KIRKLAND PARK BOARD REGULAR MEETINGPDFs/... · To request an alternate format, file a complaint or...

KIRKLAND PARK BOARD REGULAR MEETING Date: September 13, 2017 Time: 7:00 p.m. Place: Council Chambers, City Hall

The mission of the Park Board shall be to provide policy advice and assistance

to the Department of Parks and Community Services and City Council in order to ensure the effective provision of Parks and Community Services programs and facilities to the residents of the City of Kirkland.

AGENDA

Estimated Time 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 5 minutes 3. INTRODUCTION 5 minutes John Lloyd, Deputy Director 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 5 minutes 5. ITEMS FROM THE AUDIENCE 5 minutes 6. REVIEW OF ACTION ITEMS No items 7. PRESENTATIONS

a. Totem Lake Connector Bridge Update 10 minutes 8. COMMUNICATIONS 20 minutes

a. Correspondence b. Staff Reports – August Department Update c. Committee Reports d. Comments from the Chair

Alternate Formats: Persons with disabilities may request materials in alternative formats. Persons with hearing impairments may access the Washington State Telecommunications Relay Service at 711. Title VI: Kirkland’s policy is to fully comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act by prohibiting discrimination against any person on the basis of race, color, national origin or sex in the provision of benefits and services resulting from its programs and activities. Any person who believes his/her Title VI protection has been violated, may file a complaint with the City. To request an alternate format, file a complaint or for questions about Kirkland’s Title VI Program, contact the Title VI Coordinator at 425-587-3011 or [email protected]. The City of Kirkland strives to accommodate people with disabilities. Please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 425.587.3190, or for TTY Services call 425.587.3111 (by noon the work day prior to the meeting) if we can be of assistance. If you should experience difficulty hearing the proceedings, please bring this to the attention of the Chairperson by raising your hand.

mailto:[email protected]

Kirkland Park Board September 13, 2017 9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS

a. City-School District Playfield Partnership Program 45 minutes Action: Review Report

b. Juanita Beach Bathhouse Project Update 20 minutes

Action: Information only

10. NEW BUSINESS

a. Request to Rename Marina Park 15 minutes

Action: Provide recommendation to staff

b. Required training for October meeting 5 minutes Action: Watch required videos for next meeting

11. GOOD OF THE ORDER

a. Discussion items or questions for liaison role 5 minutes Action: Bring input to next Park Board meeting 12. ADJOURNMENT Estimated meeting completion: 9:20 p.m.

Next meetings: October 11 November 15 (note change from regular meeting date) December 13

From: Lynn ZwaagstraTo: "Karen"; City CouncilCc: Park BoardSubject: RE: Juanita Beach Master PlanDate: Monday, August 28, 2017 4:38:06 PM

Hello Karen,Thank you for your email. It’s always good to hear a diversity of opinions and viewpoints as they pertain to park development. I’m also happy to hear of your strong interest in both acquiring park space and developing the parks. The community here is very vested in the parks; its inspiring to see such an active and engaged community. I’d like to go ahead and provide a few updates for you regarding Juanita Beach Park, Edith Moulton and McAuliffe Park.

· The Juanita Beach Park master plan is in the process of being implemented. Albeit, it does seem to have taken quite a long time. Some of that was due to the economic downturn, with funding being restored over the past few years to resume with both development and acquisition. The design of the new bathhouse and pavilion is following the master plan to the best of our ability. Some small changes have been made due to newly identified wetlands. One wetland on the south eastern corner of the park prohibited placement of a shelter there as called out in the master plan. A new wetland was also identified in the south western corner, which has caused additional delays. We are close to resolution on that and we are looking to speak to the Park Board in September about design feedback and options for moving forward. That meeting is September 13 at 7pm in Council Chambers, all members of the public are always welcome and there is opportunity for public comment at the beginning of each meeting.

· The development of Edith Moulton was moving forward and the park construction project, as called out in the master plan, was released to bid last summer. Unfortunately, we did not receive adequate bids to award the project. After receiving some community and City Council feedback, some changes have been made to how the bid will be released this coming fall. We are quite hopeful that we will be able to move forward with the project.

· We have received strong community input to consider going forward with the McAuliffe Park master plan so that park can also be developed. This is currently listed as a work plan item for 2018.

I sure hope Kirkland has not lost its focus on outstanding parks. While I’ve only been here for just over a year, in that time, we’ve worked pretty hard to advance both park acquisition and development projects. Admittedly, the current economic growth is a bit challenging, we are moving forward as quickly as our resources will allow. As mentioned above, the Kirkland community is very vested in parks; this can result in diametrically opposed views. We are striving to balance those competing interests to holistically serve the community. Hopefully, this information is helpful. Thank you again for your email. Lynn ZwaagstraParks and Community Services Director

8.a.

mailto:/O=CITY OF KIRKLAND/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=LYNN ZWAAGSTRA459




[email protected]

From: Karen [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, August 25, 2017 4:00 PMTo: City CouncilCc: Park BoardSubject: Juanita Beach Master Plan Kudos to Kirkland City Council for its vision in purchasing additional park land as it becomes available. This has always been an important part of making Kirkland the desirable city it is today. I am writing to remind council that there are two other parks in the same neighborhood, Juanita Beach and Edith Moulten, that are waiting for funds to complete their master plans. I hope this is considered before looking at developing a master plan for McAuliffe. Juanita Beach has a master plan accepted in 2006 that covered park land on both sides of Juanita Dr. Several years ago part of the plan was implemented on the south side. However, some of the important elements remain to be put in place. This includes the replacement of the decrepit 1960’s bathhouse, the replacement of family picnic shelters, an expanded playground and creating temporary dock space for motorized boats. And then there is the property on the north side of the park that sits waiting for someone to help. Kirkland seems to have lost its focus on creating outstanding parks. Are possible funds available for park improvements being used to fund other projects such as transportation and related CIP projects? The Juanita Beach bathhouse had funding from a levy in 2012. It was not built. Now the price has increased considerably to no one’s surprise. Currently there seems to be a real urgency after promises of completion several years in a row. In the rush to get this done, parks is trying to get a facility in place that has had no public input nor has there even been a second version to compare. Smaller family picnic shelters are being replaced with a huge million dollar picnic shelter that the city hopes to use as a rental. Again, no public input to the change to the master plan. Juanita Beach is a premier destination park in Kirkland. It has had a master plan in place for 11 years. I ask council to please move forward in completing it. Karen Lightfeldt Sent from Mail for Windows 10

8.a.


https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986

Parks and Community Services Department Report August, 2017

Administration, Planning and CIP Projects

Park Land Acquisition - On August 2 the City Council authorized the City Manager to enter into a purchase and sale agreement for acquisition of land to expand McAuliffe Park. Located just north of the existing park on 108th Ave NE, the Richards Property is being acquired for $1,672,000.

Juanita Beach Bathhouse Replacement – Staff continue to work with the project design team to identify strategies to reduce projected construction costs prior to moving forward with additional design work. Recent meeting have been held with the Department of Ecology and Northshore Utility District to look at design and permitting alternatives. Staff will return to the Council with a report and recommendations in September.

1% for Public Art – Four artists will be interviewed at the end of the month by a joint Cultural Arts Commission/Park Board committee. One artist will be selected to create art for Waverly Beach, Edith Moulton Park, and the Bathhouse project.

Edith Moulton Park – Construction bidding will commence in September for this park development project. A recommendation for bid award is scheduled for the City Council’s November 8 meeting.

Totem Lake Park – A design kick-off meeting was held this month for the design and engineering team, led by prime consultant Berger Partnership. Park design will reach the 30% completion milestone by January of 2018.

New Deputy Director for Operations, John Lloyd, started on August 1. John’s focus will be on parks, recreation and the Green Kirkland Partnership. John comes to Kirkland with a strong background in recreation and facility operations, ball fields, construction project oversight, safety and risk management and overall financial management of various recreation services and amenities. John’s focus will be on working with staff to accomplish major work plan items.

Staff began working on mid-year budget processes, including year-end revenue and expense projections. Additionally, staff are analyzing needed service packages that may be considered for 2018; however, most service package options will be considered with the 2019-2010 biennial budget.

Associated with the budget updates, staff analyzed the impact for the state-mandated minimum wage increase and addition of sick leave benefits for part-time / contingent staff. The impact for 2018 will be manageable; however, there will be a significant impact in 2019 and 2020 which will require detailed analysis and discussion on cost recovery.

Staff received approval to add some on-call office and clerical support to assist with the work load of manually processing payroll for 250 employees, billing, invoicing, contract routing and reporting. The hiring process will commence in September.

Administrative staff joined the Park Operations and Green Kirkland Partnership staff for Lucity training that will allow the final software configuration before the “go live” training begins in September.

The City Directors had their quarterly retreat focusing on the state of City finances and employee recognition.

An inter-departmental group convened to review and train each other on the respective department’s approach to tree management.

8.b.

Department Report – January, 2017 Page 2 of 12 Parks Maintenance and Operations

Staff installed new playground equipment at Cedar View this past month. In addition to the

play area, staff installed a large French drain to address some water challenges the site was

receiving during the rainy months.

The warm weather in August brought tens of thousands of visitors to the parks to enjoy the

outdoors, including special events like the Little League World Series. The weather also posed

challenges with stressed trees, warm water temperatures, growth of milfoil, and heavy user

traffic.

(New Swings and Bouncy toys at Cedar View Park)

Marina Park Pavilion received some new Monier roof tiles this month. Several were broken this summer from an unknown source.

A special marker in remembrance of Louis Deane Todd “Louie” was installed at the Cemetery. Local historian, Matt McCauley, conducted research at the Cemetery discovered a few past residents that never received headstones. Advocacy and generous donations are bringing the headstones to fruition.

OO Denny Park received some tree mitigation work along Denny Creek. In partnership with Public Works, Parks staff “habitated” three trees that were identified as being unsafe. The debris was placed alongside the creek to enhance the ecological and environmental quality.

Operations staff continue to invest significant time training and ramping up for our new Maintenance Management System, LUCITY which is on schedule to go live in October. Throughout August, staff have attended multiple hours of systems training and work on configuration on a daily basis. The software is expected to be a tremendous asset; however, configuration during the summer months have created a strain on staff. Due to the software requirements, park spaces may have seen a slight reduction to service levels which will continue through September.

8.b.

Department Report – January, 2017 Page 3 of 12

(A pair of young River Otters with a perch at Houghton Beach Park)

Snyder’s Corner hosted Telfer Pavements who were in Kirkland working on the over-lay of our streets. Periodically, operations will make accommodations for park use in order to assist the City with completing CIP projects.

Centercal Properties, the developers of Totem Lake, will be renting the former Yuppie Pawn Shop building through December. As the development progresses and gets built-out, space is at a premium and the developers need project management space. Since Parks will not being entering into development of Totem Lake Park this year, the “yuppie job shack” was a helpful interim solution to the space challenge.

Hundreds of Kirkland residents that didn’t make the trip to Oregon for the Solar Eclipse headed out to open lawn areas throughout the City. Staff reported literally hundreds of people at large grass areas like Crestwoods, Everest, 132nd and several City / School Partnership fields.

Recreation Customer Service Operations: Registration for 2017 Fall & 2018 winter programs began on August 10, 2017. Staff was again

impressed with the new CivicRec registration system. Online was very active and surpassed last year’s numbers. First day of registration involved 720 transactions and over $104,000 in revenue.

Staff worked with CivicRec, our new software vendor, to plan follow up training for September 19 & 21.

Deputy Director John Lloyd & Recreation Manager Linda Murphy are in the final stages of the recruitment process for the Business/Customer Service Supervisor position.

North Kirkland Community Center

Giggles and Grins and Summer Theater Camps for Preschoolers wrapped up eight weeks of camp the week of August 14th with 192 participants.

8.b.


(Giggles and Grins camp)

Summer Jump Rope Camp had 28 campers in attendance, and a culminating performance on the last day with an audience of over 60.

(Jump Rope campers)

Twenty Junior Summer Day Campers participated in a once (maybe twice) in a lifetime event, viewing a solar eclipse. With NASA certified glasses, and pin hole viewers crafted by the campers and staff, they were led outside in small groups for a spectacular view of the eclipse from the grounds of the community Center.

(Junior camper checking out the Solar Eclipse)

Staff hosted two pop-up programs in Aug. A field day on August 11 and a 3 on 3 basketball

tournament on Aug 18. Both were small but well received. These programs help build community

and have a positive impact on the residents who live near North Kirkland Community Center. Additionally, pop-up programs heighten awareness of the programs offered inside the building and increased registrations!

(Pop up program at NKCC) (Pop up 3 on 3 Basketball Tournament)

8.b.

Department Report – January, 2017 Page 5 of 12 Peter Kirk Community Center and Peter Kirk Pool

Summer aquatics season is wrapping up! The Peter Kirk Pool and beach are open through September 4th. Everyday this summer, the pool has been filled with programming and patrons enjoying public swims. Over 15,000 people have visited the pool during public swims throughout the summer. The Peter Kirk Pool is one of the only public outdoor swimming pools in the area and program participants and swimmers share often their love for the facility!

(Peter Kirk Pool Swim Instructors) (Preschool 1 and 2 Swim Lessons)

This summer over 1,156 youth and parents enjoyed Sprinkler Park Thursday at Lee Johnson Field.

Sprinkler Park Thursday, sponsored by Rotary Club of Kirkland Downtown, provided the community with a fun, free way to cool off during the summer heat! Program participants are very excited and hopeful for a permanent splash park!

(Sprinkler Park Thursdays at Lee Johnson Field)

The Kirkland Orca Swim ended the 17th season with the championship swim meet on Saturday,

August 12th at Snohomish Aquatics Center and Sunday, August 13th the team celebrated the season with a pool party at the Peter Kirk Pool. Two swimmers were recognized with the Lifetime Orca Achievement Award for their participation through age 18. Coach Grant was also given the Ultimate Lifetime Orca Award for swimming as a youth on the team as well as coaching for 6 seasons.

8.b.


(Left-to-Right: Daniel Groven, Lifetime Orca Award Recipient, Kevin Blair, Lifetime Orca Award Recipient, and Head Coach Grant, Ultimate

Lifetime Orca Award)

Peter Kirk Day Camp had the opportunity to spend the day at Juanita Bay Park learning about the wildlife from an

Audubon Society volunteer and learning about the environment from a Green Kirkland Partnership volunteer. The campers had the opportunity to also participate in a service project with GKP while out at the park.

PKCC hosted the Wild, Wild West Luncheon, a fun inter-generational special event for the PK Day campers and adults aged 50+ from the community. Local story teller Debbi Dimitri performed as Annie Oakley and Calamity Jane. The PKCC staff prepared lunch for over 90 participants.

This year the PKCC Advisory Board chose to take on a new type of service project when they formed their annual work plan. They decided to partner with Friends of Youth and hold a drive that ran for three months, from May 18th through August 15th, to collect toiletry items for homeless youth. This drive was so incredibly successful that one of the board members rented a storage unit to hold the items that were collected. Staff from FOY picked up all the donated items on August 23rd. These items will be distributed by FOY, an organization that last year served over 6500 youth in their three core areas (Youth & Family Services, Outreach & Shelter Services and Education, House & Employment Support).

(Items collected for Friends of Youth)

8.b.

Department Report – January, 2017 Page 7 of 12 Senior Council is working on a new reoccurring piece in Kirkland Reporter – “Coming of

Age….Again” and will be featured monthly in the paper. Senior Council is also preparing for the Viva Volunteers! Event on October 14th.

The second Senior Steppers trip walk was on August 8th to Marymoor Park in Redmond. Participants also received lunch at Fairwinds Redmond after their walk.

Youth Council is finalizing the We’ve Got Issues program on drug abuse. Mike Connor is adding his finishing touches to the program and then it will be published. The Leadership Team held its annual retreat on August 20th. During the retreat the group created their work plan, schedule for the year, teambuilding and selected new Co-Chairs.

Teen Traffic Court heard seven cases at the August 4th session of Teen Traffic Court. New processes and paperwork are being developed to help streamline the process for participants in the program.

KTUB- Danel Lawrence recently took a new position within the YMCA and resigned his position as KTUB Director. Yasmine Farrington-Hernandez took over as Director on August 14th.

Human Services The City of Kirkland joined the organization Welcoming America. This organization supports

communities across the country in their efforts to create more inclusivity for both new and long-time residents. More information is available here: https://www.welcomingamerica.org/

The Human Services Commission is developing its work plan to present to Council in October. Eastside Human Services Forum:

Received a presentation on the Veterans, Seniors & Human Services Levy that will be on the ballot in November. More information is available here: http://www.kingcounty.gov/elected/executive/constantine/initiatives/veterans-seniors-levy.aspx

Upcoming Important Dates:

We invite you to participate in one of the upcoming Welcoming Week activities. A link to a calendar of events is here: https://ericmembers.wordpress.com/calendar-2/. Please note in particular the kick-off event “Welcoming 101” happening Friday, September 15th.

On September 25th at 7 p.m. a community information session will be held at Salt House Church, 11920 NE 80th St., to provide the community with an update on the day center for families that opened last November as well as the proposed permanent shelter for women and families with children.

Green Kirkland Partnership GKP staff have been participating in the configuration of the Lucity Asset Management software

over the past few months. System review and training began in August. Thursday August 3rd, Green Kirkland staff and Stewards hosted a field trip for ~30 Peter Kirk Day

Camp participants at Juanita Bay Park, along with Eastside Audubon Society.

Friday August 11th, at Juanita Heights Park, GKP staff hosted employees from Root Metrics, continuing a summer company tradition of volunteering.

Saturday August 12th, at Josten Park, Green Kirkland Stewards hosted a forest restoration event with 12 community volunteers to maintain native plantings.

Wednesday August 16th, at Crestwoods Park, GKP Stewards hosted 20 Microsoft volunteers for critical site maintenance.

Friday August 18th, at Juanita Beach Park, Cision employees gave a day of service, which was a new company to partner with GKP.

Friday August 18th, at Juanita Bay Park, Green Kirkland Stewards and GKP Staff hosted Price Waterhouse Cooper employee service day with 45 volunteers.

8.b.

https://www.welcomingamerica.org/

http://www.kingcounty.gov/elected/executive/constantine/initiatives/veterans-seniors-levy.aspx

https://ericmembers.wordpress.com/calendar-2/

Department Report – January, 2017 Page 8 of 12 Thursday, August 24, at Everest Park, GKP and Parks Department staff hosted the annual Green

Kirkland Appreciation BBQ to celebrate volunteer accomplishments with over 30 volunteers.

Saturday August 26th, Green Kirkland Stewards hosted a monthly forest restoration event at Juanita Bay Park with 20 volunteers.

Green Kirkland Photos: 45 Volunteers from PwC (left) joined Green Kirkland Stewards at Juanita Bay Park for a day of service

on August 18th, and five superstar volunteers from Root Metrics came out three times this summer to help Green Kirkland Stewards at Friday events (right).

Upcoming Important Dates:

September 6th from 8:30 - 12:30 at North Rose Hill Woodlands Park, GKP and partners EarthCorps will host the Kirkland International Community School. This event is made possible through grant funding from King Conservation District.

On September 15th, GKP celebrates United Way of King County Day of Caring with three events. The main 150 person volunteer event will be 10am – 2pm at Crestwoods Park, with two smaller events, 10am – 1 pm, at Juanita Bay and Juanita Beach Park. The big event will be managed by EarthCorps through funding provided by a King Conservation District grant.

September 16th from 9am – 12pm at Kiwanis Park, Green Kirkland Stewards and Kiwanis Club members host a forest restoration event.

September 20th from 4pm – 6pm at Crestwoods Park, Green Kirkland Stewards host a community volunteer event to maintain forested areas in the park.

September 23th from 10am – 1pm at Juanita Bay Park, Green Kirkland Stewards host a community volunteer event to restore natural areas in the park.

Special Event Permitting and Support Special Events staff planned and implemented the Juanita Friday Market each Friday in August. In addition, staff coordinated support for the Kirkland Wednesday Market, Kirkland Summer Concert Series and Jr. Softball World Series. Staff supported the following events through permitting, coordination with other City departments for street closures, fire and police support, safety and sanitary regulations and banners; City facility use such as parks, parking lots and streets; evening and weekend on-call logistical support as needed; and communication with the public.

o National Night Out Neighborhood Block Parties, August 1

National Night Out is a nationwide campaign aimed at involving communities in crime and drug prevention awareness. Kirkland residents hosted more than twenty parties throughout the city and enjoyed visits from Police, Fire and City Council representatives. Staff works in conjunction with Police, Fire and Public Works to issue block party permits for events that include road closures. A total of twelve permits were issued during the month of August for National Night Out and other block parties.

8.b.


o Kirkland Summerfest, August 11 – 12

The three-day event featured the Rotary Duck Dash, juried arts including the sixth annual Young

Artists Exhibition, five amusement attractions, eleven bands, fifteen food vendors, wine garden

and so much more! Throughout the weekend city staff support included setup and breakdown of

the city-owned stage, daily safety inspections, F.O.G. and sewer connection services, seventeen

off-duty officers plus Explorers for traffic control and garden security.

(Summerfest activities at Marina Park)

o Tolling of the Boats, August 19

The United States Submarine Veterans - Seattle Base, hosted the annual Tolling of the Boats

Ceremony at the Marina Park Pavilion. The service, which honors the memory of submariners

who lost their lives in the line of duty, included recognition of WWII Veterans, reading of the

“Tolling of the Boats”, laying of wreath and twenty-one gun salute. Event staff support included

pre-event venue safety inspections.

o DennyFest, August 20

For those who didn’t leave town for the solar eclipse the Finn Hill Neighborhood Alliance hosted

the annual DennyFest celebration at OO Denny Park. The event featured a new wine garden,

interactive booths, inflatable bouncer and lots of great music! Event staff support included pre-

event venue safety inspections and two off-duty officers for traffic control and garden security.

o Park to Park Swim, August 27

The annual Park to Park Swim offered ‘The Classic’ 1.3 mile swim which started at Matthews

Beach in Seattle and ended at OO Denny Park and ‘The Double Dip’ 2.5 mile swim roundtrip from

OO Denny. Proceeds from the event benefit the Emergency Patient Assistance Fund at Seattle

Children’s Hospital. The fund provides families essential items such as food, gas and a place to

stay while children are hospitalized. More than 2,000 families were served last year alone. Event

staff support included pre-event safety inspections and King County Marine Patrol for water

safety.

Interdepartmental Special Events Permitting and Support Team:

Event organizers from Washington Multi-Sport LLC presented plans for the 2nd annual Lake

Washington Half Marathon to be held at Juanita Beach Park on November 4. The event includes

half marathon and 5k courses and beer garden. In all, twenty-seven awards will be presented to

top finishers in different categories.

Final reports were reviewed for events which took place in June and July. Upcoming Events:

o September, Wednesdays: Kirkland Wednesday Market, Marina Park o September, Fridays: Juanita Friday Market, Juanita Beach o September 2: Salsa Marina, Marina Park o September 9: Crossing Kirkland, CKC

8.b.


o September 16: Seattle 3 Day Walk o September 22 - 24: Kirkland Oktoberfest, Marina Park o September 30: Oral Cancer Awareness Walk, Juanita Beach Park

Interdepartmental/Interagency Committees Tree Team (Tim Werner) Tree Team is scheduled for September. Green Team (Sharon Rodman) August meeting was cancelled. Volunteer Service Team (Jeremy Jones) No meeting in August. Customer Service Team (Linda Murphy – acting) Emergency Management Action Team (Linda Murphy) August meeting content was discussion and preparation for September and October. September – National Preparedness Month

8.b.

Department Report – January, 2017 Page 11 of 12 Parks and Community Services Monthly Tracking – July 2017

Marina use Number Revenue

Boat slip rentals

Boat launch cards sold 55 $2970

Commercial dockings 16 $2919

Monthly facility rentals and use

Hours used by City programs

Hours used by community

Heritage Hall 12.5 101.5

PKCC Rooms

(aggregate)

NKCC Rooms

(aggregate) 721.93 11

School gymnasiums

Picnic shelters (# of bookings)

6 bookings 12 hours

122 bookings 826 hours 311 hours SE

Ballfields - Kirkland 228.25 630.5

Ballfields - LWSD 0 908

Green Kirkland Partnership

Number of volunteer

hours 727

Number of volunteer events

18

Volunteer Hour Value 26,380.90

Acres of new restoration 0.6

Acres in restoration maintained 2.8

Total plants planted 0

Invasive trees removed 35

Contracted crew field

hours 116

Human Services (service organizations receiving grant

dollars)

Number of Kirkland

residents served to date 10,668

Cemetery

Number of interments

Special

Events

Number of events 11

Calendar days 21

Estimated event

participants 82,300

8.b.

HOURS BY PARK TYPE

January February March May April June July

Community Parks 964 828 1271 1072 1004 1074 1666

Natural Parks 80 45 122 106 93 234 400

Peter Kirk Pool 11 5 110 114 93 169 107

Waterfront Parks 571 553 758 1068 748 1963 1762

Neighborhood Parks 323 276 445 675 584 837 662

Other City Maintained Sites 1396 1315 1329 1511 1142 1998 1642

City School Partnerships 130 88 130 209 211 264 192

Grand Total 3475 3109 4164 4754 3873 6538 6430

8.b.

HOURS BY PARKJanuary February March May April June July

City/School Best High 47.25 25 15.5 21.25 19.5 33.5 30

City/School Juanita High 10 8 2.5 4

City/School Kirkland Junior High8.5 10.75 11.5 56.5 47 53.5 54

City/School Mark Twain Elementary15 11.75 16.5 22.25 28.5 41 26

City/School Rose Hill Elementary16.5 17.25 23.5 23.5 20.5 31 32

Crestwoods 431.5 367.5 426 217 279 347 258

Everest 39.5 117.75 271 475.8 357 372 955.5

Juanita Beach Park 149.5 152.5 284 430 260 617 532

Peter Kirk Campus /KPC /Library/Teen/Sr. Ctr144.75 222 335 470.5 345 543 626.5

Cemetery 429.5 212 218.5 274.5 142 233.3 174.25

David Brink 45 34 52 87 56.5 85.5 100.5

Edith Moulton 25.5 12 17.5 44.5 23 28.5 50.5

Houghton Beach 84.5 44 119 134 107 536 228

Heronfield Wetlands 1.5 2 5 11 9.5

Heritage Hall 24.5 28.5 18.5 18 9.5 41 67

Marina Park 209 236.5 152 233 153 469 535.5

McAuliffe Buildings 2 6 4.5 5.5 1.5

McAuliffe Park 270.5 164.5 257.5 143 186 145 254

Marsh Park 51.5 63 91.5 109.3 106 133 186.5

Off site/Work for Others 191.5 374 169.5 58.5 78.5 252 53.5

OO Denny Park 149.5 165.2 145 217.5 126 295 260.5

Pool 11 4.5 110 113.5 93 168.8 106.5

Shop (at the Maintenance Center)419.5 235 342 247 257 310 274

Tot Lot 20 11.25 23 24.5 9.5 33.5 12.5

Waverly Beach 30 21 43 67.5 60 101 125

City/School Juanita Elementary 16.5 8 9 13.75 17 26 19

Forbes Creek 12 4.5 5.5 11 9 22 14

Highlands 11.5 5 8 13.5 17.5 20 16.5

Heritage Park 144.5 110.5 170 131 142 229.5 282

Juanita Bay 78 29.5 88.5 89.5 85 177.5 159.5

Mark Twain 1 3 16 30 13.5 54.5 21.5

North Kirkland Community Center42.5 25 53.5 85.5 80.5 134.5 93.5

South Rose Hill Park 42 52 58.5 51.5 65 55.25 46.25

Rose Hill Meadows 42.5 26.5 75.75 37.75 34.3 68.25 50.75

Totem Lake Wetlands 4.5 9 13.5 1.5 26 4.5

Van Aalst 20.5 9.75 15.5 27 22.5 60 28.5

Watershed 2 15 32.5 16 7.5 55.5 40

Carillon Woods 10.25 16 9.75 9.5 9.25 27.5 25.5

Cedar View 0.5 1 10 37.5 87 29

Houghton Neighborhood Park 14.25 14.5 30.75 48.5 43 72.75 60.75

Josten Park (NJOS) 0.5 2 15.5 27 4 9 7

Reservoir 17 14 14.5 24.75 25 37.5 34.5

Spinney Homestead/100th 5.5 24.5 20 18.5 10 31.5 10

Terrace 16.75 12 18.5 35.75 26.5 38 38.5

Woodlands Park/Firehouse 15 22.5 40.5 34 31 61.5 96.5

Windsor Vista 33 2.5 6.5 5 9 3.5

Kiwanis 1 2 0.5 1.5 1 2.5 2

City/School Lake View Elementary16.25 8.5 13.5 17.25 30 15.5 20

Green Spaces 4 22.5 32 19.5 11.5 3.5 20.5

Norway Hill 10 4.5 7.5 17.5 5.5 14 12.5

Office Staff 26.5 49.5 59.5 24 29.5 33.5 30

Cotton Hill Park 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 7 0.5

Kingsgate 7 1 1.5 1 2.5 7.5 3

2nd Ave Dock 0.5 11.5 4.5 5.5 5 4.5

Settlers Landing / 10th Street 1 3.5 6 3.5 4 5.5

City/School Ben Franklin Elementary 7 28 31.75 26 43 44

Juanita Heights 22.5 39.5 1 3 5

SQ 132nd Square Park 52 54.5 126.5 186 161 169.5 137.5

Ohde Pea Patch 6.5 1 3.5 21

Brookhaven 4 11.5 13.5 12 23

Yarrow Bay Wetlands 0.5 0.25 1 1.5

Lake Ave West 4.5 1 14.5 47.5

Neal Landguth Wetlands 0.5 0.5 0.5 1

City/School Other 4 23 19.5 20 7

Hazen Hills 48.5 66 30.5

Snyders Corner 22 22.5

100thNE/NE140th 10 5.5 3.5

Bud Holman 27.75 24.5

Woodinville Water Tower Park 2

Grand Total 3475 3108.7 4164 4754 3873 6538 6430

8.b.

Sum of HOURS Column Labels

Row Labels January February March April May June July Grand Total

City School Partnerships 130 88.25 129.5 210.5 209.25 263.5 192 1223

Community Parks 963.5 828.25 1271 1004 1071.75 1073.5 1666 7878

Natural Parks 80 44.5 121.5 92.5 105.75 234 400.25 1078.5

Neighborhood Parks 323.25 275.5 444.75 583.5 675 837.25 661.75 3801

Other City Maintained Sites 1396.25 1314.7 1329 1142 1510.5 1998.25 1642 10332.7

Peter Kirk Pool 11 4.5 110 93 113.5 168.75 106.5 607.25

Waterfront Parks 571 553 758 747.5 1067.8 1963 1761.5 7421.8

Grand Total 3475 3108.7 4163.75 3873 4753.55 6538.25 6430 32342.25

8.b.

CITY OF KIRKLAND Department of Parks and Community Services 123 Fifth Avenue, Kirkland, WA 98033 425.587.3000 www.kirklandwa.gov

MEMORANDUM To: Park Board From: Lynn Zwaagstra, Director Michael Cogle, Deputy Director Date: September 7, 2017 Subject: SCHOOL PLAYFIELD PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM RECOMMENDATION: That the Park Board receive a report evaluating school sites being considered for the City’s School Playfield Partnership Program. A formal recommendation from the Board will be requested at the Board’s October meeting, at which time a staff recommendation will be presented. BACKGROUND DISCUSSION: 1. Introduction The 2012 Park Levy approved by voters included an initial $1,000,000 for new City – School District City Playfield Partnerships. These funds are scheduled to be allocated in 2017 and 2018. The purpose of the City – School District Playfield Partnership Program is to improve and maximize use of public school assets for community recreation in a cost-effective manner. By enhancing the Lake Washington School District’s (LWSD) playfields, the Department of Parks and Community Services is able to better meet the community’s desired level of service for athletic fields. Fields are made safer, more playable, and more accessible for local sports organizations, for students, and for the surrounding neighborhood. The community’s playfield inventory is improved or expanded without the need for expensive land acquisition or development of costly infrastructure such as vehicle parking and site utilities. The program is funded from the voter-approved 2012 Kirkland Parks Levy in the total amount of $1,000,000. The Council took action earlier this year to utilize $11,424 of the project budget for a maintenance pilot program to provide basic infield maintenance to the playfields at Finn Hill Middle School in 2017. Subsequently, the Department of Parks and Community Services contracted with Lyon Landscape Architects in the amount of $51,710 to provide site analysis, preliminary design concepts, and cost estimating for selected school sites. This has resulted in a remaining available balance of $936,866 to be applied to playfield improvements as part of this program.

9.a.

http://www.kirklandwa.gov/

Memorandum to Park Board City – School Playfield Partnership Program

September 7, 2017 Page 2

2. Summary of Initial Planning Efforts and Public Engagement

Staff kicked off the project with briefings to the Park Board (February 2017) and City Council Public Works, Parks, & Human Services Committee (March 2017). The briefings included background on the program and a recommended public process for determining which school playfield projects should be selected for improvements through the program. School playfield stakeholders including sports organizations, neighborhood associations, and school PTSAs were invited to submit project ideas to the Department of Parks and Community Services. The Department received two written suggestions, both for Finn Hill Middle School. At the Park Board’s May meeting community members were invited to attend and offer project proposals. In addition to Finn Hill Middle School, meeting participants advocated for playfield improvements to Peter Kirk and Rose Hill elementary schools. Following public comment, the Park Board provided guidance to staff on which projects should move forward for further analysis, as follows (and in no particular order):

a) Finn Hill Middle School Rationale: Improvements to existing playfields would increase capacity for games and practices for multiple sports. Existing baseball/softball fields could be improved for relatively modest costs since much of the field infrastructure is already in place. A secondary multi-purpose field at the school could be considered for synthetic turf and lighting. Potential funding and operational partnership opportunities with community sports organizations.

b) Peter Kirk Elementary School Rationale: School is pending major reconstruction and completion by 2019. Opportunity to partner with LWSD during school construction could result in cost efficiencies. School PTSA has proposed use of synthetic turf in lieu of grass.

c) Rose Hill Elementary School Rationale: Parks Dept. currently maintains a portion of the school’s play area. Improvements to remaining portion of site could support informal and organized sports activities and the incremental maintenance costs for the Department could be comparatively modest.

d) Juanita High School Rationale: School is pending major reconstruction and completion by 2021. Opportunity to improve and expand underutilized multi-purpose playfield adjacent to existing fields. Potential to partner with LWSD during school construction could result in cost efficiencies.

A program update was subsequently provided to the City Council on July 5, and the Park Board conducted a tour of the four school sites on July 12.

9.a.



3. Factors to be Considered in Determining Playfield Partnership Projects

Staff have worked with the Park Board to identify the following factors to be considered in determining future projects:

a) LWSD Approval. The Lake Washington School District, as the property owner, will need to provide approval for any proposed project. Approval would occur through the Office of the School Superintendent, with recommendations provided by the District’s capital projects, facility maintenance, and individual school site administrative staff. District staff may also consult with the LWSD Board of Directors.

b) Cost. The selected project (or projects) must be accomplished within the established overall program budget, including any potential additional partnership or grant funding which may be secured. Cost efficiencies may be obtained by completing a playfield project as part of a larger school renovation/replacement project.

c) Need. The degree to which the proposed project will increase the safety, playability,

and/or use of a playfield should be considered, particularly in comparison to other candidate projects.

d) Site Conditions. An evaluation of the school site is necessary to assess (a) its capacity

to accommodate the proposed improvements and uses; (b) any environmental or other physical constraints; and (c) conflicts with any existing or future uses of the site.

e) Neighborhood Impacts. An evaluation of the potential impacts to adjacent and

surrounding neighbors should be conducted for projects which may potentially increase or change field usage. Examples would include proposals to convert a practice field to a game field, or the addition of lighting for nighttime play. Traffic and parking impacts may also need to be assessed. In certain cases the LWSD may require that the City demonstrate support and agreement from surrounding neighbors in order to proceed.

f) Partnership and Shared Funding Opportunities. Proposed projects should be evaluated

for potential partnerships with community sports organizations or other partners. Opportunities to leverage the City’s funding with private and other public agencies should be explored. For example, the State of Washington offers a Youth Athletic Facilities matching grant program through the State’s Recreation and Conservation Office. Playfield projects completed in conjunction with school construction will typically realize cost efficiencies as well.

g) Ongoing Maintenance and Capital Replacement Costs. LWSD has minimal funding to maintain the District’s playfields. As a result the City has committed to be responsible for on-going maintenance at playfields in which the City has provided a capital investment. On-going tasks completed by Parks Dept. groundskeepers include mowing, fertilizing, weeding, irrigating, and periodic turf restoration and repairs. The direct on-going costs incurred by the Department to maintain playfields as part of the partnership program are approximately $400,000 per year. Funding sources include both the 2002 Park Maintenance Levy and the 2012 Kirkland Parks Levy. In most cases projects funded through this program will require City Parks Dept. staff to

9.a.



perform ongoing maintenance. These costs should be identified and the ongoing funding secured prior to moving forward with a playfield project. The first source of funding to be considered for on-going maintenance is the 2012 Parks Levy. Life cycle costs for playfield synthetic turf and other playfield features should be determined for capital replacement planning.

h) Public and User Group Support. The City should seek community feedback to help

determine which school site(s) should be included in the program. Projects which enjoy support from community members, neighborhood associations, PTSA groups, and/or sports organizations should be pursued.

4. Evaluation of School Sites The landscape architecture firm of Lyon Landscape Architects (Lyon), based in Kirkland, was selected to assist the City in evaluating the four school sites identified for consideration. Lyon has extensive experience working with communities and school districts on a variety of playfield projects. Subconsultants brought on by Lyon to assist with this project include Navix Engineering (civil engineering and environmental) and BCE Engineers (electrical and lighting). The Lyon team was asked to do the following:

• Conduct site visits and complete preliminary site assessments using existing data and mapping;

• Develop preliminary schematic design options for the four school sites; • Develop preliminary construction cost estimates; • Complete a written report detailing findings and conclusions (see Attachment 1).

The Park Board is asked to review the consultant’s report prior to the upcoming Board meeting. Representatives of the consultant team will attend the Board meeting to present their findings. Staff would like to emphasize that construction costs as detailed in the report are only part of the overall Project Budget for a City capital construction project. In addition to construction costs, a Project Budget also includes those costs related to design, engineering, permitting, inspections, project management, taxes, contingencies, and other miscellaneous items. Individual projects of $500,000 or more are also targeted for the City’s 1% for Art program, with art funds required to be included in the Project Budget as per City policy. A preliminary Project Budget for each of the ten playfield options presented in the consultant report is provided in Attachment 2. It should be noted that these are preliminary budget numbers based on typical percentages assigned for various project line items. They would need to be refined moving forward based on specific project scope. Construction costs would also need to be adjusted for inflation once a projected year of construction is determined. Due to the volatile construction bidding climate in our region, staff have been advised to use a conservative 10% per year escalation factor for construction costs. The attachment also provides our initial staff projections on likely annual maintenance costs and rental revenue.

9.a.



5. Public Engagement and Decision-Making Process

Staff will be sharing the report with School District staff and stakeholder groups over the coming weeks in order to gather their comments and suggestions. This information will be provided to the Board in October. The public engagement and decision-making process for the Playfield Partnership Program outlined below was reviewed by the Park Board and City Council. The Council and the LWSD could seek more public engagement prior to final decisions if desired.

Attachments: 1 – Consultant Report 2 – Project Budgets for Playfield Options

Initial Consultation with LWSD

(March, then ongoing)

Public Outreach: Request for Projects(Completed in April)

Public Meeting(May Park Board

Meeting)

Project Evaluations by Staff and LWSD

(May-August)

Findings and Conclusions Report

to Park Board(September)

Staff Recommendation to Park Board (October)

Park Board Recommendation to

City Council(November)

LWSD ApprovalCIty Council Approval

(TBD)

Project Implementation(Timeline to be

Determined)

9.a.

11237 NE 95th St, Kirkland, WA 98033 Kirkland Playfield Partnership – Feasibility Study

(253) 209-4053 | LyonLA.com Executive Summary

August 29, 2017 Michael Cogle, Deputy Director City of Kirkland, Department of Parks & Community Services 123 5th Avenue Kirkland, WA 98033 RE: Kirkland Playfield Partnership Program - Feasibility Study Dear Michael, The City of Kirkland has a running partnership with Lake Washington School District to improve existing playfields to

increase playable hours and allow for greater community use. Lyon Landscape Architects was retained to develop and

provide the City of Kirkland Parks Department with Schematic Designs, Itemized Cost Estimates and a narrative of our

understanding of the design opportunities, existing conditions and constraints and other pertinent information on four

Lake Washington School District sites within the Kirkland city boundaries.

The evaluation and schematic designs are based upon the City’s desire to expend playable hours and days within the

constraints of the four existing school sites. The four partnership sites were initially chosen with input from the

community in previous Park Board meetings. Each site is able to accommodate a significantly improved playing surface

from what is currently existing. The four school sites included in the study are the following:

Finn Hill Middle School

Examine an existing baseball/softball field and football field with cinder track and provide a natural grass renovation or

synthetic turf replacement for both. Field Lighting will be considered for both fields. A wetland buffer affects the

northern portion of the football field and will require a redesigned field which reduces the size of the field from 102,000

square feet to 91,500 square feet and changes the track configuration to an 8’ wide walking and jogging path.

Rose Hill Elementary School

The existing westernmost field will include a natural grass field renovation and new irrigation system. The two existing

backstops will be replaced with new backstops in opposite corners to allow for simultaneous play.

Peter Kirk Elementary School

Currently in Design Development Phase, by the LWSD selected architect and design team. The proposed 36,704 square

foot sand field with underdrain system will be considered for an upgrade with natural grass or synthetic turf to provide

more playable hours for the neighboring community.

Juanita High School

Examine an abandoned baseball field with stream and wetland buffers encroaching on the west and south sides. The

remaining 40,000 square feet may include a natural grass field renovation and new irrigation system. A new 6’ tall

perimeter fence will be installed and the remaining 35,000 square feet of abandoned field will be restored as a natural

landscape buffer.

Page 1

Attachment 1


(253) 209-4053 | LyonLA.com Executive Summary

For this study, the definition of new pervious surface was interpreted per the 2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual (2016 KCSWDM), which defines it as “the conversion of a native vegetated surface or other native surface to a non-native pervious surface (e.g. conversion of forest or meadow to pasture land, grass land, cultivated land, lawn, landscaping, bare soil, etc.), or any alteration of existing non-native pervious surface that significantly increases surface and storm water runoff (e.g. conversion of pasture land, grass land, or cultivated land to lawn, landscaping, or bare soil; or alteration of soil characteristics).” Per this definition, the replacement of an existing natural turf field with a new natural turf field (with no underdrains) is not considered new pervious surface. New Impervious surfaces include pervious surfaces installed with underdrains. Pollution-generating impervious surface (GPIS) includes pervious surfaces installed with underdrains that are considered to be significant sources of pollutants in stormwater runoff. As defined by 2016 KCSWDM, this includes lawn, landscaping and sports fields.

Reference documents included:

2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual

City of Kirkland Department of Public Works Policy D-10: Addendum to the 2016 King County Surface Water

Design Manual

City of Kirkland GIS information

Available drawings, plans, reports for each school site

Other information and resources needed during the next phase of design will be geotechnical reports, site surveys,

wetland biologist studies and reports.

Working with our design team, we used these documents and studies to provide the best possible design and feedback

with the information we had access to. The following Drawings, Cost Estimates and Design Narrative have been

prepared to assist the City in determining how to proceed with renovating and developing improved playing fields and

the cost associated with a number of options.

We look forward to presenting our recommendations to the Park Board and assisting the City with these important

projects serving the community.

Sincerely yours,

Moghan Lyon

Lyon Landscape Architects

Page 2

Attachment 1

90' BASES22'

95' PROPOSED

118' EXIST. DEPTH

2

0

±

BASEBALL AND SOFTBALL FIELDS

APPROXIMATELY 105,000 SF

FITS 330' x 200' SOCCER FIELD

NATURAL GRASS OR SYNTHETIC TURF

240' FROM HOME

170' FROM HOME

APPROX. 275' TO FOUL POLE

APPR

OX.

280

' TO

FO

UL

POLE

60' BASES

20 LINEAR FEET OF NETTING,20' ABOVE FIELD

EDGE OF EXIST.SKINNED INFIELD

EXISTING FIELD LIMITS

EXISTING TENNIS COURTSOVER DETENTION VAULT

EXISTING TRACK AND FOOTBALL FIELD

warning track

EXISTING SKINNED INFIELD

APPROX. 195' TO FOUL POLE

60' BASES

WATER QUALITYTREATMENT VAULT

FLOW SPLITTER

STORM INLET EXISTDETENTION VAULT

STORM DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS

WATER QUALITY VAULT

FLOW SPLITTERS

DETENTION VAULT

CONNECTION TO EXISTING SYSTEMS

FIELD DRAINS @ 20' OC

FINN HILL MIDDLE SCHOOL BASEBALL FIELD RENOVATION

BCE ENGINEERS

Fife, WA 98424253-922-0446

Lyon LandscapeA r c h i t e c t s1 1 2 3 7 N E 9 5 t h S tK i r k l a n d , W A 9 8 0 3 32 5 3 - 2 0 9 - 4 0 5 3w w w . L y o n L A . c o [email protected]

NAVIX ENGINEERINGSITE | CIVIL

CITY OF KIRKLAND &LAKE WASHINGTON SCHOOL DISTRICT

PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM

Page

3

Atta

chm

ent 1


(253) 209-4053 | LyonLA.com Finn Hill Middle School - Design Narrative

FINN HILL MIDDLE SCHOOL – DESIGN NARRATIVE Two separate fields are proposed for field improvements at the Finn Hill Middle School site:

1. The baseball and softball fields constructed when the new school was built along NE 132nd street, and 2. The older natural grass football field and cinder track that was untouched during the new school construction

located in the northwest corner of the school property, adjacent to single family homes to the west and Big Finn Hill Park to the north.

1. Field Renovation – Baseball & Softball Fields

The baseball and softball fields consist of two natural grass playfields with a warning track, shared outfields, fencing all around, dugouts for both fields and an irrigation system for the shared outfields. The diamonds oppose each other on the southeast and northwest corners of the playfield. We were asked to accommodate multiple age groups, including Colt League, where bases are 90’ apart and Little League where the bases are located 60’ apart. Our plan also reduces the size of the skinned infield while increasing the turf area. To accommodate the field requirements of the Colt League, netting is being suggested atop the existing outfield fencing at the foul poles to effectively increase the dimensions of the field to be approximately 300 feet down each foul line. It is our belief that Colt League baseball would not allow for simultaneous play on the softball field due to limited field size. Renovation options of the existing field include:

a. Renovation of the existing natural grass outfield and skinned infields, or b. Installation of synthetic turf for the entire area, including outfield and infields. c. Field Lighting and netting along the foul poles

Option A: Natural Grass Field & Skinned Infield Renovation In reducing the baseball infield, work would include replacing a portion of the skinned infield with natural grass, to match the newly renovated outfield. The turf will be thatched, aerated, top-dressed with soil and over seeded with a slit seeder. The irrigation system will be adjusted and two quick couplers added for improved infield maintenance. Additionally, netting along the foul poles would address field dimension concerns for older age baseball leagues and new bases would be set. Option B: Synthetic Turf Replacement The Synthetic Turf Replacement option would replace the existing skinned infield and natural grass outfield with 105,000 sf of synthetic turf. The top 12” of field would be removed and replaced with a Base course, Top course and synthetic turf. Underdrains including a collector line and field drains would be installed requiring water treatment requirements. Additionally, the existing irrigation system would be removed and the Point of Connection capped. For both options, field lighting will allow for more playable hours.

2. Stormwater Management - Baseball & Softball Fields

The existing fields have limited drainage infrastructure, with a perimeter collector drain and a “smile” drain located at the grass/dirt infield interface within the north field. The drainage system for the fields connects to a concrete detention vault located beneath the tennis courts. The fields and associated drainage infrastructure

Page 4

Attachment 1



was constructed with the recent 2009-2010 school construction project, and was likely designed in accordance with 2009 King County drainage manual requirements, though this has not been verified as the TIR (storm report) has not been obtained for review. Given the size of the detention facility and the fact that it is designed for the baseball field and tennis court facilities, we speculate that the baseball fields were considered “impervious surfaces” in the calculations. This is an important item to verify as it will have a significant impact on the required flow control facility required with either of the proposed improvements. Option A: Natural Turf Renovation Approximately 4,700 SF of natural turf is proposed to be added to the north baseball field to reduce the size of the dirt infield. The remaining turf outfield will be renovated in place, with minor disturbance. Options with underdrains and without underdrains are being considered. Renovation of the existing natural turf field, with no underdrains, would likely result in no stormwater management system improvements required. If the disturbed area is less than 7,000 SF, then no drainage review would be required. If activities result in more than 7,000 SF of disturbed area, then full drainage review may be required.

Historically, this type of work is classified as maintenance and not subject to stormwater review. However, if drainage review was required, it is still likely that no stormwater management improvements would be required for the ‘no underdrains’ design. Only pervious surfaces would be replaced, and per Section 1.2.3 Core Requirement #3: Flow Control Facilities, the project would meet Basic Exemption (b): less than ¾ acres of new pervious surface will be added.

Water quality treatment will not be required for the ‘no underdrains’ design as the project would meet the Surface Area Exemption requirement stated in 1.2.8 Core Requirement #8: Water Quality Facilities, since less than 5,000 SF of new plus replaced PGIS will be created, and less than ¾ acre of new PGPS will be added.

With underdrains, the existing flow control system may not be adequate and enhanced water quality treatment will be required. The existing stormwater infrastructure does not appear to include water quality treatment for the baseball fields. Therefore, a treatment facility is likely to be necessary upstream from the detention vault. If the existing detention vault is undersized, then additional detention could be required.

Flow control BMP’s per 2016 KCSWDM are not required for natural turf renovation with no underdrains, but would be required with underdrains. Flow control BMP’s may not be feasible on the baseball field site due to poor infiltrating soils and a lack of available space for BMP facilities. Geotechnical evaluation may be required to support any infeasibility requirements.

Stormwater Summary for Option A: Natural Turf Renovation

Category No Underdrains With Underdrains

Drainage Review: Not Required Full Drainage Review

Flow Control: Not Required Possible

Water Quality: Not Required Enhanced Treatment Required1

Flow Control BMP’s: Not Required Required 1 Required if not provided in the current design. Preliminary research does not indicate WQ treatment is provided with the current design.

Page 5

Attachment 1



Option B: Synthetic Turf Renovation Approximately 105,000 SF of field area is proposed for renovation of the existing field with synthetic turf, with underdrains.

Flow control is likely required since the field will be considered an impervious surface, due to the underdrains below the field. The baseball fields currently drain to a detention vault located below the tennis courts. The design of the vault and contributing surfaces has not been available for review by Navix, so how the baseball fields were factored into the design is unknown. Per 2009 KCSWDM, turf fields with underdrains were to be modelled as 75% pervious/25% impervious, while 2016 KCSWDM requires fields with underdrains to be designed as 100% impervious. Therefore, additional detention storage is likely necessary for the new fields.

Synthetic turf is considered Pollution Generating Impervious Surface (PGIS) surface, and therefore enhanced water quality treatment is required. Potentially, water quality (WQ) treatment requirements can be reduced to basic treatment if crumb rubber infill is not used. This will need to be determined by identifying the alternative infill and working with the City of Kirkland stormwater reviewers.

Flow control BMP’s per 2016 KCSWDM would be required for synthetic turf renovation with underdrains. Flow control BMP’s may not be feasible on the baseball field site due to poor infiltrating soils and a lack of available space for BMP facilities. Geotechnical evaluation may be required to support any infeasibility requirements.

Stormwater Summary for Option B: Synthetic Turf

Category With Underdrains

Drainage Review: Full Drainage Review

Flow Control: Required

Water Quality: Required; Enhanced treatment1

Flow Control BMP’s: Required *1 Enhanced treatment required for crumb rubber infill. Alternative infill materials may allow a reduction to Basic treatment, pending City

approval.

Page 6

Attachment 1

11237 NE 95th Street

Kirkland, WA 98033

253-209-4053

Finn Hill Middle School 1 of 1

Estimate of Probable Project Development Cost - Baseball - Grass - Option 1

Line # Cost Item Item Total unit quantity unit cost

Skinned Infield Turf Renovation

1 Remove, haul and dispose portion of skinned infield (6" depth) 4,250$ cubic yard 85 50.00$

2 Place sandy loam topsoil (replacing infield mix) 4,250$ cubic yard 85 50.00$

3 New turf at infield 1,800$ square feet 4,500 0.40$

4 Subtotal Skinned Infield Turf Renovation 10,300$

Existing Turf Renovation - 56,000 sf

5 Thatch existing turf 5,600$ square feet 56,000 0.10$

6 Aerate 5,600$ square feet 56,000 0.10$

7 Topdress with 1" specified soil 8,750$ cubic yards 175 50.00$

8 Overseed with slit seeder 2,800$ square feet 56,000 0.05$

9 Turf Establishment: mow, reseed bare areas, fertilize, weed

control (2x/month for 4 months. 8 visits) 4,000$ visits 8 500.00$

10 Subtotal Existing Turf Renovation 26,750$

Irrigation System

11 Adjust Existing System 4,000$ lump sum 1 4,000.00$

12 Add Quick Coupler 1,000$ each 2 500.00$

13 Subtotal for Irrigation System 5,000$

Furnishings

14 Set new bases 2,000$ lump sum 1 2,000.00$

15 20' tall netting 10,000$ linear feet 100 100.00$

16 Subtotal for Furnishings 12,000$

17 Subtotal Demolition 10,300$

18 Subtotal Turf Renovation 26,750$

19 Subtotal Irrigation System Installation 5,000$


21 Subtotal 54,050$

22 Mobilization @10% 5,405$

23 General Contigency @15% 8,108$

24 Grand Total for FHMS Baseball - Grass 67,563$

Add Alternate - Field Lighting

Lights, Poles, Power, Etc 415,000$ lump sum 1 415,000.00$

Subtotal for Field Lighting 415,000$

Page 7

Attachment 1


Kirkland, WA 98033

253-209-4053


Estimate of Probable Project Development Cost - Baseball - Synthetic - Option 2


Demolition

1 Cap Existing Irrigation POC 500$ lump sum 1 500.00$

2 Subtotal for Demolition 500$

Excavation of Field - 105,000 sf

3 Remove, haul and dispose existing field down 12" 195,000$ cubic yards 3,900 50.00$

4 Remove existing irrigaton and dispose 2,500$ lump sum 1 2,500.00$

5 Subtotal Excavation of Field 197,500$

Synthetic Turf (105,000 sf)

6 8" Collector Line 18,000$ linear feet 400 45.00$

7 4" Field Drains 48,400$ linear feet 4,840 10.00$

8 Base course at 6" depth 52,650$ cubic yards 1,950 27.00$

9 Top course at 4" depth 35,100$ cubic yards 1,300 27.00$

10 New Concrete curb - 6" wide x 12 deep" 4,000$ linear feet 400 10.00$

11 New Synthetic Turf Installed 735,000$ square feet 105,000 7.00$

12 Subtotal for Synthetic Turf 893,150$

Furnishings

13 New bases 2,000$ lump sum 1 2,000.00$

14 20' tall netting 10,000$ linear feet 100 100.00$


Additional Drainage Requirements

16 Detention Facility, 32,000 CF 320,000$ cubic feet 32,000 10.00$

17 Excavate subgrade for Detention Facility 75,000$ cubic yards 1,500 50.00$

18 Water Quality Treatment Facility 57,600$ acre 36,000 1.60$

19 Flow Control BMPs 20,000$ lump sum 1 20,000.00$

20 Site Restoration from vault work 25,000$ lump sum 1 25,000.00$

21 Subtotal for Additional Drainage Requirements 497,600$

Field Lighting

22 Lights, Poles, Power, Etc 415,000$ lump sum 1 415,000.00$

23 Subtotal for Field Lighting 415,000$

Page 8

Attachment 1


Estimate of Probable Project Development Cost - Baseball - Synthetic - Option 2Line # Cost Item Item Total unit quantity unit cost

24 Subtotal forDemolition 500$

25 Subtotal for Excavation of Field 197,500$

26 Subtotal for Synthetic Turf 893,150$



31 Subtotal for Field Lighting 415,000$

32 Subtotal 2,015,750$



35 Grand Total for FHMS Baseball - Synthetic 2,519,688$

Page 9

Attachment 1

8'8'

(7) PATH LIGHTS, 50' OC

EXISTING 20' WIDE TRACKTO BE REMOVED

EXISTING OUTER CURB TO REMAIN

8' WIDE CRUSHED ROCKOR ASPHALT PATH

EXISTING PATH

NEW CONCRETECURB INSIDE PATH

EXISTING FIELD LIMITS

NEW RESTROOM AREA

KC WETLA

ND 187'-

6" BUFFER - 1

2/200

9

FIELD LIGHTING DISTRIBUTION EQUIPMENT

STORM DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS

WATER QUALITY VAULT

FLOW SPLITTERS

DETENTION VAULT

CONNECTION TO EXISTING SYSTEMS

FIELD DRAINS @ 20' OC

FINN HILL MIDDLE SCHOOL MULTI-USE FIELD RENOVATION

BCE ENGINEERS

Fife, WA 98424253-922-0446




PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM

Page

10

Atta

chm

ent 1



3. Field Renovation - Multi-Use Field The existing natural grass football field sits within a 20 foot wide cinder track with 6 inch concrete curbs on either side. There are old wood track events within the D-Zones and east side of the field. The field has a significant crown and catch basins along the perimeter in a noticeable swale. Access to the field requires walking down the fire lane to an asphalt path that leads to the down to the field. There are currently no lights from the parking lot to the field. There is an extensive wetland northeast of the field and school located within the boundaries of Big Finn Hill Park. As part of the design and construction of Finn Hill Junior High (now Middle School) the wetland buffer was determined and reported by the Watershed Company in 2009. At that time, Finn Hill Middle School was part of unincorporated King County. Since then, the school is now within the City of Kirkland limits and the wetland buffer requirements have changed. A new wetland delineation and report will need to be done to determine the buffer restrictions now required. The conceptual field design we provided assumes no field or track renovation within the buffer without any significant mitigation and further information needed from a wetland biologist or other source.

Option A: Natural Grass Field Replacement Due to the existing wetland buffer delineation, the exact boundaries of the buffer would have to be determined before the replacement of the new field. Work would include the removal of the entire existing track, field and goalposts. A 91,500 square foot natural grass multi-use field with no crown is proposed. An 8 foot wide asphalt walking and jogging path defines the limit of the field and a 5,000 square foot Activity Area located in the northwest corner of the new play area. The natural grass multi-use field will include new irrigation. Option B: Synthetic Turf Replacement A synthetic turf field would be within the same limits of work as the proposed natural grass field. There would not be an irrigation system, but an underdrain system including a detention vault, collector drain and field drains would be included. For both options, a 5,000 square foot activity area would be located in the northwest corner. Field lighting will be considered for more playable hours. In addition to the field lighting, path lighting would lead from the fire lane to provide greater visibility and improved safety down to the field. A restroom near the field is an additional option to consider. The previous field area within the buffer may be an additional 21,000 square feet of usable space pending further information regarding the wetland buffer restrictions, or an enhanced landscape buffer.

4. Stormwater Management - Multi-Use Field

The total disturbed area would be approximately 130,000 SF. Approximately 12,000 SF of impervious track surface would be replaced with asphalt, and approximately 5,000 SF of Activity Area is proposed. The field area would be either no new pervious surface (natural turf, no underdrains), or 12,000 SF of new impervious (synthetic or natural turf, with underdrains).

According to Kirkland GIS maps, the existing field includes a perimeter drainage system that collects runoff and discharges it to an existing wetland to the north, located within Big Finn Hill Park.

Page 11

Attachment 1



A small wetland is located with to the southwest of the field, but does not appear to collect any runoff.

Option A: Natural Turf Renovation

One option under consideration is a natural turf field restoration. Due to the downstream wetland where the storm drainage currently drains, flow control facilities are likely to be required. The required design approach would need to be verified with the City, and a wetland hydrologist.

Water quality treatment may not be required for the ‘no underdrains’ design as the project could potentially meet the Surface Area Exemption requirement stated in 1.2.8 Core Requirement #8: Water Quality Facilities, since less than 5,000 SF of new plus replaced PGIS will be created, and less than ¾ acre of new PGPS will be added. However, given the downstream wetland, water quality treatment could be required. The required design approach would need to be verified with the City, and a wetland hydrologist.

If underdrains are utilized in the design, then flow control and water quality treatment would be required, since the field surface would be considered a new impervious surface.

The type of flow control system could take a variety of forms, with storage for runoff provided in pipes, a gravel layer below the field, a vault, or a combination of these elements.

The size of the flow control system can vary depending on modelling requirements for the system. Requirements contained within 2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual, Reference 5, Guide Sheet 3: Wetland Protection Guidelines (Volumetric Analysis) must be implemented per agency requirements and may have significant impacts to the flow control system design and sizing.

Analysis under wetland protection guidelines is complex and a qualified hydrologist should be consulted to determine best practices for this particular wetland. Additionally, the City of Kirkland will need to approve the modelling approach. For the purposes of this study, the flow control system is assumed to be designed in accordance with Conservation Flow Control area requirements.

Enhanced water quality treatment will be required prior to discharge to the downstream wetland. Treatment is likely to be provided by a proprietary filter system, such as the Modular Wetland Stormwater Biofiltration System (MWS), by BioClean, or the Filterra Bioscape

Flow control BMP’s per 2016 KCSWDM would be required for natural turf renovation with no underdrains, and for the track replacement and play areas. Bioretention facilities at the north end may be feasible if they are allowed in the buffer area, or an infiltration gallery below the field may be feasible.

Stormwater Summary for Option A: Natural Turf


Drainage Review: Full Drainage Review Full Drainage Review

Flow Control: Required1 Required1

Water Quality: Likely Required2 Required2

Flow Control BMPs: Required Required 1Compliance with wetland protection criteria per 2016 KCSWDM

2 Enhanced treatment

Option B: Synthetic Turf Renovation A synthetic turf field may be implemented for the field renovation. With this design, underdrains will be utilized and therefore a flow control system will be required. The type of flow control system could take a variety of

Page 12

Attachment 1



forms, with storage for runoff provided in pipes, a gravel layer below the field, a vault, or a combination of these elements. The size of the flow control system can vary depending on modelling requirements for the system. Requirements contained within 2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual, Reference 5, Guide Sheet 3: Wetland Protection Guidelines (Volumetric Analysis) must be implemented per agency requirements and may have significant impacts to the flow control system design and sizing. Analysis under wetland protection guidelines is complex and a qualified hydrologist may need to be consulted to determine best practices for this particular wetland. Additionally, the City of Kirkland will need to approve the modelling approach, and it is recommended that a wetland hydrologist evaluate the wetland and proposed stormwater management design. For the purposes of this study, the flow control system is assumed to be designed in accordance with Conservation Flow Control area requirements. Enhanced water quality treatment will be required prior to discharge to the downstream wetland. Treatment is likely to be provided by a proprietary filter system, such as the Modular Wetland Stormwater Biofiltration System (MWS), by BioClean, or a Filterra Bioscape Vault, by Contech. Flow control BMP’s per 2016 KCSWDM would be required for synthetic turf renovation with underdrains. Bioretention facilities at the north end may be feasible if they are allowed in the buffer area.

Stormwater Summary for Option B: Synthetic Turf

Category With Underdrains

Drainage Review: Full Drainage Review

Flow Control: Required1

Water Quality: Required, Enhanced Treatment

Flow Control BMPs: Required 1Compliance with wetland protection criteria per 2016 KCSWDM

5. Electrical Engineering Systems Requirements – Baseball & Softball Fields AND Multi-Use Field

Provide new electrical systems including power distribution and field lighting that meets all current codes including NEC and energy requirements. Site Utilities and Power Distribution The existing school appears to be fed with a 3000A, 277/480 Volt electrical service. It is expected the existing service for the school is adequate to support the new field lighting load. Power will be extended from the existing main electrical room with (2) 3-phase, 480 Volt, 100A feeders, (1) to the track and soccer field and one to the baseball fields. If it is determined that both fields will be provided with lights, it is possible that one feeder will be extended to a central point for both fields. Field Lighting Field lighting will all utilize High Efficient LED fixtures in order to achieve three primary objectives when compared to traditional HID sources:

a. To reduce maintenance over the lifetime of the lighting system b. Increased energy savings, c. Precise control of the light to direct it only to the field or area it is intended to illuminate.

Page 13

Attachment 1



These LED field lights will minimize glare on the field, provide a more comfortable environment, and give a better control for the light aiming than the traditional HID lights. The fixtures will be selected and oriented to ensure light spill is minimized. The LED sources will be provided with CCT 5700K and minimum of 75 CRI. The lighting will provide measured average illumination level of the mean in accordance with IESNA class IV, which is average illumination level at 20 footcandles (FC) for soccer, football and softball/baseball outfields and 30 FC for the infield. The light levels will meet or exceed the footcandle requirement. The footcandle level shall have a uniformity ratio of maximum to minimum ratio of not greater than 2.05:1.0 on soccer, football, softball, and baseball fields.

Walkway Lighting Walkway lighting, for increased safety and security after the field lights are turned off, will be provided along the existing pedestrian path between the approximate Northeast corner of the Soccer field and the Northwest Corner of the existing fire lane. The new lights will be on approximate 10’-12’ high pedestrian scale poles and will use High Efficiency LED sources to match existing site lighting to the greatest extent possible. The lighting will be designed to an average of about 0.5 FC of illumination level in accordance with IESNA.

Page 14

Attachment 1


Kirkland, WA 98033

253-209-4053


Estimate of Probable Project Development Cost - Multi-Use & Path - Grass - Option 1


Demolition

1 Remove existing Football goalposts 500$ each 2 250.00$

2 Remove edges of field events 500$ lump sum 1 500.00$

3 Remove inside concrete curb of track and dispose 1,440$ linear feet 480 3.00$


Earthwork of Field (87,500 sf) & Track (29,000 sf)

5 Excavate field to subgrade (10" average depth for crown) 135,000$ cubic yards 2,700 50.00$

6 Excavate track to subgrade (6" depth) 27,000$ cubic yards 540 50.00$

7 Subtotal Earthwork of Field & Track 162,000$

New Seeded Turf - 91,500 sf

8 Imported sandy loam topsoil and spread, 6" depth 85,000$ cubic yards 1,700 50.00$

9 Seed with a Brillion drill 9,150$ square feet 91,500 0.10$

10 Adjust existing irrigation system 20,000$ lump sum 1 20,000.00$

11 Turf Establishment: mow, reseed bare areas, fertilize,

weed control (2x/month for 10 months. 20 visits) 10,000$ visits 20 500.00$

12 Subtotal New Seeded Turf 124,150$

Walking Path - 12,000 sf

13 Asphalt (crushed rock path - $15,000) 30,000$ square feet 12,000 2.50$

14 New Concrete curb - 6" wide x 12 deep" 18,000$ linear feet 1,800 10.00$

15 Subtotal for Walking Path 48,000$



17 Excavate subgrade for Detention Facility 46,250$ cubic yards 925 50.00$

18 Water Quality Treatment Facility 90,000$ acre 2.5 36,000.00$



Landscape Buffer Enhancement

21 Trees, shrubs, groundcover and temporary irrigation 84,000$ square feet 21,000 4.00$

22 Subtotal for Landscape Buffer Enhancement 84,000$

Page 15

Attachment 1


Estimate of Probable Project Development Cost - Multi-Use & Path - Grass - Option 1



24 Subtotal Earthwork Field & Track 162,000$


26 Subtotal Walking Path 48,000$


28 Subtotal Landscape Buffer Enhancement 84,000$

29 Subtotal 796,840$



32 Grand Total for FHMS Multi-Use Grass - Option 1 996,050$

Add Alternate - Lighting

Path Lights 33,000$ lump sum 1 33,000.00$

Field Lighting 260,000$ lump sum 1 260,000.00$

Subtotal for Lighting 293,000$

Optional General Improvements

Restroom (or Porta Potty)

Play Equipment

Picnic Shelter

Page 16

Attachment 1


Kirkland, WA 98033

253-209-4053


Estimate of Probable Project Development Cost - Multi-Use & Path - Synthetic - Option 2


Demolition

1 Remove existing Football goalposts 500$ each 2 250.00$

2 Remove edges of field events 500$ lump sum 1 500.00$

3 Remove inside concrete curb of track and dispose 1,440$ linear feet 480 3.00$

4 Cap existing irrigation system 500$ lump sum 1 500.00$


Earthwork of Field (87,500 sf) & Track (29,000 sf)

6 Excavate field to subgrade (8" average depth for crown +

12" below curbs = 20") 270,000$ cubic yard 5,400 50.00$

7 Excavate track to subgrade (6" depth) 27,000$ cubic yard 540 50.00$

8 Subtotal Earthwork of Field & Track 297,000$

Synthetic Field - 91,500 sf

9 8" Collector Line 26,100$ linear feet 580 45.00$

10 4" Field Drains 46,000$ linear feet 4,600 10.00$

11 Base Course - 6" depth 45,900$ cubic yards 1,700 27.00$

12 Top Course - 4" depth 31,050$ cubic yards 1,150 27.00$

13 New Concrete curb - 6" wide x 12 deep" 18,000$ linear feet 1,800 10.00$

14 Synthetic Turf 640,500$ square feet 91,500 7.00$

15 Subtotal Synthetic Field 807,550$

Walking Path - 12,000 sf

16 Asphalt (crushed rock path - $15,000) 30,000$ square feet 12,000 2.50$




19 Excavate subgrade for Detention Facility 140,000$ cubic yards 2,800 50.00$

20 Water Quality Treatment Facility 90,000$ acre 2.5 36,000.00$



Lighting

23 Path Lights 33,000$ lump sum 1 33,000.00$

24 Field Lighting 260,000$ lump sum 1 260,000.00$


Page 17

Attachment 1


Estimate of Probable Project Development Cost - Multi-Use & Path - Synthetic - Option 2






29 Subtotal Earthwork Field & Track 297,000$

30 Subtotal New Synthetic Turf 807,550$

31 Subtotal Walking Path 30,000$


33 Subtotal Field Lighting 293,000$

34 Subtotal Landscape Buffer 84,000$

35 Subtotal 2,384,490$



38 Grand Total for FHMS Multi-Use Synthetic - Option 2 2,980,613$

Optional General Improvements

Restroom (or Porta Potty)

Play Equipment

Picnic Shelter

Page 18

Attachment 1

EXISTING BIO-RETENTION FILTER.OUTSIDE LIMIT OF WORK

LATERALIRRIGATION

LINES, 50' OC

TIE INTOEXIST. FIELD

REMOVE (2) EXISTING BACKSTOPS

(2) NEW BACKSTOPS

IRRIGATIONVALVES

IRRIGATION MAINLINE

ROSE HILL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PLAYFIELD RENOVATION




PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM

Page

19

Atta

chm

ent 1


(253) 209-4053 | LyonLA.com Rose Hill Elementary - Design Narrative

ROSE HILL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL – DESIGN NARRATIVE

1. Field Renovation The northwest corner of Rose Hill Elementary School is the site of an existing natural grass playfield with a backstop at the southwest and southeast corners. There is a fenced bio-retention filter used for water quality treatment of the parking lot run off in the southwest corner of the area that will not be disturbed within the scope of the field renovation. The playfield currently does not have an irrigation system or underdrain system. Due east of the field, separated by a playground and concrete curb, is a natural grass playfield that has been upgraded through the Kirkland Playfield Partnership during construction of the recently built school. The proposed renovation of the west field is approximately 71,000 square feet. Turf renovation would include the removal of the top 6” of grass, weeds, roots and soil and will be replaced with 6” of new topsoil. The field will be seeded and an irrigation system added. The irrigation system will tie in to the existing mainline in the southeast corner, as shown on the record drawings received from LWSD. Additionally, the existing backstops will be replaced with new backstops located at the southeast and northwest corners to allow for simultaneous play. An alternative option to seeding would be the use of sand-grown sod reducing the establishment period.

2. Stormwater Management Options:

Option A: Renovation of the existing natural turf field, with no underdrains.

Renovation of the existing natural turf field, with no underdrains, would likely result in no stormwater management system improvements required. If the disturbed area is less than 7,000 SF, then no drainage review would be required. If activities result in more than 7,000 SF of disturbed area, then full drainage review may be required. Historically, this type of work is classified as maintenance and not subject to stormwater review. However, if drainage review was required, it is still likely that no stormwater management improvements would be required for the ‘no underdrains’ design. Only pervious surfaces would be replaced, and per Section 1.2.3 Core Requirement #3: Flow Control Facilities, the project would meet Basic Exemption (b): less than ¾ acres of new pervious surface will be added.

Water quality treatment will not be required for the ‘no underdrains’ design as the project would meet the Surface Area Exemption requirement stated in 1.2.8 Core Requirement #8: Water Quality Facilities, since less than 5,000 SF of new plus replaced PGIS will be created, and less than ¾ acre of new PGPS will be added.

Flow Control BMP’s would not be required for the ‘no underdrains’ design as the project would only be replacing existing pervious surfaces.

Option B: Renovation of the natural turf field, with underdrains.

Full drainage review would be required for a turf renovation design that includes underdrains, since the field would then be considered an impervious surface and minimum thresholds would be exceeded. Flow control would be required for the field design, designed to Conservation Flow Control requirements. Flow control would likely consist of either a detention tank or vault, or potentially a layer of gravel storage below the field could provide adequate detention.

Page 20

Attachment 1


(253) 209-4053 | LyonLA.com Rose Hill Elementary - Design Narrative

Water quality treatment would be required for Enhanced Treatment, and would likely be provided by a proprietary filter system, or, if the existing soils have the required treatment properties, by infiltration.

Flow Control BMP’s would be required for the field renovation with underdrains. Infiltration trenches would likely be feasible to satisfy this requirement.

Stormwater Summary for Natural Turf Renovation


Drainage Review: None or Full Drainage Review1 Full Drainage Review

Flow Control: Not Required Required

Water Quality: Not Required Required, Enhanced Treatment

Flow Control BMPs: Not Required Required 1 None if disturbed area is less than 7,000 SF or if the renovation is considered maintenance.

Page 21

Attachment 1


Kirkland, WA 98033

253-209-4053

Rose Hill Elementary 1 of 1

Estimate of Probable Project Development Cost - Natural Grass Field


Demolition

1 Existing Backstops 500$ each 2 250.00$

2 Subtotal Demolition 500$

Turf Renovation - 71,000 sf

3 Remove 6" of grass, weeds and roots, haul and dispose of materials 65,000$ cubic yards 1,300 50.00$

4 Till/cultivate exist. Soil 6" deep & grade smooth 1,920$ hours 16 120.00$

5 Place 6" of sandy loam topsoil 70,000$ cubic yards 1,400 50.00$

6 Cultivate topsoil into exist. Tilled soil, 10" min. depth 2,880$ hours 24 120.00$

7 Seed with Brillion drill 7,100$ square feet 71,000 0.10$

8 Turf Establishment: mow, reseed bare areas, fertilize, weed control

(2x/month for 4 months. 8 visits) 4,000$ visits 8 500.00$


Irrigation System Installation

10 Controller Install 500$ lump sum 1 500.00$

11 Six Zone System 30,000$ each 6 5,000.00$

12 Subtotal for Irrigation System Installation 30,500$

Furnishings

13 Patterson Williams Backstop - Model No. 1228-00G 10,400$ each 2 5,200.00$


15 Subtotal for Demolition 500$

16 Subtotal for Turf Renovation 150,900$






22 Grand Total for Rose Hill - Natural Grass Field 236,529$

Page 22

Attachment 1

LATERALIRRIGATION LINES,

50' OC, TYP

IRRIGATIONVALVES

IRRIGATION MAINLINE

PLAY FIELD - 36,704 SF

NATURAL GRASS OR SYNTHETIC TURF

UNSTRUCTURED PLAY AREA

248'

148'

UP TO (3) MICRO SOCCER FIELDS75' x 90'

ANTICIPATED CONCRETE CURBAROUND PERIMETER OF FIELDIN CURRENT DESIGN

LIMIT OF WORK

PETER KIRK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PLAYFIELD UPGRADE




PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM

Page

23

Atta

chm

ent 1


(253) 209-4053 | LyonLA.com Peter Kirk Elementary - Design Narrative

PETER KIRK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL – DESIGN NARRATIVE

1. Field Improvements

Peter Kirk Elementary School is currently in the Design Development Phase by Studio Meng Strazzara and their Design Team. The current design of the play field will consist of a rectangular 148’ x 248’ sand field with underdrains and a perimeter concrete curb per Lake Washington School District standards. The undrain system will collect runoff and convey it to a new detention vault facility located at the east extent of the field.

2. Stormwater Management

If the sand field was upgraded to either natural grass or synthetic turf, then water quality treatment for the stormwater discharge from the field underdrain system would be required. Per LPD, the school design team’s civil engineer, a cartridge filter system would likely be utilized for water quality treatment upstream from detention due to space and elevation constraints. If the potential upgrade to natural or synthetic turf were incorporated into the current design now, the potential cost impacts for the upgrade would be significantly reduced. There are several options for incorporating the field upgrades into the current design. The water quality (WQ) treatment filter facility could be installed with or without filters so no pipe revisions or excavation would be required. Or, alternately, a catch basin or a wye could be installed with the school construction to account for the required inlet to outlet drop in pipe elevations at the WQ treatment facility. Then, the WQ treatment facility could be installed at a later date without additional pipe replacement and associated excavation or detention vault modifications.

Stormwater Summary for Natural or Synthetic Turf Renovation

Category With Underdrains (already in the school design)

Drainage Review: None if accounted for by the school design team’s drainage design Flow Control: Already provided; no extra storage needed Water Quality: Required, Enhanced Treatment Flow Control BMPs: Already provided

Page 24

Attachment 1


Kirkland, WA 98033

253-209-4053

Peter Kirk Elementary 1 of 1

Estimate of Probable Project Development Cost - Natural Grass Field - Option 1


New Seeded Turf - 36,704 sf

1 Imported sandy loam topsoil and spread, 8" depth 45,000$ cubic yards 900 50.00$

2 Pea Gravel subbase, 4" depth 22,500$ cubic yards 450 50.00$

3 Seed with a Brillion drill 3,670$ square feet 36,704 0.10$

4 Turf Establishment: mow, reseed bare areas, fertilize,

weed control (2x/month for 10 months. 20 visits) 10,000$ visits 20 500.00$


Irrigation System


7 Six Zone System 30,000$ each 6 5,000.00$

8 Subtotal for Irrigation System 30,500$

Storm Drain System

9 Water Quality Treatment - Filter System 30,000$ lump sum 1 30,000.00$

10 Subtotal for Storm Drain System 30,000$


12 Subtotal Irrigation System 30,500$

13 Subtotal Storm Drain System 30,000$


15 Mobilization @0% - included in new school construction -$


17 Grand Total for Peter Kirk - Natural Grass Field 158,671$

Page 25

Attachment 1


Kirkland, WA 98033

253-209-4053

Peter Kirk Elementary 1 of 1

Estimate of Probable Project Development Cost - Synthetic Turf Field - Option 2


Synthetic Turf Field - 36,704 sf

1 Field Drains - Included in new school -$

2 Base Course - 6" depth 18,360$ cubic yards 680 27.00$

3 Top Course - 4" depth 12,285$ cubic yards 455 27.00$

4 Synthetic Turf 256,928$ square feet 36,704 7.00$

5 Subtotal Synthetic Turf Field 287,573$

Stormwater System

6 Water Quality Treatment - Filter System 30,000$ lump sum 1 30,000.00$

7 Subtotal for Stormwater System 30,000$

8 Subtotal Synthetic Turf Field 287,573$

9 Subtotal Stormwater System 30,000$


11 Mobilization @0% - included in new school construction -$


13 Grand Total for Peter Kirk - Synthetic Turf Field 355,682$

NIC

Page 26

Attachment 1

LANDSCAPE BUFFERENHANCEMENT

(APPROXIMATELY 35,000 SF)

RENOVATED MULTI-USE FIELDOUTSIDE OF STREAM & WETLAND

BUFFERS (APPROXIMATELY 40,000 SF)

LATERALIRRIGATION LINES,

APPROX. 45' OC

IRRIGATIONVALVES

IRRIGATION MAINLINE

(3) MICRO SOCCER FIELDS75' x 90'

TIE INTO EXISTING MAINLINE.LOCATION TO BE CONFIRMED

6' HT CHAIN LINK FENCE AROUNDWEST AND SOUTH SIDES

6' HT CHAIN LINK FENCE AROUNDWEST AND SOUTH SIDES

APPROX. 140'

AP

PR

OX

. 265

'

JUANITA HIGH SCHOOL PLAYFIELD RENOVATION




PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM

Page

27

Atta

chm

ent 1


(253) 209-4053 | LyonLA.com Juanita High School - Design Narrative

JUANITA HIGH SCHOOL – DESIGN NARRATIVE

1. Field Renovation

The southwest corner of the Juanita High School property is the site of an abandoned baseball field. The backstop, netting and dugouts are still in place and in disrepair. The current baseball field used by the school encroaches on the outfield of the abandoned field, leaving approximately 75,000 square feet of neglected open lawn and skinned infield. A preliminary review of existing conditions indicates the presence of a stream and wetland along the west and south field borders shown in a Shannon & Wilson, Inc. drawing labeled “Wetland and Stream Delineation Map” in a November 2016 Wetland Delineation Report. Buffers for the stream and wetland significantly reduce the available field area for renovation. The potential area for renovation left is approximately 40,000 square feet. Turf renovation will include the removal of the top 6” of grass, weeds, roots and soil and replaced with 6” of new topsoil. The field would be re-seeded with the addition of an irrigation system. A perimeter 6 foot tall fence with access gates would separate the new field from the area left within the buffer. Turf establishment may take up to 10 months before optimal playable conditions. The remaining 35,000 sf within the buffer area would be restored as a natural landscape enhancement buffer.

Page 28

Attachment 1


Kirkland, WA 98033

253-209-4053

Juanita High School 1 of 1

Estimate of Probable Project Development Cost - Natural Grass - Partial Field - 40,000 SF


Demolition

1 Remove existing backstop and netting 4,000$ each 1 4,000.00$

2 Remove and fill existing dugouts 8,000$ each 2 4,000.00$


Turf Renovation - 40,000 sf

4 Remove 6" of grass, weeds and roots, haul and dispose of materials 37,500$ cubic yards 750 50.00$

5 Till/cultivate exist. Soil 6" deep & grade smooth 1,920$ hours 16 120.00$

6 Place 6" of sandy loam topsoil 37,500$ cubic yards 750 50.00$

7 Cultivate topsoil into exist. Tilled soil, 10" min. depth 2,160$ hours 18 120.00$

8 Seed with Brillion drill 4,000$ square feet 40,000 0.10$

9 Turf Establishment: mow, reseed bare areas, fertilize, weed control

(2x/month for 10 months. 20 visits) 10,000$ visits 20 500.00$


Irrigation System Installation


12 Four Zone System 20,000$ each 4 5,000.00$


Perimeter Fencing

14 6' tall fencing with access gates 11,700$ linear feet 450 26.00$

15 Subtotal for Perimeter Fencing 11,700$






20 Subtotal Irrigation System Installation 20,500$

21 Subtotal Perimeter Fencing 11,700$

22 Subtotal Landscape Buffer Enhancement 140,000$




28 Grand Total for Juanita HS PartialField - Natural Grass 327,190$

Page 29

Attachment 1

Rose HillElementary Juanita High

Natural Grass Synthetic Turf Natural Grass Upper Natural Upper Natural Upper Synthetic Lower Natural Lower Natural Lower Turf Natural Grassw/Lights w/Lights w/Lights w/Lights

Project Cost Estimate 219,206$ 512,955$ 376,351$ 112,424$ 951,537$ 4,196,288$ 1,654,522$ 2,261,172$ 4,959,205$ 551,992$

Playfield M&O Costs 24,699$ 13,535$ 41,355$ 70,799$ 89,224$ 63,650$ 71,179$ 91,429$ 58,075$ 42,289$

Mitigation Areas M&O Costs 9,600$ 9,600$ 9,600$ 4,800$

Added Annual Hours of Use 720 792 720 720 1440 1584 720 1440 1584 720

Projected Annual Revenue 1,440$ 19,800$ 1,440$ 1,440$ 2,880$ 39,600$ 1,440$ 2,880$ 39,600$ 1,440$

Peter Kirk Elementary Finn Hill Middle School

SUMMARY: PLAYFIELD OPTIONS

Attachm

ent 2

City School Partnership / Overview of Site Costs

Site Scenario Labor Hours Material Cost Utilities Cost Labor Costs Total Cost

Finn Hill Upper Grass 1013 10,039$ 10,110$ 50,650$ 70,799$ Finn Hill Upper Synthetic 891 675$ 44,550$ 45,225$ Finn Hill Upper w / Lights 40 16,425$ 2,000$ 18,425$

Finn Hill Lower Grass 984 10,858$ 11,121$ 49,200$ 71,179$ Finn Hill Lower Synthetic 740 825$ 37,000$ 37,825$ Finn Hill Lower w / Lights 40 18,250$ 2,000$ 20,250$ Finn Hill Lower Mitigation Maint 192 9,600$ 9,600$

Peter Kirk El Grass 352 3,595$ 3,504$ 17,600$ 24,699$ Peter Kirk El Synthetic 262 435$ 13,100$ 13,535$

Rose Hill El Grass 541 7,531$ 6,774$ 27,050$ 41,355$

Juanita High School Grass 687 4,125$ 3,814$ 34,350$ 42,289$ Juanita High School Mitigation Maint 96 4,800$ 4,800$

Notes:

* Finn Hill Elementary - Open / Close hours will be lower if both upper & lower part of the project * Water & Power costs based on current costs and square footage calculations / 365 days per year for lights * Synergy at RH El with Open / Close based on current maintenace responsibilities on-site * All costs based on current practices and square footage provided by consultant * Labor hours only - @ $50/hr - Average total costs of Lead, Senior, and Grounds * Equipment & Vehicle costs not added * No over-head costs added * Labor hours could increase with prep's & tournaments / Practice level of service only

Attachm

ent 2

Finn Hill Middle School Playfields

Task Natural (No lights) Natural (w/ lights) Synthetic w/ lights) Natural (No lights) Natural (w/ lights) Synthetic w/ lights)

Construction $67,563 $586,313 $2,519,688 $996,050 $1,362,300 $2,980,613Design/Engineering/Reports @ 15% $10,134 $87,947 $377,953 $149,408 $204,345 $447,092Add Design: Environmental/Stormwater @ 05% $0 $0 $125,984 $49,803 $68,115 $149,031Construction Contingency @ 10% $6,756 $58,631 $251,969 $99,605 $136,230 $298,061Taxes @ 10% $6,756 $58,631 $251,969 $99,605 $136,230 $298,061Permits; Owner Items; Misc. $5,000 $10,000 $23,000 $5,000 $5,000 $23,000Project Management @ 12% $8,108 $70,358 $302,363 $119,526 $163,476 $357,674Construction Inspection @ 12% $8,108 $70,358 $302,363 $119,526 $163,476 $357,6741% for Art $0 $9,300 $41,000 $16,000 $22,000 $48,000

Total $112,424 $951,537 $4,196,288 $1,654,522 $2,261,172 $4,959,205

Square feet of play space 105,000 105,000 105,000 105,000 105,000 105,000 Project cost per square foot $1.07 $9.06 $39.96 $15.76 $21.53 $47.23

Upper Lower

Attachm

ent 2

Rose Hill Elementary School West Playfield

Natural Grass

Construction $236,529Design/Engineering/Reports @ 15% $35,479Add Design: Environmental/Stormwater @ 05% $0Construction Contingency @ 10% $23,653Taxes @ 10% $23,653Permits; Owner Items; Misc. $5,000Project Management @ 12% $28,383Construction Inspection @ 12% $23,6531% for Art $0

Total $376,351

Square feet of play space 71,000 Project cost per square foot $5.30

Attachm

ent 2

Peter Kirk Elementary School Playfield(Assumes that fields are built as part of School Construction by LWSD)

Task Natural Grass Synthetic Turf

Construction $158,671 $355,682Design/Engineering/Reports @ 15% $23,801 $53,352Add Design: Environmental/Stormwater @ 05% $0 $17,784Construction Contingency @ 10% $15,867 $35,568Taxes @ 10% $15,867 $35,568Permits; Owner Items; Misc. $5,000 $15,000Project Management @ 12% $0 $0Construction Inspection @ 12% $0 $01% for Art $0 $0

Total $219,206 $512,955

Square feet of play space 36,704 36,704 Project cost per square foot $5.97 $13.98

Attachm

ent 2

Juanita High School West Playfield

Grass

Construction $327,190Design/Engineering/Reports @ 15% $49,079Add Design: Environmental/Stormwater @ 05% $16,360Construction Contingency @ 10% $32,719Taxes @ 10% $32,719Permits; Owner Items; Misc. $10,000Project Management @ 12% $39,263Construction Inspection @ 12% $39,2631% for Art $5,400

Total $551,992

Square feet of play space 40,000 Project cost per square foot $13.80

Attachm

ent 2

Per SF Project Cost Comparison

Natural Grass Fields SF CostsFH Middle Upper 105,000 sf 1.07$ RH Elem 71,000 sf 5.30$ FH Middle Upper w/lights 105,000 sf 5.58$ PK Elem 36,704 sf 5.97$ Juanita High 40,000 sf 13.80$ FH Middle Lower 116,500 sf 15.76$ FH Middle Lower w/lights 116,500 sf 21.53$

Synthetic Turf FieldsPK Elem 36,704 sf 13.98$ FH Middle Upper w/lights 105,000 sf 39.96$ FH Middle Lower w/lights 116,500 sf 47.23$

Attachm

ent 2

CITY OF KIRKLAND Department of Parks & Community Services 123 5th Avenue, Kirkland, WA 98033 425.587.3300 www.kirklandwa.gov

To: Park Board From: Michael Cogle, Deputy Director Date: September 7, 2017 Subject: Juanita Beach Bathhouse Replacement Project Update RECOMMENDATION That the Park Board receive a project update from staff. BACKGROUND In June the Park Board received an update on the Juanita Beach Bathhouse Replacement project, including details about a projected budget shortfall based on cost estimates derived from building design at the 30% completion milestone. Subsequent to the Board meeting staff has provided briefings to the City Council and received direction from Council to investigate a number of strategies to bring the project closer to within budget. At the Board’s September meeting staff will summarize the information we have gathered thus far and some cost reduction options that will be considered by the City Council. Staff anticipates receiving further project direction from the City Council at their meeting of September 19.



MEMORANDUM To: Park Board From: Michael Cogle, Deputy Director Date: September 4, 2017 Subject: REQUEST TO RENAME MARINA PARK RECOMMENDATION: That the Park Board consider a request to rename Marina Park or name the Pavilion at Marina Park after Allen Locke and provide guidance to staff on next steps, if any. BACKGROUND DISCUSSION: At the Park Board’s regular meeting of June 14, 2017 former Mayor Bill Woods, former Mayor Bob Neir, and former Kirkland Fire Chief Bob Ely spoke in support of renaming Marina Park in honor of former Kirkland City Manager Allen Locke. Mr. Locke served as Kirkland’s first City Manager for 20 years, from 1965 to 1985. During Mr. Locke’s tenure in Kirkland many of its iconic waterfront parks were developed, including Marina Park. Mr. Locke died in 2014. A letter to the Park Board from Mr. Woods is included as Attachment A. The City Council’s Park Naming Policy (Attachment B) directs the Park Board to consider names suggested by the community and to make recommendations to the City Council. Staff suggests the following naming options for the Park Board to consider related to this request:

• Rename Marina Park to: Allen Locke Park • Rename Marina Park to: Allen Locke Marina Park • Alternatively, name the Marina Park Pavilion as: Allen Locke Pavilion at Marina Park • Decline the request to rename Marina Park or the option to name the Pavilion after Mr.

Locke If the Park Board is interested in the proposed name change then staff recommends that the Park Board solicit public comment on the proposal prior to formalizing its recommendation to the City Council. Final action by the Board on the proposal would occur at a subsequent Board meeting later this year after public input is considered.

10.a.


Attachment A

Attachment B


MEMORANDUM To: Park Board From: Lynn Zwaagstra, Director Date: September 4, 2017 Subject: REQUIRED TRAINING RECOMMENDATION: That the Park Board review and complete the required training for Boards and Commissions prior to the October 11, 2017, Park Board meeting. BACKGROUND DISCUSSION: All Boards and Commission members are required to view the State Attorney General’s open government and public records training. This training consists of watching the videos available publicly via a weblink as indicated below. Also for your reference, a step-by-step open government training document is attached that contains instructions on how to find the trainings on the Attorney General’s website should you have any difficulty with the links below. Open Public Meetings Act Video – 16 minutes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3B7_Xm3I8c Public Records Act Training Video – 22 minutes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38k1XPpT9Po In addition to this training provided by the Attorney General, the City of Kirkland requires a Code of Ethics training and verification that Board and Commission members have read both the Code of Ethics and Code of Conduct. Both the Code of Ethics and Code of Conduct are attached and the video training link is listed below. http://kirkland.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=23&clip_id=2656 At the October Park Board meeting, Park Board members will complete all verification paperwork. Attachment A Attorney General “How To” Reference Attachment B City of Kirkland Code of Ethics Attachment C City of Kirkland Code of Conduct

10.b.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3B7_Xm3I8c

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38k1XPpT9Po

http://kirkland.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=23&clip_id=2656

HOW TO TAKE ONLINE OPEN GOVERNMENT TRAINING

THROUGH THE WASHINGTON STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE WEB PAGE

STEPS

1. Click here to access the “Washington State Attorney General’s Office Open Government Training Web Page.”

2. Scroll down to the “Open Government Training Curriculum.”

3. Select the training lesson(s) you need to take. In sum, effective July 1, 2014, within 90 days of appointment/taking

office and at intervals of no more than 4 years thereafter:

Members of multimember governing bodies need to take open public meetings training. (Lesson 3). The

members who are elected local or statewide officials must also take records training. (Lessons 2 and 4).

Other elected local and elected statewide officials must take records training. (Lessons 2 and 4).

Records officers must take records training. (Lessons 2 and 4).

Although not required, other public officials and public employees can take the trainings as well. For example,

incumbents in their office/position as of July 1, 2014 are strongly recommended to take the training in 2014

relevant to their position, as described above. See RCW 42.30.205, RCW 42.56.150, and RCW 42.56.152; and Q & A.

4. View the online training lesson(s).

5. When you are done, it is recommended you document the training you received.

More details are below.

► If you need open meetings training (see RCW 42.30.205):

Watch the Open Public Meetings Act (RCW 42.30) video* (16 minutes) or review the PowerPoint. They are in

Lesson 3. Lesson 3 is for state and local agencies.

► If you need records training (see RCW 42.56.150 and RCW 42.56.152):

Watch the Public Records Act (RCW 42.56) video* (22 minutes) or review the PowerPoint. They are in

Lesson 2. Lesson 2 is for state and local agencies.

+ and

Review the Records Retention and Management (RCW 40.14) online tutorial for your position linked in

Lesson 4. Those tutorials are provided by the State Archives. You can also go directly to those tutorials here:

Local Agencies

If you are a local official, click here to review the online tutorial.

If you are a local employee, click here to review the online tutorial.

State Agencies

If you are a state official, click here to review the online tutorial.

If you are a state employee, click here to review the online tutorial.

► Last step: If you want to document the training (recommended):

You can use the sample certificate under “Last Step” at the bottom of the AGO Open Government Training

Web Page.

Or, your agency may have other methods to document training.

If you want more information on the topics covered in these lessons, see the “Other Resources” and other materials linked

on the Open Government Training Web Page.

* Note: The videos are accessible through YouTube. State employees are also able to view the videos through the Washington State Department of

Enterprise Services online Learning Management System.

Attachment A

http://www.atg.wa.gov/OpenGovernmentTraining.aspx

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=42.30.205




http://www.atg.wa.gov/uploadedFiles/Home/About_the_Office/Open_Government/Open_Government_Training/QandA-Re-ESB-5964.pdf

http://www.sos.wa.gov/archives/recordsmanagement/default.aspx

http://www.sos.wa.gov/archives/RecordsManagement/PublicOfficialsandPublicRecords/index.html

http://www.sos.wa.gov/archives/RecordsManagement/Tutorial1BasicsofRM/index.html



http://hr.wa.gov/training/Pages/AboutLMS.aspx

ORDINANCE 0-4348

AN ORDINANCE OF THE cm OF KIRKLAND RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A NEW CHAPTER 3.14 IN THE KIRKLAND MUNICIPAL CODE, CODE OF ETHICS.

WHEREAS, the citizens and business of Kirkland are entitled to have fair, ethical and accountable local government that has earned the public's full confidence for integrity; and

WHEREAS, adopting a Code of Ethics for members of the City Council and the City's boards and commissions wi ll promote public confidence in the integrity of local government and fair operation; and

WHEREAS, the Code of Ethics wil l provide the basis for education and training for City officials both elected and appointed, to ensure that the highest standards and best practices with regard to ethics will be followed;

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Kirkland do ordain as follows:

Section 1. The Code of Ethics is established as Chapter 3 .14 of the Kirkland Municipal Code as set forth in the attached Exhibit "A."

Section 2. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, part or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by any court of of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.

Section 3. This ordinance shall be in force and effect five days from and a~er its passage by the Kirkland City Council and publication pursuant to Section 1.08.017, Kirkland Municipal Code in the summary form attached to the original of this ordinance and by this reference approved by the City Council.

Passed by majority vote of the Kirkland City Council in open meeting this 7th day of February, 2012.

Signed in authentication thereof this 7th day of February, 2012.

Attachment B

0-4348

Attest:

~J ..Jc.:4-oolt' Q~ Ci erk

Approved as to Form:

Ll1,: .J , .. L~ a,,_ City Attorney

-2-

Attachment B

r

r i

3.14.010 - POLICY

EXHIBIT A

Chapter 3.14

CODE OF ETHICS

0-4348

(a) Purpose. The Kirkland City Council has adopted a Code of Ethics for members of the City Council and the City's boards and commissions to promote public confidence in the integrity of local government and its fair operation. This Code of Ethics will provide the basis for education and training for city officials, both elected and appointed, to ensure that the highest standards and best practices with regard to ethics will be followed.

(b) Intent The citizens and businesses of Kirkland are entitled to have fair, ethical and accountable local government that has earned the public's full confidence. In keeping with the City of Kirkland's commitment to excellence, the effective functioning of democratic government therefore requires that:

(1) public officials, both elected and appointed, comply with the laws and policies affecting the operations of government;

(2) public officials be independent, impartial and fair in their judgment and actions; (3) public office be used for the public good, not for personal gain; and ( 4) public deliberations and processes be conducted openly, unless legally confidential, in an

atmosphere of respect and civility.

3.14.020 - DEFINffiONS (a) "Official" means a member of the City Council or a member of Council-appointed City

boards and commissions and other Council-appointed task groups or committees, including youth members.

(b) "Relative" means spouse or domestic partner, child, step-child, parent, step-parent, parent-in-law, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, son- or daughter-in law, brother- or sister-in law.

3.14.030 - PROHIBITED CONDUCT (a) Conflicts of Interest. In order to ensure their independence and impartiality on behalf of

the common good, Officials shall not participate in government decisions in which any of the following has a financial interest: (i) the Official, (ii) a Relative, (iii) an individual with whom the Official resides, or (iv) an entity that the Official serves as an officer, director, trustee, partner or employee. Officials shall abstain from participating in deliberations and decision-making where conflicts exist. This section shall not apply (i) to decisions regarding taxes or fees, (ii) if the financial interest is shared with more than ten percent of the City's population, or (iii) if the financial interest exists solely because of the Official's ownership of less than one percent of the outstanding shares of a publicly traded corporation.

(b) Appearance of Conflict. If it could appear to a reasonable person, having knowledge of the relevant circumstances, that the Official's judgment is impaired because of either ( 1) a personal or business relationship not covered under the foregoing paragraph, or (2) a transaction or activity engaged in by the Official, the Official shall make a public, written

1

Attachment B

r

I I

0-4348

disclosure of the facts giving rise to the appearance of a conflict before participating in the matter.

(c) Misuse of Public Position or Resources. Except for infrequent use at little or no cost to the City, Officials shall not use public resources that are not available to the public in general, such as City staff time, equipment, supplies or facilities, for other than a City purpose.

(d) Representation of Third Parties. Except in the course of official duties, Officials shall not appear on behalf of the financial interests of third parties before the bodies on which the Officials serve or in interaction with assigned staff. However, the members of the City Council shall not appear on behalf of the financial interest of third parties before the Council or any board, commission or proceeding of the City, or in interaction with staff.

(e) Solicitations of Charitable Contributions. No Official may make direct personal solicitations for charitable contributions from City employees.

(f) Gifts and Favors. Officials shall not take any special advantage of services or opportunities for personal gain, by virtue of their public office, which are not available to the public in general. They may not solicit or receive any thing of monetary value from any person or entity where the thing of monetary value has been solicited, or received or given or, to a reasonable person, would appear to have been solicited, received or given with intent to give or obtain special consideration or influence as to any action by the Official in his or her official capacity; provided, that nothing shall prohibit campaign contributions which are solicited or received and reported in accordance with applicable law. They shall not accept or solicit any gifts, favors or promises of future benefits except as allowed by Kirkland Municipal Code 3.80.140.

(g) Confidential information. Officials shall not disclose or use any confidential information gained by reason of their official position for other than a City purpose. "Confidential Information" means (i) specific information, rather than generalized knowledge, that is not available to a person who files a public records request, and (ii) information made confidential by law.

3.14.040 - FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS All Officials, except members of the City Council, shall file a City of Kirkland Disclosure

Statement annually. In accordance with Chapter 42.17 RCW, members of the Kirkland City Council shall disclose investments, interests in real property, sources of income, and creditors through the filing of a Public Disclosure Commission Form F-1, "Personal Financial Affairs Statement." Members of boards and commissions shall be advised, as part of the application process, that they will be required to file the applicable City of Kirkland Disclosure Statement within ten days of appointment.

3.14.050 - ETHICAL STANDARDS In addition to Section 3.14.030 of the Code of Ethics, which shall be administered by the

Ethics Officer, Officials are also encouraged to comply with the following standards: (1) Compliance with other laws. Officials shall comply with Federal, State and City laws in

the performance of their public duties. These laws include, but are not limited to: the United States and Washington constitutions; laws pertaining to conflicts of interest, election campaigns, financial disclosures and open processes of government; and City ordinances and policies. See Appendix A. As required by RCW 42.17.750, no Official shall knowingly solicit or encourage, directly or indirectly, any political contribution from any City employee. Except under limited circumstances described in RCW 42.17.130, no Official may use or authorize the use of the facilities of the City for the purpose of assisting a campaign for the election of any

2

Attachment B

r

r I I

0-4348

person to any office, or for the promotion of or opposition to any ballot proposition in a manner not available to the general public on the same terms.

(2) Personal integrity. The professional and personal conduct of Officials must be above reproach and avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Officials shall refrain from abusive conduct, threats of official action, personal accusations or verbal attacks upon the character or motives of other members of Council, boards and commissions, the staff or public. Officials shall maintain truthfulness and honesty and not compromise themselves for advancement, honor, or personal gain. Additionally, Officials shall not directly or indirectly induce, encourage or aid anyone to violate the Code of Ethics and it is incumbent upon Officials to make a good faith effort to address apparent violations of this Code of Ethics.

(3) Working for the Common Good. Recognizing that stewardship of the public interest must be their primary concern, Officials will work for the common good of the people of Kirkland and not for any private or personal interest, and they will ensure fair and equal treatment of all persons, claims and transactions coming before the City Council, boards and commissions. Officials need to be mindful that making special requests of staff - even when the response does not benefit the Official personally, puts staff in an awkward position.

(4) Respect for Process. Officials shall perform their duties in accordance with the processes and rules of order established by the City Council and board and commissions governing the deliberation of public policy issues, meaningful involvement of the public, and implementation of policy decisions of the City Council by City staff.

(5) Commitment to Transparency. Transparency, openness, and accountability are fundamental values of the City - and are also required by the laws of the state of Washington. The public has a right to inspect and copy public records unless exempt by law from disclosure. All materials relating to the conduct of City government that are prepared, possessed, used or retained by any Official, including email and other electronic records, are subject to requirements for retention, protection, and disclosure. Officials may assume that all copies of materials received from City staff have already been archived and do not need to be retained. Officials shall not discard, damage, or destroy the original copy of any public record unless directed by the City Public Records Officer (the City Clerk), who has responsibility to ensure that the City complies with the record retention schedules established under Chapter 40.14 RCW. Officials shall promptly provide any records requested by the Public Records Officer in response to a disclosure request under the Public Records Act, Chapter 42.56 RCW. It is the responsibility for the Public Records Officer, together with the City Attorney, to decide which records meet the definition of "public record" and whether or not they are exempt from disclosure; Officials must not take it upon themselves to decide whether a record meets the definition of a public record, that a record is exempt from disclosure, or to otherwise conceal a record.

(6) Conduct of Public Meetings. Officials shall prepare themselves for public issues; listen courteously and attentively to all public discussions before the body; and focus on the business at hand. They shall refrain from interrupting other speakers; making personal comments not germane to the business of the body; or otherwise interfering with the orderly conduct of meetings.

(7) Decisions Based on Merit Officials shall base their decisions on the merits and substance of the matter at hand, rather than on unrelated considerations.

(8) Ex parte Communications. In quasi-judicial matters, Officials shall publicly disclose substantive information that is relevant to a matter under consideration by the Council or boards and commissions, which they may have received from sources outside of the public decision-making process.

3

Attachment B

r

r \

0-4348

(9) Attendance. As provided in RON 35A.12.060, a Council Member shall forfeit his or her office by failing to attend three consecutive regular meetings of the Council without being excused by the Council. Unless excused, members of boards and commissions are expected to attend all meetings.

(10) Nepotism. The City Council will not appoint Relatives of City Council Members to boards or commissions or other appointed positions.

(11) Advocacy. When acting in an official capacity as a City Official representing the City, Officials shall represent the official policies or positions of the City Council, board or commission to the best of their ability when the City Council, board or commission has taken a position or given an instruction. When presenting their individual opinions and positions, members shall explicitly state they do not represent their body or the City of Kirkland, nor will they allow the inference that they do. Officials have the right to endorse candidates for all Council seats or other elected offices. It is inappropriate to make or display endorsements during Council meetings, board/commission meetings, or other official City meetings. However, this does not preclude Officials from participating in ceremonial occasions, community events, or other events sponsored by civic groups.

(12) Policy Role of Officials. Officials shall respect and adhere to the council-manager structure of Kirkland City government as outlined by Chapter 35A.13 RON. In this structure, the City Council determines the policies of the City with the advice, information and analysis provided by the public, boards and commissions, and City staff. Except as provided by State law, Officials shall not interfere with the administrative functions of the City or the professional duties of City staff; nor shall they impair the ability of staff to implement Council policy decisions.

Ch. 9A. 72 RCW RCW 35A.12.060 Ch. 35A. 13 RCW RCW 35A.13.020 Ch. 40.14 RCW RCW 42.17.130

RCW 42.17.750 Ch. 42.23 RCW Ch. 42.36 RCW Ch. 42.56 RCW KMC 3.80.140 Ch. 3.12 KMC

APPENDIX A

Perjury and interference with official proceedings Vacancy for nonattendance Council-manager plan of government Incompatible offices Preservation and destruction of public records Use of public office or agency facilities in campaigns - prohibition -exceptions Solicitation of contributions by public officials or employees Code of ethics for municipal officers - contract interests Appearance of fairness doctrine - limitations Public records act Kirkland code on acceptance of gifts Limitations on campaign contribution

3.14.060 - ETHICS OFFICER (a) The City Council creates the position of Ethics Officer. The City Manager will contract

with one or more agencies to fill this position. The Ethics Officer will provide for annual review of the Code of Ethics, review of training materials provided for education regarding the Code of Ethics, and advisory opinions concerning the Code of Ethics. The Ethics Officer shall also be responsible for the prompt and fair enforcement of its provisions when necessary.

(b) The Ethics Officer, in addition to other duties, may recommend changes or additions to this Code of Ethics to the City Council. The Ethics Officer shall provide input into and review the training materials and program developed for this Code of Ethics.

4

Attachment B

r

r I

0-4348

3.14.070 - ADVISORY OPINIONS (a) Upon request of any Official, the Ethics Officer shall render written advisory opinions

concerning the applicability of Sections3.14.030 and 3.14.040 of this Code to hypothetical circumstances and/or situations solely related to the persons making the request. The Ethics Officer will not render opinions on matters that are the purview of other government agencies or officials, e.g., the Public Disclosure Commission, the City Public Records Officer, etc.

(b) Upon request of any Official, the Ethics Officer may also render written advisory opinions concerning the applicability of the Code of Ethics to hypothetical circumstances and/or situations related to a matter of city-wide interest or policy.

(c) The Ethics Officer will endeavor to respond to requests for advisory opinions within forty-five ( 45) days of submission of the request, or more rapidly if the requester expresses urgency in the request.

(d) A person's conduct based in reasonable reliance on an advisory opinion rendered by the Ethics Officer shall not be found to violate this Code of Ethics, as long as all material facts have been fully, completely, accurately presented in a written request for an advisory opinion, the Ethic's Office issues an advisory opinion that the described conduct would not violate the Code of Ethics, and the person's conduct is consistent with the advisory opinion. The Ethics Officer reserves the right to reconsider the questions and issues raised in an advisory opinion and, where the public interest requires, rescind, modify, or terminate the opinion, but a modified or terminated advisory opinion will not form the basis of a retroactive enforcement action against the original requester. Advisory opinions will contain severability clauses indicating that should portions of the opinion be found to be unenforceable or not within the Ethics Officer's authority, the remainder of the opinion shall remain intact.

3.14.080 - COMPLAINTS, INVESTIGATIONS, HEARINGS AND ENFORCEMENT The Ethics Officer shall resolve inadvertent and minor violations of the Code of Ethics

informally and may resolve inadvertent or minor violations informally, unless the Ethics Officer determines that doing so would not serve the public interest. When a violation is neither inadvertent nor minor, the Ethics Officer may initiate an action in accordance with this section.

(1) COMPLAINT PROCESS (A) Complaint Requirements - Setvice. Any person may submit a written complaint to the

Ethics Officer alleging one or more violations of this Code of Ethics by an Official. The complaint must set forth specific facts with enough precision and detail for the Ethics Officer to make a determination of sufficiency. It must be signed under penalty of perjury by the person(s) submitting it in a manner consistent with Chapter 9A.72 RCW.

(B) Rnding of Sufficiency. The Ethics Officer shall make a determination of sufficiency within thirty (30) days of receipt of the written complaint. A complaint shall be sufficient if the allegations, if established, would violate Section3.14.030 or 3.14.040 of this Code. The Ethics Officer's determination is not reviewable. If the finding is one of sufficiency of the complaint, then the Ethics Officer shall investigate the complaint as set forth below.

(C) Dismissal. The Ethics Officer shall dismiss the complaint if the Ethics Officer determines that the violation was inadvertent and minor; or a violation occurred, but appropriate actions have been taken to fully address the allegedly unethical conduct.

(D) Notice. Notice of action by the Ethics Officer shall be provided as follows: 1. Notice of a finding of insufficiency or dismissal of a complaint by the Ethics Officer shall

be sent to the person who made the complaint and the person complained against within seven (7) days of the decision by the Ethics Officer. A finding of insufficiency or dismissal of a

5

Attachment B

r

r \

0-4348

complaint by the Ethics Officer is final and binding, and no administrative or other legal appeal is available through the Ethics Officer.

2. Within seven (7) days of the Ethics Officer rendering a finding of sufficiency, the City Clerk shall send notice to the person who made the complaint and the person complained against, of the Ethics Officer's determination. If, after investigation, the Ethics Officer has reason to believe that a material violation of Section 3.14.030 or 3.14.040 has occurred, the City Clerk shall give notice of the public hearing which will be held to determine if a violation has occurred. Notice shall be provided at least thirty (30) days prior to the date set for the hearing. The person complained against shall have the right to file a written answer to the charge and to appear at the hearing with or without legal counsel, submit testimony, be fully heard, and to examine and cross examine witnesses.

(E) Stipulations. At any time after a complaint has been filed with the Ethics Officer, the Ethics Officer may seek and make recommendations that the City Council enter into a stipulation with the person complained against. The recommended stipulation will include the nature of the complaint, relevant facts, the reasons the Ethics Officer thinks a stipulation is appropriate, an admission of the violation by the person complained against, a promise by the person complained against not to repeat the violation, and if appropriate, a recommended remedy or penalty. The recommended stipulation shall be sent to the person who made the complaint and the person complained against and forwarded to the City Council for action.

(2) CONDUCT OF HEARINGS (A) All hearings on complaints found to be sufficient by the Ethics Officer shall be conducted

by the Hearing Examiner. The hearing shall be informal, meaning that the Hearing Examiner shall not be bound by the strict rules of evidence prevailing in courts of law or equity. The Hearing Examiner may call witnesses on his or her own motion and compel the production of books, records, papers, or other evidence as needed. To that end, the Hearing Examiner shall issue subpoenas and subpoenas duces tecum. All testimony shall be under oath administered by the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner may adjourn the hearing from time to time to allow for the orderly presentation of evidence. The Hearing Examiner shall prepare an official record of the hearing, including all testimony, which shall be recorded by mechanical device, and exhibits; provided that the Hearing Examiner shall not be required to transcribe such records unless presented with a request accompanied by payment of the cost of transcription.

(B) Within thirty (30) days after the conclusion of the hearing, the Hearing Examiner shall, based upon a preponderance of the evidence, make and fully record in his or her permanent records, findings of fact, conclusions of law, and his or her recommended disposition. A copy of the findings, conclusions, and recommended disposition shall be sent to the person who made the complaint and to the person complained. Additional copies of the findings, conclusions, and recommendations shall be forwarded to the Ethics Officer and City Council.

(3) CilY COUNCIL ACTION Final City Council action to decide upon stipulations and recommendations from the Ethics

Officer and findings, conclusions, and recommendations from the Hearing Examiner shall be by majority vote in a public meeting. If the proceeding involves a member of the City Council, deliberations by the Council may be in executive session. The member of the Council against whom the complaint was made, will not participate in any executive session and shall not vote on any matter involving him or herself. However, upon request of the member of the Council against whom the complaint was made, a public hearing or public meeting before the Council will be held on the issue of penalties.

6

Attachment B

r

r l

0-4348

( 4) DISPOSffiON In the event the Hearing Examiner finds that the person against whom the complaint was

made has violated the Code of Ethics, then the City Council may take any of the following actions by a majority vote of the Council. The action of the City Council shall be final and not subject to further review or appeal except as may be otherwise provided by law or as provided in Subsection 5 below.

(A) Dismissal Dismissal of the complaint without penalties. (B) Referral A complaint may be referred to another agency with jurisdiction over the

violation, such as the Public Disclosure Commission. Final action on the complaint may be stayed pending resolution of the matter by the agency to which it was referred.

(C) Admonition. An admonition shall be an oral non-public statement made by the Mayor, or his/her designee, or if the complaint is against the Mayor, the Deputy Mayor or his/her designee to the Official.

(D) Reprimand A reprimand shall be administered to the Official by a resolution of reprimand by the City Council. The resolution shall be prepared by the City Council and shall be signed by the Mayor or, if the complaint is against the Mayor, the Deputy Mayor.

(E) Censure. A resolution of censure shall be a resolution read personally to the person in public. The resolution shall be prepared by the City Council and shall be signed by the Mayor or if the complaint is against the Mayor, the Deputy Mayor. The person shall appear at a City Council meeting at a time and place directed by the City Council to receive the resolution of censure. Notice shall be given at least twenty (20) calendar days before the scheduled appearance at which time a copy of the proposed resolution of censure shall be provided to the person. The resolution of censure shall be read publicly, and the person shall not make any statement in support of, or in opposition thereto, or in mitigation thereof. The resolution of censure shall be read at the time it is scheduled whether or not the Official appears as required.

(F) Removal Member of Board or Commission or Other Appointed Task Group or Committee. In the event the individual against whom the complaint was made is currently a member of a City board or commission or other task group or committee, appointed by the City Council, the City Council may, in addition to other possible penalties set forth in this section, and notwithstanding any other provision of the Kirkland Municipal Code, by a majority vote remove the individual from such board or commission effective immediately.

(G) Civil Penalties. The City Council may assess a civil penalty of up to One Thousand Dollar ($1,000.00) or three (3) times the economic value of anything received in violation of this Code of Ethics or three times (3) the economic value of any loss to the City, whichever is greater. Any monetary penalty assessed civilly shall be placed in the City's general fund.

(H) Contract void. As provided by RON 42.23.050, any contract made in violation of Chapter 42.23 RON, "Code of ethics for municipal officers - contract interests," is void.

(I) Other penalties. The City Council may impose a restriction, loss of a committee assignment, or loss of appointment as a representative of the City for any regional or multijurisdictional body or membership on any board or commission which requires an appointment or confirmation of an appointment by the City Council.

(5) REVIEW OF CIVIL PENALTIES If the City Council orders an Official to pay a civil penalty, the Official may seek a writ of

review from the superior court pursuant to Ch. 7.16 RCW, within thirty (30) days of the City Council's order.

(6) PROTECTION AGAINST RETALIATION Neither the City nor any Official may take or threaten to take, directly or indirectly, official or

personal action, including but not limited to discharge, discipline, personal attack, harassment,

7

Attachment B

I \

r

0-4348

intimidation, or change in job, salary, or responsibilities, against any person because that person files a complaint with the Ethics Officer.

(7) PUBLIC RECORDS Records filed with the Ethics Officer become public records that may be subject to inspection

and copying by members of the public, unless an exemption in law exists. To the extent required to prevent an unreasonable invasion of personal privacy interests protected by RON 42.56.230(2), identity information may be redacted when an unsubstantiated complaint is made available in response to a public records request; however, in each case, the justification for the redaction shall be explained fully in writing. A finding by the Ethics Officer determining that a complaint is sufficient shall contain at the beginning the following specific language:

NOTICE: ANY PORTION OF THIS FINDING DETERMINING SUFFICIENCY OF ANY PORTION OF A COMPLAINT DOES NOT DETERMINE THE TRUTH OR FALSITY OF THE ALLEGATIONS CONTAINED IN THE COMPLAINT FILED WITH THE ETHICS OFFICER. THE ETHICS OFFICER HAS ONLY DETERMINED THAT IF CERTAIN FACTS CONTAINED IN THE COMPLAINT ARE FOUND TO BE TRUE DURING A LATER HEARING TO BE CONDUCTED BY THE HEARING EXAMINER, THEN VIOLATION(S) OF THE CODE OF ETHICS MAY BE FOUND TO HAVE OCCURRED.

The City shall release copies of any written reports resulting from an investigation of a sustained complaint, any Hearing Examiner orders, and any written censures or reprimands issued by the City Council, in response to public records requests consistent with Chapter 42.56 RON and any other applicable public disclosure laws.

(8) LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION - LIMITATION PERIOD - EFFECTIVE DATE {A) This Code of Ethics shall be liberally construed to effectuate its purpose and policy and

to supplement existing laws that relate to the same subject. (B) Any action taken under this Code of Ethics must be commenced within three years from

the date of violation. (C) This Code of Ethics shall take effect February 18, 2012.

8

Attachment B

RESOLUTION R-4889

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KIRKLAND ADOPTING A CODE OF CONDUCT.

WHEREAS, the holding of public office and positions on City Boards and Commissions is a public trust, and

WHEREAS, the Kirkland City Council desires to ensure the public's confidence in its elected and appointed representatives;

NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Kirkland as follows:

Section 1. The Code of Conduct attached as Exhibit A is adopted.

Passed by unanimous vote of the Kirkland City Council in open meeting this 6th day of September, 2011.

Signed in authentication thereof this 6th day of September, 2011.

Attest:

Attachment C

F""'""

i I '

CITY OF KIRKLAND

R-4889 Exhibit A

CODE OF CONDUCT FOR CITY COUNCIL AND BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS

The Code of Conduct is supplemental to the Kirkland Municipal Code and the Code of Ethics and applies to the City Council and all members of City advisory boards and commissions. The Code of Conduct describes how Kirkland officials treat each other and work together for the common good of the community. Conducting the City's business in an atmosphere of respect and civility is the underlying theme in this code. City Officials are responsible for holding themselves and each other accountable for displaying actions and behaviors that consistently model the ideals expressed in the code.

Implicit in the Code of Conduct is recognition of the worth of individual members and an appreciation for their individual talents, perspectives and contributions. The Code will ensure an atmosphere where individual members, staff and the public are free to express their ideas and work to their full potential.

As a City Official of the City of Kirkland, I agree to these principles of conduct:

We consistently demonstrate the principles of professionalism, respect and civility in working for the greater good of Kirkland.

) We assure fair and equal treatment of all people. I

We conduct ourselves both personally and professionally in a manner that is above reproach.

We refrain from abusive conduct, personal charges or verbal attacks on the character or motives of Council members, commissioners, staff and the public.

We take care to avoid personal comments that could offend others.

We show no tolerance for intimidating behaviors.

We listen courteously and attentively to all public discussions and treat all people the way we wish to be treated.

We serve as a model of leadership and civility to the community.

Our actions inspire public confidence in Kirkland government.

1

Attachment C

R-4889 Exhibit A

F"""" Keeping in mind the common good as the highest purpose, we will focus on 1

1

holding efficient meetings that achieve constructive solutions for the public 1 benefit. ' '

r I

We work as a team t solve problems and render decisions that are based on the merits and substance of the matter.

We respect differences and views of other people.

We adhere to the principles and laws governing the Council/Manager form of govemment and treat all staff with respect and cooperation.

We will refrain from interfering with the administrative functions and professional duties of staff.

We will not publicly criticize individual staff but will privately communicate with the City Manager any concerns about a Department or Department Director or staff person.

We will refrain from negotiating or making commitments without the involvement and knowledge of the City Manager.

We will work with staff in a manner that consistently demonstrates mutual respect.

We will not discuss personnel issues, undermine management direction, or give or imply direction to staff.

We will communicate directly with the City Manager, department directors or designated staff contacts when asking for information, assistance or follow up.

We will not knowingly blindside one another in public and will contact staff prior to a meeting with any questions or issues.

We will not attend City staff meetings unless requested by staff.

I acknowledge that I have received and read this Code of Conduct

Name

Date

2

Attachment C

KIRKLAND PARK BOARD REGULAR MEETINGPDFs/... · To request an alternate format, file a complaint or...

Documents

Transcript of KIRKLAND PARK BOARD REGULAR MEETINGPDFs/... · To request an alternate format, file a complaint or...