and the need for added permanent facilities to (1) reduce and eliminate our need for portables and (2) accommodate future growth as housing in the Kent region continues to expand. We started with a list of 2 billion in needs and through itemizing and prioritizing, we brought the list of essential projects to 495 million. This list was brought before the District’s Board of Directors for comments, discussion, and approval. A Capital Bond Measure followed and went out to vote in April 2023 and did not pass with voter approval. After the failure to pass the 2023 Bond, we re-evaluated needs as well as next steps. Surveys went out to the community to see what people would like to prioritize from the list of needed projects. A new list of projects was presented through the 2023 Levy in November. This levy did not pass. This list was again taken and revised to prioritize projects that are critical to operations and life safety within our buildings. In April we set forth our 2024 Levy to a vote, which also did not receive the needed support to pass. We once again reduced the Levy list to include only emergent needs to critical building operations, and the measure was approved by voters in November of 2024. Future updates to this Capital Facilities Plan will include details of any adopted planning. With the opening of Canyon Ridge Middle School, our sixth grade moving from elementary to middle school, and our boundary change, we have advanced opportunities to even out capacity at each site to accommodate our programs, district-wide site capacity, and student-based needs. For the Six-Year Finance Plan, costs of future schools are based on estimates from Kent School District Capital Planning Team. Please see pages 13-14 for a summary of the cost basis. Cost Basis Summary For impact fee calculations, construction estimated costs are based on the last elementary school built in Kent, adjusted for inflation, and projected cost future elementary school, as well as average pricing of nearby school districts recently built new middle and new high school projects. Project Projected Cost New Elementary School $68,000,000 New Middle School $155,000,000 New High School $220,000,000 Site Acquisition Cost The site acquisition cost is based on an average cost of sites purchased or built on within the last ten years. Please see Table 7 for a list of site acquisition costs and averages. District Adjustment The impact fee calculations on Appendix B & C result in a zero-dollar impact fee total for this year but may be adjusted if needed per RCW 36.70A.130(2)(b) provision. 31 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 SIX-YEAR FINANCE PLAN Secured Unsecured Impact SCHOOL FACILITIES *2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 TOTAL Local & State State 2 or Local 3 Fees 5 Estimated Estimated PERMANENT FACILITIES No School Projects at this time.$0 TEMPORARY FACILITIES Additional portables 3 - 4 $0 OTHER N / A Totals $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * F = Funded U = Unfunded NOTES: 2 The District anticipates receiving some State Funding Construction Assistance for some projects. 3 Facility needs are pending review. Some of these projects may be funded with impact fees. 4 Cost of portables based on current cost and adjusted for inflation for future years. 5 Fees in this column are based on amount of fees collected to date and estimated fees on future units. Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 6 May 2024 32 AG E N D A I T E M # 6 . c ) KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 Site Acquisitions & Costs Average of Sites Purchased, Sold or Built on within last 10 Years Type & # on Map School / Site Year Open / Purchased Sold Location Acreage Cost/Price Avg cost-price/acre Total Average Cost / Acre Elementary No Acquisitions for Elemenary Schools 0.00 $0 Elementary Site Subtotal 0.00 $0 $0 Elem site average Middle School No Acquisitions for Middle Schools 0.00 $0 Middle School Site Subtotal 0.00 $0 $0 Middle Schl Site Avg. Senior High No Acquisitions for High Schools 0.00 $0 $0 Senior High Site Subtotal 0.00 $0 $0 Sr Hi Site Average Note: All rural sites were purchased prior to adoption of Urban Growth Area. Numbers correspond to locations on Site Bank & Acquisitions Map on Page 17. 1 / Urban Site - Covington area North (So of Mattson MS)1984 2 / Rural Site - Ham Lake east (Pollard)1992 4 / Urban Site - Shady Lake (Sowers-Blaine-Drahota-Paroline)1995 0.00 $0 5 / Rural Site - SE of Lake Morton area (West property)1993 0 0 0 9 / Rural Site - McMillan Assemblage (South of MC)98 - 04 10 / Urban Site - Yeh-Williams (W of 132 Ave SE at SE 288)1999 12a / Urban Site - 156th Ave. SE Covington (Wikstrom)2004 12b / Urban Site - SE 256th St. Covington (West of CO)2004 16 Site - 11027 SE Kent-Kangley, WA 98030 2023 Site - 11027 SE Kent-Kangley, WA 98030 0.9 $1,382,696.90 Land included building 16a Site - 11109 SE Kent-Kangley, WA 98030 2023 Site - 11109 SE Kent-Kangley, WA 98030 0.84 $1,744,009.52 Land included building Total Acreage & Cost Total Average Cost / Acre #DIV/0! Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 7 May 202233 AG E N D A I T E M # 6 . c ) IX - Summary of Changes to June 2025 Capital Facilities Plan The Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") is updated annually based on previous Plans in effect since 1993. The primary changes from the June 2024 Plan are summarized here. Capacity changes continue to reflect fluctuations in class size ratio and program changes. Changes in portables or transitional capacity reflect use, lease or purchase, sale, surplus and/or movement between facilities. The District worked with Educational Data Solutions, LLC to update student generation factors. The updated rates are included in the body of the Plan. The District expects to receive some State Funding Assistance (formerly called “state matching funds”) for projects in this Plan and tax credit factors are updated annually. Unfunded site and facility need will be reviewed in the future. The impact fees for 2025 calendar year will result in no collection of impact fees for both Single-Family and Multi-Family due to the capacity study completed in spring 2025. 34 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) X - Appendices KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT FACTORS FOR ESTIMATED IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS Changes to Impact Fee Calculation Factors Include: ITEM Grade /Type FROM TO Increase/ Decrease Comments Student Generation Factor Elem 0.229 0.222 -0.007 Single Family (SF) MS 0.087 0.092 0.005 SH 0.113 0.116 0.003 Total 0.429 0.430 0.001 Student Generation Factor Elem 0.109 0.075 -0.034 Multi-Family (MF) MS 0.037 0.030 -0.007 SH 0.054 0.032 -0.022 Total 0.200 0.137 -0.063 State Funding Assistance Ratios (“State Match”) 52.88% 54.31% 1.43% Per OSPI Website Area Cost Allowance $375.00 $375.00 0.000 Per OSPI Website Link Average Assessed Valuation (AV) SF $594,679 $657,970 63,291 King County AV - Average of Condominiums & Apts. MF $310,811 $320,116 9,305 King County Debt Service Capital Levy Rate / $1000 $1.11 $0.46 ($0.65) Per King Co. Assessor Report General Obligation Bond Interest Rate 3.48% 4.37% 0.89% Bond Buyers 20 year GO Index Impact Fee - Single Family SF $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 No Change Impact Fee - Multi-Family MF $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 No Change 35 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Page | 1 August 18, 2025 City of Renton 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RE: Submission of 2026 Rate Schedule, Capital Facilities Plan, and Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees Distinguished Mayor Pavone, I am writing to present the Renton Regional Fire Authority's updated Capital Facilities Plan, Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees, and our 2026 Fire Impact Fee Rate Schedule and revised Fire Marshal Fee Schedule. This comprehensive revision reflects our ongoing commitment to serve the residents and businesses of Renton efficiently, responsively, and with the highest standard of safety. The Capital Facilities Plan has been meticulously updated to encompass our latest assessments, strategic priorities, and projections for the next six years. It outlines our goals and initiatives, ensuring that as Renton continues to grow and evolve, our Fire Authority remains fully equipped and prepared to address emergent and ongoing needs. Simultaneously, the revised Fire Impact Fee Rate Schedule seeks to strike a balance between our operational requirements and the economic considerations of our community. We have taken a methodical approach to ensure that the fees are not only fair but also aligned with the actual costs of providing fire prevention and emergency services for our growing community. Our objective, in presenting these updated documents, is for them to be incorporated into the City of Renton's Fee Schedule as outlined in our agencies’ interlocal agreements regarding the city’s collection of fees of behalf of the RFA. Their inclusion will ensure cohesive planning and coordination between our Fire Authority and the city's broader strategic vision. I believe this will significantly benefit our shared goal: the safety, well-being, and prosperity of Renton's residents and businesses. I would like to offer our sincere appreciation to the city staff members who worked with our staff to provide growth information for the City of Renton. The Renton Regional Fire Authority remains dedicated to serving in partnership with the City of Renton, and we deeply value our collaborative relationship. Thank you for your attention to this important matter. I await your feedback and am optimistic about the seamless integration of our updated plan and rate schedule into the city's comprehensive framework. Respectfully, Steve Heitman Fire Chief Enc: RRFA Resolution 2025-04 Adopting the Amended Capital Facilities Plan and Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees 2026 Fire Impact Fee Schedule (Section XII) and Fire Marshal Fee Schedule (Section XIII) Steven C Heitman (Aug 18, 2025 19:08:16 PDT) Steven C Heitman AGENDA ITEM #6. c) AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Section XII. Development Fees 2026 d. Fire Impact Fees 2023 2024 2026 (I) Residential ‐ single family (detacted dwelling & duplexes), per dwelling unit 829.77$ 421.98$ 779.24$ (II) Residential ‐ multi‐family & accessory dwelling unit (ADU), per dwelling unit 964.53$ 579.41$ 1,099.68$ (III) Hotel/motel/resort, per room* 1.29$ 346.22$ 669.37$ (IV) Medical care, per bed** 3.92$ 1,052.00$ 2,173.16$ (V) Office, per sq foot 0.26$ 0.14$ 0.28$ (VI) Medical/dental office, per sq foot 1.99$ 0.61$ 1.28$ (VII) Retail, per sq foot 1.25$ 0.66$ 1.19$ (VIII) Leisure facilities, per sq foot 2.36$ 0.42$ 0.90$ (IX) Restaurant/lounge, per sq foot 5.92$ 1.44$ 2.32$ (X) Industrial/manufacturing, per sq ft 0.15$ 0.05$ 0.10$ (XI) Church, per sq ft 0.56$ 0.24$ 0.49$ (XII) Education, per student*** 0.72$ 28.02$ 63.96$ (XIII) Special public facilities, per sq ft 4.48$ 0.13$ 0.27$ *Changed from sq ft to room in 2023 ** Changed from sq ft to bed in 2023 *** Changed from sq ft to student in 2023 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) OFM Fees 2023-2025 PROPOSED 2026 Section XIII. Fire Department Fire Marshal Fees (RFA) a. Fire Plans Review & Inspection Fees (I) $0 - $249.99 $50 $60 (II) $250.00 - $999.99 $50 + 2% of the cost $75 + 2% of the cost (III) $1,000 - $4,999.99 $75 + 2% of the cost $100 + 2% of the cost (IV) $5,000 - $49,999.99 $200 + 1.5% of the cost $250 + 1.5% of the cost (V) $50,000 - $99,999.99 $450 + 1.2% of the cost $525 + 1.2% of the cost (VI) $100,000 and above $950 + .75% of the cost $1100 + .75% of the cost (VII) Construction Re-Inspection. Fee is per hour with a 2 hour minimum. The minimum (may) replace with (will) be assessed if the required inspection does not meet the approval of the inspector.$175 $200 (VIII) Violation/Second Re-Inspection after 30-day period (whenever 30 days or more have passed since fire department notification of a violation, which required a first re-inspection, and such violation has not been remedied or granted an extension.$150 $175 (IX) Third and subsequent re-inspection follow-up inspection when re-inspections are required beyond the first and second re-inspections.$250 $300 (X) Preventable fire alarm fee: 1. First, second, and third preventable alarms 2. Fourth and fifth preventable alarms in a calendar year, fee is per each alarm 3. Sixth preventable alarm and sucessive preventable alarms in a calendar year, fee is per each alarm N/C $75 $150 N/C $75 $150 (XI) Late payment penalty $35 $35 b. Fire Permit Type: (I) Operational fire code permit (issued in accordance with Section 105.6 of the IFC) fee is yearly (including items such as fire special events, covered stages, mobile food facilities, hot works, etc…)$150 $185 (II) Permits for mobile food facilities that have passed a fire and life safety inspection in another jurisdiction that has reciprocity with Renton RFA $75 $92.50 (III) Hazardous materials and HPM facilities yearly (ADD & High Piled Storage)$250 $325 (IV) Construction permit 20% of plan review fee; minimum $75 20% of plan review fee; minimum $100 (V) Hazardous production materials permit (for businesses storing, handling, or using hazardous production materials as regulated in the fire code) permit is yearly $250 $325 (VI) Underground tank removal or abandonment-in-place permit (residential)$200 $300 (VII) Other requested inspection when not required by the fire code. Fee is per hour with a miniumum 1 hour when approved by the Fire Marshal, such as home daycares.$175 $200 (VIII) NSF check fees $25 $25 (X) RFA technology surcharge fee applied to Fire Department Fire Marshal Fees, subsection a. (I,II,III, IV, V, VI) 5% (match COR rate)5% AGENDA ITEM #6. c) AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 PURPOSE ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 1.2 CAPITAL PLANNING REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................................ 4 1.3 DEFINITION OF CAPITAL FACILITIES ............................................................................................................... 5 1.4 PRINCIPLES GUIDING CAPITAL INVESTMENTS ............................................................................................... 5 1.5 RRFA HISTORY AND GOVERNANCE................................................................................................................ 5 1.6 SERVICE AREA ............................................................................................................................................... 6 1.7 CURRENT CONDITIONS AND PROJECTED GROWTH ....................................................................................... 7 2.0 INVENTORY OF EXISTING RRFA CAPITAL FACILITIES.................................................................................... 8 2.1 BUILDING INVENTORY ................................................................................................................................... 8 2.2 APPARATUS INVENTORY ............................................................................................................................... 9 3.0 MEASURING FUTURE CAPITAL FACILITY NEEDS ........................................................................................ 14 3.1 LEVEL OF SERVICE MEASURES ..................................................................................................................... 14 4.0 FORECAST OF FUTURE FACILITY NEEDS, 2026-2031 .................................................................................. 22 4.1 APPARATUS FACILITY NEEDS ....................................................................................................................... 22 4.2 STATION FACILITY NEEDS ............................................................................................................................ 23 4.3 PROPOSED LOCATIONS AND CAPACITIES OF EXPANDED OR NEW CAPITAL FACILITIES ............................... 25 5.0 CAPITAL FACILITIES REVENUE ANALYSIS ................................................................................................... 26 5.1 OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................................. 26 5.2 FUNDING THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN ..................................................................................................... 26 5.3 ASSUMPTIONS ............................................................................................................................................ 26 5.4 FIRE IMPACT FEES ....................................................................................................................................... 27 5.5 OPERATING TRANSFERS .............................................................................................................................. 28 5.6 SIX-YEAR COST AND REVENUE COMPARISON ............................................................................................. 28 5.7 POLICY OPTIONS AND OTHER FUNDING SOURCES ...................................................................................... 28 APPENDIX A: AMORTIZATION SCHEDULE .............................................................................................................. 29 APPENDIX B: MAJOR REPAIR AND REHABILITATION FOR STATIONS ...................................................................... 30 APPENDIX C: FIRE STATION 11 DRIVE TIME (AID UNIT) ............................................................................................. 32 APPENDIX D: FIRE STATION 12-13 DRIVE TIME (LADDERS) ........................................................................................ 33 APPENDIX E: FIRE STATION 16/WAREHOUSE BUILDING PRELIMINARY DESIGN......................................................... 34 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Table of Exhibits Exhibit 1-1. Service Area and Station Locations ............................................................................................ 6 Exhibit 1-2. Service Area Population and Projected Growth ......................................................................... 7 Exhibit 2-1. Fire Station Inventory ................................................................................................................. 8 Exhibit 2-2. Engines in RRFA Fleet ................................................................................................................. 9 Exhibit 2-3. Ariel Ladder Inventory .............................................................................................................. 10 Exhibit 2-4. Aid Units in RRFA Fleet ............................................................................................................. 10 Exhibit 2-5. Hazardous Materials Vehicle in RRFA Fleet .............................................................................. 10 Exhibit 2-6. Brush Trucks in RRFA Fleet ....................................................................................................... 10 Exhibit 2-7. Command Vehicles in RRFA Fleet ............................................................................................... 11 Exhibit 2-8. Dive Apparatus in RRFA Fleet ..................................................................................................... 11 Exhibit 2-9. Service Vehicles in RRFA Fleet .................................................................................................... 11 Exhibit 2-10. Staff Vehicles in RRFA Fleet ..................................................................................................... 12 Exhibit 2-11. Utility Vehicles in RRFA Fleet ................................................................................................... 12 Exhibit 2-12. Small Utility Vehicles in RRFA Fleet ......................................................................................... 13 Exhibit 2-13. Other Apparatus/Equipment in RRFA Fleet ............................................................................ 13 Exhibit 3-1. Total Cost of Response by Land Use Category .......................................................................... 16 Exhibit 3-2. Response Time Level of Service Standards ............................................................................... 17 Exhibit 3-3. 2024 Response Time Level of Service Standards for Fire/Other ................................................ 17 Exhibit 3-4. 2024 Response Time Level of Service Standards for EMS ......................................................... 17 Exhibit 3-5. City of Renton 2024 PC Rating .................................................................................................. 18 Exhibit 3-6. Fire Station 11 Ladder with 2.5 Road Mile Radius .................................................................... 19 Exhibit 3-7. Highlighted City of Renton Planned Development .................................................................... 20 Exhibit 4-1. Capital Costs for Apparatus, 2026-2031 ................................................................................... 22 Exhibit 4-2. Capital Facility Costs for Stations, 2026-2031 ........................................................................... 23 Exhibit 4-3. Fire Station 16 .......................................................................................................................... 24 Exhibit 5-1. Projected Dedicated Capital Revenues and Costs .................................................................... 28 Exhibit 5-2. Estimated Capital Facilities Revenues and Costs, YOE .............................................................. 28 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 4 1.0 Introduction 1.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) is to identify capital facility needs necessary for the Renton Regional Fire Authority (RRFA) to achieve and maintain adopted standards for levels of service concurrent with, or prior to, the impacts of expected development and population growth over the next six years (2026-2031) and is consistent with the land use and transportation elements of the City of Renton (City) and King County comprehensive plans. This CFP also identifies sound fiscal policies and funding resources for implementation. 1.2 CAPITAL PLANNING REQUIREMENTS The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) requires that a county’s or city’s CFP should consist of: a) an inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities; b) a forecast of the future needs for capital facilities; c) the proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital facilities; d) a six-year plan to finance capital facilities within projected funding capacities and clearly identified sources of public money for such purposes; and e) a requirement to reassess the land use element if probable funding falls short of existing needs (RCW 36.70a.070(3)). The GMA requires that all capital facilities have “probable funding” to pay for capital facility needs and that jurisdictions have capital facilities in place and readily available when new development comes in or must be of sufficient capacity when the population grows. The City prepares a CFP element as part of its comprehensive plan. In accordance with the Interlocal Agreement (ILA) in place between the City and the RRFA, the City will incorporate the RRFA’s six-year plan for fire and emergency services facilities into its comprehensive plan CFP. That allows the City to impose an impact fee. Impact fees may be collected and spent only for the public facilities addressed by a CFP element of a comprehensive land use plan adopted pursuant to the GMA (RCW 82.02.050 (4)). Levels of service (LOS) are established in the CFP and represent quantifiable measures of capacity. They are minimum standards established by the RRFA to provide capital facilities and services to the RRFA service area at a certain level of quality and within the financial capacity of the RRFA. As the population grows, it is expected that demands for fire and emergency response services will also grow. Additional facilities will be necessary to meet this growing demand for service. LOS standards are influenced by local citizens, elected, and appointed officials, national and state standards, mandates, and other considerations, such as available funding. Growth, LOS standards, and a funded capital improvement program are to be in balance. In the case where the LOS cannot be met by a service or facility, the jurisdiction could do one of the AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 5 following: 1) add proposed facilities within funding resources, 2) reduce demand through demand management strategies, 3) lower LOS standards, 4) phase growth, or 5) change the land use plan. 1.3 DEFINITION OF CAPITAL FACILITIES The CFP addresses public facilities necessary for providing fire and emergency response services. Capital facilities generally have a long useful life and include RRFA-owned and/or -operated buildings, land, equipment, and apparatus. Capital facilities planning does not cover regular operation and maintenance, but it does include major repair, rehabilitation, or reconstruction of facilities. The RRFA considers capital assets to be assets of more than $5,000 in value and an estimated useful life of more than one year. 1.4 PRINCIPLES GUIDING CAPITAL INVESTMENTS There are two main guiding elements behind capital facilities planning: RRFA standard operating procedures (SOP) that define fiscal policies and the GMA. RRFA SOP 2315 “Reserve Funds” and SOP 2317 “Long-Term Planning” address the RRFA’s policies regarding capital reserves and investments. The CFP supports RRFA in making strategic capital investments that support this effort. RRFA intends to use the CFP as:  a tool for budgeting;  the basis for capital spending, giving a degree of assurance about how public money will be spent; and  a useful guidance document for leadership and staff. Toward that end, RRFA has developed and used the following guidelines to evaluate projects before adding them to the CFP:  Growth-related project costs should be timed to match with available remitted fire impact fee revenues.  Project costs that are not growth-related should be timed to match with revenues available through operating transfers.  Projects should be spaced to allow for progress on RRFA’s other financial goals, especially maintaining its capital and operating reserves. 1.5 RRFA HISTORY AND GOVERNANCE The Renton Regional Fire Authority (RRFA) is a special purpose district that provides fire and emergency medical services within the City of Renton, King County Fire District 25 (KCFD25), and King County Fire District 40 (KCFD40). It was officially established on July 1, 2016, following the approval of Proposition 1 by voters in both the City and KCFD25. This measure created the RRFA AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 6 and authorized the use of a fire benefit charge to fund operations. Before RRFA’s formation, fire services were provided by Renton Fire & Emergency Services (RF&ES) within the City, while both KCFD25 and KCFD40 contracted with the City for fire protection. The establishment of RRFA consolidated fire services for the City and KCFD25 under a single regional authority. The contract for services with KCFD40 was transferred to the RRFA and renewed in 2022 for an additional 20 years. On July 1, 2025, following the passage of Proposition 1 by KCFD40 voters, KCFD40 was officially annexed into the RRFA on a permanent basis. As a result, both KCFD25 and KCFD40 are now considered part of the RRFA for the purposes of this Capital Facilities Plan (CFP). 1.6 SERVICE AREA RRFA is located at the south end of Lake Washington, between Seattle and Tacoma. According to King County GIS data, the RRFA’s total response area is 37 square miles, including the City of Renton and KCFD25 (27 square miles) and the KCFD40 and Lake Youngs area (10 square miles). KCFD25 is located in the area east of the City and north of State Route 169 known as the East Renton Highlands. KCFD40 and Lake Youngs are located in the area east of the City and south of State Route 169 known as Fairwood. The RRFA service area is bordered by unincorporated areas of King County, as well as the cities of Kent, Tukwila, and Newcastle, with the City of Seattle just a few miles northwest. Exhibit 1-1 presents a map of the RRFA service area and station locations. Exhibit 1-1. Service Area and Station Locations AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 7 1.7 CURRENT CONDITIONS AND PROJECTED GROWTH Renton is the fourth largest city in King County, covering 23.54 square miles and having an estimated 2024 population of 108,584. The City includes residential neighborhoods, a strong industrial base, and a growing commercial/office sector. The City’s downtown and northern manufacturing area were designated as a regional growth center by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) in 1995. The northern part of the regional growth center borders Lake Washington and emphasizes mixed use and regional employment, including the Boeing Company’s Renton Plant and The Landing, a significant recent retail and residential development. The southern part of the regional growth center includes the downtown core and adjacent residential area. Downtown Renton has seen investment in recent years, including the Renton Pavilion Event Center and Piazza Park, the Renton Transit Center, the IKEA Performing Arts Center, Top Golf, the Hyatt, and Southport. The City also contains commercial corridors, multi-family nodes, and extensive single-family neighborhoods. KCFD25 and KCFD40 mostly contain residential areas located in King County outside of Renton city limits. Population projections for Renton, KCFD25, and KCFD40 for the years 2025-2031 are presented in Exhibit 1-2.1 The City is expected to grow by 9,405 residents, 87% of the total population growth forecasted for the RRFA service area. Exhibit 1-2. Service Area Population and Projected Growth Description 2024 Projected Growth 2025-2031 City of Renton 108,584 9,405 KCFD25 7,726 217 KCFD40 21,885 1,177 Total Service Area 138,195 10,799 City of Renton Share of Population Growth 87% 1 Source: Source: City of Renton projections are from PSRC, KCFD25 and KCFD40 are from the Office of Financial Management (OFM). AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 8 2.0 Inventory of Existing RRFA Capital Facilities This section provides a current inventory of capital facilities that are either owned or operated by RRFA, including both stations and apparatus. 2.1 BUILDING INVENTORY Exhibit 1-1 in Section 1 maps the locations and ownership of the seven fire stations operated by RRFA. Exhibit 2-1 provides station locations and square footage operated by RRFA. Exhibit 2-1. Fire Station Inventory Station Address Building Square Footage Operated by RRFA Fire Station 112 211 Mill Ave S, Renton, WA 98057 20,550 Fire Station 12 (Ex EOC) 3 1209 Kirkland Ave NE, Renton, WA 98056 14,800 Fire Station 13 18002 108th Ave SE, Renton, WA 98055 20,521 Fire Station 13 Shop 18002 108th Ave SE, Renton, WA 98055 6,000 Fire Station 14 1900 Lind Ave SW, Renton, WA 98057 13,659 Fire Station 14 Tower 1900 Lind Ave SW, Renton, WA 98057 3,658 Fire Station 15 1404 N 30th St., Renton, WA 98056 7,497 Fire Station 16 12923 156th Ave SE, Renton, WA 98059 7,732 Fire Station 17 14810 Petrovitsky Rd SE, Renton, WA 98058 6,836 2 Fire Station 11 is owned by the City of Renton and leased to RRFA. The building square footage excludes the area leased by KC Medics. 3 Fire Station 12 is owned by the City of Renton and leased to the RRFA. The building square footage excludes the portion of the building that is utilized by City of Renton Emergency Management. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 9 2.2 APPARATUS INVENTORY The RRFA maintains a wide variety of highly specialized apparatus in order to fulfill its mission to protect the community it serves. Inventories of RRFA engines, ladders, aid units, hazardous materials vehicles, brush trucks, command vehicles, dive apparatus, service vehicles, staff vehicles, utility vehicles, small utility vehicles, and other apparatus/equipment are shown in Exhibits 2-2 through 2-13. Exhibit 2-2. Engines in RRFA Fleet Vehicle Number Call Sign Station/ Division Assignment Year Make Model Replacement Year Est. Cost in Year of Replacement F074 E413 Station 13 1999 E-ONE Cyclone II not scheduled $0 F085 E414 Station 14 2005 E-ONE Cyclone II 2026 $1,790,964 F093 E412 Station 12 2008 E-ONE Quest 2026 $1,790,964 F114 E313 Station 13 2015 E-ONE Cyclone II 2031 $2,076,218 F115 E314 Station 14 2015 E-ONE Cyclone II 2031 $2,076,218 F123 E311 Station 11 2017 E-ONE Cyclone II 2033 $2,202,660 F124 E312 Station 12 2017 E-ONE Cyclone II 2033 $2,202,660 F137 E316 Station 16 2019 E-ONE Cyclone II 2035 $2,336,802 F148 E313 Station 13 2022 PIERCE Enforcer 2038 $2,553,486 F149 E314 Station 14 2022 PIERCE Enforcer 2038 $2,553,486 F2515 E316 Station 16 2003 E-ONE Cyclone II 2026 $1,790,964 F441 E417 Station 17 2022 PIERCE Enforcer 2038 $2,553,486 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 10 Exhibit 2-3. Ariel Ladder Inventory Vehicle Number Call Sign Station/Division Assignment Year Make Model Replacement Year Est. Cost in Year of Replacement F105 L311 Station 11 2011 E-ONE Aerial 2029 $3,092,898 F135 L311 Station 11 2019 E-ONE Cyclone II 2037 $2,915,353 Exhibit 2-4. Aid Units in RRFA Fleet Vehicle Number Call Sign Station/Division Assignment Year Make Model Replacement Year Est. Cost in Year of Replacement F110 A313 Station 13 2014 INTE NorthStar 2025 $526,713 F111 A312 Station 12 2014 INTE NorthStar 2025 $526,713 F138 A311 Station 11 2020 FORD F-450 2032 $647,791 F153 A313 Station 13 2022 FORD F-450 2034 $687,241 F154 A312 Station 12 2022 FORD F-450 2034 $687,241 F440 A317 Station 17 2022 FORD F-450 2034 $687,241 Exhibit 2-5. Hazardous Materials Vehicle in RRFA Fleet Vehicle Number Call Sign Station/Division Assignment Year Make Model Replacement Year Est. Cost in Year of Replacement F120 HM314 Station 14 2017 E-One Freightliner 2037 $1,030,420 Exhibit 2-6. Brush Trucks in RRFA Fleet Vehicle Number Call Sign Station/ Division Assignment Year Make Model Replacement Year Est. Cost in Year of Replacement F091 BR317 Station 17 2008 Ford F-550 not scheduled $0 F155 BR316 Station 16 2022 Ford F-550 2037 $546,490 F158 BR317 Station 17 2024 Ford F-550 2039 $579,771 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 11 Exhibit 2-7. Command Vehicles in RRFA Fleet Vehicle Number Call Sign Station/Division Assignment Year Make Model Replacement Year Est. Cost in Year of Replacement F109 B413 Station 13 2013 Chevrolet Tahoe not scheduled $0 F119 B312 Station 12 2016 Chevrolet Silverado not scheduled $0 F121 C312 Station 13 2017 Chevrolet Tahoe 2027 $140,177 F122 C314 Station 13 2017 Ford Explorer 2027 $140,177 F125 B313 Station 13 2018 Chevrolet Silverado 2028 $144,382 F134 C313 Station 13 2020 Ford Explorer 2030 $153,175 F139 C311 Station 13 2020 Ford Explorer 2030 $153,175 F156 TBD Station 11 2023 Chevrolet Silverado 2033 $167,378 Exhibit 2-8. Dive Apparatus in RRFA Fleet Vehicle Number Call Sign Station/Division Assignment Year Make Model Replacement Year Est. Cost in Year of Replacement F129 DIV312 Station 12 2018 Ram 5500 2039 $589,305 Exhibit 2-9. Service Vehicles in RRFA Fleet Vehicle Number Call Sign Station/Division Assignment Year Make Model Replacement Year Est. Cost in Year of Replacement F136 CAR312 EMS 2019 Ford F-150 Pursuit 2029 $126,598 F157 CAR52 EMS 2023 Ford F-150 Pursuit 2033 $142,488 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 12 Exhibit 2-10. Staff Vehicles in RRFA Fleet Vehicle Number Call Sign Station/Division Assignment Year Make Model Replacement Year Est. Cost in Year of Replacement F096A N/A OFM 2009 Ford Escape not scheduled $0 F104 N/A EMS 2012 Ford Escape 2027 $49,005 F116 N/A Administration 2016 Ford Police Utility 2030 $53,549 F117 N/A OFM 2015 Ford C-Max 2030 $53,549 F126 N/A OFM 2018 Ford Escape 2033 $58,515 F127 N/A OFM 2018 Ford Escape 2033 $58,515 F128 N/A OFM 2018 Ford Escape 2033 $58,515 F130 N/A OFM 2020 Ford Escape 2035 $62,078 F143 N/A OFM 2020 Ford Escape 2035 $62,078 F144 N/A OFM 2020 Ford Escape 2035 $62,078 F145 N/A Support Services 2020 Ford Escape 2035 $62,078 F146 N/A Support Services 2020 Ford Escape 2035 $62,078 F147 N/A Support Services 2020 Ford Escape 2035 $62,078 Exhibit 2-11. Utility Vehicles in RRFA Fleet Vehicle Number Call Sign Station/Division Assignment Year Make Model Replacement Year Est. Cost in Year of Replacement F066 N/A Support Services 1999 GMC Savana not scheduled $0 F112 N/A SKCFTC 2015 Ford F-250 2030 $98,014 F113 N/A OFM 2015 Dodge Promaster 2030 $98,014 F132 N/A Support Services 2019 Ford F-250 2034 $110,316 F133 N/A Support Services 2019 Ford F-250 2034 $110,316 F140 N/A Administration 2020 Chevrolet Express 2500 2035 $113,625 F151 N/A SKCFTC 2021 Ford F-150 2036 $117,034 F152 N/A SKCFTC 2021 Ford F-150 2036 $117,034 F159 N/A Support Services 2024 Chevrolet Silverado 2039 $127,886 F790 N/A Support Services 2019 Ford F-350 not scheduled $0 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 13 Exhibit 2-12. Small Utility Vehicles in RRFA Fleet Vehicle Number Call Sign Station/Division Assignment Year Make Model Replacement Year Est. Cost in Year of Replacement F131 N/A Public Educator 2020 Ford Transit Connect 2035 $68,482 F141 N/A IT-1 2020 Nissan NV200 S 2035 $68,482 F142 N/A IT-2 2020 Nissan NV200 S 2035 $68,482 Exhibit 2-13. Other Apparatus/Equipment in RRFA Fleet Vehicle Number Call Sign Station/Division Assignment Year Make Model Replacement Year Est. Cost in Year of Replacement F092 N/A N/A 2007 Cargo Trailer 22Ft not scheduled $0 F094 N/A N/A 2008 Eagle Utility not scheduled $0 F101 N/A N/A 2008 Club Inteltrak not scheduled $0 F103 N/A N/A 2008 PLRS Spirit 2025 $129,548 F118 N/A N/A 2016 EZLD Trailer 2026 $29,992 F150 N/A N/A 2005 CGMT Trailblazer 2025 $21,667 F-162 N/A N/A 2024 KEMCO U-14 No Ramp 2039 $32,773 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 5 1.1 FIRE IMPACT FEE RATE SCHEDULE ................................................................................................................. 5 1.2 STUDY ORGANIZATION ................................................................................................................................. 6 2.0 STATUTORY BASIS ...................................................................................................................................... 7 2.1 STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPACT FEES ............................................................................................ 7 3.0 FIRE IMPACT FEE METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................ 14 3.1 SERVICE AREA ............................................................................................................................................. 14 3.2 DATA SOURCES AND ROUNDING................................................................................................................. 15 3.3 LEVEL OF SERVICE ....................................................................................................................................... 15 3.4 CAPITAL COST OF RESPONSE CALCULATIONS .............................................................................................. 17 3.5 CAPITAL PROJECTS ELIGIBLE FOR IMPACT FEES ........................................................................................... 73 3.6 IMPACT FEE RATE ADJUSTMENTS ............................................................................................................... 81 APPENDIX A: CURRENT KEY DEVELOPMENT MAP ................................................................................................. 83 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Table of Exhibits Exhibit 1-1. 2024 Fire Impact Fee Rate Schedule ............................................................................................................ 6 Exhibit 3-1. Renton Regional Fire Authority Service Area and Stations ........................................................................ 14 Exhibit 3-2. Emergency Response Bed Capacity by Station .......................................................................................... 16 Exhibit 3-3. Apparatus Inventory and Emergency Responses 2024............................................................................... 18 Exhibit 3-4. Building Inventory and Building Square Feet per Incident 2024 ................................................................. 19 Exhibit 3-5. Annualized Apparatus Cost in 2025 ............................................................................................................ 21 Exhibit 3-6. Apparatus Costs per Response .................................................................................................................. 22 Exhibit 3-7. Annual Fire/Other and EMS Incidents ....................................................................................................... 23 Exhibit 3-8. Fire/Other Responses per Incident by Apparatus Type .............................................................................. 24 Exhibit 3-9. Apparatus Cost per Fire/Other Incident..................................................................................................... 24 Exhibit 3-10. Staff Vehicle and Other Equipment/Apparatus Cost per Incident ............................................................ 25 Exhibit 3-11. Annualized Station Cost per Square Foot ................................................................................................. 26 Exhibit 3-12. Station Cost per Incident ......................................................................................................................... 27 Exhibit 3-13. Fire/Other Incidents by Location ............................................................................................................. 28 Exhibit 3-14. Fire/Other Incidents at Specific Land Uses ............................................................................................... 29 Exhibit 3-15. Fire/Other Incidents in Roads and Streets - Allocated to Land Uses ........................................................ 30 Exhibit 3-16. Total Fire/Other Incidents by Land Use ................................................................................................... 31 Exhibit 3-17. Annual Fire/Other Incident Rate by Land Use .......................................................................................... 32 Exhibit 3-18. Engine Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents, per Unit of Development ........................................... 34 Exhibit 3-19. Ladder Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents, per Unit of Development ........................................... 35 Exhibit 3-20. Aid Unit Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents, per Unit of Development ......................................... 36 Exhibit 3-21. Hazardous Materials Vehicle Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents, per Unit of Development ......... 37 Exhibit 3-22. Brush Truck Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents, per Unit of Development ................................... 38 Exhibit 3-23. Command Vehicle Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents, per Unit of Development ......................... 39 Exhibit 3-24. Dive Apparatus Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents, per Unit of Development.............................. 40 Exhibit 3-25. Service Vehicle Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents, per Unit of Development .............................. 41 Exhibit 3-26. Staff Vehicle Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents, per Unit of Development ................................... 42 Exhibit 3-27. Utility Vehicle Cost per Fire/Other Incident, per Unit of Development .................................................... 43 Exhibit 3-28. Small Utility Vehicle Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incident, per Unit of Development ........................ 44 Exhibit 3-29. Other Apparatus/Equipment Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incident, per Unit of Development .......... 45 Exhibit 3-30. Fire Station Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incident, per Unit of Development ...................................... 46 Exhibit 3-31. Example of Calculation of Total Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents for a Single-Family Residential Dwelling Unit ............................................................................................................................................. 47 Exhibit 3-32. Total Capital Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents, per Unit of Development .................................. 48 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Exhibit 3-33. EMS Response per Incident Rate by Apparatus Type ............................................................................... 49 Exhibit 3-34. Apparatus Cost per EMS Incident ............................................................................................................ 50 Exhibit 3-35. EMS Incidents by Location ....................................................................................................................... 51 Exhibit 3-36. EMS Incidents at Specific Land Uses ........................................................................................................ 52 Exhibit 3-37. EMS Incidents in Roads and Streets - Allocated to Land Uses .................................................................. 53 Exhibit 3-38. Total EMS Incidents by Land Use ............................................................................................................. 54 Exhibit 3-39. Annual EMS Incident Rate by Land Use ................................................................................................... 55 Exhibit 3-40. Engine Cost of Response to EMS Incidents, per Unit of Development ..................................................... 57 Exhibit 3-41. Ladder Cost of Response to EMS Incidents, per Unit of Development .................................................... 58 Exhibit 3-42. Aid Vehicle Cost of Response to EMS Incidents, per Unit of Development .............................................. 59 Exhibit 3-43. Hazardous Materials Vehicle Cost of Response to EMS Incidents, per Unit of Development .................. 60 Exhibit 3-44. Brush Truck Cost of Response to EMS Incidents, per Unit of Development ............................................. 61 Exhibit 3-45. Command Vehicle Cost of Response to EMS Incidents, per Unit of Development ................................... 62 Exhibit 3-46. Dive Apparatus Cost of Response to EMS Incidents, per Unit of Development ....................................... 63 Exhibit 3-47. Service Vehicle Cost per EMS Incident, per Unit of Development ............................................................ 64 Exhibit 3-48. Staff Vehicles Cost of Response to EMS Incident, per Unit of Development ............................................. 65 Exhibit 3-49. Utility Vehicle Cost of Response to EMS Incident, per Unit of Development ........................................... 66 Exhibit 3-50. Small Utility Vehicle Cost of Response to EMS Incident, per Unit of Development .................................. 67 Exhibit 3-51. Other Apparatus/Equipment Cost of Response to EMS Incident, per Unit of Development ..................... 68 Exhibit 3-52. Fire Station Cost of Response to EMS Incident, per Unit of Development ............................................... 69 Exhibit 3-53. Example of Calculation of Total Cost of Response to EMS Incidents for a Single-Family Residential Dwelling Unit ................................................................................................................................................................ 70 Exhibit 3-54. Total Capital Cost of Response to EMS Incidents, per Unit of Development ............................................ 71 Exhibit 3-55. Total Cost of Response to All Incidents by Land Use Category ................................................................. 72 Exhibit 3-56. RRFA Service Area Population and Projected Growth.............................................................................. 73 Exhibit 3-57. Total Incidents Per Capita, RRFA Service Area ......................................................................................... 74 Exhibit 3-58. Projection of Annual Incidents Associated with City of Renton Growth, 2031 ......................................... 74 Exhibit 3-59. Baseline Front-Line Apparatus Responses per Incident, 2024 ................................................................. 75 Exhibit 3-60. Projected Apparatus Need Associated with City of Renton Growth, 2026-2031 ..................................... 75 Exhibit 3-61. Impact Fee Eligible Costs Associated with Planned Additions to Fleet ..................................................... 76 Exhibit 3-62. Value of Station Capacity Needed for Growth-Related Response Staffing Increases ............................... 77 Exhibit 3-63. Impact Fee Eligible Costs Associated with System Improvements ........................................................... 78 Exhibit 3-64. Capital Costs for Apparatus, 2026-2031 ................................................................................................... 79 Exhibit 3-65. Capital Facility Costs for Stations, 2026-2031 .......................................................................................... 80 Exhibit 3-66. Impact Fee Eligible Costs Compared to Projected Impact Fee Revenues, 2026-2031 .............................. 81 Exhibit 3-67. 2026 RRFA Fire Impact Fee Rate Schedule ............................................................................................... 82 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 5 1.0 Introduction The purpose of this study is to establish the rates for impact fees in the Renton Regional Fire Authority (RRFA) for fire protection facilities authorized by RCW 82.02.090(7).1 The RRFA serves the City of Renton (City), King County Fire Protection District 25 (KCFD25), and King County Fire Protection District 40 (KCFD40). However, only the City will be implementing impact fees based on this rate study. Impact fees are charges paid by new development to reimburse local governments for the capital cost of public facilities that are needed to serve new development and the people who occupy or use the new development. Throughout this study, the term “developer” is used as a shorthand expression to describe anyone who is obligated to pay impact fees, including builders, owners, or developers. Local governments charge impact fees for several reasons:  to obtain revenue to pay for some of the cost of new public facilities;  to implement a public policy that new development should pay a portion of the cost of facilities that it requires, and that existing development should not pay all of the cost of such facilities; and  to assure that adequate public facilities will be constructed to serve new development. In 2011, the City completed an impact fee rate study that included fee calculations for transportation, parks, and fire protection.2 In 2017, the RRFA and the City adopted an updated impact fee rate study3 which utilized methodology generally consistent with the methodology used in the 2011 study, but did include some refinements to reflect the RRFA’s then current approach to measuring level of service and its ability to serve growth-related service demands in the future, as described in Chapter 3. This methodology was utilized again in the 2023 rate study. This current rate study follows the same format, assumptions, and calculations of the 2011, 2017, and 2023 rate studies with some modifications to reflect the current operations and level of service for the RRFA. 1.1 FIRE IMPACT FEE RATE SCHEDULE Impact fees are paid by all types of new development within the City.4 Impact fee rates for new development are based on, and vary according to, the type of land use. Additionally, impact fee rates reflect discounts based on available funds to pay for eligible capital projects. Exhibit 1-1 shows the fire impact fee rates adopted within the City. 1 Revised Code of Washington (RCW) is the state law of Washington State. 2 Henderson, Young & Company. (August 26, 2011). Rate Study for Impact Fees, City of Renton. 3 BERK. (August 28, 2017). Rate Study for Impact Fees, Renton Regional Fire Authority. 4 The impact fee ordinance may specify exemptions for low-income housing and/or “broad public purposes”, but such exemptions must be paid for by public money, not other impact fees. The ordinance may specify if impact fees apply to changes in use, remodeling, etc. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 6 Exhibit 1-1. 2026 Fire Impact Fee Rate Schedule Land Use Unit Fire Impact Fee Single-Family Residential Dwelling Unit (d.u.) $779.24 Multi-Family Residential Dwelling Unit (d.u.) $1,099.68 Hotel/Motel/Resort Room $669.37 Medical Care Facility Bed $2,173.16 Office Square Foot $0.28 Medical/Dental Office Square Foot $1.28 Retail Square Foot $1.19 Leisure Facilities Square Foot $0.90 Restaurant/Lounge Square Foot $2.32 Industrial/Manufacturing Square Foot $0.10 Church/Non-Profit Square Foot $0.49 Education Student $63.96 Special Public Facilities Square Foot $0.27 1.2 STUDY ORGANIZATION This rate study includes three chapters.  Chapter 1 provides an introduction and defines the 2026 fire impact fee rate schedule.  Chapter 2 summarizes the statutory requirements for impact fees in Washington State and describes how the RRFA’s impact fees comply with the statutory requirements.  Chapter 3 includes the RRFA service area, level of service used for the purpose of calculating impact fee rates, and the methodology for calculating the capital costs of response by unit of development. It also provides a list of growth-related capital projects that are eligible for impact fees and final adjustments to the impact fee rates to account for eligible costs and future payments of other revenues. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 7 2.0 Statutory Basis This chapter summarizes the statutory requirements for impact fees in Washington State and describes how the RRFA’s impact fees comply with the statutory requirements. 2.1 STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPACT FEES The Growth Management Act of 1990 (Chapter 17, Washington Laws, 1990, 1st Ex. Sess.) authorizes local governments in Washington State to charge impact fees. RCW 82.02.050 - 82.02.110 contain the provisions of the Growth Management Act that authorize and describe the requirements for impact fees. The following synopsis of the most significant requirements of the law includes citations to the Revised Code of Washington as an aid to readers who wish to review the exact language of the statutes. 2.1.1 Types of Public Facilities Four types of public facilities can be the subject of impact fees: 1) public streets and roads, which may also encompass related transportation infrastructure such as bicycle and pedestrian facilities; 2) publicly owned parks, open space and recreation facilities; 3) school facilities; and 4) fire protection facilities (RCW 82.02.090(7)). 2.1.2 Types of Improvements Impact fees can be spent on “system improvements” (which are typically outside the development), as opposed to “project improvements” (which are typically provided by the developer on-site within the development). Impact fees can never be used to fund maintenance or operational needs (RCW 82.02.050(5) and RCW 82.02.090(5) and (9)). 2.1.3 Benefit to Development Impact fees must be limited to system improvements that are reasonably related to, and which will benefit new development (RCW 82.02.050(4)(a) and (c)). Local governments must establish reasonable service areas (one area, or more than one, as determined to be reasonable by the local government), and local governments must develop impact fee rate categories for various land uses (RCW 82.02.060). 2.1.4 Proportionate Share Capital improvement costs can be funded using impact fees to the extent that the improvements are reasonably related to the new development and reasonably benefit the new development. Costs assessed on a development cannot exceed its proportionate share of the costs of system improvements. The impact fee amount shall be based on a formula (or other method of AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 8 calculating the fee) that determines the proportionate share (RCW 82.02.050(4)(b) and RCW 82.02.060(1)). 2.1.5 Reductions of Impact Fee Amounts Impact fees rates must be adjusted to account for other revenues that the development pays (if such payments are earmarked for or pro-ratable to particular system improvements) RCW 82.02.060(1)(b)). Impact fees may be credited for the value of dedicated land, improvements or construction provided by the developer (if such facilities are in the adopted CFP as system improvements eligible for impact fees and are required as a condition of development approval) (RCW 82.02.060(5)). 2.1.6 Exemptions from Impact Fees Local governments have the discretion to provide exemptions from impact fees for low-income housing (RCW 82.02.060(2)) and other broad public purposes including the development of an early learning center, but all such exempt fees must be paid from public funds (other than impact fee accounts) (RCW 82.02.060(3)). 2.1.7 Developer Options Developers who are liable for impact fees can submit data and/or an analysis to demonstrate that the impacts of the proposed development are less than the impacts calculated in this rate study (RCW 82.02.060(7)). Developers can pay impact fees under protest and appeal impact fee calculations (RCW 82.02.070(4) and (5)). The developer can obtain a refund of the impact fees if the local government fails to expend or obligate the impact fee payments within ten years, or terminates the impact fee requirement, or the developer does not proceed with the development (and creates no impacts) (RCW 82.02.080). 2.1.8 Capital Facilities Plans Impact fees must be expended on public facilities in a capital facilities plan (CFP) element or used to reimburse the government for the unused capacity of existing facilities. The CFP must conform to the Growth Management Act of 1990 and must identify existing deficiencies in facility capacity for current development, capacity of existing facilities available for new development, and additional facility capacity needed for new development (RCW 82.02.050(4), RCW 82.02.060(9), and RCW 82.02.070(2)). 2.1.9 New Versus Existing Facilities Impact fees can be charged for new public facilities (RCW 82.02.060(1)(a)) and for the unused capacity of existing public facilities (RCW 82.02.060(9)) subject to the proportionate share limitation described above. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 9 2.1.10 Accounting Requirements The local government must separate the impact fees from other monies, expend or obligate the money on CFP projects within ten years, and prepare annual reports of collections and expenditures (RCW 82.02.070(1)-(3)). 2.1.11 Compliance with Statutory Requirements for Impact Fees Many of the statutory requirements listed above are fulfilled in Chapter 3 of this study, which presents the calculation of the fire impact fees. Some of the statutory requirements are fulfilled in other ways, as described below. 2.1.12 Types of Public Facilities This study contains impact fees for fire protection facilities as authorized by statute. The RRFA defines “fire protection” as fire protection facilities, including but not limited to fire stations, fire apparatus, and any furnishings and equipment that may be capitalized. The City uses this same definition in the Renton Municipal Code (RMC 4-1-190). In general, local governments that are authorized to charge impact fees are responsible for specific public facilities for which they may charge such fees. In no instance may a local government charge impact fees for private facilities, but it may charge impact fees for some public facilities that it does not administer if such facilities are “owned or operated by government entities” (RCW 82.02.090 (7)). A city may charge impact fees for fire and enter into an agreement with a regional fire authority (RFA) for the transfer, expenditure, and reporting of fire impact fees for the RFA. A city may only charge and use impact fees on RFA projects if it has an agreement with the RFA, and the city’s CFP references the RFA CFP. As part of the RRFA plan, the City and the RRFA entered into an interlocal agreement (ILA) (CAG- 16-116) in which the City agreed to collect the fire impact fees. Subsequent agreements between the City and the RRFA in 2017 (CAG-19-022) and in 2019 (CAG-19-022, Adden #1-19) affirmed the City will collect fire impact fees on behalf of the RRFA, subject to specific requirements. 2.1.13 Types of Improvements The impact fees in this study are based on system improvements that are described in Chapter 3. No project improvements are included in this study. The public facilities that can be paid for by impact fees are “system improvements” (which are typically outside the development), and “designed to provide service to areas within the community at large” as provided in RCW 82.02.090(9)), as opposed to “project improvements” (which are typically provided by the developer on-site within the development or adjacent to the development), and “designed to provide service for a particular development project and that are necessary for the use and convenience of the occupants or users of the project” as provided AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 10 in RCW 82.02.090(5). The capital improvements costs contained in Chapter 3 comply with these requirements. Impact fee revenue can be used for the capital cost of public facilities. Impact fees cannot be used for operating or maintenance expenses. The cost of public facilities that can be paid for by impact fees include design studies, engineering, land surveys, land and right of way acquisition, engineering, permitting, financing, administrative expenses, construction, applicable mitigation costs, and capital equipment pertaining to capital improvements. 2.1.14 Benefit to Development, Proportionate Share and Reductions of Fee Amounts The law imposes three tests of the benefit provided to development by impact fees: 1) proportionate share, 2) reasonably related to need, and 3) reasonably related to expenditure (RCW 80.20.050(4)). In addition, the law requires the designation of one or more service areas (RCW 82.02.060(8)). Proportionate Share First, the “proportionate share” requirement means that impact fees can be charged only for the portion of the cost of public facilities that is “reasonably related” to new development. In other words, impact fees cannot be charged to pay for the cost of reducing or eliminating deficiencies in existing facilities. Second, there are several important implications of the proportionate share requirement that are not specifically addressed in the law, but which follow directly from the law:  Costs of facilities that will benefit new development and existing users must be apportioned between the two groups in determining the amount of the fee. This can be accomplished in either of two ways: (1) by allocating the total cost between new and existing users, or (2) calculating the cost per unit and applying the cost only to new development when calculating impact fees.  Impact fees that recover the costs of existing unused capacity should be based on the government's actual cost. Carrying costs may be added to reflect the government's actual or imputed interest expense. The third aspect of the proportionate share requirement is its relationship to the requirement to provide adjustments and credits to impact fees, where appropriate. These requirements ensure that the amount of the impact fee does not exceed the proportionate share.  The “adjustments” requirement reduces the impact fee to account for past and future payments of other revenues (if such payments are earmarked for, or pro-ratable to, the system improvements that are needed to serve new growth). The impact fees calculated in this study include an adjustment that accounts for any other revenue that is used by the RFA to pay for a portion of growth’s proportionate share of costs. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 11 This adjustment is in response to the limitations in RCW 82.02.060 (1)(b) and RCW 82.02.050(2).  The “credit” requirement reduces impact fees by the value of dedicated land, improvements or construction provided by the developer (if such facilities are in the adopted CFP, identified as the projects for which impact fees are collected, and are required as a condition of development approval). The law does not prohibit a local government from establishing reasonable constraints on determining credits. For example, the location of dedicated land can be required to be acceptable to the local government. Reasonably Related to Need There are many ways to fulfill the requirement that impact fees be “reasonably related” to the development's need for public facilities, including personal use and use by others in the family or business enterprise (direct benefit), use by persons or organizations who provide goods or services to the fee-paying property or are customers or visitors at the fee-paying property (indirect benefit), and geographical proximity (presumed benefit). These measures of relatedness are implemented by the following techniques:  Impact fees are charged to properties which need (i.e., benefit from) new public facilities. The RRFA provides fire protection facilities to serve all kinds of property throughout its service area, therefore impact fees have been calculated for all types of property.  The relative needs of different types of growth are considered in establishing fee amounts (i.e., different impact values for different types of land use). For instance, this study analyzed fire/other and EMS incident and response data to determine rates for each type of land use.  Feepayers can pay a smaller fee if they demonstrate that their development will have less impact than is presumed in the impact fee schedule calculation for their property classification. Such reduced needs must be permanent and enforceable (i.e., via land use restrictions). Reasonably Related to Expenditures Two provisions of the City’s impact fee ordinance comply with the requirement that expenditures be “reasonably related” to the development that paid the impact fee. First, the requirement that fee revenue must be earmarked for specific uses related to public facilities ensures that expenditures are on specific projects, the benefit of which has been demonstrated in determining the need for the projects and the portion of the cost of needed projects that are eligible for impact fees as described in this study. Second, impact fee revenue must be expended or obligated within ten years, thus requiring the impact fees to be used to benefit to the feepayer and not held by the RRFA. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 12 Service Areas for Impact Fees Impact fees in some jurisdictions are collected and expended within service areas that are smaller than the jurisdiction that is collecting the fees. Impact fees are not required to use multiple service areas unless such “zones” are necessary to establish the relationship between the fee and the development. Because of the compact size of the RRFA and the accessibility of its fire facilities to all properties within the service area, the RRFA’s fire facilities serve the entire RRFA service area, therefore the impact fees are based on a single service area corresponding to the boundaries of the RRFA. 2.1.15 Exemptions The City’s impact fee ordinance addresses the subject of exemptions. Exemptions do not affect the impact fee rates calculated in this study because of the statutory requirement that any exempted impact fee must be paid from other public funds. As a result, there is no increase in impact fee rates to make up for the exemption because there is no net loss to the impact fee account as a result of the exemption. 2.1.16 Developer Options A developer who is liable for impact fees has several options regarding impact fees. The developer can submit data and or/analysis to demonstrate that the impacts of the proposed development are less than the impacts calculated in this rate study. The developer can appeal the impact fee calculation by the RRFA. If the local government fails to expend the impact fee payments within ten years of receipt of such payments, the developer can obtain a refund of the impact fees. The developer can also obtain a refund if the development does not proceed, and no impacts are created. These provisions are addressed in the City’s impact fee ordinance, and none of them affect the calculation of impact fee rates in this study. 2.1.17 Capital Facilities Plan There are references in RCW to the CFP as the basis for projects that are eligible for funding by impact fees. The RRFA published a CFP in August 2025 which fulfills the requirements of RCW 82.02.050 et. seq. pertaining to a “capital facilities plan”. This CFP is referenced in the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The requirement to identify existing deficiencies, capacity available for new development, and additional public facility capacity needed for new development is determined by analyzing levels of service for fire/other and emergency response. Chapter 3 provides this analysis. 2.1.18 New Versus Existing Facilities, Accounting Requirements Impact fees must be spent on capital projects contained in an adopted CFP, or they can be used to reimburse the government for the unused capacity of existing facilities. Washington State AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 13 GMA states that an impact fee ordinance “may provide for the imposition of an impact fee for system improvement costs previously incurred by a county, city, or town to the extent that new growth and development will be served by the previously constructed improvements provided such fee shall not be imposed to make up for any system improvement deficiencies” (RCW 82.02.060(9)). The rate calculations in Chapter 3 affirm there are no existing deficiencies and accounts for excess station capacity systemwide for serving new growth. Because of this excess systemwide capacity, impact fees collected can be used to pay for the debt servicing of stations not to exceed the proportional share of existing station value that is available for serving additional growth. Impact fee payments that are not expended or obligated within ten years must be refunded unless the City Council makes a written finding that an extraordinary and compelling reason exists to hold the fees for longer than ten years. To verify these two requirements, impact fee revenues must be deposited into separate accounts of the government, and annual reports must describe impact fee revenue and expenditures. These requirements are addressed by the City’s impact fee ordinance and are not factors in the impact fee calculations in this study. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 14 3.0 Fire Impact Fee Methodology This chapter describes the methodology used to calculate impact fee rates for fire protection facilities. It begins with a discussion of the service area considered for the rate study analysis. This is followed by a discussion of the level of service. Next is an inventory of fire protection facilities, which are defined to include stations, equipment, and apparatus (such as engines and other vehicles). Then a series of calculations are presented to document the methodology for determining the total facility costs per unit of development by land use type. 3.1 SERVICE AREA As noted above, the RRFA includes the City, KCFD25 and KCFD40 as shown in Exhibit 3-1. RRFA provides services to these areas as one integrated system. All facilities needed to serve these areas are owned and/or operated by the RRFA. Therefore, the analysis in this rate study considers facility costs per unit of development throughout the entire service area. Exhibit 3-1. Renton Regional Fire Authority Service Area and Stations AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 15 While this rate study considers incidents and facilities throughout the RRFA service area when calculating impact fee rates, the RRFA CFP identifies the percentage of capital facilities needs that are directly related to anticipated growth within the City only. This ensures that impact fees collected in the City are not used to pay for capital facility costs associated with growth expected in KCFD25 or KCFD40. 3.2 DATA SOURCES AND ROUNDING The data in this study of impact was provided by staff from the City and the RRFA, unless a different source is specifically cited. Inventory, incident, and response data were provided by the RRFA’s planning section and reflect conditions in the year 2024 for incidents and 2025 for inventory. The data in this study was prepared using computer spreadsheet software. In some tables in this study, there may be very small variations from the results that would be obtained using a calculator based on the same values presented. The reason for these insignificant differences is that the spreadsheet software calculates results to more places after the decimal than is reported in the tables of these reports. The calculation to extra places after the decimal increases the accuracy of the end results but causes occasional minor differences due to rounding of data that appears in this study. 3.3 LEVEL OF SERVICE The need for fire protection facilities is influenced by a variety of factors, such as response time, call loads, geographical area, land use development, topographic and manmade barriers, and standards of the National Fire Protection Association and the Washington Surveying and Rating Bureau. RRFA measures level of service (LOS) from three different perspectives. The first concerns the cost of facilities for incident response per unit of development. The second perspective concerns turnout and response times in accordance with established policy. The third perspective concerns the Protection Class rating for each of the areas served (the City, KCFD25, and KCFD40). This study focuses on the first perspective, the latter two are addressed in the RRFA CFP. For the purpose of quantifying the need for fire facilities to serve growth, this study uses the ratio of apparatus and stations to incidents. To measure this ratio, this study analyzes both facility inventory and incident data. For apparatus, the current ratio of apparatus to incidents provides an acceptable LOS, and there are no deficiencies. As growth occurs, more incidents will occur, and therefore more apparatus will be needed to maintain this standard. For stations, LOS is measured in two different ways. The first approach mirrors the LOS standard used for apparatus by measuring using the ratio of station square footage to incidents. This AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 16 approach accounts for the systemwide demands for response created by new growth. From this perspective, the current inventory of stations includes excess capacity to serve growth, as shown in Exhibit 3-2. This capacity comes in the form of beds necessary for staffing fire and emergency response facilities and apparatus. It is anticipated that much of the growth in the RRFA service area will come in the form of infill and high-rise development and increased density within the City. As this growth occurs, the RRFA intends to utilize excess bed capacity in current stations to increase its capacity for emergency response at existing stations. Systemwide, this analysis finds that 67% of station capacity is in use. The remaining 33% of station capacity is available to serve new growth. Exhibit 3-2. Emergency Response Bed Capacity by Station Station Name Total Beds Currently in Use Percentage of Capacity in Use Fire Station 11 9 8 89% Fire Station 12 10 6 60% Fire Station 13 8 6 75% Fire Station 14 7 3 43% Fire Station 15 5 3 60% Fire Station 16 6 3 50% Fire Station 17 6 5 83% Total 51 34 67% AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 17 3.4 CAPITAL COST OF RESPONSE CALCULATIONS This section guides the reader through a series of formulas and calculations with the goal of determining the total capital costs of response by unit of development. It begins with an inventory of fire apparatus and stations and the number of emergencies to which the RRFA responded. Next is an analysis of the capital cost of fire protection apparatus and stations including calculation of the capital cost per response. The emergency responses are summarized according to the types of land uses that received responses, and incident rates are calculated to quantify the average number of emergency responses per unit of development for each type of land use. The costs per response and the response incident rates are used to calculate the number and cost of responses to emergency medical service (EMS) and to fire/other5 incidents at each type of land use. The EMS and fire/other cost per unit of development are combined to calculate the total cost per unit of development. The total cost is adjusted for payments of other and the result is the fire impact fee rates for the RRFA for development within the City. These steps are described below in the formulas, descriptions of variables, tables of data, and explanation of calculations of fire impact fees. 3.4.1 Formula F-1: Inventory and Fire/Other and EMS Responses The RRFA owns and/or operates a variety of fire apparatus (i.e., fire engines, ladder trucks, Aid Units, etc.). Each vehicle responds to many emergencies. The average number of EMS responses per apparatus is used as one element in calculating the cost per EMS response. Formula F-1: Responses ÷ Apparatus = Responses per Apparatus There are two variables that require explanation: (A) fire apparatus and (B) fire stations. Variable (A): Fire Apparatus The term “fire apparatus” applies to vehicles that the RRFA uses for operations. Exhibit 3-3 contains a list of each type of primary fire apparatus and the number of each type. 5 In this study, “fire/other” refers to all emergency incidents to which RRFA responds except for medical emergencies/EMS. These would include fires, hazardous materials, gas leaks, and other non-medical related emergencies. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 18 Exhibit 3-3. Apparatus Inventory and Emergency Responses 2024 Type of Apparatus Count of Apparatus in Inventory Total Annual EMS Responses EMS Responses per Individual Apparatus Engine 12 13,150 1,096 Ladder 2 1,327 664 Aid Unit 6 9,144 1,524 Hazardous Materials Vehicle 1 133 133 Brush Truck 3 33 11 Command Vehicle 8 881 111 Dive Apparatus 1 41 41 Service Vehicle 2 - - Staff Vehicle 13 - - Utility Vehicle 10 - - Small Utility Vehicle 3 - - Other Apparatus/Equipment6 7 - - Total 68 24,709 6 Includes trailers, carts, boat, etc. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 19 Variable (B): Fire Stations RRFA provides fire/other and EMS services out of seven stations. Exhibit 3-4 lists the seven stations and the total square footage of RRFA fire stations and associated support facilities (i.e., shop and tower). Exhibit 3-4 also shows the total fire/other and EMS incidents, and the average square footage of fire station per incident (calculated by dividing the total square footage of all fire stations by the number of annual fire/other and EMS incidents). The total number of incidents from stations is less than the total incidents from apparatus (Exhibit 3-3) because more than one apparatus responds to many calls, but often one station is the source of all the apparatus responding to a call. As noted earlier in Exhibit 3-27, there is excess station capacity systemwide due to the available beds for emergency responders. The percentage of capacity in use is used to calculate station square feet in use per incident. Exhibit 3-4. Building Inventory and Building Square Feet per Incident 2024 Station Name Building Square Feet Annual Incidents Total Building Square Feet per Incident Percentage of Station Capacity in Use Station Square Feet in Use Per Incident Fire Station 118 20,550 Fire Station 12 (Ex EOC) 9 14,800 Fire Station 13 20,521 Fire Station 13 Shop 6,000 Fire Station 14 13,659 Fire Station 14 Tower 3,658 Fire Station 15 7,497 Fire Station 16 7,732 Fire Station 17 6,836 Total 101,253 20,786 4.87 67% 3.25 7 See Exhibit 3-2 for calculation of systemwide station capacity in use. 8 Station 11 is owned by the City of Renton and leased to RRFA. 9 Station 12 is owned by the City of Renton and leased to the RRFA. The building square footage excludes the portion of the Station that is utilized exclusively by the City of Renton Emergency Management Division. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 20 3.4.2 Formula F-2: Annual Cost per Apparatus Formulas F-2 through F-4 are needed to calculate the apparatus cost per fire/other incident. The first step in this calculation is to identify and annualize the cost of each type of apparatus using formula F-2. The capital cost per apparatus is based on the cost of primary response apparatus and major support equipment. The annualized capital cost per apparatus is determined by dividing the capital cost of each type of apparatus by its useful life: Formula F-2: Fire Apparatus Cost ÷ Useful Life = Annual Cost Per Apparatus There are two variables that require explanation: (C) fire apparatus cost and (D) useful life. Variable (C): Fire Apparatus Cost Exhibit 3-5 shows the annualized cost for each type of primary apparatus listed in Exhibit 3-3. The cost per apparatus includes the vehicle, fire and EMS equipment, and communication equipment. The apparatus and equipment costs in Exhibit 3-5 represent current costs to purchase a new fully equipped apparatus. Variable (D): Useful Life Exhibit 3-5 also shows the number of years of useful life of each type of apparatus. The annualized cost is calculated by dividing each apparatus cost by the useful life of that apparatus. Note that the inventory of apparatus includes a mix of front-line and reserve/callback apparatus. RRFA expects apparatus to serve one half of its useful life in a front-line status and one have as a reserve or call-back vehicle. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 21 Exhibit 3-5. Annualized Apparatus Cost in 2025 Apparatus Type Cost per Apparatus Average Useful Lifespan11 Annualized Cost of Apparatus Engine $1,738,800 13.71 $126,827.13 Ladder $2,748,000 18 $152,666.67 Aid Unit $526,713 9 $58,523.67 Hazardous Materials Vehicle $722,716 21 $34,415.05 Brush Truck $383,297 15 $25,553.13 Command Vehicle $132,130 10 $13,213.00 Dive Apparatus $389,600 21 $18,552.38 Service Vehicle $112,481 15 $7,498.73 Staff Vehicle $46,192 15 $3,079.47 Utility Vehicle $84,548 15 $5,636.53 Small Utility Vehicle $50,957 15 $3,397.13 Other Apparatus/Equipment10 $235,607 15 $15,707.13 3.4.3 Formula F-3: Cost per Apparatus per Fire/Other or EMS Response The second step in calculating the apparatus cost per fire/other or EMS response is formula F-3. The capital cost per fire/other or EMS incident is calculated for each apparatus by dividing the annualized cost per apparatus by the total annual response (both fire/other and EMS) each type of apparatus responds to. Each type of apparatus is analyzed separately because the number and type of apparatus responding to an incident varies depending on the type and severity of the incident. Formula F-3: Annual Cost Per Apparatus ÷ Annual Responses Per Apparatus = Annual Apparatus Cost Per Response There are no new variables used in formula F-3. Both variables were developed in previous formulas. In Exhibit 3-6 the cost per fire/other or EMS response is calculated for each type of apparatus. Exhibit 3-6 shows the annualized cost of one of each type of apparatus (from Exhibit 3-5) and the average annual EMS responses for each type of apparatus (from Exhibit 3-3). Each apparatus cost per response is calculated by dividing the annualized cost of that type of apparatus by the total number of annual responses for the same type of apparatus. 10 Includes carts, trailers, boat, and lift. Cost is cumulative. 11 For Engines, Ladders, and Aid Units, the average useful lifespans have been weighted to reflect the proportion of vehicles in the fleet that are front-line vs reserve or call back. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 22 Exhibit 3-6. Apparatus Costs per Response Apparatus Type Annualized Cost of Apparatus Average Annual Responses Per Apparatus Apparatus Cost Per Response Engine $126,827.13 1,096 $115.72 Ladder $152,666.67 664 $229.92 Aid Unit $58,523.67 1,524 $38.40 Hazardous Materials Vehicle $34,415.05 133 $258.76 Brush Truck $25,553.13 11 $2,323.01 Command Vehicle $13,213.00 111 $119.04 Dive Apparatus $18,552.38 41 $452.50 Service Vehicle $7,498.73 - - Staff Vehicle $3,079.47 - - Utility Vehicle $5,636.53 - - Small Utility Vehicle $3,397.13 - - Other Apparatus/Equipment12 $15,707.13 - - 12 Includes carts, trailers, boat, and lift. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 23 3.4.4 Formula F-4: Total Apparatus Cost per Fire/Other Incidents The third step in calculating the apparatus cost per fire/other incident is Formula F-4. The total apparatus cost per fire/other incident is calculated by multiplying the apparatus cost per response by the percent of fire/other incidents each type of apparatus responds to. This calculation accounts for the fact that multiple apparatuses are dispatched to many incidents, and that some apparatus are only dispatched to specific types of incidents. The result of this calculation is a weighted average total cost of apparatus per fire/other incident. Formula F-4: Annual Cost Per Response x Apparatus Percent of all Fire/Other Responses = Apparatus Cost Per Fire/Other Incident There is one new variable that requires explanation: (F) apparatus percent of fire/other responses. Variable (E): Apparatus Percent of Fire Responses The next step in calculating the apparatus cost per fire/other incident is to identify the annual number of incidents that RRFA responds to. Emergency incidents are separated into two categories: Fire/Other and EMS. Exhibit 3-7 lists the annual number of fire/other and EMS incidents responded to during 2024. Exhibit 3-7. Annual Fire/Other and EMS Incidents Incident Type Annual Incidents in 2024 Fire/Other 4,905 EMS 15,881 Total 20,786 Different types of fire/other emergencies need different types or combinations of apparatus. As a result, the usage of apparatus varies among the types of apparatus. This variance is an important factor in determining the cost per incident. The percent of fire/other responses by each type of apparatus is calculated in Exhibit 3-8 by dividing the annual fire/other responses for each type of apparatus by the total annual fire/other incidents from Exhibit 3-7. The result of the calculation in Exhibit 3-8 is the percent of fire/other incidents responded to by each type of apparatus. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 24 Exhibit 3-8. Fire/Other Responses per Incident by Apparatus Type Apparatus Type Annual Fire/Other- Related Responses for Apparatus Annual Fire/Other- Related Incidents Apparatus Response per Fire/Other Incident Engine 4,667 0.951 Ladder 505 0.103 Aid Unit 464 0.095 Hazardous Materials Vehicle 130 0.027 Brush Truck 33 0.007 Command Vehicle 527 0.107 Dive Apparatus 17 0.003 Service Vehicle 0 0.000 Total 6,343 4,905 The final step in calculating the apparatus cost per fire/other incident is shown in Exhibit 3-9. Exhibit 3-9. The cost per response for each type of apparatus (from Exhibit 3-6) is multiplied by the percent of fire/other incidents dispatched to (from Exhibit 3-8) resulting in the total apparatus cost per fire/other incident. The “bottom line” in Exhibit 3-9 is the apparatus cost per fire/other incident of $174.25. In other words, every fire/other incident “uses up” $174.25 worth of apparatus. Exhibit 3-9. Apparatus Cost per Fire/Other Incident Apparatus Type Apparatus Cost Per Response Apparatus Response per Fire/Other Incident Apparatus Cost per Fire/Other Incident Engine $115.72 0.951 $110.10 Ladder $229.92 0.103 $23.67 Aid Unit $38.40 0.095 $3.63 Hazardous Materials Vehicle $258.76 0.027 $6.86 Brush Truck $2,323.01 0.007 $15.63 Command Vehicle $119.04 0.107 $12.79 Dive Apparatus $452.50 0.003 $1.57 Service Vehicle - 0.000 0.000 Total $174.25 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 25 The RRFA dispatch system does not track usage of staff vehicles and other equipment/apparatus. However, these apparatuses are also essential RRFA emergency response operations. To account for the cost of these apparatus in this rate study, Exhibit 3-10 divides the total apparatus cost by the useful lifespan and divides these annualized costs by the total annual incidents to calculate the total cost per incident. Exhibit 3-10. Staff Vehicle and Other Equipment/Apparatus Cost per Incident Apparatus Type Total Cost of All Apparatus Useful Lifespan (years) Annualized Cost of Apparatus Annual Incidents Cost per Incident Staff Vehicle $600,496 15 $40,033.07 $1.93 Utility Vehicle $845,480 15 $56,365.33 $2.71 Small Utility Vehicle $152,871 15 $10,191.40 $0.49 Other Equipment/Apparatus $235,607 15 $15,707.13 $0.76 Total 20,786 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 26 3.4.5 Formula F-5: Annual Station Cost The annual station cost is determined by dividing the station capital cost by its useful life. Formula F-5: Station Cost Per Square Foot ÷ Useful Life = Annual Station Cost Per Square Foot There is one new variable that requires explanation: (G) station cost per square foot. Variable (G): Station Cost per Square Foot Exhibit 3-11 presents the calculation of the average annualized fire station cost per building square foot, based on estimates from TCA. This cost is broken down into three components. First, the land cost per building square foot is derived by dividing the total land cost for the new Station 16 by the combined area of the land and adding the site work cost per square foot. Second, the cost for the building, furnishings, and equipment is based on the average of the actual costs for Station 16 and the Maintenance Building. Lastly, the cost of borrowing is calculated by taking the total interest on the debt service payments associated with Station 16 and dividing it by the total square footage of the Station 16 site. The useful life represents the length of time the station is expected to last before it needs to be replaced. The annualized cost is calculated by dividing the estimated cost per square foot by the average useful life. The “bottom line” of Exhibit 3-11 is an annualized station cost of $20.68 per square foot. Exhibit 3-11. Annualized Station Cost per Square Foot Type of Cost Cost per Building Square Foot Building Useful Life (years) Annual Station Cost per Square Foot Land $52.15 Building, Furnishings, & Equipment13 $862.11 Cost of Borrowing $119.85 Total $1,034.11 50 $20.68 13The estimates were provided by TCA as of 5/29/2025. The station and maintenance shop average $564.05 per sq. ft. for “hard” building costs. An additional 53% is added for site preparation and soft costs such as sales tax, design, permitting, and furnishings. The total cost per building sq. ft. is $862.11. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 27 3.4.6 Formula F-6: Station Cost per Fire/Other and EMS Incident The station cost per fire/other and EMS incident is calculated by multiplying the annual station cost per square foot by the station square feet per fire and EMS incident. Formula F-6: Annual Station Cost per Square Foot x Station Square Feet Per Fire/Other and EMS Incident = Annual Station Cost Per Fire/Other and EMS Incident There are no new variables used in formula F-6. Both variables were developed in previous formulas. This calculation is shown in Exhibit 3-12. The station cost per square foot (from Exhibit 3-11) is multiplied by the station square feet per incident (from Exhibit 3-6). The result is the station cost of $67.17 per fire/other and EMS incident. In other words, each fire/other and EMS incident “uses up” $67.17 worth of fire station. Exhibit 3-12. Station Cost per Incident Annual Station Cost per Square Foot Square Feet per Incident Annualized Station Cost per Incident $20.68 3.25 $67.17 3.4.7 Formula F-7: Annual Fire Incident Rate per Unit of Development The annual fire/other incident rate per unit of development (i.e., dwelling unit or square foot of non- residential development) is calculated by dividing the total annual fire/other incidents to each type of land use by the number of dwelling units or square feet of non-residential development for that type of land use. Formula F-7: Annual Fire/Other Incidents at Each Type of Land Use ÷ Number of Dwelling Units or Square Feet of Each Type of Land Use = Annual Fire/Other Incidents Per Unit of Development There are two variables that require explanation: (H) annual emergency fire/other incidents at land use types, and (I) number of dwelling units or square feet. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 28 Variable (H): Annual Emergency Fire Incidents at Land Use Types The emergency incident data comes from the RRFA’s dispatch records. RRFA codes each individual incident by property type. For the purpose of developing impact fees, this study combines property types into 13 broad land use categories.14 As shown in Exhibit 3-13, RRFA responded to 4,905 fire/other incidents during 2024. Of these incidents, 3,240 were coded to a specific property type related to one of the 13 land use categories (i.e., the incident occurred at a specific property address, such as a residence or business). 428 incidents occurred in roads and streets (in most cases these are traffic-related). The records for the remaining 1,237 were not coded to one of the 13 land use categories or roadways. These include incidents with no code at all or those at other kinds of properties such as vacant land or construction sites. To account for all incidents, these 1,237 incidents were allocated proportionally to properties or roads and streets. Exhibit 3-13. Fire/Other Incidents by Location Incident Location Fire/Other Incidents Identifiable by Location Percent of Identifiable Fire/Other Incidents Fire/Other Incidents Not Identifiable by Property Type Unidentifiable Fire/Other Incidents Allocated to Location Total Fire/Other Incidents At Properties 3,240 88.33% 1,093 4,333 In Roads and Streets 428 11.67% 144 572 Total 3,668 1,237 4,905 The next four exhibits present the allocation of fire/other incidents among the 13 land use categories. 14 RRFA dispatch data includes property codes for 1-2 unit residences and multi-family residences. For simplicity, this rate study labels each category “single-family” and “multi-family”. However, development data for each of these categories starting in Exhibit 3-14 reflects the RRFA property codes. In other words, unit counts for the “single-family” land use type is inclusive of both single-family homes and duplexes. “Multi- family” is inclusive of all structures with more than 2 units. Additionally, mobile homes are included in the “multi- family” land use type consistently. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 29 Exhibit 3-14 shows the fire/other incidents that were identifiable by land use type, Exhibit 3-15 shows the fire/other incidents that were in roads and streets. Exhibit 3-16 summarizes the results of the analysis of fire/other incidents. The total annual fire/other incidents are a combination of the fire/other incidents allocated among direct responses to land use types (from Exhibit 3-14) and the allocation of incidents at roads and streets based on trip generation rates (from Exhibit 3-15). Exhibit 3-16 combines the fire/other incident data (those land use and traffic), and Exhibit 3-17 shows the fire/other incident rate per unit of development. Exhibit 3-14 shows the distribution of the 3,240 fire/other incidents that are traceable to a land use along with the percent distribution of these 3,240 incidents. In the final column, the total 4,333 fire/other incidents (3,240 traceable + 1,093 allocated) are allocated among the land use types using the percent distribution column. The result is the total annual fire/other incidents at each of the land use types. Exhibit 3-14. Fire/Other Incidents at Specific Land Uses Land Use Type Annual Fire/Other Incidents Identifiable to Land Use Percent of All Property Fire/Other Incidents Identifiable to Land Use Allocate Total Property Related Fire/Other Incidents (4,333) to Land Uses Single-Family Residential 828 25.56% 1,107 Multi-Family Residential 1,326 40.93% 1,773 Hotel/Motel/Resort 91 2.81% 122 Medical Care Facility 40 1.23% 53 Office 120 3.70% 160 Medical/Dental Office 37 1.14% 49 Retail 373 11.51% 499 Leisure Facilities 27 0.83% 36 Restaurant/Lounge 47 1.45% 63 Industrial/Manufacturing 131 4.04% 175 Church/Non-Profit 42 1.30% 56 Education 164 5.06% 219 Special Public Facilities 14 0.43% 19 Total 3,240 4,333 Variable (I): Number of Dwelling Units or Square Feet Exhibit 3-15 shows total units of development by land use category for the year 2025. Data on dwelling unit counts comes from City staff. These data reflect conditions in 2025 within the entire AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 30 RRFA service area, including City, KCFD25, and KCFD40. These data on units of development were aggregated into the same 13 land use categories used to summary incidents by property type. The fire/other incidents in roads and streets are allocated to land use types based on the amount of traffic generated by each type of land use. In Exhibit 3-15, the number of dwelling units and square feet of non-residential15 construction in the RRFA service area is multiplied by the number of daily trips that are generated by each land use type as reported in the 11th Edition of Trip Generation by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The result is the total trips associated with each land use type. The percent of trips associated with each land use type is calculated from the total of all trips. In the final calculation of Exhibit 3-15, the total 572 annual fire/other incidents in roads and streets (428 traceable + 144 allocated) are assigned to land use types using the percent of trips generated. Exhibit 3-15. Fire/Other Incidents in Roads and Streets - Allocated to Land Uses Land Use Type Units of Development ITE Trip Generation Rate Total Trips Percent of Trips Generated Annual Fire/Other Incidents in Roads and Streets per Unit of Development Single-Family Residential 30,598 d.u. 9.43000 288,539 27.93% 160 Multi-Family Residential 23,814 d.u. 6.74000 160,506 15.54% 89 Hotel/Motel/Resort 1,850 room 7.99000 14,782 1.43% 8 Medical Care Facility 615 bed 22.32000 13,727 1.33% 8 Office 8,759,448 sq. ft. 0.01084 94,952 9.19% 53 Medical/Dental Office 955,776 sq. ft. 0.03600 34,408 3.33% 19 Retail 5,397,968 sq. ft. 0.03701 199,779 19.34% 111 Leisure Facilities 522,943 sq. ft. 0.02882 15,071 1.46% 8 Restaurant/Lounge 373,733 sq. ft. 0.10720 40,064 3.88% 22 Industrial/Manufacturing 15,465,470 sq. ft. 0.00475 73,461 7.11% 41 Church/Non-Profit 864,390 sq. ft. 0.00760 6,569 0.64% 4 Education 27,183 student 1.94000 52,735 5.11% 29 Special Public Facilities 1,700,376 sq. ft. 0.02259 38,411 3.72% 21 Total 1,033,005 572 15 Non-residential units of development exclude structured parking. Single-family units include duplexes. Multi-family residential includes units in all structures larger with more than two units plus mobile homes. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 31 Exhibit 3-16 summarizes the results of the analysis of fire/other incidents. The total annual fire/other incidents are a combination of the fire/other incidents allocated among direct responses to land use types (from Exhibit 3-14) and the allocation of incidents at roads and streets based on trip generation rates (from Exhibit 3-15). Exhibit 3-16. Total Fire/Other Incidents by Land Use Land Use Types Annual Fire/Other Incidents Direct to Land Use Annual Fire/Other Incidents in Roads and Streets Allocated to Land Use Total Annual Fire/Other Incidents by Land Use Single-Family Residential 1,107 160 1,267 Multi-Family Residential 1,773 89 1,862 Hotel/Motel/Resort 122 8 130 Medical Care Facility 53 8 61 Office 160 53 213 Medical/Dental Office 49 19 69 Retail 499 111 610 Leisure Facilities 36 8 44 Restaurant/Lounge 63 22 85 Industrial/Manufacturing 175 41 216 Church/Non-Profit 56 4 60 Education 219 29 249 Special Public Facilities 19 21 40 Total 4,333 572 4,905 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 32 The final step in determining the annual fire/other incident rate per unit of development is shown in Exhibit 3-17.16 The total annual fire/other incidents for each type of land use (from Exhibit 3- 16) are divided by the number of dwelling units or square feet of structures to calculate the annual incident rate per dwelling unit or square foot. The units of development are the same as was used to determine traffic-related incidents (see Exhibit 3-15). The results in Exhibit 3-17 show how many times an average unit of development has a fire/other incident to which the RRFA responds. For example, a single-family residence has an average of 0.0414141 fire/other incidents per year. This is the same as saying that about 4% of single-family homes have a fire/other incident in a year. Another way of understanding this information is that an average single-family home would have a fire/other incident once every 25 years. Exhibit 3-17. Annual Fire/Other Incident Rate by Land Use Land Use Type Total Annual Fire/Other Incidents Attributed to Land Use Units of Development Annual Fire/Other Incidents Per Unit of Development Single-Family Residential 1,267 30,598 d.u. 0.0414141 Multi-Family Residential 1,862 23,814 d.u. 0.0781998 Hotel/Motel/Resort 130 1,850 room 0.0702098 Medical Care Facility 61 615 bed 0.0993483 Office 213 8,759,448 sq. ft. 0.0000243 Medical/Dental Office 69 955,776 sq. ft. 0.0000717 Retail 610 5,397,968 sq. ft. 0.0001129 Leisure Facilities 44 522,943 sq. ft. 0.0000850 Restaurant/Lounge 85 373,733 sq. ft. 0.0002276 Industrial/Manufacturing 216 15,465,470 sq. ft. 0.0000140 Church/Non-Profit 60 864,390 sq. ft. 0.0000692 Education 249 27,183 student 0.0091433 Special Public Facilities 40 1,700,376 sq. ft. 0.0000235 Total 4,905 16 Source: RRFA and City of Renton. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 33 i. Formula F-8: Fire/Other Incident Capital Cost per Unit of Development The capital cost of fire/other incidents per unit of development is determined by multiplying the annual fire/other incidents per unit of development (from Exhibit 3-17) times the annual capital cost per fire/other incident of each type of apparatus (from Exhibit 3-9) and fire station (from Exhibit 3-12), then multiplying that result times the useful life of the apparatus or fire station.17 Formula F-8: Annual Fire/Other Incidents per Unit of Development x Annual Cost Per Fire Incident x Useful Life of Apparatus or Station = Fire Incident Capital Cost per Unit of Development There are no new variables used in formula F-8. All three variables were developed in previous formulas. In Exhibit 3-18 through Exhibit 3-30, each fire/other incident rate (from Exhibit 3-17) is multiplied by the annual capital cost per fire/other incident. The result is then multiplied by the useful life of the apparatus or station to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for each type of apparatus and station. For example, single-family residential units average 0.0414141 fire/other incidents per year (i.e., 4% of a fire/other incident per year). In Exhibit 3-18, multiplying this incident rate times the annual capital cost of an engine ($110.10 from Exhibit 3- 9) per incident indicates a cost of about $4.55 per single-family dwelling unit to provide it with fire engines for one year. Since the weighted useful life of an engine is 13.71 years, the residential dwelling needs to pay for 13.71 times the annual rate, for a total of about $62.51 per year. 17 Some fire impact fees are calculated for the economic life of the property paying the impact fee, rather than the useful life of the apparatus and stations that provide the fire protection. Both methods meet the legal requirements for impact fees. The method used in this rate study charges impact fees for the first of each type of apparatus and station needed for new development, but subsequent replacements of apparatus and stations are funded by other revenues available to the RRFA. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 34 Exhibit 3-18. Engine Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual Fire/Other Incidents Per Unit of Development Engine Cost at $110.10 per Fire/Other Incident, per Unit of Development Engine Life Cost per Unit of Development Based on 13.71-Year useful life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.0414141 $4.5597 $62.5134 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.0781998 $8.6098 $118.0403 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.0702098 $7.7301 $105.9797 Medical Care Facility bed 0.0993483 $10.9382 $149.9634 Office sq. ft. 0.0000243 $0.0027 $0.0367 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0000717 $0.0079 $0.1083 Retail sq. ft. 0.0001129 $0.0124 $0.1704 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000850 $0.0094 $0.1283 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0002276 $0.0251 $0.3435 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000140 $0.0015 $0.0211 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000692 $0.0076 $0.1044 Education student 0.0091433 $1.0067 $13.8016 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000235 $0.0026 $0.0355 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 35 Exhibit 3-19 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for a ladder response to fire/other incidents. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-17) is multiplied by the ladder’s capital cost per fire/other incident ($23.67 from Exhibit 3-9). The result is then multiplied by the ladder’s weighted useful life of 18 years to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for ladders. Exhibit 3-19. Ladder Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual Fire/Other Incident Per Unit of Development Ladder Cost at $23.67 per Fire/Other Incident, per Unit of Development Ladder Life Cost per Unit of Development Based on 18-Year life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.0414141 $0.98 $13.4395 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.0781998 $1.85 $25.3771 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.0702098 $1.66 $22.7842 Medical Care Facility bed 0.0993483 $2.35 $32.2401 Office sq. ft. 0.0000243 $0.00 $0.0079 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0000717 $0.00 $0.0233 Retail sq. ft. 0.0001129 $0.00 $0.0366 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000850 $0.00 $0.0276 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0002276 $0.01 $0.0739 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000140 $0.00 $0.0045 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000692 $0.00 $0.0225 Education student 0.0091433 $0.22 $2.9671 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000235 $0.00 $0.0076 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 36 Exhibit 3-20 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for aid units responses to fire/other incidents. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-17) is multiplied by the aid unit cost per fire/other incident ($3.63 from Exhibit 3-9). The result is then multiplied by the nine-year weighted average useful life of an aid unit to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for aid units. Exhibit 3-20. Aid Unit Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual Fire/Other Incident Rate Aid Unit Cost at $3.63 per Fire/Other Incident, per Unit of Development Aid Unit Life Cost per Unit of Development at 9-Year life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.0414141 $0.1503 $1.3530 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.0781998 $0.2839 $2.5548 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.0702098 $0.2549 $2.2938 Medical Care Facility bed 0.0993483 $0.3606 $3.2457 Office sq. ft. 0.0000243 $0.0001 $0.0008 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0000717 $0.0003 $0.0023 Retail sq. ft. 0.0001129 $0.0004 $0.0037 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000850 $0.0003 $0.0028 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0002276 $0.0008 $0.0074 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000140 $0.0001 $0.0005 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000692 $0.0003 $0.0023 Education student 0.0091433 $0.0332 $0.2987 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000235 $0.0001 $0.0008 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 37 Exhibit 3-21 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for hazardous materials vehicle responses to fire/other incidents. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-17) is multiplied by the hazardous materials vehicle cost per fire/other incident ($6.86 from Exhibit 3-9). The result is then multiplied by the 21-year useful life of a hazardous materials vehicle to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for hazardous materials vehicles. Exhibit 3-21. Hazardous Materials Vehicle Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual Fire/Other Incident Rate Hazardous Materials Vehicle Cost at $6.86 per Fire/Other Incident, per Unit of Development Hazardous Materials Vehicle Life Cost per Unit of Development at 21-Year life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.0414141 $0.2841 $5.9661 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.0781998 $0.5365 $11.2655 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.0702098 $0.4816 $10.1144 Medical Care Facility bed 0.0993483 $0.6815 $14.3121 Office sq. ft. 0.0000243 $0.0002 $0.0035 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0000717 $0.0005 $0.0103 Retail sq. ft. 0.0001129 $0.0008 $0.0163 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000850 $0.0006 $0.0122 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0002276 $0.0016 $0.0328 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000140 $0.0001 $0.0020 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000692 $0.0005 $0.0100 Education student 0.0091433 $0.0627 $1.3172 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000235 $0.0002 $0.0034 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 38 Exhibit 3-22 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for brush truck responses to fire/other incidents. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-17) is multiplied by the brush truck cost per fire/other incident ($15.63 from Exhibit 3-9). The result is then multiplied by the 15-year useful life of a brush truck to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for brush trucks. Exhibit 3-22. Brush Truck Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual Fire/Other Incident Rate Brush Truck Cost at $15.63 per Fire/Other Incident, per Unit of Development Brush Truck Life Cost per Unit of Development at 15-Year Life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.0414141 $0.6473 $9.7095 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.0781998 $1.2223 $18.3339 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.0702098 $1.0974 $16.4607 Medical Care Facility bed 0.0993483 $1.5528 $23.2922 Office sq. ft. 0.0000243 $0.0004 $0.0057 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0000717 $0.0011 $0.0168 Retail sq. ft. 0.0001129 $0.0018 $0.0265 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000850 $0.0013 $0.0199 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0002276 $0.0036 $0.0534 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000140 $0.0002 $0.0033 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000692 $0.0011 $0.0162 Education student 0.0091433 $0.1429 $2.1436 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000235 $0.0004 $0.0055 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 39 Exhibit 3-23 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for command vehicle responses to fire/other incidents. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-17) is multiplied by the command vehicle cost per fire/other incident ($12.79 from Exhibit 3-9). The result is then multiplied by the ten-year useful life of a command vehicle to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for command vehicles. Exhibit 3-23. Command Vehicle Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual Fire/Other Incident Rate Command Vehicle Cost at $12.79 per Fire/Other Incident, per Unit of Development Command Vehicle Life Cost per Unit of Development at 10-Year Life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.0414141 $0.5297 $7.2620 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.0781998 $1.0002 $13.7124 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.0702098 $0.8980 $12.3114 Medical Care Facility bed 0.0993483 $1.2707 $17.4208 Office sq. ft. 0.0000243 $0.0003 $0.0043 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0000717 $0.0009 $0.0126 Retail sq. ft. 0.0001129 $0.0014 $0.0198 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000850 $0.0011 $0.0149 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0002276 $0.0029 $0.0399 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000140 $0.0002 $0.0024 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000692 $0.0009 $0.0121 Education student 0.0091433 $0.1169 $1.6033 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000235 $0.0003 $0.0041 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 40 Exhibit 3-24 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for dive apparatus responses to fire/other incidents. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-17) is multiplied by the dive apparatus cost per fire/other incident ($1.57 from Exhibit 3-9). The result is then multiplied by the 21-year useful life of a dive apparatus to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for dive apparatus. Exhibit 3-24. Dive Apparatus Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual Fire/Other Incident Rate Dive Apparatus Cost at $1.57 per Fire/Other Incident, per Unit of Development Dive Apparatus Life Cost per Unit of Development at 21-Year Life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.0414141 $0.0650 $0.9753 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.0781998 $0.1228 $1.8416 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.0702098 $0.1102 $1.6534 Medical Care Facility bed 0.0993483 $0.1560 $2.3397 Office sq. ft. 0.0000243 $0.0000 $0.0006 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0000717 $0.0001 $0.0017 Retail sq. ft. 0.0001129 $0.0002 $0.0027 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000850 $0.0001 $0.0020 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0002276 $0.0004 $0.0054 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000140 $0.0000 $0.0003 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000692 $0.0001 $0.0016 Education student 0.0091433 $0.0144 $0.2153 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000235 $0.0000 $0.0006 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 41 Exhibit 3-25 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for service vehicle responses to fire/other incidents. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-17) is multiplied by the service vehicle cost per fire/other incident ($0.00 from Exhibit 3-9). The result is then multiplied by the 15-year useful life of a service vehicle to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for service vehicles. Exhibit 3-25. Service Vehicle Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual Fire/Other Incident Rate Service Vehicle Cost at $0.00 per Fire/Other Incident, per Unit of Development Service Vehicle Life Cost per Unit of Development at 15-Year Life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.0414141 $0.0000 $0.0000 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.0781998 $0.0000 $0.0000 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.0702098 $0.0000 $0.0000 Medical Care Facility bed 0.0993483 $0.0000 $0.0000 Office sq. ft. 0.0000243 $0.0000 $0.0000 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0000717 $0.0000 $0.0000 Retail sq. ft. 0.0001129 $0.0000 $0.0000 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000850 $0.0000 $0.0000 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0002276 $0.0000 $0.0000 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000140 $0.0000 $0.0000 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000692 $0.0000 $0.0000 Education student 0.0091433 $0.0000 $0.0000 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000235 $0.0000 $0.0000 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 42 Exhibit 3-26 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for staff vehicle responses to fire/other incidents. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-17) is multiplied by the staff vehicle cost per fire/other incident ($1.93 from Exhibit 3-10). The result is then multiplied by the 15-year useful life of a staff vehicle to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for staff vehicles. Exhibit 3-26. Staff Vehicle Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual Fire/Other Incident Rate Staff Vehicle Cost at $1.93 per Fire/Other Incident, per Unit of Development Staff Vehicle Life Cost per Unit of Development at 15-Year Life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.0414141 $0.0799 $1.1989 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.0781998 $0.1509 $2.2639 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.0702098 $0.1355 $2.0326 Medical Care Facility bed 0.0993483 $0.1917 $2.8761 Office sq. ft. 0.0000243 $0.0000 $0.0007 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0000717 $0.0001 $0.0021 Retail sq. ft. 0.0001129 $0.0002 $0.0033 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000850 $0.0002 $0.0025 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0002276 $0.0004 $0.0066 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000140 $0.0000 $0.0004 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000692 $0.0001 $0.0020 Education student 0.0091433 $0.0176 $0.2647 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000235 $0.0000 $0.0007 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 43 Exhibit 3-27 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for utility vehicles for fire/other incidents. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-17) is multiplied by the utility vehicle cost per fire/other incident ($2.71 from Exhibit 3-10). The result is then multiplied by the 15-year useful life of a utility vehicle to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for utility vehicles. Exhibit 3-27. Utility Vehicle Cost per Fire/Other Incident, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual Fire/Other Incident Rate Utility Vehicle Cost at $2.71 per Incident, per Unit of Development Utility Vehicle Life Cost per Unit of Development at 15-Year Life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.0414141 $0.1122 $1.6835 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.0781998 $0.2119 $3.1788 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.0702098 $0.1903 $2.8540 Medical Care Facility bed 0.0993483 $0.2692 $4.0385 Office sq. ft. 0.0000243 $0.0001 $0.0010 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0000717 $0.0002 $0.0029 Retail sq. ft. 0.0001129 $0.0003 $0.0046 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000850 $0.0002 $0.0035 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0002276 $0.0006 $0.0093 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000140 $0.0000 $0.0006 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000692 $0.0002 $0.0028 Education student 0.0091433 $0.0248 $0.3717 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000235 $0.0001 $0.0010 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 44 Exhibit 3-28 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for small utility vehicles for fire/other incidents. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-17) is multiplied by the other small utility vehicle cost per fire/other incident ($0.49 from Exhibit 3-10). The result is then multiplied by the 15-year useful life of other small utility vehicles to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for other small utility vehicles. Exhibit 3-28. Small Utility Vehicle Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incident, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual Fire/Other Incident Rate Small Utility Vehicles Cost at $0.49 per Incident, per Unit of Development Small Utility Vehicles Life Cost per Unit of Development at 15-Year Life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.0414141 $0.0203 $0.3044 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.0781998 $0.0383 $0.5748 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.0702098 $0.0344 $0.5160 Medical Care Facility bed 0.0993483 $0.0487 $0.7302 Office sq. ft. 0.0000243 $0.0000 $0.0002 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0000717 $0.0000 $0.0005 Retail sq. ft. 0.0001129 $0.0001 $0.0008 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000850 $0.0000 $0.0006 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0002276 $0.0001 $0.0017 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000140 $0.0000 $0.0001 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000692 $0.0000 $0.0005 Education student 0.0091433 $0.0045 $0.0672 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000235 $0.0000 $0.0002 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 45 Exhibit 3-29 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for other apparatus/equipment to fire/other incidents. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-17) is multiplied by the other apparatus/equipment cost per fire/other incident ($0.76 from Exhibit 3-10). The result is then multiplied by the 15-year useful life of other apparatus/equipment to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for other apparatus/equipment. Exhibit 3-29. Other Apparatus/Equipment Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incident, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual Fire/Other Incident Rate Other Apparatus/Equip. Cost at $0.76 per Incident, per Unit of Development Other Apparatus/Equip. Life Cost per Unit of Development at 15-Year Life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.0414141 $0.0315 $0.4721 Multi-family d.u. 0.0781998 $0.0594 $0.8915 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.0702098 $0.0534 $0.8004 Medical Care Facility bed 0.0993483 $0.0755 $1.1326 Office sq. ft. 0.0000243 $0.0000 $0.0003 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0000717 $0.0001 $0.0008 Retail sq. ft. 0.0001129 $0.0001 $0.0013 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000850 $0.0001 $0.0010 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0002276 $0.0002 $0.0026 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000140 $0.0000 $0.0002 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000692 $0.0001 $0.0008 Education student 0.0091433 $0.0069 $0.1042 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000235 $0.0000 $0.0003 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 46 Exhibit 3-30 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for fire stations that house apparatus. The fire/other incident rate (from Exhibit 3-17) is multiplied by the fire station cost per fire/other incident ($67.17 from Exhibit 3-12). The result is then multiplied by the 50-year useful life of fire stations to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for fire stations. Exhibit 3-30. Fire Station Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incident, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual Fire/Other Incident Rate Fire Station Cost at $67.17 per Incident, per Unit of Development Fire Station Life Cost per Unit of Development at 50-Year Life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.0414141 $3.0460 $139.09 Multi-family d.u. 0.0781998 $5.7516 $262.63 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.0702098 $5.1639 $235.80 Medical Care Facility bed 0.0993483 $7.3071 $333.66 Office sq. ft. 0.0000243 $0.0018 $0.08 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0000717 $0.0053 $0.24 Retail sq. ft. 0.0001129 $0.0083 $0.38 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000850 $0.0063 $0.29 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0002276 $0.0167 $0.76 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000140 $0.0010 $0.05 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000692 $0.0051 $0.23 Education student 0.0091433 $0.6725 $30.71 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000235 $0.0017 $0.08 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 47 Exhibit 3-31 combines the capital costs of all types of apparatus and station (from Exhibit 3-18 through Exhibit 3-30) to show the total capital cost of responses to fire/other incidents for one single-family unit. Exhibit 3-31. Example of Calculation of Total Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents for a Single- Family Residential Dwelling Unit Cost Component Cost Engine $62.51 Ladder $13.44 Aid Unit $1.35 Hazardous Materials Vehicle $5.97 Brush Truck $9.71 Command Vehicle $7.26 Dive Apparatus $0.98 Service Vehicle $0.00 Staff Vehicle $1.20 Utility Vehicle $1.68 Small Utility Vehicle $0.30 Other Equipment/Apparatus $0.47 Fire Station $139.09 Total $243.97 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 48 This example is repeated for each land use to combine its capital costs of all types of apparatus and station in Exhibit 3-32. Exhibit 3-32. Total Capital Cost of Response to Fire/Other Incidents, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Fire/Other Incidents: Life Cost of All Apparatus & Stations per Unit of Development Single-Family Residential d.u. $243.97 Multi-Family Residential d.u. $460.67 Hotel/Motel/Resort room $413.60 Medical Care Facility bed $585.25 Office sq. ft. $0.14 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. $0.42 Retail sq. ft. $0.67 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. $0.50 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. $1.34 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. $0.08 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. $0.41 Education student $53.86 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. $0.14 ii. Formula F-9: Apparatus Cost per EMS Incident The calculation of apparatus cost per EMS incident is similar to the calculation of costs per fire/other incident in Exhibit 3-9. The total apparatus cost per EMS incident is calculated by multiplying the cost per apparatus per response by the percent of EMS incidents each type of apparatus responds to. This calculation accounts for the fact that multiple apparatuses are dispatched to many incidents, and that some apparatus are only dispatched to specific types of incidents. The result of this calculation is a weighted average total cost of apparatus per EMS incident. Formula F-9: Apparatus Cost Per Response x Apparatus Percent of EMS Responses = Apparatus Cost Per EMS Incident There are no new variables used in formula F-9. The first variable is identical to the data from Exhibit 3-6, and the second variable concerning the percent of EMS responses works identically to Variable F, but using EMS responses instead of fire/other responses. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 49 Different types of EMS incidents need different types or combinations of apparatus. As a result, the usage of apparatus varies among the types of apparatus. This variance is an important factor in determining the cost per incident. The percent of EMS responses by each type of apparatus is calculated in Exhibit 3-33 by dividing the annual EMS responses for each type of apparatus by the total annual EMS incidents from Exhibit 3-7. The result of the calculation in Exhibit 3-33 is the percent of EMS incidents responded to by each type of apparatus. For example, engines provided 8,483 responses to the 15,881 EMS incidents, equaling 53.4% of all EMS incidents. Another way to understand this data is that one average EMS incident involved 0.534 engines therefore the cost of responding to an EMS incident includes 53.4% of the cost of an engine. Exhibit 3-33. EMS Response per Incident Rate by Apparatus Type Apparatus Type Annual EMS-Related Responses for Apparatus Annual EMS-Related Incidents Apparatus Response per EMS Incident Rate Engine 8,483 0.534 Ladder 822 0.052 Aid Unit 8,680 0.547 Hazardous Materials Vehicle 3 0.000 Brush Truck 0 0.000 Command Vehicle 0 0.000 Dive Apparatus 354 0.022 Service Vehicle 24 0.002 Total 18,366 15,881 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 50 The final step in calculating the apparatus cost per EMS incident is shown in Exhibit 3-34. The cost per response for each type of apparatus (from Exhibit 3-6) is multiplied by the percent of EMS incidents dispatched to (from Exhibit 3-33) resulting in the total apparatus cost per EMS incident. The “bottom line” in Exhibit 3-34 is the apparatus cost per EMS incident of $104.84. In other words, every EMS incident “uses up” $104.84 worth of apparatus. Exhibit 3-34. Apparatus Cost per EMS Incident Apparatus Type Apparatus Cost Per Response Apparatus Response per EMS Incident Rate Apparatus Cost per EMS Incident Engine $115.72 0.534 $61.81 Ladder $229.92 0.052 $11.90 Aid Unit $38.40 0.547 $20.99 Hazardous Materials Vehicle $258.76 0.000 $0.05 Brush Truck $2,323.01 0.000 $0.00 Command Vehicle $119.04 0.000 $0.00 Dive Apparatus $452.50 0.022 $10.09 Service Vehicle - 0.002 0.000 Total $104.84 iii. Formula F-10: Annual EMS Incident Rate per Unit of Development Formula F-10 is the same as Formula F-7. The annual EMS incident rate per unit of development is calculated using the same methodology as described for fire/other incidents in Exhibit 3-14 through Exhibit 3-30. There are no new variables used in formula F-10. The variables are identical to those used in Formula F-7, but using EMS incidents instead of fire/other incidents. Formula F-10: Annual EMS Incidents at Each Type of Land Use ÷ Number of Dwelling Units or Square Feet of Each Type of Land Use = Annual EMS Incidents Per Unit of Development As shown in Exhibit 3-35, RRFA responded to 15,881 EMS incidents during 2024. Of these incidents, 12,922 were coded to a specific property type related to one of the 13 land use categories used in this study. 1,016 incidents occurred in roads and streets (in most cases these are traffic-related). The records for the remaining 1,943 were not coded to one of the 13 land use categories or roadways. These include incidents with no code at all or those at other kinds of properties such as vacant land or construction sites. To account for all incidents, these 1,943 incidents were allocated proportionally to properties or roads and streets. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 51 Exhibit 3-35. EMS Incidents by Location Incident Location EMS Incidents Identifiable by Location Percent of Identifiable EMS Incidents EMS Incidents Not Identifiable by Location Unidentifiable EMS Incidents Allocated to Location Total EMS Incidents At Properties 12,922 92.71% 1801 14,723 In Roads and Streets 1,016 7.29% 142 1,158 Total 13,938 1,943 15,881 Exhibits 3-36 through 3-39 present the allocation of EMS incidents among types of land use: 1. Exhibit 3-36 shows the EMS incidents that were identifiable by land use type. 2. Exhibit 3-37 shows the EMS incidents that were in roads and streets. 3. Exhibit 3-38 combines the EMS incident data (at properties and in road and streets). 4. Exhibit 3-39 shows the EMS incident rate per unit of development. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 52 Exhibit 3-36 shows the distribution of the 12,922 EMS incidents that are traceable to a land use type along with the percent distribution of these incidents. In the last column, the total 14,723 EMS incidents (12,922 traceable to land use type + 1,801 that are not) are allocated among the land use types using the percent distribution column. The result is the total annual EMS incidents at each of the land use types. Exhibit 3-36. EMS Incidents at Specific Land Uses Land Use Type Annual EMS Incidents Identifiable to Land Use Percent of All EMS Incidents Identifiable to Land Use Allocate Total Property Related EMS Incidents (14,723) to Land Uses Single-Family Residential 5,069 39.23% 5,775 Multi-Family Residential 5,226 40.44% 5,954 Hotel/Motel/Resort 196 1.52% 223 Medical Care Facility 297 2.30% 338 Office 359 2.78% 409 Medical/Dental Office 238 1.84% 271 Retail 966 7.48% 1,101 Leisure Facilities 71 0.55% 81 Restaurant/Lounge 114 0.88% 130 Industrial/Manufacturing 113 0.87% 129 Church/Non-Profit 50 0.39% 57 Education 174 1.35% 198 Special Public Facilities 49 0.38% 56 Total 12,922 14,723 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 53 The EMS incidents in roads and streets are allocated to land uses on the basis of the amount of traffic generated by each type of land use. In Exhibit 3-37, the number of dwelling units and square feet of non-residential18 construction in the service area is multiplied by the number of trips that are generated by each land use type in the same manner as Exhibit 3-15. The result is the total trips associated with each land use type. The percent of trips associated with each land use type is calculated from the total of all trips. In the final calculation in Exhibit 3-37 the total 1,158 annual EMS incidents that are in roads and streets (1,016 traceable + 142 allocated) are assigned to the land use types using the percent of trips generated. Exhibit 3-37. EMS Incidents in Roads and Streets - Allocated to Land Uses Land Use Type Units of Development ITE Trip Generation Rate19 Total Trips Percent of Trips Generated Annual EMS Incidents in Roads and Streets Per Unit of Development Single-Family Residential 30,598 d.u. 9.43000 288,539 27.93% 323 Multi-Family Residential 23,814 d.u. 6.74000 160,506 15.54% 180 Hotel/Motel/Resort 1,850 room 7.99000 14,782 1.43% 17 Medical Care Facility 615 bed 22.32000 13,727 1.33% 15 Office 8,759,448 sq. ft. 0.01084 94,952 9.19% 106 Medical/Dental Office 955,776 sq. ft. 0.03600 34,408 3.33% 39 Retail 5,397,968 sq. ft. 0.03701 199,779 19.34% 224 Leisure Facilities 522,943 sq. ft. 0.02882 15,071 1.46% 17 Restaurant/Lounge 373,733 sq. ft. 0.10720 40,064 3.88% 45 Industrial/Manufacturing 15,465,470 sq. ft. 0.00475 73,461 7.11% 82 Church/Non-Profit 864,390 sq. ft. 0.00760 6,569 0.64% 7 Education 27,183 students 1.94000 52,735 5.11% 59 Special Public Facilities 1,700,376 sq. ft. 0.02259 38,411 3.72% 43 Total 1,033,005 1,158 18 Non-residential units of development exclude structured parking. Single-family units include duplexes. Multi-family residential includes units in all structures larger with more than two units plus mobile homes. 19 Daily trip generation rates are from the 11th Edition of Trip Generation by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 54 Exhibit 3-38 summarizes the results of the analysis of EMS incidents. The total annual EMS incidents is a combination of the EMS incidents allocated among direct responses to land use types (from Exhibit 3-36) and the allocation of incidents in roads and streets based on trip generation rates (from Exhibit 3-37). Exhibit 3-38. Total EMS Incidents by Land Use Land Use Type Annual Property Related EMS Incidents by Land Use Annual EMS Incidents in Roads and Streets Assigned to Land Use Total Annual EMS Incidents by Land Use Single-Family Residential 5,775 323 6,099 Multi-Family Residential 5,954 180 6,134 Hotel/Motel/Resort 223 17 240 Medical Care Facility 338 15 354 Office 409 106 515 Medical/Dental Office 271 39 310 Retail 1,101 224 1,325 Leisure Facilities 81 17 98 Restaurant/Lounge 130 45 175 Industrial/Manufacturing 129 82 211 Church/Non-Profit 57 7 64 Education 198 59 257 Special Public Facilities 56 43 99 Total 14,723 1,158 15,881 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 55 The final step in determining the annual EMS incident rate per unit of development is shown in Exhibit 3-39. The total annual EMS incidents for each type of land use (from Exhibit 3-38) are divided by the number of dwelling units or square feet of structures to calculate the annual EMS incident rate per dwelling unit or square foot. The units of development are the same that were used to assign incidents in roads and streets to land use types (see Exhibit 3-39). The results in Exhibit 3-39 show how many times an average unit of development has an EMS incident to which the RRFA responds. Exhibit 3-39. Annual EMS Incident Rate by Land Use Land Use Type Total Annual EMS Incidents Attributed to Land Use Units of Development Annual EMS Incidents Per Unit of Development Single-Family Residential 6,099 30,598 d.u. 0.1993249 Multi-Family Residential 6,134 23,814 d.u. 0.2575922 Hotel/Motel/Resort 240 1,850 room 0.1296689 Medical Care Facility 354 615 bed 0.5752554 Office 515 8,759,448 sq. ft. 0.0000588 Medical/Dental Office 310 955,776 sq. ft. 0.0003241 Retail 1,325 5,397,968 sq. ft. 0.0002454 Leisure Facilities 98 522,943 sq. ft. 0.0001870 Restaurant/Lounge 175 373,733 sq. ft. 0.0004677 Industrial/Manufacturing 211 15,465,470 sq. ft. 0.0000136 Church/Non-Profit 64 864,390 sq. ft. 0.0000744 Education 257 27,183 students 0.0094679 Special Public Facilities 99 1,700,376 sq. ft. 0.0000582 Total 15,881 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 56 iv. Formula F-11: EMS Incident Capital Cost per Unit of Development The capital cost of EMS incidents per unit of development is determined by multiplying the annual EMS incidents per unit of development (from Exhibit 3-39) times the annual capital cost per EMS incident of each type of apparatus (Exhibit 3-34) and fire station (from Exhibit 3-12), then multiplying that result times the useful life of the apparatus or fire station. Formula F-11: Annual EMS Incidents per Unit of Development x Annual Cost Per EMS Incident x Useful Life of Apparatus or Station = EMS Incident Capital Cost per Unit of Development There are no new variables used in formula F-11. The variables are identical to those used in Formula F- 8 but using EMS incident rates and costs instead of fire/other incident rates and costs. In Exhibit 3-40 through Exhibit 3-52, each EMS incident rate (from Exhibit 3-39) is multiplied by the annual capital cost per EMS incident. The result is then multiplied by the useful life of the apparatus or station to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for each type of apparatus and station. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 57 Exhibit 3-40 calculates the EMS related capital costs of an engine per unit of development. For example, single-family residential units average 0.1993249 EMS incidents per year (i.e., 19% of an EMS incident per year). Multiplying this by the annual capital cost of $61.81 per incident (from Exhibit 3-34) results in a cost of $12.32 per dwelling unit to provide it with engines for one year. Since the engine lasts on average 13.71 years on average, the residential dwelling needs to pay for 13.71 times the annual rate, for a total of $168.91. Exhibit 3-40. Engine Cost of Response to EMS Incidents, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual EMS Incident Rate Engine Cost at $61.81 per EMS Incident, per Unit of Development Engine Life Cost per Unit of Development at 13.71-Year life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.1993249 $12.3203 $168.9109 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.2575922 $15.9218 $218.2875 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.1296689 $8.0148 $109.8834 Medical Care Facility bed 0.5752554 $35.5565 $487.4801 Office sq. ft. 0.0000588 $0.0036 $0.0499 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0003241 $0.0200 $0.2746 Retail sq. ft. 0.0002454 $0.0152 $0.2079 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0001870 $0.0116 $0.1585 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0004677 $0.0289 $0.3963 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000136 $0.0008 $0.0116 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000744 $0.0046 $0.0631 Education students 0.0094679 $0.5852 $8.0233 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000582 $0.0036 $0.0493 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 58 Exhibit 3-41 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for ladders responding to EMS incidents. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-39) is multiplied by the ladder capital cost per EMS incident ($11.90 from Exhibit 3-34). The result is then multiplied by the 18-year average useful life of a ladder to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for ladders. Exhibit 3-41. Ladder Cost of Response to EMS Incidents, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual EMS Incident Rate Ladder Cost at $11.90 per EMS Incident, per Unit of Development Ladder Life Cost per Unit of Development at 18-Year life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.1993249 $2.37 $42.6954 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.2575922 $3.07 $55.1762 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.1296689 $1.54 $27.7751 Medical Care Facility bed 0.5752554 $6.85 $123.2197 Office sq. ft. 0.0000588 $0.00 $0.0126 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0003241 $0.00 $0.0694 Retail sq. ft. 0.0002454 $0.00 $0.0526 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0001870 $0.00 $0.0401 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0004677 $0.01 $0.1002 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000136 $0.00 $0.0029 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000744 $0.00 $0.0159 Education students 0.0094679 $0.11 $2.0280 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000582 $0.00 $0.0125 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 59 Exhibit 3-42 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for aid units responding to EMS incidents. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-39) is multiplied by the aid unit capital cost per EMS incident ($20.99 from Exhibit 3-34). The result is then multiplied by the nine-year average useful life of an aid vehicle to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for aid units. Exhibit 3-42. Aid Vehicle Cost of Response to EMS Incidents, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual EMS Incident Rate Aid Vehicle Cost at $20.99 per EMS Incident, per Unit of Development Aid Vehicle Life Cost per Unit of Development at 9-Year life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.1993249 $4.1838 $37.6545 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.2575922 $5.4069 $48.6617 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.1296689 $2.7218 $24.4958 Medical Care Facility bed 0.5752554 $12.0746 $108.6715 Office sq. ft. 0.0000588 $0.0012 $0.0111 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0003241 $0.0068 $0.0612 Retail sq. ft. 0.0002454 $0.0052 $0.0464 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0001870 $0.0039 $0.0353 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0004677 $0.0098 $0.0884 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000136 $0.0003 $0.0026 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000744 $0.0016 $0.0141 Education students 0.0094679 $0.1987 $1.7886 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000582 $0.0012 $0.0110 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 60 Exhibit 3-43 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for hazardous materials vehicles responding to EMS incidents. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-39) is multiplied by the hazardous materials vehicle capital cost per EMS incident ($0.05 from Exhibit 3-34). The result is then multiplied by the 21-year average useful life of a hazardous materials vehicles to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for hazardous materials vehicles. Exhibit 3-43. Hazardous Materials Vehicle Cost of Response to EMS Incidents, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual EMS Incident Rate Hazardous Materials Vehicle Cost at $0.05 per EMS Incident, per Unit of Development Hazardous Materials Vehicle Life Cost per Unit of Development at 21-Year life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.1993249 $0.0100 $0.2093 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.2575922 $0.0129 $0.2705 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.1296689 $0.0065 $0.1362 Medical Care Facility bed 0.5752554 $0.0288 $0.6040 Office sq. ft. 0.0000588 $0.0000 $0.0001 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0003241 $0.0000 $0.0003 Retail sq. ft. 0.0002454 $0.0000 $0.0003 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0001870 $0.0000 $0.0002 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0004677 $0.0000 $0.0005 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000136 $0.0000 $0.0000 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000744 $0.0000 $0.0001 Education students 0.0094679 $0.0005 $0.0099 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000582 $0.0000 $0.0001 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 61 Exhibit 3-44 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for brush trucks responding to EMS incidents. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-39) is multiplied by the brush trucks capital cost per EMS incident ($0.00 from Exhibit 3-34). The result is then multiplied by the 15-year average useful life of a brush truck to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for brush trucks. Exhibit 3-44. Brush Truck Cost of Response to EMS Incidents, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual EMS Incident Rate Brush Truck Cost at $0.00 per EMS Incident, per Unit of Development Brush Truck Life Cost per Unit of Development at 15-Year Life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.1993249 $0.0000 $0.0000 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.2575922 $0.0000 $0.0000 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.1296689 $0.0000 $0.0000 Medical Care Facility bed 0.5752554 $0.0000 $0.0000 Office sq. ft. 0.0000588 $0.0000 $0.0000 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0003241 $0.0000 $0.0000 Retail sq. ft. 0.0002454 $0.0000 $0.0000 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0001870 $0.0000 $0.0000 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0004677 $0.0000 $0.0000 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000136 $0.0000 $0.0000 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000744 $0.0000 $0.0000 Education students 0.0094679 $0.0000 $0.0000 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000582 $0.0000 $0.0000 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 62 Exhibit 3-45 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for command vehicles responding to EMS incidents. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-39) is multiplied by the command vehicle capital cost per EMS incident ($0.00 from Exhibit 3-34). The result is then multiplied by the ten- year average useful life of a command vehicle to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for command vehicles. Exhibit 3-45. Command Vehicle Cost of Response to EMS Incidents, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual EMS Incident Rate Command Vehicle Cost at $0.00 per EMS Incident, per Unit of Development Command Vehicle Life Cost per Unit of Development at 10-Year Life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.1993249 $0.0000 $0.0000 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.2575922 $0.0000 $0.0000 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.1296689 $0.0000 $0.0000 Medical Care Facility bed 0.5752554 $0.0000 $0.0000 Office sq. ft. 0.0000588 $0.0000 $0.0000 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0003241 $0.0000 $0.0000 Retail sq. ft. 0.0002454 $0.0000 $0.0000 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0001870 $0.0000 $0.0000 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0004677 $0.0000 $0.0000 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000136 $0.0000 $0.0000 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000744 $0.0000 $0.0000 Education students 0.0094679 $0.0000 $0.0000 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000582 $0.0000 $0.0000 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 63 Exhibit 3-46 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for dive apparatus responding to EMS incidents. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-39) is multiplied by the dive apparatus capital cost per EMS incident ($10.09 from Exhibit 3-34). The result is then multiplied by the 21-year average useful life of a dive apparatus to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for dive apparatus. Exhibit 3-46. Dive Apparatus Cost of Response to EMS Incidents, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual EMS Incident Rate Dive Apparatus Cost at $10.09 per EMS Incident, per Unit of Development Dive Apparatus Life Cost per Unit of Development at 21-Year Life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.1993249 $2.0112 $42.2350 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.2575922 $2.5991 $54.5812 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.1296689 $1.3084 $27.4755 Medical Care Facility bed 0.5752554 $5.8043 $121.8909 Office sq. ft. 0.0000588 $0.0006 $0.0125 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0003241 $0.0033 $0.0687 Retail sq. ft. 0.0002454 $0.0025 $0.0520 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0001870 $0.0019 $0.0396 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0004677 $0.0047 $0.0991 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000136 $0.0001 $0.0029 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000744 $0.0008 $0.0158 Education students 0.0094679 $0.0955 $2.0062 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000582 $0.0006 $0.0123 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 64 Exhibit 3-47 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for service vehicles. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-39) is multiplied by the service vehicle capital cost per incident ($0.00 from Exhibit 3-34). The result is then multiplied by the 15-year average useful life of a service vehicle to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for service vehicles. Exhibit 3-47. Service Vehicle Cost per EMS Incident, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual EMS Incident Rate Service Vehicle Cost at $0.00 per Incident, per Unit of Development Service Vehicle Life Cost per Unit of Development at 15-Year Life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.1993249 $0.0000 $0.0000 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.2575922 $0.0000 $0.0000 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.1296689 $0.0000 $0.0000 Medical Care Facility bed 0.5752554 $0.0000 $0.0000 Office sq. ft. 0.0000588 $0.0000 $0.0000 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0003241 $0.0000 $0.0000 Retail sq. ft. 0.0002454 $0.0000 $0.0000 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0001870 $0.0000 $0.0000 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0004677 $0.0000 $0.0000 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000136 $0.0000 $0.0000 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000744 $0.0000 $0.0000 Education students 0.0094679 $0.0000 $0.0000 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000582 $0.0000 $0.0000 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 65 Exhibit 3-48 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for staff vehicles. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-39) is multiplied by the staff vehicle capital cost per incident ($1.93 from Exhibit 3-10). The result is then multiplied by the 15-year average useful life of a staff vehicle to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for staff vehicles. Exhibit 3-48. Staff Vehicles Cost of Response to EMS Incident, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual EMS Incident Rate Staff Vehicle Cost at $1.93 per Incident, per Unit of Development Staff Vehicle Life Cost per Unit of Development at 15-Year Life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.1993249 $0.3847 $5.7705 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.2575922 $0.4972 $7.4573 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.1296689 $0.2503 $3.7539 Medical Care Facility bed 0.5752554 $1.1102 $16.6536 Office sq. ft. 0.0000588 $0.0001 $0.0017 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0003241 $0.0006 $0.0094 Retail sq. ft. 0.0002454 $0.0005 $0.0071 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0001870 $0.0004 $0.0054 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0004677 $0.0009 $0.0135 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000136 $0.0000 $0.0004 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000744 $0.0001 $0.0022 Education students 0.0094679 $0.0183 $0.2741 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000582 $0.0001 $0.0017 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 66 Exhibit 3-49 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for utility vehicles. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-39) is multiplied by the utility vehicle capital cost per incident ($2.71 from Exhibit 3-10). The result is then multiplied by the 15-year average useful life of a utility vehicle to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for utility vehicles. Exhibit 3-49. Utility Vehicle Cost of Response to EMS Incident, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual EMS Incident Rate Utility Vehicle Cost at $2.71 per Incident, per Unit of Development Utility Vehicle Life Cost per Unit of Development at 15-Year Life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.1993249 $0.5402 $8.1026 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.2575922 $0.6981 $10.4711 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.1296689 $0.3514 $5.2710 Medical Care Facility bed 0.5752554 $1.5589 $23.3841 Office sq. ft. 0.0000588 $0.0002 $0.0024 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0003241 $0.0009 $0.0132 Retail sq. ft. 0.0002454 $0.0007 $0.0100 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0001870 $0.0005 $0.0076 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0004677 $0.0013 $0.0190 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000136 $0.0000 $0.0006 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000744 $0.0002 $0.0030 Education students 0.0094679 $0.0257 $0.3849 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000582 $0.0002 $0.0024 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 67 Exhibit 3-50 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for small utility vehicles. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-39) is multiplied by the small utility vehicle capital cost per incident ($0.49 from Exhibit 3-10). The result is then multiplied by the 15-year average useful life of a small utility vehicle to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for small utility vehicles. Exhibit 3-50. Small Utility Vehicle Cost of Response to EMS Incident, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual EMS Incident Rate Small Utility Vehicle Cost at $0.49 per Incident, per Unit of Development Small Utility Vehicle Life Cost per Unit of Development at 15-Year Life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.1993249 $0.0977 $1.4650 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.2575922 $0.1262 $1.8933 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.1296689 $0.0635 $0.9531 Medical Care Facility bed 0.5752554 $0.2819 $4.2281 Office sq. ft. 0.0000588 $0.0000 $0.0004 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0003241 $0.0002 $0.0024 Retail sq. ft. 0.0002454 $0.0001 $0.0018 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0001870 $0.0001 $0.0014 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0004677 $0.0002 $0.0034 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000136 $0.0000 $0.0001 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000744 $0.0000 $0.0005 Education students 0.0094679 $0.0046 $0.0696 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000582 $0.0000 $0.0004 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 68 Exhibit 3-51 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for other apparatus/equipment. The incident rate (from Exhibit 3-39) is multiplied by the other apparatus/equipment capital cost per incident ($0.76 from Exhibit 3-10). The result is then multiplied by the 15-year average useful life of other apparatus/equipment to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for other apparatus/equipment. Exhibit 3-51. Other Apparatus/Equipment Cost of Response to EMS Incident, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual EMS Incident Rate Other Apparatus/Equip Cost at $0.76 per Incident, per Unit of Development Other Apparatus/Equip Life Cost per Unit of Development at 15-Year Life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.1993249 $0.1515 $2.2723 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.2575922 $0.1958 $2.9366 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.1296689 $0.0985 $1.4782 Medical Care Facility bed 0.5752554 $0.4372 $6.5579 Office sq. ft. 0.0000588 $0.0000 $0.0007 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0003241 $0.0002 $0.0037 Retail sq. ft. 0.0002454 $0.0002 $0.0028 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0001870 $0.0001 $0.0021 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0004677 $0.0004 $0.0053 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000136 $0.0000 $0.0002 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000744 $0.0001 $0.0008 Education students 0.0094679 $0.0072 $0.1079 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000582 $0.0000 $0.0007 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 69 Exhibit 3-52 calculates the capital cost per unit of development for fire stations that house EMS apparatus. The EMS incident rate (from Exhibit 3-39) is multiplied by the fire station capital cost per fire/other and EMS incident ($67.17 from Exhibit 3-12). The result is then multiplied by the 50-year useful life of a fire station to calculate the capital cost per unit of development for fire stations. Exhibit 3-52. Fire Station Cost of Response to EMS Incident, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development Annual EMS Incident Rate Fire Station Cost at $67.17 per Incident, per Unit of Development Fire Station Life Cost per Unit of Development at 50-Year Life Single-Family Residential d.u. 0.1993249 $13.3887 $669.43 Multi-Family Residential d.u. 0.2575922 $17.3025 $865.12 Hotel/Motel/Resort room 0.1296689 $8.7099 $435.49 Medical Care Facility bed 0.5752554 $38.6399 $1,932.00 Office sq. ft. 0.0000588 $0.0040 $0.20 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. 0.0003241 $0.0218 $1.09 Retail sq. ft. 0.0002454 $0.0165 $0.82 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. 0.0001870 $0.0126 $0.63 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. 0.0004677 $0.0314 $1.57 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. 0.0000136 $0.0009 $0.05 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. 0.0000744 $0.0050 $0.25 Education students 0.0094679 $0.6360 $31.80 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. 0.0000582 $0.0039 $0.20 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 70 Exhibit 3-53 combines the capital costs of all types of apparatus and station (from Exhibit 3-40 through Exhibit 3-52) to show the total capital cost of responses to EMS incidents for one unit of single-family residential development. Exhibit 3-53. Example of Calculation of Total Cost of Response to EMS Incidents for a Single-Family Residential Dwelling Unit Cost Component Cost Engine $168.91 Ladder $42.70 Aid Unit $37.65 Hazardous Materials Vehicle $0.21 Brush Truck $0.00 Command Vehicle $0.00 Dive Apparatus $42.23 Service Vehicle $0.00 Staff Vehicle $5.77 Utility Vehicle $8.10 Small Utility Vehicle $1.47 Other Equipment/Apparatus $2.27 Fire Station $669.43 Total $978.75 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 71 This example is repeated for each land use to combine its capital costs of all types of apparatus and stations in Exhibit 3-54. Exhibit 3-54. Total Capital Cost of Response to EMS Incidents, per Unit of Development Land Use Type Unit of Development EMS Incidents: Life Cost per Unit of Development of All Apparatus & Stations Single-Family Residential d.u. $978.75 Multi-Family Residential d.u. $1,264.86 Hotel/Motel/Resort room $636.72 Medical Care Facility bed $2,824.69 Office sq. ft. $0.29 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. $1.59 Retail sq. ft. $1.20 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. $0.92 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. $2.30 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. $0.07 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. $0.37 Education students $46.49 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. $0.29 v. Formula F-12: Total Cost per Unit of Development The fire/other and EMS costs per unit of development are combined in Exhibit 3-55 to determine the total fire/other and EMS cost per dwelling unit or nonresidential square foot. Formula F-12: Fire Incident Capital Cost Per Unit of Development x EMS Incident Capital Cost Per Unit of Development = Total Cost of Response Per Unit of Development There are no new variables used in formula F-12. Both variables were developed in previous formulas and exhibits. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 72 Exhibit 3-55. Total Cost of Response to All Incidents by Land Use Category Land Use Type Unit of Development Fire/Other Incident Life Cost of All Apparatus & Station (Impact Cost of Fire/Other) EMS Incident Life Cost of All Apparatus & Station (Impact Cost of EMS) Total Cost of Response to EMS, Fire, & Other Incidents Per Unit of Development by Land Use Category Single-Family Residential d.u. $243.97 $978.75 $1,222.71 Multi-Family Residential d.u. $460.67 $1,264.86 $1,725.53 Hotel/Motel/Resort room $413.60 $636.72 $1,050.32 Medical Care Facility bed $585.25 $2,824.69 $3,409.94 Office sq. ft. $0.14 $0.29 $0.43 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. $0.42 $1.59 $2.01 Retail sq. ft. $0.67 $1.20 $1.87 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. $0.50 $0.92 $1.42 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. $1.34 $2.30 $3.64 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. $0.08 $0.07 $0.15 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. $0.41 $0.37 $0.77 Education students $53.86 $46.49 $100.35 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. $0.14 $0.29 $0.42 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 73 b. CAPITAL PROJECTS ELIGIBLE FOR IMPACT FEES As discussed in Section 3.2, the City is expected to grow during the period of 2025 to 2031. This growth, and the new development associated with it, will create increased demands for fire and emergency response services. This chapter first projects increased apparatus needs and the proportion of those needs that are related to expected growth within the City only. This is to identify the proportion of capital facility costs that can be funded with City fire impact fee revenues. Following the summarization of apparatus needs is a summarization of growth-related projects at stations needed to increase operational capacity for emergency response. i. Projected Growth in the RRFA Service Area Exhibit 3-56 presents estimated population in the RRFA in 2024 as well as net population growth projections for the years 2025 through 2031.20 The total service area population is expected to grow by 10,799 residents, of which 9,405 are City residents. This is 87% of the total population growth forecasted for the RRFA service area. Exhibit 3-56. RRFA Service Area Population and Projected Growth Description 2024 Growth 2025-2031 City of Renton Population 108,584 9,405 KCFD 25 Population 7,726 217 KCFD 40 Population 21,885 1,177 Total Service Area Population 138,195 10,799 City of Renton Share of Population Growth 87% ii. 2031 Incident Projections The number of incidents in the service area is expected to grow with population. Exhibit 3-57 compares population estimates area to total emergency incidents for the years 2021 through 2024.21 This study assumes that the average annual rate of growth in incidents per capita will continue. By 2031, the rate is assumed to be 0.1873. 20 Source: City of Renton projections are from PSRC, KCFD25 and KCFD40 are from the Office of Financial Management (OFM). 21 Source: Renton RFA Planning section. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 74 Exhibit 3-57. Total Incidents Per Capita, RRFA Service Area Description 2021 2022 2023 2024 City of Renton Population 106,785 107,900 108,436 108,584 KCFD 25 Population 6,402 7,947 7,854 7,726 KCFD 40 Population 21,317 22,148 21,852 21,885 Total Service Area Population 134,504 137,995 138,142 138,195 Total Incidents 18,281 19,185 20,370 20,786 Total Incident per Capita 0.1359 0.1390 0.1475 0.1504 As shown in Exhibit 3-56, the City is projected to grow by 9,405 between 2025 and 2031. Exhibit 3-58 shows the projected number of annual incidents associated with this growth in population, using the projected incidents per capita rate for 2031. Exhibit 3-58. Projection of Annual Incidents Associated with City of Renton Growth, 2031 Description Value Source City of Renton Projected Population Growth, 2026-2031 9,405 RRFA Analysis of City of Renton Forecast Incidents per Capita, 2031 0.1873 RRFA projection based on historic trend (2021-2024) Annual Incidents Associated with City of Renton Population Growth 1,762 RRFA Calculation iii. Projected Growth-Related Apparatus Needs through 2031 In 2022, the RRFA operated with seven front-line engines, one front-line ladder and three front- line Aid Units. Exhibit 3-59 presents baseline responses per incident and average annual responses per front-line apparatus. Unlike the calculations in Chapter 3, these calculations combine both EMS and fire/other incidents to determine response rates per incident. This measure represents the total annual response capacity for each type of vehicle. For the purpose of projecting service demands in 2031, this analysis assumes the proportion of incidents by type (fire, EMS, etc.) will not change. This assumption is supported by analysis of incident data between 2021 and 2024. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 75 Exhibit 3-59. Baseline Front-Line Apparatus Responses per Incident, 2025 Apparatus Type Count of Front- Line Apparatus Annual Responses Annual Incidents Response Rate per Incident Annual Responses per Front-Line Apparatus Engine 7 13,150 0.6326 1,879 Ladder 1 1,327 0.0638 1,327 Aid Unit 4 9,144 0.4399 2,286 Total 20,786 Exhibit 3-60 calculates the number of additional apparatus needed to serve new growth projected in the City. First it calculated projected growth-related responses by apparatus type by multiplying the projected growth-related annual incidents from Exhibit 3-59 by the annual response rate per incident from Exhibit 3-60. Next, these growth-related responses are divided by the annual responses per front-line apparatus from Exhibit 3-60. It shows that RRFA will need 0.59 new engines, 0.08 new ladders and 0.34 new Aid Units to serve projected growth inside the City. Exhibit 3-60. Projected Apparatus Need Associated with City of Renton Growth, 2026 - 2031 Apparatus Type Annual Incidents Associated with Renton Population Growth, 2031 Response Rate per Incident Projected Growth- Related Responses Annual Responses per Front- Line Apparatus Additional Front- Line Apparatus Needed to Serve Renton Growth, 2031 Engine 0.6326 1,115 1,879 0.59 Ladder 0.0638 112 1,327 0.08 Aid Unit 0.4399 775 2,286 0.34 Total 1,762 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 76 Exhibit 3-61 shows the planned apparatus additions to fleet to address anticipated needs in the entire RRFA service area. It also calculates the percentage of these total planned additions to fleet that are associated with City growth-related needs. Exhibit 3-60 identifies the need for apparatus to respond to an additional 775 aid unit responses and 1,227 non-aid unit responses per year due to new growth. As discussed in the capital facilities plan, much of the growth in the RRFA service area will come in the form of infill development and increased density within the City. As the growth occurs, the RRFA intends to add additional apparatus units to address the anticipated increase in multi-story housing (ladder) and emergency medical calls for service (aid unit). Exhibit 3-61. Impact Fee Eligible Costs Associated with Planned Additions to Fleet Apparatus Type Total Planned Additions to Fleet, 2026-2031 Additional Front- Line Apparatus Needed to Serve Renton Growth, 2031 Percentage Related to City of Renton Growth, 2026-2031 Unit Cost of Apparatus22 Impact Fee Eligible Costs Cost of Future Reserve Capacity Engine 0 0.00 87% $0 $0 $0 Ladder 1 0.68 87% $2,531,895 $2,205,063 $326,832 Aid Unit 1 0.34 87% $426,918 $371,809 $55,109 22 Unit Cost of apparatus reflects the estimated cost in the year of replacement. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 77 iv. System Improvement Costs Already Incurred As discussed in Section 3.3, the RRFA has excess capacity at stations systemwide to accommodate increased emergency response staffing. Between 2026 and 2031, the RRFA intends to increase response operations staffing by 18% from 152 to 180 FTE systemwide. Exhibit 3-62 calculates the total station value associated with the station capacity needed to accommodate this increase in response operations staffing, systemwide. Exhibit 3-62. Value of Station Capacity Needed for Growth-Related Response Staffing Increases Description Value A. Total station square feet in RRFA inventory (from Exhibit 3-4) 101,253.00 B. Total cost per building square foot (from Exhibit 3-11) $1,034.11 C. Total value of RRFA station inventory (A multiplied by B) $104,706,881.80 D. Baseline percentage of RRFA station capacity in use (from Exhibit 3-2 ) 67% E. Value of station capacity in use (C multiplied by D) $69,804,587.86 F. Percent increase in response and EMS staffing, 2026-2031 18% G. Value of increased in usage of station capacity (E multiplied by F) $12,858,739.87 H. Percentage of projected service area growth inside City of Renton (from Exhibit 3-56) 87% I. Value of increased usage of station capacity needed to accommodate City of Renton growth (G multiplied by H) $11,198,856.23 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 78 Exhibit 3-63 shows the estimated debt service on RRFA capital facilities. The anticipated debt service for capital facilities does not exceed the total value of increased station capacity needed to accommodate response staffing needed to serve Renton growth (row I in Exhibit 3-62). Therefore, the entire amount of this debt service is impact fee eligible.23 Exhibit 3-63. Impact Fee Eligible Costs Associated with System Improvements Station Name Address Debt Service Payments 2026-2031 Fire Station 16/Maintenance $17,811,779.17 23 Note that RCW 82.02.050(2) states that “…the financing for system improvements to serve new development … cannot rely solely on impact fees.” Exhibit 3-66 identifies other revenue sources to be applied to comply with this requirement. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 79 v. Summary of Impact Fee Eligible Project Costs Exhibit 3-64 presents RRFA’s capital cost for apparatus during the six-year period of 2026-2031. It includes both replacements to existing apparatus as well as fleet expansions necessitated by new growth. Exhibit 3-64. Capital Costs for Apparatus, 2026-2031 Project Description Quantity Average Unit Cost 2026-2031 Total Cost in Year of Replacement Percentage Related to City of Renton Growth, 2026-2031 Impact Fee Eligible Costs (2031) Apparatus Replacements Engine 5 $1,905,066 $9,525,328 0% $0 Ladder 2 $3,004,126 $3,092,898 0% $0 Aid Unit 0 $0 $0 0% $0 HazMat Vehicle 0 $0 $0 0% $0 Brush Truck 0 $0 $0 0% $0 Command Vehicle 5 $146,217 $731,085 0% $0 Dive Apparatus 0 $0 $0 0% $0 Service Vehicle 1 $126,598 $126,598 0% $0 Staff Vehicle 3 $52,034 $156,103 0% $0 Utility Vehicle 0 $98,014 $196,029 0% $0 Sm. Utility Vehicle 0 $0 $0 0% $0 Other Apparatus/Equipment 0 $0 $0 0% $0 Apparatus Fleet Expansions Aerial 1 $2,531,895 $2,531,895 87% $2,205,063 Aid Unit 1 $426,918 $426,918 87% $371,809 Apparatus Total $7,261,526 $2,576,871 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 80 Exhibit 3-65 presents RRFA’s capital facility costs for stations during the six-year period of 2026- 2031. It includes debt service payments, and renovations for operational needs as well as the proportion of that cost that is reasonably related to serving new growth in the City of Renton. Exhibit 3-65. Capital Facility Costs for Stations, 2026-2031 Project Description Total Cost (2026-2031) Percentage Related to City of Renton Growth Impact Fee Eligible Costs Station Debt Servicing Fire Station 16 Debt Service Payments $10,566,414 17% $1,796,290 Maintenance Shop Debt Service Payments $7,245,365 23% $1,644,698 Station Renovations for Operational Needs Admin Headquarters Facility Improvements $0 0% $0 Fire Station 11 Facility Improvements $315,654 0% $0 Fire Station 12 Facility Improvements $480,807 0% $0 Fire Station 13 Facility Improvements $1,098,502 0% $0 Fleet Shop Facility Improvements $0 0% $0 Fire Station 14 Current Facility Improvements $320,962 0% $0 Tower Facility Improvements $0 0% $0 OFM Facility Improvements $0 0% $0 Fire Station 15 Facility Improvements $0 0% $0 Fire Station 16 Current Facility Improvements $98,004 0% $0 Fire Station 16 Future Facility Improvements $31,656,935 0% $0 Future Fleet Shop Facility Improvements $0 0% $0 Fire Station 17 Facility Improvements $1,069 0% $0 Total Station Costs $51,783,712 $3,440,988 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 81 c. IMPACT FEE RATE ADJUSTMENTS Exhibit 3-66 summarizes total impact fee eligible costs and accounts for revenues that RRFA plans to use for funding a portion of impact fee eligible costs. The remaining impact fee eligible costs are $5,718,210, or 95 percent of total impact fee eligible costs. Exhibit 3-66. Impact Fee Eligible Costs Compared to Projected Impact Fee Revenues, 2026-2031 Description Estimated Cost/Revenue Total Impact Fee Eligible Costs (Apparatus + Stations) $6,017,859 Payments from Other Revenue Sources $299,650 Remaining Impact Fee Eligible Costs $5,718,210 Percentage of Impact Fee Eligible Costs to be Funded with Impact Fee Revenues 95% Projected Impact Fee Revenues Assuming Renton Adopts Total Cost Per Unit of Development24 $8,972,530 Projected Revenues in Excess of Remaining Impact Fee Eligible Costs $3,254,320 Impact Fee Eligible Costs as a Percentage of Maximum Projected Revenues 64% Also shown in Exhibit 3-62 are projected impact fee revenues, assuming the city implements an impact fee schedule equal to the full capital costs per unit of development shown in Exhibit 3- 55.25 The remaining impact fee eligible costs amount to about 64 percent of these projected revenues. Therefore, to avoid collecting more impact fee revenue than impact fee eligible capital costs, the full capital costs per unit of development are multiplied by 64 percent to determine the fire impact fee rate. 24 Assumes City of Renton implements an impact fee schedule equal to the full capital costs per unit of development shown in Exhibit 3-55. 25 Projected impact fee revenues are based on projections provided by the City of Renton and contained within the “Current Key Development (August 2025)” as shown in Appendix A. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 82 Exhibit 3-67. 2025 RRFA Fire Impact Fee Rate Schedule Land Use Unit Total Cost of Response Per Unit of Development Percentage Needed for Eligible Costs Fire Impact Fee Single-Family Residential d.u. $1,222.71 64% $779.24 Multi-Family Residential d.u. $1,725.53 64% $1,099.68 Hotel/Motel/Resort room $1,050.32 64% $669.37 Medical Care Facility bed $3,409.94 64% $2,173.16 Office sq. ft. $0.43 64% $0.28 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. $2.01 64% $1.28 Retail sq. ft. $1.87 64% $1.19 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. $1.42 64% $0.90 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. $3.64 64% $2.32 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. $0.15 64% $0.10 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. $0.77 64% $0.49 Education students $100.35 64% $63.96 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. $0.42 64% $0.27 RCW 82.02.050(2) requires that “…the financing for system improvements to serve new development … cannot rely solely on impact fees.” As shown in Exhibit 3-67, the remaining impact fee eligible costs used as the basis for the impact fee calculation amount to just 64 percent of total impact fee eligible costs. Therefore, the rates in Exhibit 3-67, which are based on only 64 percent of total impact fee eligible costs, comply with RCW82.02.050(2). AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees - August 2025 83 Appendix A: Current Key Development Map26 15 Assumes City of Renton implements an impact fee schedule equal to the full capital costs per unit of development shown in Exhibit 3-55. 25 Projected impact fee revenues are based on projections provided by the City of Renton and contained within the “Current Key Development (August 2025)” as shown in Appendix A. 26 Source: https://rentonwa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Minimalist/index.html?appid=298f547a608e4ebf97251280134224b8 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 14 3.0 Measuring Future Capital Facility Needs The GMA was enacted to provide local oversight of community growth with the intent for local governments such as counties, cities, and towns to monitor and mitigate the impacts of growth. GMA Goal 1 promotes placing growth in urban areas where there are public facilities and services, while GMA Goal 12 promotes adequate facilities and services to support development: (1) Urban growth. Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner. (12) Public facilities and services. Ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards (RCW 36.70A.020(12)). Concurrency for transportation infrastructure is mandated by the GMA, and local agencies were given the authority to establish concurrency guidelines for other public needs such as water, sewer, and fire services: Purpose.  The purpose of concurrency is to ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to support development are adequate to serve that development at the time it is available for occupancy and use, without decreasing service levels below locally established minimum standards.  Concurrency describes the situation in which adequate facilities are available when the impacts of development occur, or within a specified time thereafter. Concurrency ensures consistency in land use approval and the development of adequate public facilities as plans are implemented, and it prevents development that is inconsistent with the public facilities necessary to support the development.  With respect to facilities other than transportation facilities, counties and cities may fashion their own regulatory responses and are not limited to imposing moratoria on development during periods when concurrency is not maintained (WAC 365-196-840). The RRFA CFP identifies the need for $26.7M in capital investments as shown in Exhibits 4-1 and 4-2, to maintain fire service concurrency through the year 2031. 3.1 LEVEL OF SERVICE MEASURES RRFA measures LOS from three different perspectives. The first concerns the cost of facilities for AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 15 incident response per unit of development. The second perspective concerns turnout and response times in accordance with established policy. The third perspective concerns the Protection Class (PC) rating for each of the areas served (the City of Renton, KCFD25, and KDFD40). Each of these LOS measures are described below. 3.1.1 Cost of Facilities for Incident Response per Unit of Development In 2025, RRFA conducted a rate study for fire impact fees. That study presents a methodology for quantifying the need for fire and EMS stations and apparatus to serve new growth, for the purpose of collecting fire impact fees. The level of service standard is the 2024 ratio of apparatus and stations to EMS and fire/other incidents. More specifically, the rate study calculates the annualized facility value per incident as well as the number of incidents produced by different kinds of development. This determines the total cost of facilities for incident response needed per unit of development. This standard is used to measure the systemwide capacity of facilities to support incident response throughout the RRFA service area. Full documentation of the methodology is available in the rate study. A brief summary follows. For apparatus, including engines and other response vehicles, the ratio of apparatus to incidents as of 2024 was selected as an acceptable LOS standard. As growth occurs, more incidents will occur, and therefore more apparatus will be needed to maintain this standard. It is anticipated that much of the growth in the RRFA service area will come in the form of infill development and increased density within the City. As the growth occurs, the RRFA intends to add additional apparatus units to address the anticipated increase in multi-story housing (ladder) and emergency medical calls for service (aid unit). For fire stations, the rate study measures LOS using the ratio of station square footage to incidents. However, a deduction to the square footage is made to account for unused beds that could accommodate additional fire and emergency response staff. As stated above, it is anticipated that much of the growth in the RRFA service area will come in the form of infill development and increased density within the City. As this growth occurs, the RRFA intends to utilize excess bed capacity in current stations to increase its capacity for emergency response at existing stations. On the next page, Exhibit 3-1 shows the cost of response per unit of development (dwelling unit, square foot, room, or student), by land use category, as calculated in the 2025 RRFA Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees. These represent the total amount of facility investment the RRFA would need to make to maintain the current level of service as growth occurs within the service area, but not the actual fire impact fee to be charged. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 16 Exhibit 3-1. Total Cost of Response by Land Use Category Land Use Type Unit of Development Total Cost of Response to EMS, Fire, & Other Incidents, Per Unit of Development4 Single-Family Residential d.u. $779.24 Multi-Family Residential d.u. $1,099.68 Hotel/Motel/Resort room $669.37 Medical Care Facility bed $2,173.16 Office sq. ft. $0.28 Medical/Dental Office sq. ft. $1.28 Retail sq. ft. $1.19 Leisure Facilities sq. ft. $0.90 Restaurant/Lounge sq. ft. $2.32 Industrial/Manufacturing sq. ft. $0.10 Church/Non-Profit sq. ft. $0.49 Education student $63.96 Special Public Facilities sq. ft. $0.27 3.1.2 Turnout and Response Time Standards Traffic and geographic barriers currently present challenges to providing adequate response time in some areas. For this reason, RRFA also has turnout and response time standards for measuring performance across the entire service area and by individual station. Turnout and response time standards are documented in SOP 4101 “Response Guidelines”. First, this policy addresses turnout times, or the interval that begins when audible or visual notification is received by firefighters from the 911 center and ends at the beginning point of travel time. SOP 4101 states: “Turnout time for emergent responses shall be expedient and no longer than one hundred twenty seconds.” Second, this policy addresses response times, or the interval that begins with notification and ends with the time the unit arrives on scene. SOP 4101 states: “The organization aspires in a non-disaster situation, under current conditions of funding, staffing, and equipment, to respond to 90% of the emergency service calls within 7 minutes and 30 seconds from the time of dispatch.” These standards are summarized in Exhibit 3-2. 4 Source: RRFA Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees, 2025 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 17 Exhibit 3-2. Response Time Level of Service Standards Service Standard Response Time Meet Response Time Goal Turnout time for emergency response 120 seconds 100% First unit arrival 7 minutes and 30 seconds from the time of dispatch 90% Measuring response time helps RRFA to identify where additional capacity may be necessary. It also helps to identify where current conditions such as station design, local traffic, land use, or geographic barriers are presenting challenges to responding to incidents in a timely manner. For example, Fire Stations 13 and 16 are multi-story buildings that require response crews to travel from a second story to the main story in order to respond, thus increasing their turnout time compared to a single-story station. Similarly, the increased density of multi-family housing and commercial development outside of the Fire Station 11 response area reduces the probability of meeting the response standard and impacts response time level of service for that property type. The response time level of service standards for 2024 are displayed in Exhibit 3-3 and 3-4. Exhibit 3-3. 2024 Response Time Level of Service Standards for Fire/Other In/Out of Jurisdiction Turnout time under 120 seconds Response time under 7.5m In Jurisdiction 54.57% 85.26% Out of Jurisdiction 55.14% 83.11% Exhibit 3-4. 2024 Response Time Level of Service Standards for EMS In/Out of Jurisdiction Turnout time under 120 seconds Response time under 7.5m In Jurisdiction 74.55% 96.27% Out of Jurisdiction 71.94% 95.13% AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 18 3.1.3 Washington Surveying Rating Bureau Protection Class A Washington Surveying Rating Bureau (WSRB) protection class (PC) is a score from 1 to 10 that represents the community-provided fire protection capabilities available at a specific property. A PC of 1 indicates exemplary fire protection capabilities are available; a PC of 10 indicates the fire protection capabilities, if any, are not sufficient to receive credit for insurance. Each community in Washington state has a PC, which is used as a starting point to determine the PC of individual properties. In 2018, the City’s PC was upgraded from a Class 3 to a Class 2.5 This rating was maintained in the City’s 2024 WSRB rating. This rating places the City in the top 5.6% in the country and top 2.4% in the state in terms of protection class ratings. In July of 2022, the City of Seattle became the first and only fire department in the state to achieve a Class 1 PC. Exhibit 3-5. City of Renton 2024 PC Rating The improvements made to fire and life safety throughout Renton over the past several years have led to this outstanding upgrade in PC for the Renton community. Because a community’s PC is one of the key factors in insurance premium determination, not only does this upgrade represent exceptional fire and life safety protection, but Renton property owners also have an even greater opportunity to realize insurance premium savings. KCFD25 and KCFD40 both maintain a PC of Class 3. A community's PC rating is evaluated using the following criteria:  Fire department (40%), including distribution of stations, staffing levels, equipment, and personnel training.  Water supply (35%), including water flow capacity, fire hydrant location, and maintenance.  Emergency communications system (9%), including dispatching system, staffing, and training.  Fire safety control (16%), including fire code and building code enforcement, fire investigations, and public fire education programs. 5 Source: Country Wide PC Ratings were obtained in 2025 from www.isomitigation.com/ppc/program-works/facts-and-figures-about-ppc-codes- around-the-country/. State Wide PC Ratings were published in the WSRB Protection Class Report for Renton, dated April 1, 2024. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 19 Because the PC criteria that most affect the overall rating are the fire operations and deployment of resources for fire protection, the RRFA must maintain the fire protection apparatus, staffing, and deployment that supports its current PC rating as growth occurs. For example, WSRB requires a ladder to be positioned within 2.5 road miles of a given structure. The RRFA maintains a single ladder located at Fire Station 11 in downtown Renton. Exhibit 3-6 shows the 2.5 road mile radius of Fire Station 11 in comparison to the projected new development within the City. A second ladder is required to address the growth in these areas. Exhibit 3-6. Fire Station 11 Ladder with 2.5 Road Mile Radius AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 20 Some of the City-projected developments that will require a ladder response are shown in Exhibit 3-7 below. 6 Exhibit 3-7. Highlighted City of Renton Planned Development 6 Source: City of Renton: Renton Highlighted Development (arcgis.com) accessed 07/28/2025. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 21 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 22 4.0 Forecast of Future Facility Needs, 2026-2031 The following is a summary of capital facility needs for the period of 2026-2031. 4.1 APPARATUS FACILITY NEEDS Over the next six years, RRFA will need to replace 17 apparatus and add 2 additional apparatus to its fleet. The inventory of apparatus in Section 2.2 provides the year of replacement for all apparatus in the current fleet. Exhibit 4-1 summarizes scheduled apparatus replacements and total costs through the year 2031. It also includes the cost of expansions to the RRFA vehicle fleet needed to serve new growth.7 Exhibit 4-1. Capital Costs for Apparatus, 2026-2031 Project Description Quantity Average Unit Cost Total Cost in Year of Replacement Percentage Related to City of Renton Growth Impact Fee Eligible Costs Apparatus Replacements Engine 5 $1,905,066 $9,525,328 0% $0 Ladder 1 $3,092,898 $3,092,898 0% $0 Aid Unit 0 $0 $0 0% $0 HazMat Vehicle 0 $0 $0 0% $0 Brush Truck 0 $0 $0 0% $0 Command Vehicle 5 $146,217 $731,085 0% $0 Dive Apparatus 0 $0 $0 0% $0 Service Vehicle 1 $126,598 $126,598 0% $0 Staff Vehicle 3 $52,034 $156,103 0% $0 Utility Vehicle 2 $98,014 $196,029 0% $0 Sm. Utility Vehicle 0 $0 $0 0% $0 Other Apparatus/Equipment 0 $0 $0 0% $0 Apparatus Fleet Expansions Ladder 1 $2,531,895 $2,531,895 86% $2,205,063 Aid Unit 1 $426,918 $426,918 86% $371,809 Apparatus Total $16,786,855 $2,576,871 7 See the RRFA Rate Study for Fire Impact Fees (2025) for the methodology used to determine the proportion of growth-related apparatus needs based on population. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 23 4.2 STATION FACILITY NEEDS RRFA has three categories of station facility costs: debt servicing for existing stations, new station construction, and renovations to address operational needs. The costs related to these needs are summarized in Exhibit 4-2 and described in more detail below. Exhibit 4-2. Capital Facility Costs for Stations, 2026-2031 Project Description Total Cost Percentage Related to City of Renton Growth Impact Fee Eligible Costs Fire Station Debt Servicing Fire Station 16 $10,566,414 17% $1,796,290 Future Fleet Maintenance Shop $7,245,365 23% $1,644,698 Fire Station Improvements for Operational Needs Fire Station 11 Facility Improvements $315,654 0% $0 Fire Station 12 Facility Improvements $480,807 0% $0 Fire Station 13 Facility Improvements $1,098,502 0% $0 Fire Station 13 Shop Facility Improvements $0 0% $0 Fire Station 14 Facility Improvements $320,962 0% $0 Fire Station 14 Tower Facility Improvements $0 0% $0 Fire Station 15 Facility Improvements $0 0% $0 Fire Station 16 Facility Improvements $98,004 0% $0 Fire Station 17 Facility Improvements $1,069 0% $0 Total Fire Station Costs $12,881,412 $3,440,988 4.2.1 Debt Servicing RRFA intends to relocate Fire Station 16 and construct a new maintenance and repair facility within the City limits to support anticipated growth in the area. Construction costs have not yet been developed; however, TCA has provided an estimate of approximately $32M for the project, exclusive of land acquisition, design, and other pre-construction expenses. The RRFA currently has no debt but does intend to issue Limited Tax General Obligation (LTGO) bonds in September 2025 for the financing of the new Fire Station 16 and maintenance facility in the amount of approximately $33M. The RRFA received a AA+ rating from S&P in July of 2025. The debt service in Exhibit 4-2 represents anticipated bond payments for the years 2026-2031. See Appendix A for an estimated amortization table. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 24 4.2.2 New Facility Needs RRFA has identified the need to replace Fire Station 16 in the East Plateau neighborhood on the northeast side of Renton. The existing facility was built in 1974 and is approaching 50 years old and does not accommodate the modern needs of the fire service. Building a new station will increase capacity to serve expected growth in this area of Renton for the next 50 years. In addition, the RRFA intends to build a new maintenance facility to provide the space necessary to conduct apparatus service and repair as we continue to expand our fleet. Construction of the new Fire Station 16 and maintenance facility is anticipated to begin in 2025. The total estimated cost of station and maintenance facility construction, land acquisition, design, and other pre-construction expenses is approximately $40,000,000. The portion of project costs attributed to City growth for the new Fire Station 16 is 17%, which corresponds to the increase in bed capacity from six to seven, representing a 17% increase in operational capacity. For the maintenance facility, 23% of the cost is allocated to growth based on a weighted analysis of the fleet’s service demands. The facility is specifically designed to support heavy-duty emergency response vehicles, such as engines and ladder trucks, which require advanced infrastructure including oversized service bays, reinforced vehicle lifts, and high-capacity tooling systems to accommodate their size, weight, and mechanical complexity. The weighted analysis used to determine the growth-related cost share takes into account the disproportionate maintenance requirements of ladder trucks compared to engines. The following assumptions were applied: one engine equals one maintenance unit, while one ladder truck equals 2.5 maintenance units due to its complexity and infrastructure demands. The current fleet includes 12 engines (12 units) and 2 ladder trucks (5 units), totaling 17 maintenance units. With the addition of one new ladder truck and the retention of the current ladder truck as a reserve, the maintenance load will increase by 5 units, resulting in a future total of 22 maintenance units. The growth-related share of this increase is calculated using the formula: Growth Allocation: = Future Load – Current Load = 22-17 = 5 = 23% Future Load 22 22 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 25 Exhibit 4-3. Fire Station 16 4.2.3 Capital Projects Associated with Station Operational Needs The RRFA anticipates several improvement projects at existing fire stations necessary to address operational needs and maintain concurrency of fire services through 2031. These improvements include major repair and rehabilitation and do not include regular operations and maintenance. They are summarized in Exhibit 4-2 above and detailed in Appendix B. 4.3 PROPOSED LOCATIONS AND CAPACITIES OF EXPANDED OR NEW CAPITAL FACILITIES 4.3.1 Apparatus The RRFA has identified the need to add one aid unit and one ladder to serve the new growth within the City. Appendix C highlights the areas covered by the addition of an aid unit at Fire Station 11, much of which includes new development parcels. Appendix D highlights the areas covered by adding an additional ladder and locating one ladder at Fire Station 12 and one at Fire Station 13. 4.3.2 Station The new Fire Station 16 and maintenance facility will be located at 15815 SE 128th St in Renton. The existing Fire Station 16 is 7,732 square feet (SF) and is situated on a 58,806 SF parcel of land. Due to the limited size of the current lot, the maximum building area allowed is 12,800 SF which will not accommodate a station intended to serve growth over the next 50 years, the average longevity of a fire station. In addition, the current maintenance facility located at Fire Station 13 is at maximum capacity and cannot accommodate servicing any additions to the RRFA fleet. An additional maintenance facility is needed. The new Fire Station 16 will be located on a 151,721 SF parcel of land and that will allow up to 25,100 SF of building space. A single-story station of approximately 15,150 square feet will accommodate seven beds and three bays, and a five-bay maintenance facility are planned for the new parcel. See Appendix E for a preliminary layout of the parcel. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 26 5.0 Capital Facilities Revenue Analysis 5.1 OVERVIEW This CFP revenue analysis supports the financing for providing facilities and services, as required by RCW 36.70A.070(3)(d). Revenue estimates, using assumptions based on historical trends, are used to represent realistic expectations for revenue that may be available for capital funding. This revenue analysis provides an approximate, and not exact, projection of future revenue sources. The numbers projected in this analysis are for planning purposes and cannot account for sensitivities such as local, state, and federal policy, economic trends, and other factors. This analysis may not align with RRFA’s annual budget because it is based on multi-year projections of revenue, while the annual budget presents precise estimates of available revenue for spending in a specific fiscal year. 5.2 FUNDING THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Estimated future revenues are projected for the years 2026-2031. The revenue analysis is categorized according to:  Dedicated Capital Revenues. Dedicated revenues are required to be used for certain types of capital spending, outlined by the law. The dedicated capital revenues for RRFA include fire impact fees remitted to RRFA by the City.  Operating Transfers. Operating transfers-in are those revenue sources that are transferred in from the operating fund. Although these are not dedicated sources to be relied on for capital funding, the RRFA endeavors to make regular operating transfers-in to its reserves on a level basis each year. These transfers are not specifically dedicated to capital spending and could be used elsewhere.  LTGO Bonds. Financing bonds that do not require voter approval or include the levying of an additional tax to repay them.  Other Funding Sources. The RRFA continuously explores external sources available to fund capital projects such as grant opportunities. 5.3 ASSUMPTIONS The RRFA revenue analysis is based on the following assumptions:  Analysis Boundary. The analysis includes the current RRFA boundary as shown in Exhibit 1-1.  Growth. Growth targets were provided by the City staff and reflect projections as of August 2025. Property Tax. This analysis assumes that property tax revenues will increase at an annual rate of 1% going forward, with the assessed value and new construction growing according to the July 2025 King County Economic and AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 27 Revenue Forecast – Office of Economic and Financial Analysis.  Fire Benefit Charge. In 2021, the voters approved a ten-year renewal of the fire benefit charge with a vote of nearly 82% in favor of the proposition. By law, the fire benefit charge may be used for up to 60% of the RRFA operating budget. In 2025, the fire benefit makes up approximately 19% of the RRFA’s total budget.  Fire Impact Fees. This analysis assumes the City will adopt the 2026 fire impact fees proposed by the RRFA and will remit fees collected to the RRFA as outlined in the interlocal agreement between the City and the RRFA. Projected residential and commercial impact fee revenues are based on residential and nonresidential growth projections provided by City staff.  EMS Levy. This analysis assumes revenues from the EMS levy continue to increase at an annual growth rate of 3%.  Permits and Fees. This analysis assumes revenues from miscellaneous permits and fees will increase slightly over the current rates.  EMS Services. This analysis assumes revenues from EMS services will increase at a rate of 3% per year and Ground Emergency Medical Transport (GEMT) revenues will remain level. GEMT funding is at the discretion of the federal government and the program could be modified or cancelled at any time. 5.4 FIRE IMPACT FEES The City has collected fire impact fees since 2011. In 2023, the debt service on Fire Station 13 was paid in full using impact fees collected by the City. The City now remits fire impact fees to the RRFA on a monthly basis. Impact fees collected through 2025 will be used for capital facility needs identified in the 2024-2029 RRFA CFP. Fees collected beginning in 2026 will be used for capital facility needs identified in this CFP. The RRFA projects fire impact fees of $5,718,210 for the years 2026 through 2031. Exhibit 5-1 compares the projected fire impact fee revenue to the projected growth-related project costs, as presented in Exhibit 4-1 and Exhibit 4-2. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan – August 2025 28 Exhibit 5-1. Projected Dedicated Capital Revenues and Costs Dedicated Revenues and Project Costs 2026-2031 Total Revenues and Costs Fire Impact Fee Revenues (remitted) $5,718,210 Planned Growth-Related Project Costs $6,017,859 Estimated Dedicated Funding Surplus/(Deficit) ($299,650) 5.5 OPERATING TRANSFERS The projected revenues available for operating transfers-in over the planning period of 2026-2031 is $51,200,000. RRFA’s funding streams for these transfers-in and for capital facilities costs include revenues from its property tax, fire benefit charge, transport and GEMT fees, EMS levy, LTGO bonds, and miscellaneous permits and fees. 5.6 SIX-YEAR COST AND REVENUE COMPARISON This six-year comparison looks at RRFA’s total revenues and planned project costs for the six-year planning horizon of 2026-2031 in order to understand the difference between future dedicated capital costs and potential future revenues. Capital costs are presented as year of expenditure (YOE) and include growth-related capital facility and apparatus replacement costs. Exhibit 5-2 summarizes projected capital facilities revenues and costs.8 Exhibit 5-2. Estimated Capital Facilities Revenues and Costs, YOE Capital Facilities Revenues and Costs 2026-2031 Growth-Related Capital Costs $6,017,859 Capital Replacement and Project Costs, not Growth-Related $26,709,454 Total Costs $32,727,314 Impact Fee Revenue $5,718,210 Operating Transfer Potential Revenue $51,200,000 Estimated Funding Surplus/(Deficit) $24,190,896 5.7 POLICY OPTIONS AND OTHER FUNDING SOURCES One additional potential funding source option is:  Unlimited Tax General Obligation (UTGO) Bonds: Financing bonds that require voter approval and include the levying of an additional tax to repay them. 8 Source: Renton RFA, 2025. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan 29 Appendix A: Amortization Schedule Estimated Debt Servicing Amortization Schedule Payment: Every 6 Months Term: 20 Years Amount: $33,150,000 Interest Rate: 5.0% Year Interest Principal Debt Service Year 1. Year #1 $377,029.17 $1,980,000.00 $2,357,029.17 2025 2. Year #2 $1,556,250.00 $1,020,000.00 $2,576,250.00 2026 3. Year #3 $1,505,250.00 $1,070,000.00 $2,575,250.00 2027 4. Year #4 $1,451,750.00 $1,125,000.00 $2,576,750.00 2028 5. Year #5 $1,395,500.00 $1,180,000.00 $2,575,500.00 2029 6. Year #6 $1,336,500.00 $1,240,000.00 $2,576,500.00 2030 7. Year #7 $1,274,500.00 $1,300,000.00 $2,574,500.00 2031 8. Year #8 $1,209,500.00 $1,365,000.00 $2,574,500.00 2032 9. Year #9 $1,141,250.00 $1,435,000.00 $2,576,250.00 2033 10. Year #10 $1,069,500.00 $1,505,000.00 $2,574,500.00 2034 11. Year #11 $994,250.00 $1,580,000.00 $2,574,250.00 2035 12. Year #12 $915,250.00 $1,660,000.00 $2,575,250.00 2036 13. Year #13 $832,250.00 $1,745,000.00 $2,577,250.00 2037 14. Year #14 $745,000.00 $1,830,000.00 $2,575,000.00 2038 15. Year #15 $653,500.00 $1,920,000.00 $2,573,500.00 2039 16. Year #16 $557,500.00 $2,020,000.00 $2,577,500.00 2040 17. Year #17 $456,500.00 $2,120,000.00 $2,576,500.00 2041 18. Year #18 $350,500.00 $2,225,000.00 $2,575,500.00 2042 19. Year #19 $239,250.00 $2,335,000.00 $2,574,250.00 2043 20. Year #20 $122,500.00 $2,450,000.00 $2,572,500.00 2044 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan 30 Appendix B: Major Repair and Rehabilitation for Stations Station/Description 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 Fire Station #11 $26,095 $186,491 $0 $103,068 $0 $0 Water heater $26,095 - - - - - Exhaust Fan, Furnace - $186,491 - - - - Flooring, Ceiling Finishes, Expansion Tank, Painting - - - $103,068 - - Fire Station #12 $304,134 $117,146 $26,577 $7,856 $0 $25,094 Air handler unit, pump $304,134 - - - - - Automatic Transfer Switch, Boiler, Furniture/Millwork - $117,146 - - - - Unit heaters - - $26,577 - - - Pump, water heater, Painting - - - $7,856 - $25,094 Fire Station #13 $0 $423,400 $0 $21,529 $64,887 $588,686 Storage Tank and Painting - - - - $64,887 - AC Unit, Condensing Unit, Evaporative Unit, Fire Alarm Systems, Lighting, Roofing - $423,400 - - - - Air Compressor, Carpet, Auto Transfer Switch, Water Heater, Package Unit - - - $21,529 - $588,686 Fire Station #14 $0 $129,419 $123,889 $67,011 $0 $643 Electrical panel, painting - $129,419 - - - - Doors/hardware, water heater - - $123,889 - - - Flooring, Pump, Expansion Tank - - - $67,011 - $643 Fire Station #16 $49,712 $0 $6,921 $13,658 $11,014 $16,699 AC Unit, Water Heater - - - - $11,014 $16,699 Exhaust Fan, Unit Heater $49,712 - - - - - Generator - - $6,921 - - - Painting - - - $13,658 - - Fire Station #17 $0 $0 $0 $1,069 $0 $0 Water Heater - - - $1,069 - - Grand Total $379,941 $856,456 $157,387 $214,191 $75,901 $631,122 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan 31 Appendix C: Fire Station 11 Drive Time (Aid Unit) AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan 32 Appendix D: Fire Station 12-13 Drive Time (Ladders) AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan 33 Appendix E: Fire Station 16/Maintenance Building Preliminary Design AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Capital Facilities Plan 34 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) D>‘énton CAPITAL PLANNING SCHOOL DISTRICT AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICE |EXCELLENCE |EQUITY DATE:June 16,2025 TO:Dr.Damien Pattenaude,Superintendent FROM:Matt Feldmeyer,Executive Director,Capital Planning and Construction Mee Ss FOR BOARD MEETING:June 25,2025 G/\e/2 CONSENT AGENDAITEM:2025-2031 Capital Facilities Plan A Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan,to be updated annually,is required by the Washington State Growth Management Act and the School Impact Fee Ordinance Act,of King County,Code Title 21A.If serves as a guide to the development of school facilities and forms the basis for the calculation of school impact fees that are imposed on new development by King County and the cities whose service areas overlap the Renton School District. The Plan is intended to evaluate the need for future facilities based on forecast enrollment growth and student capacity of existing facilities.The Plan also identifies potential sources of funding for additional construction or acquisition. DISTRICT GOALS: Removing Barriers &Supporting Students BUDGET IMPLICATION: This item has no budget implication. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the District's 2025 Capital Facilities Plan. Attachment:2025 Capital Facilities Plan Recommendations: |haye reviewed ang |a i.i _ jennifer A.(Fprmer /pe ‘Agsistant Stperintendent of Finance and Operations/CFO SERVICE |EXCELLENCE |EQUITY 7812 S 124 St,Seattle,Washington 98178-4830 |p.425.204.4403 |£.425.204.4476 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) 1 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Renton School District No. 403 Board of Directors Stefanie McIrvin, Ed. D, President Justin Booker, Vice President Avanti Bergquist, MD Susan Talley Pam Teal Damien Pattenaude, Ed. D, Superintendent Adopted: _June 25, 2025_ AGENDA ITEM #6. c) 2025 SIX YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Renton School District No. 403 TABLE OF CONTENTS II. II. IV. VI. VIL. VII. INTRODUCTION ENROLLMENT TRENDS STANDARD OF SERVICE & CAPACITY ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS GROWTH RELATED PROJECTS SIX-YEAR FINANCE PLAN IMPACT FEES APPENDICES AGENDA ITEM #6. c) I. INTRODUCTION Purpose of the Capital Facilities Plan: This Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan (the “Plan”)is prepared by the Renton School District (the “District”) in compliance with the requirements of the Washington State Growth Management Act (the “GMA”), King County Code, and applicable ordinances of the cities of Bellevue, Newcastle, and Renton. The Plan was prepared using data available in the spring of 2025. The GMA outlines 14 broad goals including adequate provision of necessary public facilities and services. Schools are among these necessary facilities and services. School districts adopt capital facilities plans to satisfy the requirements of RCW 36.70A.070 and to identify additional school facilities necessary to meet the educational needs of the growing student populations anticipated in their districts. It is the District’s intent that the Plan be adopted by King County and the cities of Bellevue, Newcastle, Renton, SeaTac, and Tukwila as a sub-element of their respective Capital Facilities Plans. Currently, King County and the cities of Bellevue, Newcastle, and Renton collect school impact fees on behalf of the District when requested. The Capital Facilities Plan contains the following required elements: 1. Enrollment forecasts for each grade span over the next six years. 2. Aninventory of the existing capital facilities owned by the District and capacity of those facilities based on the District’s current Standard of Service. 3. A forecast of future needs for capital facilities and the proposed capacities of expanded or new facilities. 4. A six-year plan for financing those capital improvements. As relevant, a calculation of school impact fees and data substantiating such fees.5. Overview of the Renton School District: The District is located on the south end of Lake Washington,eleven miles southeast of Seattle and eleven miles south of Bellevue. Home to more than 100,000 people who value working, living, and playing in the Pacific Northwest, Renton has a strong economic base and a favorable business climate. The District spans approximately thirty-two square miles and serves a diverse population of approximately 14,000 students in pre-K through 12th grade at four high schools, four middle schools, sixteen elementary schools, and an early childhood learning center. District programs also address the special needs of disabled, academically gifted, and artistically talented students. Three schools (Renton Park Elementary, McKnight Middle, and Lindbergh High) are U.S. Department of Education-recognized Blue-Ribbon Schools of Excellence. Community support for Renton schools is strong. School levies, which make up 25% of the district's budget, have been consistently approved by the community for more than 20 years. Voter-approved bond measures or capital facilities levies from 1992 through 2022 have brought exciting improvements in school buildings and support facilities, including the rebuilding of all AGENDA ITEM #6. c) elementary schools, the remodeling of most middle and high schools, and the recent additional construction of two new elementary schools (Sartori and Hilltop Heritage) and a middle school (Risdon). Voter support has also provided state-of-the-art technology -a must to prepare students for living and working in this leading high-tech region. Every classroom has high-speed Internet connections and ample computer devices for all students. Ensuring each student graduates with options and is prepared to participate fully in our democracy is at the heart of Renton School District's mission. Three core values of Service, Excellence, and Equity guide the district’s strategic framework in family and community engagement, excellence in learning and teaching, and removing barriers and supporting students. Students are encouraged to reach for excellence through a variety of programs that focus on rigorous academic skills, problem solving, creative and critical thinking, and social and emotional growth. Renton School District staff are committed to preparing all students for success in their post-secondary journey. Teachers are encouraged to take an active role in promoting their own professional growth through collaborating on the use and development of high-quality instructional materials, sharing successful strategies, and looking for new ways to assess student progress. This focus on continuous staff development enables teachers to consistently improve the quality of instruction and prepares them to help students meet rigorous state academic standards. The District’s voters in 2019 approved a $249.6 M bond measure to fund a new elementary school (Hilltop Heritage Elementary School) to accommodate enrollment needs. Sartori Elementary School opened in 2018 as a choice school, providing additional capacity relief. The voters in November 2022 approved a $676 M bond to fund property acquisition and construction of a new Renton High School and security, seismic, and building systems updates at various schools throughout the District. Property acquisition is currently in process and the high school project is in the design phase currently. In recent years the District’s K-12 enrollment has seen an overall decline. Consistent with much of the region, the District’s enrollment was affected by the global pandemic, lower birth rates, and increases in home based school instruction. The number of new homes planned for future construction in the District continues to be higher than the number of permitted units that were built between 2019 and 2023. The District anticipates, based on recent enrollment projections, that enrollment at all grade levels is likely to see a small decrease over the six year planning period. The District plans to monitor actual enrollment patterns closely and will incorporate new information as a part of future updates to this Plan. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Il. STANDARD OF SERVICE & CAPACITY The District’s Standard of Service is the standard adopted by the District that identifies the program year, school organizational structure, student/teacher ratios by grade level (considering the requirements of students with special needs), daily class schedule, types of facilities and other factors identified by the District as necessary to support its educational programs and objectives. The Standardof Service is used to ascertain current and future capacity. It should also be noted that although the State Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes square foot guidelines for capacity funding criteria, those guidelines do not account for the actual program needs in the District. The Growth Management Act and King County Code 21A.43 authorize the District to adjust the standard of service based on the District's specific needs. The District uses a traditional elementary (K-5)/middle (6-8)/high school (9-12) organizational structure. The District, and the Renton Education Association, recognize that reasonable class size is necessary for optimum learning, and have established the following targets in student/teacher ratios for most regular classroom purposes: Students receive instruction in classes such as band/orchestra, choir, physical education at a larger ratio based on program and space. Student /teacher ratio for special education classes held in self-contained classrooms within comprehensive elementary and secondary facilities is assumed to be 12:1. Educational facilities dedicated solely to special education or other specialized programs are excluded from capacity calculations, as are associated student headcounts. At the high school level, due to adopted State and local graduation requirements,it is not possible to achieve 100% utilization of regular teaching stations. Based on actual utilization due to these considerations, the District uses a standard utilization rate of 80% at the high school level (4 out of 5 periods) for determining high school capacity. Beginning with the graduating class of 2020-2021, high school graduation requirements require one additional credit of science (three instead of two), and a total of twenty-four credits; three more than the previously required 21. This requirement impacts high school capacity as well. Additionally, similar to the high school utilization rate, a typical middle school utilizes a six period day and requires that one period be designated for teacher planning. This requirement reduces middle school capacity by one-sixth, or 17 percent. Student/teacher ratios are applicable to both permanent and relocatable classrooms. However, since relocatable facilities do not allow for the full range of educational activities promoted by the District, they are generally viewed as temporary or interim housing, necessary to Grade Levels K-1 21% Grade Level 2 22:1 Grade Level 3 24:1 Grade Levels 4-12 29:1 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) accommodate enrollment fluctuations and interim development driven enrollment increases until such time as permanentfacilities can be financed and constructed. For those reasons,relocatable classrooms capacities are calculated, but not used in the analysis of future facility needs. Using the Standard of Service, the District calculates building capacity for each of its facilities. The calculation is made by reviewing the use of each classroom/teaching station in each facility in collaboration with individual school leadership. Spaces in buildings used for special program purposes such as special education and alternative learning environments are not included in the District’s regular classroom capacity. Core facilities, such as the cafeteria or gymnasium,are not considered regular classrooms. A building’s regular classroom capacity may change from year to year. For example,if the school enrollment has a higher number of special education students in a given year, there is potential that a teaching station is removed from the capacity inventory, thereby reducing the overall school capacity for that given year. Capacity at the secondary school level is further limited by the previously identified class scheduling restrictions and student distribution among elective classes. Based on a typical middle school six-period day, where one period is designated for teacher planning, capacity is reduced by one-sixth, or 17 percent of theoretical capacity. Similarly, at high schools with a five-period day, capacity is reduced for a teacher planning period by one-fifth, or 20 percent. Elective classes, many of which require specialized classrooms, also figure into the equation for determining a school’s capacity, which together with required classes, require a well thought out master schedule if the facility’s capacity is to be maximized. The District’s capital facilities include both permanent structures and relocatable (interim or portable) classrooms. The District’s permanent K-12 facilities include 16 elementary schools, four middle schools, and four high schools. Two Special Instructional Use facilities house the District’s early childhood, special education, and alternative learning programs. Support facilities include the Kohlwes Education Center (District administration), Transportation Center, Facilities Operations and Maintenance Center, Nutrition Services/Warehouse, Renton Memorial Stadium, and the Lindbergh Swimming Pool. Total permanent facilities encompass 2,670,757 square feet, with 2,495,051 square feet (93%) devoted to K-12 and instructional special use. See Appendix A for District Maps. The District currently has a permanent K-12 facilities capacity of 15,342 (including the opening of Hilltop Heritage Elementary School fall of 2023). See Tables 1 & 2 below and Appendix B. Importantly, current and future capacity at the elementary level, as documented in this report, is based on the District’s current Standard of Service, and does not necessarily reflect aspirational K-3 student/teacher ratios of seventeen students to one teacher. The District continues to make progress towards these requirements, by utilizing available classroom space, added staffing and plans to utilize the new elementary school classrooms to work towards this ratio. Most recent ratios have been anywhere from 17.3 to 19:1 but staffing recent enrollment changes and budget impacts have slowed the district’s progress. The District relocatable or portable facilities are used primarily to address enrollment fluctuations and to house students on an interim or temporary basis until permanent facilities can Current Capacity: AGENDA ITEM #6. c) || be constructed. For those reasons they are not considered a long-term solution for housing students and are not considered “permanent” capacity. Of the 55 relocatable facilities in the ” containing two classrooms (approximately 1,792District’s inventory, 46 are “double portables square feet together), and nine are singles (each approximately 896 square feet). See Appendix B. Combined, they provide the District with a total of 101 relocatable classrooms, encompassing 90,496 square feet of additional space available for instruction. The tables below summarize existing K-12 permanent and portable classroom capacity. See also Appendix B for detail by school building. Table 1 -Existing Permanent and Portable Capacity by Grade Level FACILITY ELEMENTARY HIGH SCHOOLS TOTAL (K-12)TYPE SCHOOLS MIDDLE SCHOOLS Total TotalTotal Total Capacity/Permanent to Capacity/Permanent to Capacity/Permanent to Capacity/Permanent to Portable PortablePortable Portable 4,458 97.97% 15,342 89.02%PERMANENT 7,449 85.61% 3,435 86.22% 92 2.03% 1,892 10.98%RELOCATABLE 1,252 14.39% 548 13.76% TOTAL 8,701 100.00% 3,984 100.00% 4,550 100.00% 17,235 100.00% AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Table 2 -Inventory and Capacity of Permanent Facilities PROGRAM NAME LOCATION AREA (ft?) CAPACITY Benson Hill 18665 116th Ave. SE, Renton, 98058 67,533 520 Bryn Mawr 8212 S 118th St., Seattle, 98178 49,157 338 Campbell Hill 6418 S 124th St., Seattle, 98178 57,072 332 Cascade 16022 116th Ave. SE, Renton, 98058 59,164 467 a Hazelwood 7100 116th Ave. SE, Newcastle, 98056 66,161 591 5 Highlands 2727 NE 7th St., Renton, 98056 60,000 547 9 Hilltop Heritage 1075 Duvall Ave NE 98059 79,881 554 a Honey Dew 800 Union Ave. NE, Renton, 98059 54,620 336 z Kennydale 1700 NE 28th St., Renton, 98056 65,169 622 i Lakeridge 7400 S 115th St. Seattle, 98178 52,958 398 S Maplewood Hgts. 130 Jericho Ave., Renton, 98059 56,220 402 a Renton Park 16828 128th Ave. SE, Renton, 98058 65,955 476 m Sartori 332 Park Ave. N, Renton, 98057 76,797 554 Sierra Heights 2501 Union Ave. NE, Renton, 98058 53,992 472 Talbot Hill 2300 Talbot Rd., Renton, 98055 57,844 460 Tiffany Park 1601 Lake Youngs Way, Renton, 98058 58,758 380 Total Grades K-5 Capacity 981,281 7,449 Dimmitt 12320 -80th Ave. S, Seattle, 98178 109,070 794 WY McKnight 2600 NE 12th St., Renton, 98056 126,706 847 —! a SB Nelsen 2304 Jones Ave. S, Renton, 98055 124,234 896 = o Risdon 6928 -116th Ave. SE, Newcastle 98056 133,934 898 Total Grades 6-8 Capacity 493,944 3,435 a Hazen 1101 Hoquiam Ave. NE, Renton, 98059 327,395 1,462 3 Lindbergh 16426 -128th Ave. SE, Renton, 98058 242,662 1,211 © Renton 400 S 2nd St., Renton, 98057 278,373 1,389 2 Talley 7800 S 132nd St., Renton, 98178 70,831 397 oO = Total Grades 9-11 Capacity 919,261 4,458 TOTAL GRADE LEVELS K-12 2,394,486 15,342| 6 Meadow Crest ELC 1800 Index Ave. NE, Renton, 98056 68,752 464 2 = HOME Program -Spring Glen 2607 Jones Ave. S, Renton, 98055 7,008 84 < WW Renton Academy 2607 Jones Ave. S, Renton, 98055 24,805 48 Z Total Instructional Special Use 100,565 596 Total Instructional Facilities 2,495,051 15,938 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) | Facilities Operations Center 7812 S 124th St., Seattle, 98178 21,894 57,200Kohlwes Educational Center 300 SW 7th St., Renton, 98057 16740 -128th Ave. SE, Renton,ia 13,7102 Lindbergh Pool 98058 a Nutrition Services / iB Warehouse 409 S Tobin St., Renton 98057 27,466 & Renton Memorial Stadium 405 Logan Ave. N, Renton, 98057 35,193 20,243a Transportation Center 420 Park Ave. N, Renton, 98057 175,706Total Support Services 2,670,757|Total All Permanent Facilities Undeveloped Property The District currently has the following undeveloped real property in its inventory: Skyway Site S Langston Rd. & 76th Ave. S, Seattle 4.18 Acres AGENDA ITEM #6. c) D IV. ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS The District saw consistent year over year growth between 2011 and 2018. In 2019, enrollment started to decline slightly and, like most school districts, the District’s enrollment was impacted by the global pandemic and temporary closure of in-person learning. The District’s enrollment has continued to decline between 2021 and 2025. Using medium growth projections, the District expects that its enrollmentwill continue to decline approximately | percent each year for the next six-year planning period. Numerous methodologies are available for projecting long-term enrollments. The most common method is known as cohort survival which tracks groups of students through the system and adjusts the populations to accountfor the average year-to-year growth. For example, fourth grade enrollment is adjusted based on the average enrollment trend of the past in order to estimate next year’s fifth grade enrollment. This calculation method considers the past five years’ trends to determine the average adjustmentfactor for each grade, or cohort. The method works well for all grades except kindergarten, where there is no previous year data. For kindergarten, two methodologies are generally used: A linear extrapolation from the previous five years of kindergarten enrollment, assuming thatthere is a trend; or, alternatively, a comparison of the kindergarten enrollmentto births from five years prior can be used to calculate a “birth-to-k” ratio. For example, kindergarten enrollmentin 2025 is divided by the total births in King County in 2020 to produce a birth-to-k ratio. The average ratio for the last five years can then be applied to births in subsequentyears to estimate kindergarten enrollment. The Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) uses the cohort survival method to project enrollments for purposes of the School Construction Assistance Program. The cohort survival method generally works well for Districts that have a consistent trend of gradual increases or declines in enrollment.It is less reliable in Districts where spikes in demographic trends (especially a marked increase or decrease in new housing or other enrollment factors) can lead to dramatic swings in enrollment from one yearto the next. In addition, the use of the linear extrapolation method at the kindergarten level can result in a distorted trend since it does not consider changes in birth rate trends. Combining cohort survival with other information about births, housing, regional population trends, and even trends in service area and private school enrollment can often provide for a more accurate forecast. The District contracts with FLO Analytics to prepare a modified cohort survival projection. The modified cohort survival projection combines the average rollup at existing grades with estimates of growth expected from new housing, as well as assumptions about market share gains or losses that the District is likely to see at certain grade levels. Estimates of housing growth for this model were obtained from building permit information provided by the respective jurisdictions. However, there are many unknowns due to current market concerns in real estate, inflation, and recent changes in government funding and job markets. As a result, and to be prepared for the different scenarios, the District reviews three projections: a low, medium, and high. See Appendix for recent enrollment history and projected enrollment. Projection Methodology: 10 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) || The District reviewed FLO Analytics’ low, medium, and high modified cohort survival projections to determine our enrollment forecast for 2024-2030, and chose the medium scenario as the likely enrollment forecast for this time period. All of these scenarios included a continued decline in enrollment for the District. However, the medium scenario projected an enrollment decline similar to the last five years of enrollment, with slightly less of a decline per year to accommodate the current residential developments in the pipeline for our area. The District will continue to monitor development, move-in/move-outs, and trends within the four-county area to better predict enrollment more than two years out. Table 3 below identifies projected enrollment CHANGE ACTUALOCT.| Soso HEADCOUNT CHANGE 2024 -2030 2024 -2030 (medium) -6.30% (405) 6,027 6,432 ELEMENTARY -4.80% (148) 2,938 3,086 MIDDLE -6.29% (263) 3,917 4,180 HIGH -6.06% (10) 155 165 other/alt -5.96% (826.00) 13,037 13,863 TOTAL Projections through 2030-2031: using the medium growth scenario. Table 3 — Projected Enrollment — 2024 to 2030 11 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) || |||||| ||||| |||||| |||||| ||||| ||||| V. CAPITAL FACILITIES NEEDS AND PLANNING Capacity Needs: When considering the District’s existing permanent capacity as compared to projected enrollment through the 2030-2031 school year, the District shows sufficient capacity in the near term at the elementary, middle school, and high school level. Importantly, the opening of the new Sartori Elementary School in August 2018 and Hilltop Heritage Elementary School in 2023 addressed capacity-specific needs and provides an overall increase in capacity for the elementary grade span, which were identified during 2015 & 2018 long-range planning and Citizens’ Facilities Advisory Committee sessions in preparation for our voter-approved 2016 capital levy (which provided funding to construct Sartori Elementary School) and 2019 capital bond (which provided funding to construct Hilltop Heritage Elementary School). Table 4 compares the District’s permanent capacity (from Table 2) with the six year enrollment projections by grade level (Appendix D). Anticipated capacity additions over the planning period are included in the analysis but are subject to funding and completion. Table 4 -Capacity Analysis: Surplus/Deficit Projections* (2024/25 -2030/31) [ SURPLUS / DEFICIT CAPACITY PROJECTIONS’2024/25 -2030/31 | 24/25* 25/26 | 26/27 | 27/28 28/29 | 29/30 | 30/31 | BLEW K-5 "| PROGRAM CAPACITY STUDENT ENROLLMENT SURPLUS / (DEFICIT CAPACITY) 7,449 6 940 7,449 6,352 1,097 7,449 6,273 1,176 7,449 6,210 1,239 7,449 6,076 1,373 7,449 6,044 1,405 7,449 6,027 1,422 MIDDLE 6-8 PROGRAM CAPACITY STUDENT ENROLLMENT SURPLUS / (DEFICIT CAPACITY) 3,435 3, 3,435 3,194 241 3,435 3,162 273 3,435 3,129 306 3,435 3,057 378 3,435 3,008 427 3,435 2,938 497 HIGH 9-12 PROGRAM CAPACITY? STUDENT ENROLLMENT SURPLUS / (DEFICIT CAPACITY) | 4,458 \ 4,458 4,156 302 4,458 4,012 446 4,458 3,960 498 4,669 3,989 680 4,669 3,939 730 4,669 3,917 752 medium range projection -24/25 and beyond 1. Doesnot include relocatable facilities (portables) High School capacity increases by 211 students in 2028 with Renton HS replacement2. The 2022 voter-approved capital bond provided funding for property acquisition, planning, and construction of a replacement of Renton High School. This project is expected to include added program capacity to address potential enrollment growth beyond the six-year planning period. The project is also intended to replace an aging school building and work towards program equity across the high school grade space atall District high schools. 12 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Additionally, the 2022 capital bond included a building modernization of Hazen High School, including seismic structural updates, safety/security updates, HVAC system updates,finish updates in classrooms, corridors, and the library. This project is eligible for approximately $28.6 million from OSPI — School Construction Assistance Program (SCAP) funding for a building modernization at the secondary school grade level. We are currently pursuing the SCAP funding for this project and it is the only OSPI — SCAP funding that the District is currently eligible to receive. Table 4 does not include planned capacity additions at the middle school level but there is discussion for future bond planning that includes the need to replace both Nelson Middle School and Dimmitt Middle School, based on the age and condition of the school buildings. The District will continue to monitor middle school enrollment growth to determine if additional capacity as a part of these potential projects is needed for growth. It should be noted that the District is also reaching its maximum limit in providing portable classrooms at many of its existing sites due to current land use and building code requirements. For the last six-year period, the District’s highest priorities have been to address existing and projected facility capacity deficits, aging infrastructure at secondary schools, and responding to/planning for both growth and program related added capacity. These projects funded by the 2019 bond, 2022 bond, and impact fees, are projects responding to growth. This has included: Completion of Hilltop Heritage Elementary School, helping to relieve capacity needs in e the Hazen High School service area. With the opening of Hilltop Heritage Elementary School in 2023, the District continues to have available capacity at the elementary level to serve potential enrollment growth. High school additions and/or renovations to create additional science classroom/laboratory space to address changes in State graduation requirements. e Planning for replacement of Renton High School, Dimmitt Middle School, and/or Nelson e Middle School — all aging facilities and potentially impacted by future growth. Acquisition of land for future development. e Addition and or relocation of relocatable classrooms (interim classroom space knownas e portables). Over the next six years the District will continue to implement the projects funded by the votes in the November 2022 bond. These projects include the following capacity and non-capacity projects: e Interior door hardware/lock updates e New key system Capital Construction Plan: Safety & Security 13 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Main entry video intercoms e Entryway improvements to provide front door line-of-sight for office staff e Security camera updates and new installations e e Updated fire alarm and security alarm panels, devices, and systems Update seismic and structural systems in older buildings (retrofitting e and modification of existing structures to make them more resistant to seismic activity, ground motion,or soil failure) Improvements and equipment replacement of school Heating, Ventilation, and Air e Conditioning (HVAC)systems Upgrades to electrical, plumbing, and mechanical systems e Upgrades to boilers and domestic hot water heaters e Replacement of aging roofs at school buildings e Build anew high school facility for the Renton High School service area, providing e a modern learning environment and equitable athletic opportunities for all students. The District’s intent in structuring its capital improvement program is to maintain a constant level of construction throughout the program period to optimize the utilization of its management capabilities. The District utilizes a combination of in-house project management (Capital Planning and Construction Office) and outside managementconsultants to accomplish this. School Improvements Purchase Property Provide for up to forty acres for a Renton High School replacement and the e relocation of our Nutrition Services/Warehouse facility. Build New Renton High School 14 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) VI. SIX-YEAR FINANCE PLAN Funding for planned improvements is typically secured from several sources including voter- approved bonds or capital levies, State Construction Assistance Program funding, and impact fees. Bonds are typically used to fund the construction of new schools and other capital improvement projects and require a 60% voter approval. The District’s voters in 2019 approved a $249.6 M bond measure to fund a new elementary school (Hilltop Elementary School) to accommodate enrollment needs. Sartori Elementary School opened in 2018 as a choice school, providing additional capacity relief. The voters in November 2022 approved a $676 M bond to fund property acquisition and construction of a new Renton High School and security, seismic, and building systems updates at various schools throughout the District. State School Construction Assistance funds come from the Common School Construction Fund. The State deposits revenue from the sale of renewable resources from State school lands set aside by the Enabling Act of 1889 into the Common School Account. If these sources are insufficient to meet needs, the Legislature can appropriate General Obligation Bond funds, or the Superintendent of Public Instruction can prioritize projects for funding. School districts may qualify for State School Construction Assistance Program (SCAP) funds for specific capital projects based on a prioritization system. The District anticipates receiving approximately $28 M in SCAP funding for the Hazen High School Modernization project. Where a district is eligible, impact fees are a means of supplementing traditional funding sources for the construction of public facilities needed to accommodate new development. See Section VII School Impact Fees. The primary funding sources for all capital construction projects scheduled over the next six years include 2022 Bond funds and remaining funds from the 2022 technology/capital levy. Growth driven projects funded by impact fee revenue and 2019 bond funds are nearing completion. The majority of the recent bond funds will be directed towards land acquisition and the replacement of Renton High School. Construction of this school will not begin for two years due to the need to complete land acquisition and site preparation. If enrollment projections change to show that added capacity is needed to accommodate growth at the 9-12 grade level, the District will evaluate including the high school capacity additions as a part of a future impact fee calculation. Capacity adding projects represent only a portion of the district’s total capital improvement plan. Estimated expenditures for capacity projects over the duration of this six-year plan are indicated in Table 5 below. Funding Sources: Finance Plan: 15 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) |||||||| Table 5a— Six Year Finance Plan — Added New Capacity Estimated Expenditures‘ ($1,000,000's) Funding ($1,000,000's) Project 2024-2025-2026-2027-2028-2029-2030-. 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Total Secured? Unsecured? 2 2 0New Elem. School 2 HS Science 0 0 0Classrooms 0 2 2 0Land Acquisition 2 4 4 0portables 4 0 0 0 8 8 0Total 8 0 0 0 1. Estimated expenditures based on total project cost, including hard and soft costs. 2. Secured funding includes 2022 bond monies, and previously collected school impact fees. The District did not receive SCAP funds for the capacity projects identified in Table 5a. Unsecured funds include, where relevant, future school impact fees and potential bond initiatives.3. 16 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) |||||||| Table 5b — Six Year Finance Plan -Projects not Related to Added Capacity Funding ($1,000,000's) Estimated Expenditures' ($1,000,000's) 2030-2025-2026-2027-2028- 2 0 2 9 - 2024-Project 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Total Secured? Unsecured Total 62 97 156 192 64 18 0} 589 589 0 Estimated expenditures based on total project cost, including hard and soft costs. 1. 2. Secured funding includes 2022 bond monies. Includes approximately $28.6 M in WA State OSPI -SCAP funding. 3. Renton High School Replacement & Site Expansion 36 52 102 146 55 18 409 409 0 Hazen HS Modernization? Sierra Heights Secure Entry and Admin Remodel & Seismic Updates 10 5 20 1 20 18 3 71 6 71 6 0 0 Lindbergh HS HVAC & Seismic Updates 1 2 16 20 4 43 43 0 District-wide Safety/Security Updates 2 4 4 2 12 12 0 District-wide Seismic Updates (phase 1) District-wide HVAC Updates (phase I) District-wide Building Envelope and Roof Updates (phase 1) 3 3 2 10 5 3 7 4 3 1 4 1 2 21 18 9 21 18 9 0 0 0 17 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) The GMA authorizes jurisdictions to assess and collect impact fees to supplement funding of additional public facilities needed to accommodate new development. Impact fees cannot be used for the operation, maintenance,repair, alteration, or replacement of existing capital facilities used to meet existing service demands.In the case of public schools, impact fees are assessed only on residential new development. King County and the cities of Bellevue, Newcastle, and Renton currently collect impact fees on behalf of the District. Where applicable, the District calculates its impact fees in conformance with the codes of each jurisdiction. To be eligible to collect school impact fees for new capacity projects, a district must demonstrate expected grade level enrollment growth over the six-year planning period and a related need for new capacity. The school impact fee formula examines the costs of housing new students from growthby using a student generation factor, which indicates the number of students that each type of dwelling produces based on recenthistorical data. See Appendix C for detail on the student generation rates. Other factors used to calculate school impact fees include: Site Acquisition Costs -the actual or estimated cost per acre to purchase property. Building Cost — the actual or estimated cost to construct growth related facilities. Temporary Facility Cost -the actual or estimated cost per classroom to purchase and install a relocatable classroom,including site work and utilities. State Construction Assistance Program Funding Credit -the amount of funding provided by the State, subject to District eligibility, based on a construction cost allocation and funding assistance percentage established by the State. Tax Credit — the estimated amountthat a new homeowner will pay toward the school construction bond primarily funding the capacity improvement, derived from assessed property values, taxation rate, and current bond interest rates. As required by local ordinances, the District’s fee formula incorporates a fifty (50) percent “discount rate,” which operates to set the final fee at 50% of the calculated unfunded need. Table 6 below compares the District’s current impact fee with the recommended 2026 impact fee. VU. IMPACT FEES 18 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) | CHANGE 2026 2025 IMPACT FEES SINGLE-($1,003 $0 $1,003 FAMILY ($3,268) $0 $3,268 MULTI-FAMILY Due to the current projection of no expected grade level enrollment growth at K-5, 6-8, or 9-12, The District intends to monitor the District is not eligible to collect impact fees for 2026. enrollment growth closely and will update the CFP accordingly should the District become eligible for school impact fees in the future. Table 6 — School Impact Fees Effective Proposed January January 19 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) =———=— =——— t APPENDIX A —RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT MAP CES THE™ NMS= . FE aE Remy ae kat Fees Abbreviations Renton School District Map Legend Secondary Schools: Elementary Schools: Dimmitt Middle School OMS Benson Hill Elementary BHE Hazen High School HHS Bryn Mawr Elementary BME i)Renton Ue Bellevue Lindbergh High School LHS Cascade Elementary CES McKnight Middle School MMS Campbell Hill Elementary CHE Nelsen Middle School NMS Honeydew Elementary HDE ee Seatac a Kent Renton High School RHS Hazlewood Elementary HES Risdon Middle School Hilltop Heritage Elementary RMS THS HHE Talley High School Highlands Elementary HLE . Kennydale Elementary KDEKing County ee Tukwila a Lakeridge Elementary LRE Maplewood Heights Elementary MHE i Renton Park Elementary RPE City Limits Newcastle Early Learning & Specialty: Sartori Elementary SAE of Renton Meadow Crest Sierra Heights Elementary MEC SHE Early Learning Center Talbot Hill Elementary THE KC UG —Renton Academ' RAS Park Elementa -Tiffany y TPE Boundary Eyal) ie AGENDA ITEM #6. c) |||| | ||| ||| | |||| | «|| |||| || APPENDIX B — SCHOOL CAPACITY CHARTS Appendix B: Table 1 -Elementary School Capacity FACTORS: Student/Teacher Ratios: Grades K-1 21:1 Grade 2 22:1 Grade 3 24:1 Grades 4-5 29:1 Scheduling Efficiciency 1.00 Program Efficiency 1.00 TOTALRELOCATABLE CLASSROOMSSCHOOL PERMANENT TEACHING STATIONS 2 3 45 SPED JOTHER| CAP TOTAL] K-14 2 3 45 SPED|OTHER| CAP CAPTOTAL] K-1 32 8 3 3 6 4 8 520 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 520BENSONHILL BRYN MAWR 25 7 3 5 0 1 9 338 6 0 0 0 5 0 1 145 483 25 6 2 6 0 2 9 332 8 0 0 a 5 0 0 217 549CAMPBELLHILL 4 0 0 2 96 5634 0 7 3 10 467 6 0 0CASCADE 31 7 2 6 591 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 591HAZELWOOD 32 9 4 4 7 a2 8 4 3 7 2 8 547 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 547HIGHLANDS 0 0 0 5544 6 3 5 554 0 0 0 0 0 22 7 4 4 0 i 6 336 8 0 0 0 6 0 2 174 510HILLTOP HERITAGE 30 8 4 HONEY DEW 9 3 5 8 2 6 622 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 622KENNYDALE 33 5 29 427283986 0 0 0 1 0LAKERIDGE 26 6 3 3 4 26 1 5 2 0 2 6 402 12 0 0 3 9 0 0 333 735MAPLEWOOD HGTS.} 3 A 6 2 1 476 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 476RENTON PARK 32 7 3 7 554 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 554SARTORI 32 8 4 4 6 8 4 3 4 3 7 472 8 0 0 1 3 0 4 111 583SIERRA HGTS. 29 6 { 6 460 5 0 0 2 0 { 2 60 520TALBOT HILL 26 8 3 2 4 0 0 0 3 0 1 87 46727 8 3 3 2 2 9 380TIFFANY PARK 35 121 7,449 65 0 0 13 32 1 49 1,252 8,704TOTAL 460 117 56 54 69 RELOCATABLE CLASSROOMS TOTALLINDBERGH SERVICE PERMANENT TEACHING STATIONS 2 3 45 SPED |OTHER| CAP |TOTAL| K-1 2 3 4-5 SPED|OTHER| CAP CAPAREA TOTAL] K-1 32 8 3 3 6 4 8 520 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 520BENSONHILL 0 7 3 10 467 6 0 0 4 0 0 2 %6 563CASCADE 31 7 4 0 0 47647600 0 0 0 0RENTONPARK 32 7 3 3 2 1 8 3 3 2 2 9 380 4 0 0 0 3 0 1 87 467TIFFANY PARK 27 10 0 0 4 3 0 3 183 2,026122 30 13 9 21 11 38 1,843TOTAL TOTALRELOCATABLE CLASSROOMSHAZEN PERMANENT TEACHING STATIONS 3 45 SPED |OTHER| CAP TOTAL] K-1 2 3 4-5 SPED|OTHER| CAP CAPSERVICE AREA TOTAL] K-1 2 9 4 4 7 2 6 591 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 591HAZELWOOD 32 0 554355540 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 it 4 4 0 1 6 336 HILLTOP HERITAGE 30 8 4 4 6 8 0 0 0 6 0 2 174 510HONEY DEW 3 5 8 2 6 622 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 622KENNYDALE 33 9 26 1 5 2 0 2 6 402 12 0 0 3 9 0 0 333 735MAPLEWOOD HGTS.}| 8 4 3 4 3 7 472 8 0 0 { 3 0 4 111 583SIERRA HGTS. 29 30 0 0 4 18 0 8 618 3,595172 44 24 2 25 13 36 2,977TOTAL TOTALRELOCATABLE CLASSROOMS CAP TOTAL} K-1 2 3 45 SPED|OTHER| CAP CAPRENTON HIGH PERMANENT TEACHING STATIONS SPED|OTHER| BRYN MAWR 25 7 3 5 0 1 9 338 6 0 0 0 5 0 {145 483 25 6 2 6 0 2 9 332 SERVICE AREA TOTAL] K-1 2 3 45 8 0 0 3 5 0 0 217 549CAMPBELL HILL 0 0 0 0 0 54737285470 0 0HIGHLANDS 32 8 4 29 427283986 0 0 0 1 0 5LAKERIDGE 26 6 3 3 4 8 3 2 6 1 6 460 5 0 0 2 0 ¢ 2 60 520TALBOT HILL 26 451 2,5268 40 2,075 25 0 0 .1 1 8TOTAL 134 35 15 19 17 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) Appendix B: Table 2 -Middle School Capacity Appendix B: Table 3 -High School Capacity (24:1 @ Talley) Core Classes 29:1 PE 40:1 Band /Orchestra 40:1 Choir 50:1 SPED 12:1 Other 31:1 (24:1 @ Talley) Scheduling Efficiciency 0.80 Program Efficiency 0.90 FACTORS: Student/Teacher Ratios: Core Classes 29:1 PE 35:1 Band /Orchestra 40:1 Choir 50:1 SPED 12:1 Other 31:1 Scheduling Efficiency 0.83 Program Efficiency 0.95 SCHOOL FACTORS: Student/Teacher Ratios: SCHOOL AGENDA ITEM #6. c) J|||||| |||||]|||||||]||| ff||||| | |}||||| |||ff||| || || | SGRs I Students Housing Housing Type K-12 9-12 6-8 K-12 || K-5 9-12 6-8 «-5 Units 0.219 0.065 0.045 0.108 121 36 25 60 553 Single-family 0.214 0.046 0.038 0.131 108 23 19 66 505 Multifamily 0.213 0.043 0.037 |] 0.133 80 16 14 50 376 AptiPlex 0.217 0.054 0.039 jf 0.124 28 7 5 16 129 Townhome Notes APPENDIX C — STUDENT GENERATION RATES (SGR) The formula for determining school impact fees, as established by King County Council Ordinance 11621, requires that school districts provide “student factors based on district records of average actual student generation rates for new developments constructed over a period of not more than five years prior to the date of the fee calculation.” The Ordinance also provides that, in the event this information is not available in the District, “data from adjacent districts, districts with similar demographics, or county-wide averages must be used.” Appendix C: Table 1 -Student Generation Rates by Housing Subcategory (2025) Units built in 2024 are excluded, because they may not have been completed and occupied by October 2024, King County code Title 214.43 defines the housing types as such, “single family units shall mean single detached dwelling units, and multi-family units shail mean townhouses and apartments.” (a) The multifamily category represents all structures with five or more housing units, including the following structure types: apartment, townhome,and plex (i.e., duplex,triplex, and fourplex}. (b) The multifamily Apt/Plex subcategory includes the following structure types: apartment and plex. Sources Renton School District October 2024-25 headcount enrollment. King County GIS parcels and King County Department of Assessments assessor information. Appendix C: Table 2 -Student Generation Rates for Projects with 25+ Housing Units (2019-2023) Housing Type Project Name YearBuilt 1 Bed| 2 Bed| 3 Bed 4 Bed| 5 Bed Units K-5 Students 6-8 9-12] K-12] K-5 SGRs 6-8 9-12 K-12 Apt/Plex Leonard Place} 2019 23 21| 5 o 0 4a 12 3 0 15 ]]0.250} 0.063] 0.000] 0.313 Apt/Plex Oaks 2021 4a] 12} 0] 04 0 60 5 2 3 10 |]0.083]0.033] 0.050] 0.167 Apt/Plex Tenace 2021 73 o o wos 2 1 4 |10.019] 0.009} 0.009 | 0.037 Apt/Plex 2022 32 0 145 0.186] 0.041 0.069] 0.297 Townhome Village 2019 60 0.100 0.033] 0.067 0.200 Farms No. 06 ~ f=. f-P= --32 0,156] 0.063] 0.031 0.250 At Tiffany Park ~f.f->= |. -95 0.074] 0.021} 0.042] 0.137 Terrace ~-= -= 7 -5s? 0.102] 0.051 0.136 0.288 Lake Wash Of Eden ~ ~ ~ ~ -~ 34 0.118] 0.088} 0.059 0.265 Notes Only developments wilh 25 or more unils included. Units built in 2024 are excluded, because they may not have been completed and occupied by October 2024. King County code Title 21A.43 defines the housing types as such, “single family units shall mean single detached dwelling units, and multi-family units shall mean townhouses and apartments.” {a} The multifamily Apt/Plex subcategory includes the following structure types: apartment, and plex (i.e., duptex,triplex. and fourplex). Sources Renton SchoolDistrict October 2024-25 headcount enrollment, King County GIS parcels and King County Department of Assessments assessor information. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) ° Permitted Units 2019-2023 Units in the Pipeline Appendix C: Table 3 -Past & Future Housing Development 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 mi MF 706 5,590 @SF 470 136 Source City of Renton, Planning Division. Prepared by special request, April 11, 2025. Appendix C:Table 4 — Residential Development Details ID Jurisdiction Name Units Notes RI of Renton Renton MF 3,458 TBD R_2 of Renton 800 Renton MF 1,179 1(419 under construction soon R3 of Renton Triton Towers MF 900 TBD R_4 of Renton Solera MF 651 i 2025; 277 affordable units Red) of Renton MF 385 R_6 of Renton 6 MF R7 of Renton Solera Townhomes MF 90 R of Renton Camellia Court MF 72 for 2025 R9 of Renton Grant Place Townhomes MF 36 R_10 of Renton 4th Dimension MF 26 R11 of Renton Towns on 12th SF 90 has not started R 12 of Renton Lakeview Terrace SF 55 R 13 of Renton SF 21 R 14 of Renton Willowcrest Il SF 19 R 15 of Renton Christelle SF 19 recorded R 16 of Renton SF 18 R 17 of Renton Jefferson SF 13 R 18 of Renton VEK on Aberdeen SF 12 R 19 of Renton Emerald SF 10 na Oo SF 15 Total SF 272 Total MF 902 Total Units 7AT4 Notes King County code Tille 21A.43 defines the housing lypes as such, “single family units shall mean single detached dwelling units, and mulli-family units shall mean townhouses and apartments.” SF is single-family and MF is multifamily, which representsall structures with five or more housing units, including the following structure types: opariment, townhome,and plex{i.e., duplex, triplex, and fourplex). Sources City of Renton and King County. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) APPENDIX D —-ENROLLMENT HISTORY AND PROJECTIONS Appendix D: Table 4 -Historical Enrollment by Grade 2018-19 Grade 2018-19] 2019-20] 2020-21 2021-22} 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 to 2024-25 K 1,263 1.097 1,116 1,097 1,022 | | -255 | 1,248 1,213 1,099 1,124 1111 F-| -238 2 1,208 1.216 181 1,099 | -153 3 1,225 1.142 176 116b | -187 4 1,256 1,186 106 1,162 1,172 | -257 5 1,286 1,204 137 |. | 1,137 -140 6 1,236 113 1,052 | : “141 7 1,175 145 1,117 1,043 8 1,125 1,167 1,131 1,078 9 L118 1,123 127 1,110 ‘| 1,131 1,109 106 1,164 iW | 992 973 1,017 1,021 12 980 971 969 1,006 K-12 Total 15,172 14,918 14,433 14,383 14,125 Notes Students enrolled in Running Start full time are excluded from analysis. The lowest and highest enrollment values per grade are highlighted blue and orange,respectively. Sources Renton School District October 2018-19 to 2024-25 headcount enrollment. 2 AGENDA ITEM #6. c) ||| | ff= 2030-31 Grade 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 , 70 oe | . kK 30 1 2 3 4 5 b 7 8 9 os —-1,03 1,0581114 10 | 946 ; 872. s1072 1 | 892 910 : _ 9a 944 dP 2 6,027 6,044 6,076 6,210 6,273 6,352 6,509 K-5 2,938 3,008 3,057 3,127 3,162 3,194 3,143 6-8 3217 3.239 3.289 3.260 4012 4156 A201 212 12,882 12,991 13,122, 13,299 13,447 13,702 13,853 K-12 Appendix D: Table 2 -Enrollment Forecasts by Individual Grade -Middle Scenario Notes Students enrolled full-time in Running Start are excluded from analysis. Darker shading represents higher values and lighter shading represents lower values. Sources Renton School District October 2024-25 headcount enrollment and FLO 2025-26 to 2030-3] enrollment forecasts (middie scenario). AGENDA ITEM #6. c) APPENDIX E —-IMPACT FEE CALCULATION Due to the current projection of no expected grade level enrollment growth at K-5, 6-8, or 9- 12, the District is not eligible to collect impact fees for 2026. AGENDA ITEM #6. c) AB - 3928 City Council Regular Meeting - 15 Sep 2025 SUBJECT/TITLE: Criminal Justice Purposes Sales Tax RECOMMENDED ACTION: Refer to Finance Committee DEPARTMENT: Executive Services Department STAFF CONTACT: Eric Perry, Government Affairs Manager EXT.: 6520 FISCAL IMPACT SUMMARY: The proposed ordinance will implement a one-tenth of one percent (0.1%) sales and use tax in Renton for criminal justice purposes. Current forecasts estimate the Criminal Justice Purposes tax will generate between $3 and $3.5 million per year. Money collected under this tax must be used for criminal justice purposes, as defined in Section 201, Chapter 350, Laws of 2025 (or as may be amended in the future). SUMMARY OF ACTION: Adoption of the Criminal Justice Purposes sales and use tax by the Renton City Council will implement a one- tenth of one percent (0.1%) sales and use tax within the City of Renton for criminal justice purposes. Money collected under this tax must be used for criminal justice purposes, as defined in Section 201, Chapter 350, Laws of 2025 (or as may be amended in the future). EXHIBITS: A. Ordinance STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the implementation of a one-tenth of one percent (0.1%) sales and use tax, as allowed by ESHB 2015 (Section 201 of Chapter 350, Laws of 2025), for criminal justice purposes. AGENDA ITEM #6. d) DATE: September 5, 2025 TO: Jason A. Seth, City Clerk FROM: Shane Moloney, City Attorney SUBJECT: Legal Approval of Ordinance Amending RMC 5-10-1 & 5-10-2 (Criminal Justice Purposes Sales Tax) The above-mentioned legislation is approved as to legal form. /s/ Shane Moloney Shane Moloney City Attorney SM: mhc Cc: Eric Perry, Government Affairs Manager Kari Roller, Finance Department Administrator Jon Schuldt, Police Chief Jeffrey Hardin, Police Deputy Chief Ryan Rutledge, Police Deputy Chief AGENDA ITEM #6. d) 1 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. ________ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING SECTIONS 5-10-1 AND 5-10-2 OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE TO AUTHORIZE AN ADDITIONAL ONE TENTH OF ONE PERCENT SALES AND USE TAX FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE PURPOSES IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 201, CHAPTER 350, LAWS OF 2025, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, in the 2025 Regular Session, the Washington State Legislature approved, and the Governor signed, Engrossed Substitute House Bill 2015 (Chapter 350, Laws of 2025); and WHEREAS, Section 201 of Chapter 350, Laws of 2025 amends Chapter 82.14 RCW to authorize, under specified circumstances, the imposition of a local sales and use tax that may not exceed one-tenth of one percent for criminal justice purposes; and WHEREAS, under Section 201, Chapter 350, Laws of 2025, the ordinance authorizing the sales and use tax must include a finding that the city has met the requirements to receive a grant from the Local Law Enforcement Grant Program created through Section 101, Chapter 350, Laws of 2025; and WHEREAS, the City, through its law enforcement agency, the Renton Police Department, meets the requirements to receive a grant from the Local Law Enforcement Grant Program created through Section 101, Chapter 350, Laws of 2025; and WHEREAS, the Renton Police Department provided the Criminal Justice Training Commission (CJTC) with detailed documentation of the City’s qualification for the grant requirements. Such documentation was provided more than forty-five (45) days prior to adoption of this ordinance and the CJTC either did not identify any deficiencies in the documentation or AGENDA ITEM #6. d) ORDINANCE NO. ________ 2 the City is committed to submitting supplemental documentation to recify any documentation deficiencies identified by the CJTC, as provided in Section 201, Chapter 350, Laws of 2015; and WHEREAS, the sales and use tax authorized under Section 201, Chapter 350, Laws of 2025 will represent a significant additional source of funding to address public safety needs in the City; and WHEREAS, imposing the sales and use tax in furtherance of programs and services allowed by Section 201, Chapter 350, Laws of 2025, including addressing high-priority community safety needs, will provide beneits to the City’s residents, guests, and businesses; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City to impose a local sales and use tax as authorized under Section 201, Chapter 350, Laws of 2025; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The City Council finds that the City meets the eligibility requirements to impose the sales and use tax authorized by Section 201, Chapter 350, Laws of 2025, and if there were any documentation deficiencies identified by the CJTC, such deficiencies will be rectified. SECTION II. All portions of the Renton Municipal Code in this ordinance that are not shown in strikethrough and underline edits or are not explicitly repealed herein remain in effect and unchanged. SECTION III. Section 5-10-1 of the Renton Municipal Code is amended to add a new subsection D to read as follows: D. There is hereby imposed an additional sales or use tax upon every taxable event, as defined in RCW 82.14.020, occurring within the City, as authorized by AGENDA ITEM #6. d) ORDINANCE NO. ________ 3 Section 201, Chapter 350, Laws of 2025. Money collected under this subsection must be used for criminal justice purposes, as defined in Section 201, Chapter 350, Laws of 2025 (or as may be amended in the future). SECTION IV. Section 5-10-2 of the Renton Municipal Code is amended to add new subsections D and E to read as follows: D. The tax imposed under RMC 5-10-1.D is assessed on the selling price in the case of a sales tax, or value of the article used, in the case of a use tax. The rate of such tax imposed shall be one-tenth of one percent, as allowed under Section 201, Chapter 350, Laws of 2025 (or as may be amended in the future). E. To the extent an additional sales tax imposed by the City would cause the total rate of tax for sales of lodging to exceed the maximum amount allowed by RCW 82.14.410, sales of lodging shall be exempt from the portion of the tax that would be prohibited by Chapter 82.14 RCW. SECTION V. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk is authorized to direct the codifier to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the corrections of scriveners or clerical errors; references to other local, state, or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering and references. The City Clerk is further authorized to direct the codifier to update any chapter, section, or subsection titles in the Renton Municipal Code affected by this ordinance, and to replace references to Section 201, Chapter 350, Laws of 2025 with applicable RCW section references as such sections are codified. SECTION VI. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such AGENDA ITEM #6. d) ORDINANCE NO. ________ 4 invalidity or unconstitutionality thereof shall not affect the constitutionality of any other section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this ordinance. SECTION VII. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after publication of a summary of this ordinance in the City's official newspaper, except Sections III and IV shall take effect on January 1, 2026. The summary shall consist of this ordinance's title. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2025. Jason A. Seth, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2025. Armondo Pavone, Mayor Approved as to form: Shane Moloney, City Attorney Date of Publication: ESD:25ORD012: 9.5.2025 AGENDA ITEM #6. d) 1 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. ________ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING SUBSECTION 8-5-15.D OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE, ESTABLISHING THE KING COUNTY METRO WASTEWATER PASS THROUGH RATE FOR 2026, AUTHORIZING CORRECTIONS, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. All portions of the Renton Municipal Code in this ordinance that are not shown in strikethrough and underline edits or are not explicitly repealed herein remain in effect and unchanged. SECTION II. Subsection 8-5-15.D of the Renton Municipal Code is amended as follows: 8-5-15 SEWER CHARGES: D. Additional Charges: In addition to the foregoing charges specified in this Section, the following rates shall be charged, in accordance with the Interlocal Agreement with King County Wastewater: 1. Single-family dwelling units: Single-Family Residential: 2025 Rate 2026 Rate King County Wastewater Charge $58.28 $62.36 62.66 King County Rate Adjustment Charge $0.00 $0.00 2. All users other than single-family: AGENDA ITEM # 8. a) ORDINANCE NO. ________ 2 All Users Other Than Single-Family: 2025 Rate 2026 Rate King County Wastewater Charge – Minimum Charge includes 750 Cubic Feet usage charge $58.28 $62.36 $62.66 King County Wastewater Charge – Per each additional 100 Cubic Feet usage charge over 750 Cubic Feet $7.77 $8.31 $8.35 King County Rate Adjustment Charge $0.00 $0.00 3. Any additional charges hereafter imposed by King County Wastewater under the “Industrial Cost Recovery” or “Industrial Waste Surcharge” programs required under the FWPCA (PL 92-500), Section 204, or as same may be amended hereafter, plus fifteen percent (15%) thereof as an additional charge for the City’s cost of implementing such programs. 4. Senior and/or disabled low-income rates: a. Senior and/or disabled citizens who qualify under RMC 8-4-31.C for low-income rates prior to May 31, 2008, are eligible for a seventy-five percent (75%) subsidy of City sewer charges and a nonsubsidized rate for the King County Wastewater charge in accordance with the Interlocal Agreement with King County Wastewater: AGENDA ITEM # 8. a) ORDINANCE NO. ________ 3 Low-income Rates Qualified prior to May 31, 2008 2025 Rate 2026 Rate King County Wastewater Charge Non-subsidized $58.28 $62.36 $62.66 King County Rate Adjustment Charge $0.00 $0.00 City Sewer Charge 75% subsidy $8.42 $8.59 b. All other senior and/or disabled citizens qualifying under RMC 8-4-31.C for low-income rates after May 31, 2008, are eligible for a fifty percent (50%) subsidy for City sewer charges and a nonsubsidized rate for the King County Wastewater charge in accordance with the Interlocal Agreement with King County Wastewater: Low-income Rates Qualify After May 31, 2008 2025 Rate 2026 Rate King County Wastewater Charge Non-subsidized $58.28 $62.36 $62.66 King County Rate Adjustment Charge $0.00 $0.00 City Sewer Charge 50% Subsidy $16.84 $17.17 SECTION III. These rates become effective with billings computed on or after January 1, 2026 for the 2026 rates. SECTION IV. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk is authorized to direct the codifier to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the corrections of AGENDA ITEM # 8. a) ORDINANCE NO. ________ 4 scriveners or clerical errors; references to other local, state, or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering and references. The City Clerk is further authorized to direct the codifier to update any chapter, section, or subsection titles in the Renton Municipal Code affected by this ordinance. SECTION V. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality thereof shall not affect the constitutionality of any other section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this ordinance. SECTION VI. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after publication of a summary of this ordinance in the City's official newspaper. The summary shall consist of this ordinance's title. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2025. Jason A. Seth, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2025. Armondo Pavone, Mayor AGENDA ITEM # 8. a) ORDINANCE NO. ________ 5 Approved as to form: Shane Moloney, City Attorney Date of Publication: PW: 25ORD015: 8.21.2025 AGENDA ITEM # 8. a) 1 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. ________ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DECLARING AN EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT CONTAINED AND DESCRIBED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 20171208000184 SURPLUS TO THE CITY’S NEEDS, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND RECORD WITH KING COUNTY A REALEASE OF SAID EASEMENT, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, in December 2017, Ruth Bill, the property owner of King County Tax Parcel ID 1463400021 (“Parcel”), granted the City a sanitary sewer easement described in King County Recording No. 20171208000184 (“Easement”), attached hereto and incorporated by this reference as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, Ruth Bill subsequently sold the Parcel subject to the Easement, and the current owner of the Parcel is Conner Homes at Maple Highlands, LLC (“Petitioner-Owner”); and WHEREAS, Petitioner-Owner is constructing the Maple Highlands (Chambers) plat project (“Project”) on the Parcel in such a way the existing Easement is ineffective; and WHEREAS, Petitioner-Owner has proposed an alternative sanitary sewer easement that will better serve the Project as shown on Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated by reference, which will be dedicated to the City at no cost upon recording of the Project plat for the operation and maintenance of the utilities within the Parcel; and WHEREAS, pursuant to requirements of Chapter 9-1 of the Renton Municipal Code (“RMC”), on June 9, 2025, Petitioner-Owner filed a petition for release of the easement (“Petition”) which was signed by owners of more than two-thirds (2/3) of the property affected by the Easement; and AGENDA ITEM # 8. b) ORDINANCE NO. ________ 2 WHEREAS, the Community and Economic Development Department (“CED”), in coordination with other City Departments and in compliance with the City’s Policy & Procedure #100-12 related to Surplus Real Property, has identified the Easement as surplus to the City’s needs; and, WHEREAS CED has reviewed all relevant documentation related to the Petition to determine ownership, and that no public funds were expended in its acquisition, improvement, or maintenance and therefore is considered a “Class B” easement for which no compensation is required aside from the processing fee required under the Fee Schedule; and, WHEREAS the City, after a news release and publication of a public notice for public hearing, did hold on September 8, 2025, a public hearing in accordance with RCW 35.94.040 to consider declaring the Easement surplus to the City’s needs, and those members of the public who wished to testify were duly allowed to testify and the testimony was considered by the City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The facts and background of the Recitals are found to be accurate and true for the purposes of this Ordinance. SECTION II. The City Council finds that the Easement is a Class B easement, and that therefore no compensation for its release, aside from the processing fee identified in the City Fee Schedule, is required. SECTION III. The Easement is hereby declared surplus to the needs of the City, and it is in the best interests of the public to release the Easement. AGENDA ITEM # 8. b) ORDINANCE NO. ________ 3 SECTION IV. The Mayor and City Clerk are authorized to execute and record with King County a release of easement in a form the same or similar to that in Exhibit C, herein incorporated by this reference, along with a copy of this Ordinance. SECTION V. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality thereof shall not affect the constitutionality of any other section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this ordinance. SECTION VI. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after publication of a summary of this ordinance in the City's official newspaper. The summary shall consist of this ordinance's title. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2025. ______________________________ Jason A. Seth, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2025. ______________________________ Armondo Pavone, Mayor Approved as to form: Shane Moloney, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD-CED: 25ORD014: 8.4.25 AGENDA ITEM # 8. b) ORDINANCE NO. ________ 4 EXHIBIT A – EASEMENT, RECORDING NO. 20171208000184 AGENDA ITEM # 8. b) Instrument Number: 20171208000184 Document:EAS Rec: $77.00 Page-1 of 4 Record Date:12/8/2017 8:54 AM Electronically Recorded King County, WA EXCISE TAX NOT REQUIRED BY KAREN GREAGOR, DEPUTY Return Address: City Clerk's Office City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Title: SANITARY SEWER UTILITIES EASEMENT Property Tax Parcel Number: 146340-0021 Project File#: PR17-000137 Street Intersection or Project Name: MeadowVue Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released: Additional reference numbers are on page N/A. Grantor(s): Grantee(s): 1.Ruth Bill, a single woman 1.City of Renton, a Munlcipaf Corporation Additional legal is on page ___ of document. (Abbreviated legal description MUST go here.) LEGAL DESC RIPTION: NORTH 15 FEET OF THE NORTH HALF OF LOT 4, ALL IN BLOCK 1, CEDAR RIVER FIVE ACRES TRACTS, AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 16 OF PLATS, PAGE 52, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. ALSO KNOWN AS LOT B OF KING COUNTY LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 8908008 APPROVED NOVEMBER 30, 1989. Meadowvue City Utilities Easement.doc2 (Draft 8-10-17) (003)\Page 1 of 4 FORM 03 0013/bh/CA2-21-97 AGENDA ITEM # 8. b) Instrument Number: 20171208000184 Document:EAS Rec: $77.00 Page-2 of 4 Record Date:12/8/2017 8:54 AM King County, WA The Grantor, Ruth Bill, a single woman, for and in consideration of mutual benefits, do by these presents, grant, bargain, sell, convey, and warrant unto the Grantee, the City of Renton, a Washington municipal corporation, its successors and assigns, an easement for public sanitary sewer with necessary appurtenances over, under, through, across and upon the following described property (the right-of-way) in King County, Washington, more particularly described as follows:. THE NORTH 15 FEET OF THE NORTH HALF OF LOT 4 OF CEDAR RIVER FIVE ACRE TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 16 OF PLATS, PAGE 52, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. For the purpose of constructing, reconstructing, installing, repairing, replacing, enlarging, operating and maintaining said sewer and wastewater utilities and utility pipelines, together with the right of ingress and egress thereto without prior institution of any suit or proceedings of law and without incurring any legal obligation or liability therefor. Following the initial construction of its facilities within the 15-foot strip described on Exhibit A, Grantee may from time to time construct such additional sewer and wastewater facilities as it may require so long as all such additional facilities are also located within the 15-foot strip described on Exhibit A. This easement is granted subject to the following terms and conditions: 1. The Grantee shall, upon completion of any work within the property covered by the easement, restore the surface of the easement, and any private improvements disturbed or destroyed during execution of the work, as nearly as practicable to the condition they were in immediately before commencement of the work or entry by the Grantee. 2.Granter shall retain the right to use the surface of the easement as long as such use does not interfere with the easement rights granted to the Grantee. Grantor shall not, however, have the right to: a. Erect or maintain any new buildings or structures within the easement; or b. Plant any new trees, shrubs or vegetation having deep root patterns which may cause damage to or interfere with the utilities to be placed within the easement by the Grantee; or c.Develop, landscape, or beautify the easement area in any way which would unreasonably increase the costs to the Grantee of restoring the easement area and any private improvements therein. d.Dig, tunnel or perform other forms of construction activities on the property which would disturb the compaction or unearth Grantee's facilities on the right-of-way, or endanger the lateral support facilities. e. Blast within fifteen (15) feet of the right-of-way. This easement shall run with the land described herein, and shall be binding upon the parties, their heirs, successors in interest and assigns. Grantor covenants that Grantor is the lawful owner of the above property and that Grantor has a good and lawful right to execute this agreement. By this conveyance, Grantor will warrant and defend the easement hereby granted unto the Grantee against all and every person or persons, whomsoever, lawfully claiming or to claim the same. This conveyance shall bind the heirs, executors, administrators and assigns forever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said Grantor has caused this instrument to be executed this __ day ofNovember, 2017. Ruth Bill Meadowvue City Utilities Easement.doc2 (Draft 8-10-17) (003)\Page 2 of 4 Form 84 0001/bh FORM 03 0013/bh/CA2-2 l-97 AGENDA ITEM # 8. b) Instrument Number: 20171208000184 Document:EAS Rec: $77.00 Page-3 of 4 Record Date:12/8/2017 8:54 AM King County, WA Notary Seal must be within box INDIVIDUAL FORM OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF WASHINGTON ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Ruth Bill signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be her free and voluntary act for the uses and pur oses mentioned in the instrument Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print) P¼I Lh'1 fftJ(Jl.l'-er, :Tf"" My appointment expires: __ l.,,./_l_'f',�/_-z_,s,_/_i ______ _ Dated: ,ft/ alto/?, REPRESENTATIVE FORM OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT Meadowvuc City Utilities Easement.doc2 (Draft 8-l0-l7) (003)\Page 3 of 4 FOR1v1 03 0013/bh/CA2-2 l-97 AGENDA ITEM # 8. b) Instrument Number: 20171208000184 Document:EAS Rec: $77.00 Page-4 of 4 Record Date:12/8/2017 8:54 AM King County, WA Meadowvue City Utilities Easementdoc2 (Draft 8-10-17) (003)\Page 4 of 4 ""'"' FORM 03 00 l 3/bh/CA2-2 l-97 AGENDA ITEM # 8. b) ORDINANCE NO. ________ 5 EXHIBIT B – MAPLE HIGHLANDS UTILITY PLAN SHEET AGENDA ITEM # 8. b) 0. 1 ' 5. 1 ' 14 ' 4' FND IRON PIPE SHED(TYP.) PROP LINE 15 2 N D A V E S E 15 4 T H A V E S E 1234 5 6 7 10 9 8 12 11 TRACT A STORM SE 138TH PL SE 5TH PL 15 3 R D A V E S E 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 17+00 28 + 0 0 29 + 0 0 30 + 0 0 31 + 0 0 32 + 0 0 33 + 0 0 51 + 0 0 52 + 0 0 53 + 0 0 53 + 0 5 68 + 0 0 69 + 0 0 70 + 0 0 71 + 0 0 72 + 0 0 73 + 0 0 74 + 0 0 38 5 38 6 38 6 38 6 3 8 7 38 7 385386387 385 38 4 3 8 5 386 38 7 387 375 380 385 374 376 377 378 379 381 382 383 384 386 381 382 383 38 538 4 38 6 38 7 38 8 384384 388 3 9 0 3 9 5 3 8 9 39 1 3 9 2 3 9 3 3 9 4 3 8 5 3 9 0 3903 9 0 395 38 4 38 6 387 3 8 8 388 3 8 8 3 8 9 3 9 1 392 393 394 TRACT B 380 385 378 379 381 382 383 384 CITY OF RENTON IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS T A C O M A 2215 North 30th Street, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 253.383.2422TEL 253.383.2572FAX www.ahbl.comWEB S E A T T L E S P O K A N E T R I - C I T I E S MAPLE HIGHLANDS AHBL JOB #2221005.10 39 Know what's below. before you dig.Call R C2 3 0 0 4 6 3 6 LU A 2 2 - 0 0 0 1 2 2 PR 2 2 - 0 0 0 1 0 9 R-____ N GRAPHIC SCALE 0 40 80 1" = 40 FEET 20 C5.0COMPOSITE UTILITY PLAN C5.0 C5.0 29 UTILITY NOTE 1.WATER DESIGN UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT WITH KING COUNTY WATER DISTRICT 90. 2.ALL UTILITIES DESIGNED TO SERVE THE PLAT SHALL BE PLACED UNDERGROUND. SE 5TH PL Q: \ 2 0 2 2 \ 2 2 2 1 0 0 5 \ 1 0 _ C I V \ C A D \ _ S i t e D e v e l o p m e n t \ 2 2 2 1 0 0 5 - S H - U T I L . d w g TE D - 4 0 - 4 2 7 8 R-427829 WW P - 2 7 - 4 2 7 8 S-427802 EXISTING SEWER SYSTEM SHALL BE OPERATIONAL UNTIL PROPOSED SEWER SYSTEM IS INSTALLED, APPROVED FOR CONNECTION, AND CONNECTED PRIOR TO DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL. 09/10/2024 WASTEWATER UTILITY jstowell 11/26/2024 DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING HHuynh 12/04/2024 AG E N D A I T E M # 8 . b ) ORDINANCE NO. ________ 6 EXHIBIT C – DRAFT RELEASE OF EASEMENT AGENDA ITEM # 8. b) Page 1 of 1 Return Address: City Clerk’s Office City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Release of Easement Property Tax Parcel Number: Project File #: Street Intersection: Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released: Additional reference numbers are on page _____. Grantor(s): Grantee(s): 1.City of Renton, a Municipal Corporation 1. 2. The Grantor, as the owner of an easement acquired from _________ _______ dated on ____________________ , recorded under King County Recording Number ____________________of King County, State of Washington, over real property described below: A _____________________________ easement encumbering the following described property: The CITY OF RENTON does hereby abandon and release the above described easement and all rights acquired under it. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said City has caused this instrument to be executed by the Mayor and attested to by the City Clerk this ____ day of ____________________, 20____. MAYOR CITY CLERK Notary Seal must be within box STATE OF WASHINGTON ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) _____________________ I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that ___________________________________________________________signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument _________________________________________________________________ Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print)____________________________________ My appointment expires:___________________________ Dated: _________________________________________ 20171208000184 AGENDA ITEM # 8. b) EXHIBIT “A” (SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT) THAT PORTION OF LAND LYING WITHIN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. SITUATED IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON; SAID PORTION BEING PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: NORTH 15 FEET OF THE NORTH HALF OF LOT 4, ALL IN BLOCK 1, CEDAR RIVER FIVE ACRE TRACTS, AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 16 OF PLATS, PAGE 52, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. ALSO KNOWN AS LOT B OF KING COUNTY LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 8908008 APPROVED NOVEMBER 30, 1989. CONTAINING 8,914 SQUARE FEET OR 0.20 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. 01/11/2024 AGENDA ITEM # 8. b) 1 5 4 T H A V E S E 1 5 2 N D A V E S E N 2215 North 30th Street, Suite 200, Tacoma, WA 98403 253.383.2422 TEL 253.383.2572 FAX EXHIBIT "B" 01/11/2024 AGENDA ITEM # 8. b)