kent regional fire authority capital facilities and ... › wp-content › uploads › 2016 ›...

2014 – 2033

Kent Regional Fire Authority Capital Facilities & Equipment Plan

September 3, 2014

Capital Facilities and Equipment Plan

KENT REGIONAL FIRE AUTHORITY CAPITAL FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT PLAN 2014 - 2033

2014-2033 Kent Fire Department RFA Capital Facilities Plan Page ii

Kent Regional Fire Authority Capital Facilities & Equipment Plan Prepared For:

Kent Regional Fire Authority

24611 116th Avenue SE Kent, WA 98038

Prepared By:

Kent Regional Fire Authority’s Strategic Planning Unit

With Special Assistance from:

Jim Schneider, Fire Chief Ken Weatherill, Deputy Chief

Pat Pawlak, Division Chief Greg Markley, Battalion Chief

Margaret Martin, Finance Manager Larry Rabel, Captain

Don Gentry, IT Manager Randy Droppert, Firefighter

September 2014

This plan as prepared is reflective of the economic downturn known as the “Great Recession” which occurred between 2007 and 2009 following collapse of the national real estate bubble created between 2002 and 2007. As a result of this recession, most planned capital improvements during that time were deferred or canceled. The following pages of this plan reflect a strategic, responsible, and cost conscious strategy that recognizes the economic burdens of the recent past and current economy. While the recession extended original implementation timelines for capital improvements, this plan works toward responsibly maintaining the resources necessary to meet the demands of growth while working to achieve and sustain the adopted levels of service established by the Kent Regional Fire Authority over the 20-year life of this plan.


2014-2033 Kent Fire Department RFA Capital Facilities Plan Page iii


2014-2033 Kent Fire Department RFA Capital Facilities Plan Page iv

Table of Contents

Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................................................................................... iv

Table of Tables ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ ix

Table of Figures ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 11

1. DEFINITIONS: .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 12

2. Introduction and Purpose .............................................................................................................................................................................. 17

2.1. Background & Organizational Overview: ............................................................................................................................................... 18

2.1.1. Yesterday........................................................................................................................................................................................ 18

2.1.2. Today .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 20

2.1.3. Tomorrow’s Growth ....................................................................................................................................................................... 22

3. Physical Capital Resources ............................................................................................................................................................................. 25

3.1. Fire Stations and Work Sites .................................................................................................................................................................. 25

3.2. Apparatus and Equipment ..................................................................................................................................................................... 33

3.2.1. No Specific Standards..................................................................................................................................................................... 33

3.2.2. National Fire Protection Association Research of Fire Response Vehicles .................................................................................... 34

3.2.1. KFDRFA Apparatus and Equipment Replacement Policy ............................................................................................................... 36

3.3. Firefighting Equipment .......................................................................................................................................................................... 58

4. Needed Resources ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 59


2014-2033 Kent Fire Department RFA Capital Facilities Plan Page v

4.1. Impacts of the Growth Management Act .............................................................................................................................................. 59

4.2. Indicators of Future Capital Facility Needs ............................................................................................................................................ 60

4.2.1. Level of Service Measures ............................................................................................................................................................. 60

4.3. National, State, and Local Level of Service Expectations ...................................................................................................................... 64

4.3.1. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Levels of Service ......................................................................................................... 64

4.3.2. Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE) Levels of Service ............................................................................................................ 64

4.3.3. Washington State Levels of Service ................................................................................................................................................... 65

4.3.4. Kent Fire Department Regional Fire Authority Levels of Service ...................................................................................................... 65

4.3.4.1. Benchmark Levels of Service (Fire, Haz-Mat, Rescue responses) ............................................................................................. 66

4.3.4.2. Baseline Levels of Service (Fire, Haz-Mat, Rescue responses) .................................................................................................. 67

4.3.4.3. Benchmark Levels of Service (EMS response) ........................................................................................................................... 68

4.3.4.4. Baseline Levels of Service (EMS Response) ............................................................................................................................... 68

4.4. Historical Fire Department Performance Issues and Efforts toward Concurrency ............................................................................... 70

4.5. Current Drive Time Response Performance .......................................................................................................................................... 71

4.5.1. Reliability of Deployed Resources to Performance Expectations ................................................................................................. 74

4.6. Conclusion of Need for Capital Resources ............................................................................................................................................ 75

Performance Indicator 2A.3 CC: ............................................................................................................................................................ 77

Performance Indicator 2A.7: ................................................................................................................................................................. 77


2014-2033 Kent Fire Department RFA Capital Facilities Plan Page vi

Performance Indicator 2B.1 CC: ................................................................................................................................................................ 77

Performance Indicator 2B.2: ...................................................................................................................................................................... 77

Performance Indicator 2B.3 ....................................................................................................................................................................... 77

Performance Indicator 2B.5 CC ................................................................................................................................................................ 78

Performance Indicator 2B.6 CC ............................................................................................................................................................ 78

5. Level of Service and Station Deployment Adopted ....................................................................................................................................... 79

5.1. Needed Capital Projects and Purchases ................................................................................................................................................ 80

5.1.1. Cost of New Fire Stations ............................................................................................................................................................... 80

5.1.1.1. Addition of New Kent Valley Fire Station ................................................................................................................................... 80

5.1.1.2. Addition of a New Benson Rd/SE 108th Ave Station .................................................................................................................. 83

5.1.1.3. Addition of a new Riverview Station .......................................................................................................................................... 85

5.1.1.4. Addition of a New Covington Station ......................................................................................................................................... 86

5.1.1.5. Re-Location of Station 75 ........................................................................................................................................................... 87

5.1.2. Capital Improvement Necessary to Maintain Fire Apparatus ....................................................................................................... 88

5.1.3. Summary of New Construction Costs ............................................................................................................................................ 89

5.1.4. Capital Improvement Necessary to Maintain Existing Assets ........................................................................................................ 89

5.1.5. Capital Cost of Special Equipment Required, 2014 through 2033 ................................................................................................. 90

5.1.6. Capital Cost of Additional Apparatus Necessary for Concurrency ................................................................................................. 92


2014-2033 Kent Fire Department RFA Capital Facilities Plan Page vii

6. Six Year Funding Plan 2015 - 2020 ................................................................................................................................................................ 93

7. 20 Year Financing Plan ................................................................................................................................................................................... 94

7.1. Revenue Options to Fund Capital Purchases......................................................................................................................................... 94

7.1.1. Tax Levies ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 94

7.1.2. General Obligation Bonds .............................................................................................................................................................. 94

7.1.3. Contract Income ............................................................................................................................................................................ 94

7.1.4. Fees and Charges ........................................................................................................................................................................... 95

7.1.5. Interest Income ............................................................................................................................................................................. 95

7.1.6. Donations ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 95

7.1.7. Grants ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 95

7.1.8. Sale of KFDRFA Assets ................................................................................................................................................................... 96

7.2. Debt Obligations .................................................................................................................................................................................... 96

7.3. 20 Year Funding Plan ............................................................................................................................................................................. 97

7.4. Financial Feasibility of Capital Facilities Plan......................................................................................................................................... 98

8. Appendix A, 20 Year Apparatus Replacement Schedule ............................................................................................................................... 99

9. Changes in Station Deployment Plans: 2008 compared to 2013 ................................................................................................................ 100

9.1. Movement of 2008 Alternate Fire Station Site “I”/2008, New Covington/2013 ................................................................................ 100

9.2. Movement of 2008 Alternate Fire Station Site “A”/2008, New 75/2013 ........................................................................................... 100


2014-2033 Kent Fire Department RFA Capital Facilities Plan Page viii

9.3. Elimination of 2008 Alternate “G” ....................................................................................................................................................... 100

9.4. Addition of Riverview Station Site/2013 .............................................................................................................................................. 101


2014-2033 Kent Fire Department RFA Capital Facilities Plan Page ix

Table of Tables

Table 1 Population and Housing Growth .............................................................................................................................................................. 24

Table 2 Current and Future Commercial Space Estimates .................................................................................................................................... 24

Table 3 Summary of Existing Fire Station & Accessory Structures ........................................................................................................................ 31

Table 4: Fire Apparatus Manufacturers Association (FAMA) Apparatus Life Expectancy..................................................................................... 34

Table 5: Aging of Kent Fire Department RFA Fire Engines / Compared to FAMA survey, no FAMA data available 2013 .................................... 35

Table 6: Fire Engine and Ladder Inventory ............................................................................................................................................................ 37

Table 7: Inventory of Aid and Command Apparatus ............................................................................................................................................. 41

Table 8: Inventory of Staff Vehicles ....................................................................................................................................................................... 45

Table 9: Support Apparatus and Equipment ......................................................................................................................................................... 50

Table 10: Inventory of Special Operations Equipment.......................................................................................................................................... 54

Table 11: Inventory of Firefighting Equipment ..................................................................................................................................................... 58

Table 12 Benchmark and Baseline Drive Time Performance of Stations 71 to 74 ................................................................................................ 72

Table 13 Benchmark and Baseline Drive Time Performance of Stations 75 to 78 ................................................................................................ 73

Table 14 Overall Fire Department Benchmark and Baseline Drive Time Performance 2010-2012 ...................................................................... 73

Table 15 Current Response Availability/Reliability to Service Demand; 2009-2012 ............................................................................................. 75

Table 16: Criteria for Choosing Valley Station 3 Site ............................................................................................................................................. 81

Table 17 Cost of New 407 Washington Station ..................................................................................................................................................... 82


2014-2033 Kent Fire Department RFA Capital Facilities Plan Page x

Table 18: Cost of new Benson Station ................................................................................................................................................................... 84

Table 19 Cost of New Riverview Fire Station ......................................................................................................................................................... 85

Table 20 Cost of New Covington Station ............................................................................................................................................................... 86

Table 21 Cost of Relocating Station 75 .................................................................................................................................................................. 87

Table 22 Maintenance Facility Costs...................................................................................................................................................................... 88

Table 23: Schedule of Asset Preservation Projects, 2014 - 2030 ........................................................................................................................... 89

Table 24 20 Year Special Equipment Costs ............................................................................................................................................................ 90

Table 25 Annual Cost of Special Equipment 2014 - 2033 ...................................................................................................................................... 91

Table 26 Annual Apparatus Replacement Summary ............................................................................................................................................. 92

Table 27: Six (6) Year Capital Needs ...................................................................................................................................................................... 93

Table 28: 20 Year Cost/Funding Plan ..................................................................................................................................................................... 97

Table 29 20 Year Apparatus Cost and Replacement Schedule .............................................................................................................................. 99

Table of Figures

Figure 1: Service Area Map of the Kent Regional Fire Authority ................................................................................................................................. 21

Figure 2: KFDRFA Service Area and Station Locations ................................................................................................................................................. 32

Figure 3 Proposed 11 Fire Station Deployment ........................................................................................................................................................... 79

Figure 4: 2008 Twelve Station Deployment Map ...................................................................................................................................................... 101

Figure 5: 2013 Eleven Station Deployment Map ....................................................................................................................................................... 102


[12]

1. DEFINITIONS:

Accredited Agency: A fire service agency that has undergone the self-assessment process of the CFAI and successfully passed a peer review process geared toward assuring that the agency requesting accreditation is in compliance with the performance indicators and guidelines of the program.

Aid Car: A fire service term that refers to a vehicle set up primarily as an ambulance with additional tools for firefighting and rescue work.

Brain Death: As defined by the American Heart Association, means the irreversible death of brain cells that begins four to six minutes after cardiac arrest. A victim’s chance of survival is reduced 7 to 10 percent for every minute of delay of CPR and defibrillation. Few attempts at resuscitation are successful unless if CPR and defibrillation are not provided within minutes of collapse.

CFAI: An acronym for the Commission on Fire Accreditation International, the organization that administers the CPSE’s

Accreditation Program. Accreditation is a comprehensive self-assessment and evaluation model that enables organizations to

examine past, current, and future service levels and internal performance and compare them to industry best practices. This

process leads to improved service delivery.

Concentration: Refers to the deployment of multiple fire and rescue resources from within a fire service jurisdiction so that the proper number of resources needed for all types of emergency incidents can be assembled at the scene of an emergency within the defined level of service time.

Concentration Time: Refers to the total response time needed for all first alarm resources to assemble at the scene of an emergency.

Concurrency: Concurrency refers to the twelfth goal of the Washington State Growth Management Act1 which requires public facilities and services necessary for public safety to be adequate to serve new development without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards.

1 Found in RCW 36.70A.020


[13]

CPSE: An acronym for the Center for Public Safety Excellence. The Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE) promotes the

continuous quality improvement of fire and emergency service agencies that serve communities worldwide by providing training and career resource information. As a nonprofit, 501(c)(3) corporation, CPSE supports and encourages agencies and personnel to meet international performance standards through various programs and the work of two commissions: the Commission on Fire Accreditation International (CFAI) and the Commission on Professional Credentialing (CPC).

CPSE serves as the governing body for the organizations that offer accreditation, education, and credentialing services to first responder and fire service industry professionals and agencies.

To assist in fulfilling its mission, the CPSE partners with several agencies including: the International City/County Managers Association (ICMA), the Insurance Services Office (ISO), the International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC), the International Association of Firefighters (IAFF), the International Code Council (ICO), the U.S. Fire Administration (USFA), the International Society of Fire Service Instructors (ISFSI), and others.

The Commission on Fire Accreditation International (CFAI) is committed to assisting and improving fire and emergency service agencies around the world in achieving organizational and professional excellence through its strategic self-assessment model and accreditation process to provide continuous quality improvement and enhancement of service delivery to the community and the world at large.

Deployment Objectives: Consist of those levels of service and deployment goals established in policy by a fire agency.

Distribution: Refers to the strategic deployment or “distribution” of fire resources over a geographic area so that response time for the first units arrival to any emergency meet the agencies adopted level of service time for first unit arrival. Properly distributed resources arrive in time to minimize and/or terminate average routine emergencies. For larger events, first arriving units are expected to assess the situation, establish an action plan, and call for additional resources.

Distribution Time: Refers to the elapsed time required for the first dispatched unit to arrive at the scene of an emergency.


[14]

Drive Time: The elapsed time needed for an emergency vehicle to travel to a dispatched address. Drive time begins when the wheels of a fire apparatus begin to roll in response to a dispatch and ends when the apparatus is parked at the scene of the dispatched address.

Effective Response Force: Refers to the number of resources and personnel needed to effectively provide fire or emergency medical

services. The number of resources making up an effective response force varies by type of emergency. Fire Service Concurrency: See Concurrency First-in: Refers to the first fire and rescue resource to arrive at the scene of an emergency. Distribution performance is a

measure of first-in drive time. Flash-Over: As defined by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, means when all combustibles in a room burst

into flame and the fire spreads rapidly. * Flash-Over is dependent on many factors, (fuel load, oxygen supply, size of room, etc) but is generally recognized as a likely event from 7 minutes to 12 minutes after ignition occurs.

Survival is no longer possible in a room that has flashed-over. Flashover is a significant killer of firefighters even with all of their protective gear.

Fractile Performance: Refers to the percentage of time a specified performance expectation is achieved. If an emergency response drive time of 5 minutes is achieved on 82 of 100 responses, the fractile performance would be 82%.

Full First Alarm: Refers to the total number of resources assigned to a specific incident type. The KFDRFA has set the full first

alarm resource list for a house fire at a minimum of 15 or 16 firefighters depending on the type of emergency units available at the time of dispatch. A


[15]

Level of Service: Level of service (LOS) refers to the Kent Fire Department’s adopted time and performance expectations. Benchmark LOS is the targeted goal to achieve fire service concurrency. Baseline LOS is the minimum performance expectation. Service below baseline in considered response failure. Development within areas below baseline performance should be opposed if adequate mitigation cannot be integrated into the project.

Level of Service Standards: The State Legislature in RCW. 52.33.010 communicates its intent for fire departments to establish Level of

Service Standards that permit first responders to arrive in time to prevent "brain death" as it relates to EMS; and to prevent "flash-over" as it relates to fire suppression.

Reliability: Refers to the use of fire resource capacity. For a resource to be reliable, it must be available to answer emergency calls as least as often as the service expectation placed upon that resource. For instance, if a fire resource is expected to deliver service at the adopted standard 90% of the time, then that resource should be available to respond to an emergency incident from its assigned fire station at least 90% of the time. Reliability levels below the adopted performance expectation indicate resource exhaustion.

Resource Exhaustion: Resource exhaustion occurs when the demand for service placed upon a fire service resource is so great, that its

fractile reliability begins to fall below the adopted level of service for that resource resulting in the need for resources from fire stations farther away to respond in place of the resource experiencing exhaustion. A fire station service area experiencing regular resource exhaustion will result in longer and longer response times unless additional resources are added to the fire station serving that area to create more capacity.

Response: Response refers to the movement of firefighters and fire apparatus to the scene of an emergency request for fire or emergency medical services. The request for response is generally issued through Valley Communications Center, the 9-1-1 answering point for the KFD.


[16]

Standard of Cover: Refers to the in-depth process developed by the Center for Public Safety Excellence in their accreditation process for the strategic planning of fire station and fire resource deployment. Standard of Cover is the “Standard” to which the fire department will deliver service based upon community descriptions and the risks within those community types.

Total Response Time: The time interval from receipt of alarm at the primary 911 center to when the first emergency response unit is

initiating action or intervening to control the incident.

Travel Time: The time interval that begins when a unit is en route to the emergency incident and ends when the unit arrives at the scene.

Turnout Time: The time interval that begins when audible or visual notification is received by firefighters from the 911 center and ends at the beginning point of travel time.


[17]

2. Introduction and Purpose

The purpose of this document is to identify capital resources necessary for the Kent Fire Department Regional Fire Authority (KFDRFA), to achieve and maintain the levels of service adopted herein concurrently with the next 20 years of anticipated development and population growth. This plan also identifies funding options to implement necessary resources. KFDRFA’s intent is to sustain adequate levels of service consistent with its adopted service standards and the Land Use elements of the Kent, Covington, and King County Comprehensive Plans. The goal of this plan is to provide a mechanism for decision making and provide for more deliberate planning of financial resources. As the Capital Facilities Plan for KFDRFA, this plan is also intended to fulfill the Washington Growth Management Act public facility and service requirements of RCW 36.70A.110 and Capital Facilities requirements identified in RCW 36.70A.070(3) shown below:

“(3) A capital facilities plan element consisting of: (a) An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities, showing the locations and capacities of the capital facilities; (b) a forecast of the future needs for such capital facilities; (c) the proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital facilities; (d) at least a six-year plan that will finance such capital facilities within projected funding capacities and clearly identifies sources of public money for such purposes; and (e) a requirement to reassess the land use element if probable funding falls short of meeting existing needs and to ensure that the land use element, capital facilities plan element, and financing plan within the capital facilities plan element are coordinated and consistent.”

The underlying premise of this document is that as the community continues to grow, additional resources will be required to adequately meet the growing demand for services. It is assumed that a direct relationship exists between population and demand for services which directly links to a need for resources. This plan focuses on achieving “Benchmark” level of service goals of the KFDRFA. The plan strives to achieve a “concurrency” philosophy to service delivery; meaning fire and emergency service capacity must grow concurrently with development. To determine future resource needs, this document utilizes the 20 year growth predictions found in the Kent, Covington, and King County Comprehensive Plans and the KFDRFA station location analysis work conducted between 2008 and 2013. For purposes of this plan, capital improvement is defined as a project or equipment acquisition that cost more than $5,000 with an expected useful life of more than 3 years. Land purchases, construction of buildings, and acquisition of vehicles are a few examples of a capital improvement or projects. Normal operating expenditures for salaries, routine maintenance and repair consumed during a normal year are not included in this plan.


[18]

2.1. Background & Organizational Overview:

2.1.1. Yesterday

2.1.1.1. 1853-1945

Early settlers landed in the Kent area in 1853 and began logging and farming as a means of subsistence. The fertile soil of the Kent Valley brought more farmers to the area and in 1870, the lure of raising the lucrative crop of Hops, continued to bring settlers to the area and the Kent Valley continued to grow. In the 1880’s farming began giving way to logging and by 1890, railroads began planning to provide service to the Kent and Covington areas.

Kent became the area rail hub and business center and on May 28th 1890 Kent incorporated becoming the first city outside of Seattle. The town of Kent was one square mile and home to 853 people. To the east, Covington was also becoming a rail hub providing freight services for the logging industry of the Covington and Maple Valley areas.

The Kent Fire Department was officially formed in 1892 as a volunteer organization and the Kent area continued to gradually grow for the next 20 years. The 1920’s brought the advent of the automobile, hard surfaced roadways and scheduled passenger rail service and population growth began to accelerate. During this time, Kent continued growing and serving the needs of its area farmers. To the east the Covington area began losing the economic engine of logging and began the transition to farming and tourism.

2.1.1.2. 1946-1969

The post war era brought better roadways and Kent’s farms founded on the fertile soil of the Green River Valley gradually began giving way to industry. This transition was slow because of the Green River and its propensity for annual flooding as a result of snow melt in the Cascade Mountains. Howard A. Hanson, a state legislator and King County Attorney recognized the value that flood control would bring to the Green River Valley. After WWII, Hanson began an effort to recruit state and federal funding to build a dam capable of controlling the Green River. By 1949 the Army Corp of Engineers were able to present a plan to control flooding in the Green River Valley. In 1950, Congress adopted a plan to construct the “Eagle Gorge Dam” as a federal project and renamed it the Howard A. Hanson dam following Hanson’s death in 1957. Knowing that construction of the new dam would open up real estate protected from flooding, investors began speculative land purchases betting on the continued transition of the Kent Valley to


[19]

industry. While Kent’s population had grown to about 3,200 its land area was still just a bit over one square mile. Growth was also happening around Kent and in 1948; Fire District 37 was formed to protect most of the area to the north, south and east of Kent. Land investors began the process of annexing their land to Kent to obtain the zoning that would allow them to continue building the Kent area into an industry and distribution center.

By 1960, Kent was 12.7 square miles with a population of 9,017. Kent was rapidly expanding water, sewer, and transportation infrastructure to continue and encourage growth. In December 1961, the newly constructed Howard Hanson dam was able to stop a Christmas day flood. With flood control in place, the vision of developers was a reality and growth of the Kent Valley went into overdrive. The Boeing Company and its contractors provided much of that growth between 1965 and 1966, building the Boeing Aerospace Center in the Kent Valley and the Timberlane housing project in Covington, a new small track development to provide affordable housing to Boeings growing labor force. In response to this rapid period of growth, the City of Kent hired its first paid firefighting staff consisting of a fire chief and ten firefighters.

2.1.1.3. 1970 to 2012

In 1970 Kent’s population skyrocketed to 16,275. As a result of growth, demand for fire and medical services was outpacing the abilities of both the Kent Fire Department and Fire District 37. In 1974, Kent Fire and Fire District 37 contractually consolidated with a combined uniformed staff of 39 and 12 fire stations. Combined population of both agencies was approaching 25,000.

Growth continued throughout the 1980’s and in 1992 King County, in compliance with the new Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA), established urban growth areas. The GMA was established to preserve rural areas and focus growth in areas defined by GMA counties such as King. The GMA rules of confining growth to identified urban areas, triggered additional growth throughout the once rural areas served by the Kent Fire Department and Fire District 37. The GMA created demand for higher density of development and affordable housing, changing the City of Kent’s housing demographic from 90% single family homes in 1980 to just 51% single family homes by 2000. Covington incorporated in 1997 and by 2000; the Kent Fire Department was providing service to more than 110,000 permanent residents.

The impacts of growth and the increased cost of fire services in the urbanizing Kent area caused the consolidation and closing of 6 fire stations in the 1970’s. In 1982, only six of the previous 12 fire stations of the 1970’s still existed. In 1986, Kent voters passed a public safety bond that allowed the remodeling of one existing station and construction of three replacement fire stations. Construction of these stations occurred in 1989 and 1990. Still responsible for its own fire stations, Fire District 37 was able to


[20]

purchase land and build two new fire stations, Station 75 in 1990 and Station 78 in 2008. Between Kent and Fire District 37, the combined service area was 53 square miles served by eight fire stations.

In 2007, the Kent Fire Department began recognizing that the increasing service demand caused by rapid growth, increasing operating costs and competition among City of Kent departments for the same general fund dollars would require yet another a re-invention of the more than 100 year old Fire Department. A stakeholders group consisting of property owners, business owners, citizens, elected officials, and fire department staff, met for 18 months and developed a comprehensive recommendation published in February 2008 for the Fire Department to form a new independent special purpose district called a Regional Fire Authority (RFA). In July of 2008, a formal Planning Committee was formed to develop the details by which the new RFA would be formed into a plan to be submitted to voters. In April of 2010 voters were asked to approve the Plan for a Regional Fire Authority and did with an overwhelming 72% affirmative vote. On July 1, 2010 the new Kent Fire Department Regional Fire Authority (KFDRFA) was formed between the Kent Fire Department and Fire District 37.

2.1.2. Today

Today, the KFDRFA is an internationally accredited, independent special purpose district with its own authority to impose debt and collect taxes and fees. Fire and rescue services are provided to more than 142,000 residents across 51 square miles of predominantly urban growth area. Services are provided from eight (8) fire stations with an average service area of 6.37 square miles per station. Total budgeted/actual firefighter positions in 2013 are 177/166 with a civilian support staff of 30.7/29.7. Services delivered include; fire protection, fire prevention and fire code enforcement, fire investigations, emergency medical services at the basic life support (BLS) level with advanced life support (ALS) provided by King County Medic 1. Public education toward fire prevention and life safety is also provided.

The urban growth boundary set on July 6, 1992 remains largely the same in the KFDRFA. Annexations by Auburn and Renton have reduced total service area from 53 to 51 square miles. This current service area includes the Cities of Kent and Covington and 10 square miles of unincorporated King County. Generally KFDRFA’s service area borders Renton to the north, Maple Valley to the east, the Cities of Federal Way, Des Moines and SeaTac to the west and Auburn to the south. Current 2013 population of KFDRFA is 142,9862

2 Office of Financial Management, 2012


[21]

Figure 1: Service Area Map of the Kent Regional Fire Authority


[22]

2.1.3. Tomorrow’s Growth

The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) has been designated by the Governor of the State of Washington as the Metropolitan Planning Organization for the Central Puget Sound Area which consists of King, Kitsap, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties. The PSRC is charged with regional growth management and transportation planning. The regional growth and transportation strategies currently established by the PSRC are contained in Vision 2040, a planning document adopted by the PSRC in April of 2008. Counties and cities such as King, Kent and Covington follow the guidance given by the PSRC to arrive at mandated growth targets for their planning areas. It has been the KFDRFA’s experience that predicted rates of growth in the Comprehensive Plans of King County, Kent and Covington have been underestimated. Kent’s 2006 Comprehensive Plan predicted a 31% increase in housing units between 2000 and 2020 with 40,689 as the projected number of housing units. Kent’s actual housing inventory in 2012 was 45,8913, 113% of the 20 year target with 8 years to go. The PSRC predicted Kent’s population to grow between 2000 and 2020 from 79,524 to 93,9374. Actual population in 2010 was 92,411 with 10 years of growth yet to develop. Covington produced their first Comprehensive Plan in 2003 and at the time of the 2010 US census, showed that their projections for 2013 had already been exceeded by 3%.

2.1.3.1. City of Kent

Vision 2040 requires different geographic areas to accommodate different population and employment goals largely based upon the presence of transportation infrastructure. Within Vision 2040, cities are classified as “Metropolitan Cities,” “Core Cities,” “Larger Cities” and “Small Cities.” The City of Kent has been classified as a “Core City” with the responsibility for becoming a regionally designated growth center. What this means is that Kent will be required to build to a high urban density. Vision 2040 also designates regional manufacturing/industrial centers. Kent is one of the few Core Cities designated as both a residential and industrial growth center.

Between 2000 and 2010 the annual population growth rate in the State of Washington was 14% or an average of 1.4% per year. Between 2000 and 2010 Kent’s corporate boundaries remained relatively unchanged to annexations, during this time period,

3 Washington State Office of Financial Management 4 Kent Comprehensive Plan page 2-2


Page 23

population in the City of Kent grew at a rate of 2.21% much faster than the state average but less than the King County average of 2.66% over this same period of time.

To predict future growth in the City of Kent this Plan reviewed housing unit and population growth in Kent between 1990 and 2012 to determine an average rate of growth without annexations of 1.4% per year. This growth factor was used to populate Table 1, Population Growth.

2.1.3.2. City of Covington

The City of Covington was incorporated in 1997 amidst a building moratorium imposed by the Covington Water District. Covington quickly developed interim land use plans that would work with the water district to allow development to resume and a Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 2003. Between 1997 and 2012 Covington’s population grew by 37.67% an average of 2.35% per year.

Covington continues to grow at one of the fastest rates in King County and has an inventory of buildable lands capable of continuing a similar rate of growth. Based upon current market conditions this plan projects Covington’s annual rate of growth at 1.75%, this growth factor is displayed in Table 1 Population and Housing Growth.

2.1.3.3. Unincorporated Areas

Currently, all but a small area of the unincorporated KFDRFA fall outside of King County’s urban growth area and future growth is limited by current rural zoning. Little future growth is expected unless King County undertakes a process to expand the urban growth boundary beyond today’s limits.

2.1.4. Growth Summary

2.1.4.1.1. Residential Growth Summary Between 1990 and 2012 the rate of growth in Washington State was 42% (4.80 million to 6.82 million) or 1.91% per year. King County’s growth rate was 32% (1.48 million to 1.96 million) or 1.45% per year and the population within the Kent Fire Department service area grew by 49.95% or 2.27% per year. A buildable lands study was completed in April of 2013 comparing growth rates with the KFDRFA 2006 Concurrency Plan. This evaluation confirmed that there continues to be adequate zoning and buildable lands within the KFDRFA service area to support the same type of growth that occurred between 1990 and 2012. Table 1 “Population and Housing Growth” displays both a low and high estimate of future population and housing units that


Page 24

exceed estimates of Kent and Covington but are felt to be closer to what actual growth rates will be in the future of the KFDRFA service area5. Kent’s low/high rate of growth is calculated at 1.41% and 2.27% per year, Covington is calculated at 1.75% and 2.27% per year.

Table 1 Population and Housing Growth

Service Area 1990 2000 2010 2023 2033

Housing

Units Population

Housing Units

Population Housing

Units Population

Housing Units Low/High

Population Low/High

Housing Units Low/High

Population

Covington N/A N/A 4,203 13,783 6,081 17,5756 7,447/7,876 21,494/22,734 8,857/9,858 25,566/28,455

Kent 17,484 37,960 32,488 79,524 36,760 92,411 53,532/58,743 138,931/152,455 61,578/73,526 159,812/190,821

King Co 20,748 57,508 9,950 27,362 11,237 30,902 2,4067 6,414 2,711 7,226

Total 38,232 95,468 46,461 120,669 54,0788 140,888 58,120/64,601 166,839/170,163 73,146/86,095 192,604/226,501

2.1.4.1.1. Commercial Growth Summary In 2013 the total square footage of all types of structures within the KFDRFA is 161,970,224. Of this total, 64.4 million square feet is classified as commercial space. Overall the breakdown between residential and commercial is 60.3% residential and 39.7% commercial. Based upon this ratio and the expectation that commercial growth will continue at about the same rate and ratio as residential growth, total commercial structure space in 2033 is expected to be up by 14.1 million square feet at the low estimate and 34.6 million square feet at the high estimate. Table 2 Current and Future Commercial Space Estimates

Year 2013 2023 2033

Low / High Commercial Growth in Square Feet

64,415,115 Actual 66,810,607 / 74,261,108 78,564,402 / 98,968,770

5 Rabel 2013 6 2010 U.S. Census 7 Post annexation by City of Kent in 2011 8 55,938 housing units in 2013 (14,661 apartments included)


Page 25

3. Physical Capital Resources

To retain status as an Accredited Agency, the KFDRFA follows the recommendation of the Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE). Through its Commission on Fire Accreditation International (CFAI), the CPSE places an emphasis on physical resources and planning for physical resources in Category VI of the CFAI Fire & Emergency Services Self-Assessment Manual. Category VI requires; A physical resource plan, fixed facilities and equipment that are appropriately located, well maintained and of a type and quantity to adequately meet the agencies level of service goals and objectives.

Capital resources for the KFDRFA consist of fire stations, fire apparatus (vehicles used for fire and rescue work), staff vehicles and the related equipment, tools and associated personal protective and support equipment needed to safely and legally provide fire and rescue services. Current inventories of these resources are listed below.

3.1. Fire Stations and Work Sites

Currently in 2013, emergency services are provided from eight fire stations located throughout the service area and a number of support structures as identified in and shown on the map in Figure 1. In total, 12 structures are currently maintained ranging in age from 8 to 50 years with an average age of 25 years.

Structure: Fire Station 71 Location: 504 West Crow Street

Description: Downtown Kent station, originally constructed in 1964 as the Headquarters Fire Station. The station was remodeled in 1971, again in 1974 and finally 1989. It has a 5 story hose tower in back that was built in 1976.


Page 26

Structure: Fire Station 72 Location: 25620 140th Ave SE Description:

Lake Meridian station, originally dedicated in 1982 built adjacent to an older station 72 built in 1949. An interior remodel occurred in 2011.

Structure: Station 73 Location: 26512 Military Road South Description:

Relocated south from original site and built in 1989. Includes a large classroom and a Kent Police precinct office.

Structure: Station 74 Location: 24611 116th Ave SE Description:

Kent East Hill Fire Station and Headquarters, this facility is home to Administration and Training and was built in 1990.


Page 27

Structure: Training Tower 74 Location: 24523 116th Ave SE Description:

Located just south of the Station 74 training center this four story training tower offers computerized burn props in multiple structure scenarios. Built in 1990

Structure: Training Annex 74 Location: 24523 116th Ave SE Description:

Located to the north of the current training center, this manufactured structure was built and installed in 2005 to accommodate expansion of training and emergency management staff.

Structure: Storage / Radio Shack Location: 24523 116th Ave SE Description:

This manufactured structure provides amateur radio volunteers with a radio room designed to support fire and other emergency operations during times of disaster. Built in ????


Page 28

Structure: Emergency Management Location: 24425 116th Ave SE Description:

Kent Emergency Management Offices built in 1963 and purchased in 2010. This converted residential structure provides offices and storage for Emergency Management functions and staff.

Structure: Fire Station 75 Location: 15635 SE 272nd Street Description:

Kent East Hill Fire Station Near Covington, constructed 1989, opened in 1990.

Structure: Fire Station 76 Location: 20676 72nd Ave S Description:

Kent Industrial Station; completed and opened in 1989, this station is home to the KFDRFA’s Hazardous Materials Response Team.


Page 29

Structure: Apparatus Repair Shop Location: 20678 72nd Ave S Description:

Built in 1989 this repair shop is home to the KFDRFA mechanics who maintain all fire response and staff vehicles.

Structure: Fire Station 77 Location: 20717 132nd Ave SE Description:

Completed and opened for service in 2002, this Station provides services to the KFDRFA’s north east boundaries including the Lake Youngs area.

Structure: Fire Station 78 Location: 17820 SE 256th Street Description:

Opened for service in February of 2009, Station 78 is a primary service provider to the City of Covington and unincorporated areas of King County.


Page 30

Structure: Logistics Center Location: 8320 South 208 Street, Suite H-110 Description:

Opened for service in 2013 the Logistics Center purchases, receives, and distributes equipment and logistical support to all of the KFDRFA fire stations and work sites.


Page 31

Table 3 Summary of Existing Fire Station & Accessory Structures

Fire Station/Facility Location Size Built

Yrs in Srvc Acquired Capacity Cond Acres

Dorm Beds

Station 71 504 West Crow Street 10,858 1964 49 2010 3.5 bays Fair 1.05 10Station 72 25620 140th Ave SE 7,772 1982 31 2010 3 bays Fair 0.91 6Station 73 26512 Military Road South 13,000 1990 23 2010 3 bays Good 4.69 9Station 74 24611 116th Ave SE 26,653 1990 23 Lease 2010 3 Bays Good 8.66 17Station 75 15635 SE 272nd Street 12,425 1990 23 Lease 2010 3 bays Good 4.18 14Station 76 20676 72nd Ave S 13,104 1989 24 2010 3 bays Good 2.80 9Station 77 20717 132nd Ave SE 15,900 2001 12 2010 3 bays Good 1.98 8Station 78 17820 SE 256th Street 17,685 2009 4 2010 4 bays Good 3.10 10

Totals 117,397 189 27.37 83

Station 7X 407 Washington Ave N 3,464 1994 2010 0 Demo 1.24Station 7X 21599 108th Ave SE 0 0 2010 0 Land 0.29

Totals 3,464 1.53

EM 24425 116th Ave SE 2,860 1963 50 2010 Good 0.23Training Tower 24523 116th Ave SE 4,652 1990 23 Lease 2010 Good N/ATraining Annex 24524 116th Ave SE 1,152 2005 8 2005 Poor N/AApparatus Shop 20678 72nd Ave S 10,865 1989 24 2010 4 Bays Good N/ALogistics Center 8320 S 208th Street 20,000 1979 1 2013 Good N/A

Sub-Total Totals 39,529 106 0.23Total 160,390 29.13 83

Future Fire Station Sites Owned by KFDRFA

Accesory Structures Owned or Maintained by KFDRFA


Page 32

Figure 2: KFDRFA Service Area and Station Locations

3.2. Apparatus and Equipment

3.2.1. No Specific Standards

Fire apparatus and the equipment they carry are essential to the delivery of fire and rescue services. These vehicles are used and trusted to carry an assortment of firefighting and rescue tools such as ladders, water pumps, hose, lights, generators and personnel. These vehicles come in a number of different formats to fit the particular use they are intended for. Like most fire departments, the KFDRFA uses apparatus that can provide multiple functions. For instance, while “Aid Cars” look like an ambulance and are designed for the primary purpose of delivering emergency medical services (EMS), they also carry limited firefighting gear so that staff members assigned to those units may also provide basic firefighting support. “Engines” come with a water pump and tank and are equipped primarily for pumping water and firefighting but, they also carry EMS equipment and some special rescue tools. “Ladders” are primarily tasked with aerial and search and rescue operations but are also equipped with technical rescue and EMS equipment.

While functionality is a significant concern for fire apparatus, functionality must be managed along with safety, efficiency, and effectiveness. Apparatus across America very slightly in the way they are outfitted and by performance. The geography and climate of the KFDRFA places unique challenges on apparatus. Steep grades require extra power, stronger transmissions and larger brakes as compared to flatter jurisdictions, cold and freezing weather requires different equipment than what would be required in southern climates. Hydrants do not exist in all areas of the KFDRFA so on-board hose and water capacity is also a consideration.

Because of the need for apparatus and equipment to be suited for the uses and demands of the local jurisdiction, there are no specific national standards that set the life expectancy for most apparatus and equipment. In 2004 the Fire Apparatus Manufacturers Association (FAMA), created a white paper to help determine the usage and life spans of apparatus. Surveys were sent to 1200 fire chiefs across the country and data was collected from multiple demographics. The life expectancy findings by miles driven and engine hours of use from that survey are found below in Table 6 along with a comparison of KFDRFA apparatus.


Page 34

Table 4: Fire Apparatus Manufacturers Association (FAMA) Apparatus Life Expectancy

UrbanFAMA Avg

MilesFAMA Avg

Hrs Total FAMA Miles/HoursKFDRFA

Avg MilesKFDRFA Avg Hrs

Total KFDRFA Avg Miles, Total Miles/Hours Current Fleet

Pumper (Engine) 25 6126 1107 153,150/27,675 6,700 672 167,500/16,800Aerial (Ladder) 27 6514 2379 175,878/64,233 5,115 571 138,105/15,417Rescue (Aid Car) 20 9222 1686 184,440/33,720 7,520 576 150,395/11,525

SuburbanPumper (Engine) 27 6068 1364 163,836/36,828 6,700 672 180,900/18,144Aerial (Ladder) 29 3479 1133 100,891/32,857 5,115 571 148,335/16,559Rescue (Aid Car) 22 4992 367 109,824/8,074 7,520 576 165,440/12,672

Rural Pumper (Engine) 32 2352 301 75,264/9,632 6,700 672 214,400/21,504Aerial (Ladder) 24 1866 204 44,784/4,896 5,115 571 122,760/13,704Rescue (Aid Car) 27 2756 301 74,412/8,127 7,520 576 203,040/15,552

FAMA Heavy Apparatus Life Expectancy by Demographic Compared to KFDRFAKFDRFA Equivalent Years of total service (Active plus Reserve)

3.2.2. National Fire Protection Association Research of Fire Response Vehicles

The National Fire Protection Association has been conducting needs assessment of the U.S. fire service since 2001. In 2001, 51% of the fire engines in the U.S. were at least 15 years old. In 2005, this percentage dropped to 50%. In 2010, 46% of U.S. fire engines were 15 years or older.

In communities with populations between 100,000 and 249,000, the survey found 23% (2001), 25% (2005), and 19% (2010) of fire engines were 15 years or older. Fifty percent of fire engines in the KFDRFA are currently over 15 years old.


Page 35

Table 5: Aging of Kent Fire Department RFA Fire Engines / Compared to FAMA survey, no FAMA data available 2013

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

2001 2005 2010 2013

FAMA Engines over 15 YearsOld

Kent Engines over 15 Years Old


Page 36

3.2.1. KFDRFA Apparatus and Equipment Replacement Policy

The KFDRFA is committed to maintaining a fleet of vehicles and equipment that is safe, efficient and effective for fire department operations. The Commission on Fire Accreditation International (CFAI) places an emphasis on this same goal. To maintain status as an accredited agency, the KFDRFA must comply with the following performance indicators from the 8th Edition of the CFAI Self-Assessment Manual related to fire department vehicles.

Criterion 6C: Apparatus and Vehicles Apparatus resources are designed and purchased to be adequate to meet the agency’s goals and objectives. Performance Indicators

6C.1 Apparatus are strategically located to accomplish the stated standards of response cover and service level objectives. CC 6C.2 Apparatus types are appropriate for the functions served, e.g. operations, staffs support services,

specialized services and administration. 6C.3 A current replacement schedule exists for all apparatus. 4C.4 A process is in place for writing apparatus replacement specifications that allows for employee input.

Criterion 6D: Apparatus Maintenance The inspection, testing, preventive maintenance, replacement schedule and emergency repair of all apparatus is well established and meet the emergency apparatus service and reliability needs. Performance Indicators

6D.1 An apparatus maintenance program is established. Apparatus maintenance is conducted in accordance with manufacturer’s recommendations and federal and/or state regulations. Attention is given to the safety, health and security aspects of equipment operation and maintenance. CC

6D.2 The maintenance and repair facility is provided with sufficient space and equipped with appropriate tools. 6D.3 A system is in place to ensure the inspection, testing, fueling, preventive maintenance and, emergency

repair for all fire apparatus and equipment. 6D.5 Current standard operating procedures or general guidelines are in place to direct the apparatus

maintenance program. CC 6D.8 The reserve fleet is adequate or a documented contingency plan with another agency is in place for the

event that apparatus must be taken out of service.


Page 37

Table 6: Fire Engine and Ladder Inventory

KFDRFA’s current fleet of emergency response vehicles is well maintained but front line fire engines and the single tender in the fleet has an average age of 18 years. Ten of twelve engines have surpassed their expected front line lifespan and when converting pump hours to mileage the average engine mileage of these 12 pumps is 120,658. The table below provides details of fire engine and ladder inventory. A photographic inventory of these units follows the table below.

Apparatus Type

Unit #

Model Year Make/Model Function

Height/Pump/Tank

Years in Service

2012 Miles

Engine Hours

Pump Hours

Aerial Hours

Replace Year

Age @ Replace Assignment

Ladder 1 715 1996 Pierce/Smeal Reserve Ladder 105/NA/NA 17 79,995 14 n/a 990 2016 20 20717 132 Ave SELadder 2 713 2006 Pierce/Quantum Ladder 74 105/NA/NA 7 38,684 3,824 n/a 497 2027 21 24611 116th Ave SESkyboom-1 717 2009 Pierce/Sky Boom Engine 76 65/1500/500 4 13,927 1,109 96 33 2030 21 20676 72nd Ave SSkyboom-2 718 2009 Pierce/Sky Boom Engine 75 65/1500/500 4 12,755 1,077 93 29 2030 21 15635 SE 272nd St.

8 36,340 1,506 95 387 21Type I E 1 727 1989 Pierce Lance Training Reserve NA/1500/500 24 172,522 13,860 619 n/a 2015 26 24611 116th Ave SEType I E 2 728 1989 Pierce Lance Res Engine-78 NA/1500/500 24 129,743 10,268 5,401 n/a 2015 26 17820 SE 256th St.Type I E 3 730 1989 Pierce Lance Res Engine-73 NA/1500/500 24 128,334 10,628 7,524 n/a 2015 26 26512 Military Rd SType I E 4 731 1989 Pierce Lance Res Engine-77 NA/1500/500 24 154,268 12,439 8,159 n/a 2016 27 20717 132 Ave SEType I E 5 732 1989 Pierce Lance Res Engine-76 NA/1500/500 24 144,286 11,830 6,962 n/a 2017 28 20676 72nd Ave SType I E 6 706 2001 Pierce Quantum Engine 71 NA/1500/500 12 90,972 8,305 537 n/a 2021 20 504 West CroweType I E 7 708 2001 Pierce Quantum Engine 73 NA/1500/500 12 110,430 8,279 383 n/a 2021 20 26512 Military Rd SType I E 8 766 2001 Pierce Quantum Engine 74 NA/1500/500 12 105,316 4,803 349 n/a 2021 20 24611 116th Ave SEType I E 9 767 2001 Pierce Quantum Engine 77 NA/1500/500 12 110,888 8,400 409 n/a 2021 20 20717 132 Ave SEType I E 10 710 2004 Pierce Quantum Engine 78 NA/1500/500 9 64,700 5,194 466 n/a 2024 20 17820 SE 256th St.Type I E 11 712 2005 Pierce Quantum Engine 72 NA/1500/500 8 64,444 4,573 410 n/a 2025 20 25620 140 Ave SETender 1 714 1986 Pierce Tender Tender 72 N/A/1250/1000 27 38,638 2,533 779 n/a 2017 31 25620 140th Ave SE

18 109,545 8,426 2,667 - 24

Average apparatus age, miles, pump hours, aerial hours

Average apparatus age, miles, pump hours, aerial hours


Page 38

Unit 715, 1996 Pierce Ladder -79,995 - 2012 miles.

Unit 718, 2009, Pierce Skyboom – 12,755 - 2012 miles.

Unit 713, 2006 Pierce Ladder – 38,684 – 2012 miles.

Unit 727, 1989 Pierce Lance Type I Engine – 175,522 – 2012 miles.

Unit 717, 2009 Pierce Skyboom – 13,927 – 2012 miles.



Page 39

Unit 730, 1989 Pierce Lance, Type I Engine – 128,334 – 2012 miles.

Unit 706, 2001 Pierce Quantum, Type I Engine – 90,972 – 2012 miles.

Unit 731, 1989 Pierce Lance Type I Engine – 154,268 - 2012 miles.





Page 40




Unit 714, 1986 Pierce Tender – 38,638 – 2012 miles.


Page 41

Table 7: Inventory of Aid and Command Apparatus

Apparatus Type

Unit #Model

YearMake/Model Function

Years in Service

2012 Miles

Engine Hours

Replacement Year

Age @ Replacment Assignment

Aid 1 702 2003 Road Rescue Reserve Aid - 73 10 53,881 4,404 2023 20 26512 Military Rd SAid 2 703 2003 Road Rescue Aid 70 10 68,776 5,187 2023 20 504 West CroweAid 3 704 2005 MedTec Aid Car Aid 71 8 77,673 6,214 2025 20 504 West CroweAid 4 705 2007 MedTec Aid Car Aid 74 6 48,630 3,410 2027 20 24611 116th Ave SE

9 62,240 4,804 20Command 1 724 1998 Ford Expedition Reserve Command 15 81,820 n/a 2018 20 24611 116th Ave SECommand 2 709 2003 Ford Expedition Logistics B/C 10 72,383 n/a 2023 20 8320 S 208th StreetCommand 3 7102 2006 Ford Expedition D/C Weatherill 7 36,565 n/a 2026 20 24611 116th Ave SECommand 4 7104 2006 Ford Expedition Battalion 71 7 34,892 n/a 2026 20 504 West CroweCommand 5 9904 2006 Ford Expedition D/C Pawlak 7 53,435 n/a 2026 20 24611 116th Ave SECommand 6 7122 2006 Ford Expedition Chaplain Ellis 7 57,446 n/a 2026 20 24611 116th Ave SECommand 7 7106 2007 Ford Expedition D/C Napier 6 71,023 n/a 2027 20 400 West GoweCommand 8 721 2010 Chev Tahoe Battalion 74 3 16,212 n/a 2030 20 24611 116th Ave SE

8 52,972 n/a 20EM 3 7100 2008 Ford F350 Emer Mgmt 5 22,889 n/a 2028 20 24611 116th Ave SEEM 4 7206 2008 Ford Escape D/C Marzano 5 51,873 n/a 2028 20 24612 116th Ave SE

5 37,381 n/a 20

Average Apparatus Age, Miles, Engine Hours




Page 42

Unit 702, 2003 Road Rescue Ambulance – 53,881 – 2012 miles.

Unit 705, 2007 Med-Tech Ambulance – 48,630 – 2012 miles.

Unit 703, 2003 Road Rescue Ambulance – 68,776 – 2012 miles.

Unit 724, 1998 Ford Expedition Command Car – 81,820 – 2012 miles.

Unit 704, 2005 Med-Tech Ambulance – 77,673 – 2012 miles.

Unit 709, 2003 Ford Expedition Command Car – 72,383 - 2012 miles.


Page 43


Unit 7122, 2006 Ford Expedition – Chaplin Car -57,446 – 2012 miles.




Unit 721, 2010 Chevy Tahoe Command Car – 16,612 – 2012 miles.


Page 44

Unit 7100, 2008 Ford F350 EM Command – 22,889 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7206, 2008 Ford Escape EM Command Car – 51,873 – 2012 miles.


Page 45

Table 8: Inventory of Staff Vehicles

Apparatus Type Unit # Model Year Make/Model Function Years in

Service2012 Miles

Replace Year

Age @ Replace Assignment

CARES 1 7636 2000 Chevrolet/Astro Public Education 13 27,806 2020 20 400 West GoweCARES 2 7103 2012 Toyota/FJ Cruiser CARES 1 1,268 2032 20 17820 SE 256th St.CARES 3 7606 2001 Ford Crown Vic CARES 12 67,107 2021 20 17821 SE 256th St.

EM 1 7624 1997 Ford Taurus Em Mgmt 16 53,632 2017 20 24611 116th Ave S

EM 2 7632 1999 GMC Safari Van Em Mgmt 14 41,050 2019 20 24612 116th Ave S

Fire Investigations 1 7205 2008 Ford F250 P/U Fire Investigations 5 43,504 2028 20 400 West Gowe

Fire Marshal 1 7627 1997 Ford Taurus Fire Prevention 16 54,557 2017 20 400 West Gowe

Fire Marshal 2 7628 1997 Chevrolet Astro App Maintenance 16 40,586 2017 20 400 West Gowe

Fire Marshal 3 7608 1998 Jeep Cherokee Training 15 83,190 2018 20 24611 116th Ave S

Fire Marshal 4 7630 1999 Jeep Cherokee Fire Prevention 14 77,878 2019 20 400 West Gowe

Fire Marshal 5 7610 2000 Chevrolet Lumina CARES 13 46,556 2020 20 17821 SE 256th St.

Fire Marshal 6 7625 2000 Chevrolet Astro Fire IT 13 57,800 2020 20 400 West Gowe

Fire Marshal 7 7633 2000 Ford Ranger Fire Prevention 13 53,585 2020 20 400 West Gowe

Fire Marshal 8 7634 2000 Ford Ranger Fire Prevention 13 59,530 2020 20 400 West Gowe

Fire Marshal 9 7614 2001 GMC Safari Fire Prevention 12 39,543 2021 20 400 West Gowe

Fire Marshal 10 7620 2001 Ford Crown Victoria Fire Prevention 12 55,464 2021 20 400 West Gowe

Fire Marshal 11 7108 2012 Ford Transi Wagon Public Education 1 3,045 2032 20 400 West Gowe

Staff Car 1 7203 2006 Ford Expedition Public Information 7 83,174 2026 20 400 West Gowe

Staff Car 2 7202 2008 Ford Escape Planning Unit 5 6,493 2028 20 400 West Gowe

Staff Car 3 7107 2012 Ford Escape Administration 1 8,051 2032 20 24611 116th Ave S

Training 1 7603 1998 Dodge Caravan Training 15 62,680 2018 20 24611 116th Ave STraining 2 7516 2008 Ford F-250 Spec Ops 71 5 18,294 2028 20 504 West Crow StTraining 3 7619 2001 GMC Safari Training 12 37,006 2021 20 24611 116th Ave S

11 44,426.04 20.00Average Apparatus Age, Hours, Miles


Page 46

Unit 7636, 2000 Chevy Astro - Cares Staff Car – 27,806 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7624, 1997 Ford Taurus – EM Staff Car – 53,632 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7103, 2012 Toyota FJ Cruiser – Cares Staff Car – 1,268 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7632, 1999 GMC Safari Van – EM Staff Car – 41,050 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7606, 2001 Ford Crown Victoria – Cares Staff Car – 67,107 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7205, 2008 Ford F250 – Fire Investigations Staff Car – 43,504 – 2012 miles.


Page 47

Unit 7627, 1997 Ford Taurus – Fire Marshal Staff Car – 54,557 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7630, 1999 Jeep Cherokee – Fire Marshal Staff Car – 77,878 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7628, 1997 Chevrolet Astro – Fire Marshal Staff Car – 40,586 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7610, 2000 Chevrolet Lumina – Fire Marshal Staff Car – 46,556 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7608, 1998 Jeep Cherokee – Training Staff Car – 83,190 2012 miles.

Unit 7625, 2000 Chevrolet Astro PIO Standby Vehicle – 57,800 – 2012 miles.


Page 48

Unit 7633, 2000 Ford Ranger – Fire Marshal Staff Car – 53,585 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7620, 2001 Ford Crown Victoria – Fire Marshal Staff Car – 55,464 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7634, 2000 Ford Ranger – Fire Marshal Staff Car – 59,530 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7108 2012 Ford Transit Wagon – Public Education Staff Car – 3,045 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7614, 2001 GMC Safari – Fire Marshal Staff Car – 39,543 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7203, 2006 Ford Expedition – PIO Staff Car – 83,174 – 2012 miles.


Page 49

Unit 7202, 2008 Ford Escape – Planning Unit Staff Car – 6,493 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7516, 2008 Ford F-250 – Training Staff Car – 18,294 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7107 2012 Ford Escape – Chief’s Car – 8,051 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7619, 2001 GMC Safari Van – Training Staff Car – 37,006 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7603, 1998 Dodge Caravan – Training Staff Car – 62,680 – 2012 miles.


Page 50

Table 9: Support Apparatus and Equipment

Apparatus Type Unit #Model

YearMake/Model Function Years in

ServiceHours / Miles

Replacement Year

Age @ Replacment Assignment

Air Unit 1 701 1999 Freightliner Air 72 14 9,860 2029 30 25620 140th Ave SEMaint/Support 1 7635 2000 Jeep Cherokee App Maintenance 13 148,326 2015 15 20678 72nd Ave S

Maint/Support 2 700 1993 Chevrolet Suburban Mechanics 20 95,274 2015 22 20678 72nd Ave SMaint/Support 3 7611 1995 Ford F-350 75 Decon-HM 18 18,169 2015 20 15635 SE 272nd StMaint/Support 4 7612 1995 Ford F-250 Logistics 18 76,492 2016 21 8320 S 208th St.Maint/Support 5 7621 1995 GMC Mini Van Loaner 18 54,669 2016 21 20678 72nd Ave SMaint/Support 6 7629 1998 Jeep Cherokee Training 18 104,814 2016 18 24611 116th Ave SEMaint/Support 7 707 2003 Ford Pick-up Mechanics 10 43,877 2023 20 20678 72nd Ave SMaint/Support 8 711 2006 Dodge Ram Mechanics 7 29,453 2026 20 20678 72nd Ave SMaint/Support 9 7231 2006 Chevrolet Silverado Logistics 7 38,500 2026 20 8320 S 208th St.Maint/Support 10 7204 2008 Ford F250 Training 5 14,612 2029 21 24611 116th Ave SEMaint/Support 11 7218 2005 Dodge Cargo Van Logistics 8 93,745 2023 18 8320 72nd Ave SMaint/Support 12 738 2011 Ford F350 Investigations 2 15,361 2031 20 400 West Gowe St

12 57,165.54 19Average Apparatus Age, Miles


Page 51

Unit 701, 1999 Freightliner Mobile Air Unit – 9,860 2012- miles.

Unit 7611, 1995 Ford F-250 – Special Ops Decon – 75 – 18,169 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7635, 2000 Jeep Cherokee – Fire Investigations Staff Car – 148,326 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7612, 1995 Chevrolet Astro – Logistics Support Vehicle – 76,492 – 2012 miles.

Unit 700, 1993 Chevrolet Suburban – Mechanic Staff Car – 95,274 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7621, 1995 GMC Safari – Apparatus Maintenance Loaner – 54,669 – 2012 miles.


Page 52

Unit 7629, 1998 Jeep Cherokee – Pastor Staff Vehicle – 104,814 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7231, 2006 Chevrolet Silverado – Logistics Support Vehicle – 38,500 – 2012 miles.

Unit 707, 2003 Ford F- 350 – Maintenance Support Vehicle – 43,887 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7204, 2008 Ford F-250 – Special Ops Support Vehicle – 14,612 – 2012 miles.

Unit 711, 2006 Dodge Ram 3500 – Maintenance Support Vehicle – 29,453 – 2012 miles.

Unit 7218, Xxxx Dodge Mini Cargo Van – Logistics Support

Vehicle – 93,745 – 2012 miles.


Page 53

Unit 738, 2011 Ford F-350 – Fire Investigations Support Vehicle – 15,361 – 2012 miles.


Page 54

Table 10: Inventory of Special Operations Equipment

Apparatus Type Unit #Model

YearMake/Model Function Years in

Service MilesReplace

YearAge @

Replacment Assignment

Special Ops 1 729 2006 Top Hat Trailer Training 7 n/a 2026 20 20717 132nd Ave SESpecial Ops 2 726 2007 Trailblazer Haz-Mat Decon Unit Decon 75 6 n/a 2037 30 15635 272nd Ave SESpecial Ops 3 716 2009 Haz-Mat Kentucky Trailer Haz Mat 76 4 n/a 2029 20 20676 72nd Ave SSpecial Ops 4 764 1995 Ford F350 4 X 4 Ops P/U 18 37,284 2020 25 24611 116th Ave SESpecial Ops 5 9912 2006 Wells Fargo Enclosed Trailer Pub Ed 7 n/a 2026 20 504 West Crowe StSpecial Ops 6 722 2009 Peterbilt Haz-Mat Tractor Haz Mat 76 4 9,127 2029 20 20676 72nd Ave SSpecial Ops 7 733 1983 Mobile generator Support 30 0 / 1,164 2023 40 15635 SE 272nd StSpecial Ops 8 723 2009 EZ Loader Trailer Water Res 71 4 n/a 2029 20 504 West Crowe StSpecial Ops 9 735 2008 Woodridge Boat/Motor Water Res 71 5 n/a 2038 20 504 West Crowe StSpecial Ops 10 750 2010 EZ Loader Trailer Flood Ops 3 n/a 2040 30 24611 116th Ave SESpecial Ops 11 745 2010 EZ Loader Trailer Flood Ops 3 n/a 2040 30 24611 116th Ave SESpecial Ops 12 746 2010 Jon Boat Flood Ops 3 n/a 2040 30 24611 116th Ave SESpecial Ops 13 747 2010 Jon Boat Flood Ops 3 n/a 2040 30 24611 116th Ave SESpecial Ops 14 748 2010 Jon Boat Flood Ops 3 n/a 2040 30 24611 116th Ave SESpecial Ops 15 749 2010 Jon Boat Flood Ops 3 n/a 2040 30 24611 116th Ave SESpecial Ops 16 756 2010 Tork Lift Trailer Support Srvcs 3 n/a 2030 20 15635 272nd Ave SESpecial Ops 17 7101 2010 Hallmark Shelter Trailer Emer Mgmt 3 n/a 2030 20 24611 116th Ave SESpecial Ops 18 7105 2010 ExMark Lawnmower Support Srvcs 3 n/a 2020 10 24611 116th Ave SESpecial Ops 19 7114 Falcon Utility Trailer Emer Mgmt 0 n/a 24611 116th Ave SESpecial Ops 20 7201 2010 CERT Trailer Emer Mgmt 3 n/a 2030 20 24611 116th Ave SESpecial Ops 21 7115 John Deere Gator (4 wheeler) Emer Mgmt 0 n/a 24611 116th Ave SE


Page 55

Unit 729, 2006 Top Hat Trailer – Training Support

Unit 764, 1995 Ford F-350 – Special Operations Haz-Mat Tow and Support Vehicle

Unit 726, 2007 Trailblazer Haz-Mat Decontamination Unit

Unit 9912, 2006 Wells Fargo Trailer _ Public Education

Unit 716, 2009 Haz-Mat (Kentucky) Trailer – Haz-Mat Response Vehicle

Unit 722, 2009 Peterbilt Tractor – Hazardous Materials Response Vehicle


Page 56

Unit 733, 1983 Mobile Generator

Unit 745, 2010 EZ Loader boat trailer Unit 746, 747, 748 and 749 4-2010 Jon Boats – Flood Response

Unit 723 & 735, 2010 EZ Loader boat trailer and Woodbridge boat – Special Operations, Water Rescue

Unit 756, Tork Lift Utility Trailer

Unit 750, EZ Loader Trailer

Unit 7101, 2010 Hallmark Shelter Trailer


Page 57

Unit 7105, 2010 ExMark lawnmower – Support

Unit 7115, XXXX John Deere Gator – EM Support

Unit 7114, XXXX Falcon Utility Trailer -

Unit 7501, Zone 3 Mass Casualty Incident vehicle for carrying backboards & equipment

Unit 7201, 2010 CERT Trailer – EM Support

Unit 762, Zone 3 Mass Casualty Incident Unit


Page 58

3.3. Firefighting Equipment

A full complement of special equipment is necessary for the delivery of fire and rescue services. Special equipment includes all of the equipment within fire stations or carried on fire engines and other apparatus that allow firefighters to safely and effectively deliver and record services. Table 11 provides a listing of the equipment maintained by KFDRFA.

Table 11: Inventory of Firefighting Equipment

Fire Equipment QuantityFire Hose 1249Fire Hose Nozzles 90Rescue Tools 9Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) 120SCBA Air Bottles 300Mobile Data Computers 35Desktop PC's 174Ballistic Vests 150Mobile Radios 55Portable Radios 168Personal Protective Gear 350Defibrillators 15Thermal Imaging Cameras 12

Existing Special Equipment Inventory


Page 59

4. Needed Resources

4.1. Impacts of the Growth Management Act

The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) was enacted to provide local oversight of community growth with the intent for local agencies such as counties, cities and towns, to monitor and mitigate the impacts of growth. Goal 12 of the GMA states:

(1) Urban growth. Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner.

(12) Public facilities and services. Ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards.

(1) Purpose.

(a) The purpose of concurrency is to assure that those public facilities and services necessary to support development are adequate to serve that development at the time it is available for occupancy and use, without decreasing service levels below locally established minimum standards.

(b) Concurrency describes the situation in which adequate facilities are available when the impacts of development occur, or within a specified time

thereafter. Concurrency ensures consistency in land use approval and the development of adequate public facilities as plans are implemented, and it prevents development that is inconsistent with the public facilities necessary to support the development.

(c) With respect to facilities other than transportation facilities counties and cities may fashion their own regulatory responses and are not limited to

imposing moratoria on development during periods when concurrency is not maintained.

Concurrency for transportation infrastructure is mandated by the Act and local agencies were given the authority to establish concurrency guidelines for other public needs such as water, sewer and fire services.

The impacts of area growth spurred by the GMA over that past 23 years has significantly affected KFDRFA’s ability to deliver service. Service area population in 1990 was approximately 95,018 generating just over 9,000 emergency incidents. Today in 2013, service area population is greater than 142,000 with 17,277 emergency incidents generated in 2012. Covington incorporated as a city in 1997 and since incorporation, Covington’s population has grown by more than 55%.


Page 60

Community growth generates the need for additional capital facilities and equipment to support the demand for service. While population has more than doubled within the City of Kent between 1990 and 2010, no additional investment was made in fire stations. The Public Safety Bond issue of 1988 provided funding only for the rebuilding or renovation of existing fire stations. Over this same 20 year timeline King County Fire District 37 replaced Station 77 and built two additional fire stations, Station 75 and 78 to meet increasing demand for services.

Based upon a review of current built environment and future planned growth within the KFDRFA boundaries and potential annexation areas of Kent and Covington, the KFDRFA cannot serve additional development within its boundaries without further degradation of Levels of Service resulting in a lack of concurrency and longer response times to emergency events. Concurrency and Level of Service (LOS) cannot be maintained with the current 2013 resources available to the KFDRFA.

4.2. Indicators of Future Capital Facility Needs

4.2.1. Level of Service Measures

4.2.1.1. Response Effectiveness

Response time is a critical component of any fire service system and is measured against two major benchmarks; time to brain death in a non-breathing patient and time to the occurrence of flashover9 in a structure fire.

Response effectiveness is defined as; the ability for a fire department to assemble enough equipment and personnel to prevent brain death, and control fire prior to flashover. Brain death begins to occur at 4 to 610 minutes in a non-breathing patient, and flashover can occur anywhere from 3 to 20 minutes depending on availability of oxygen and fuel in a fire. Most fire engineers

9 Flashover refers to the point in a structure fire when everything in a room has heated to a point that causes everything within the room to instantaneously burst into flames. Survival is no longer possible in a room that has flashed-over. Flashover is a significant killer of firefighters even with all of their protective gear. 10 The American Heart Association states; Brain death and permanent death start to occur in just four to six minutes after someone experiences cardiac arrest. Cardiac arrest is reversible in most victims if it's treated within a few minutes with an electric shock to the heart to restore a normal heartbeat. This process is called defibrillation. A victim's chances of survival are reduced by 7 to 10 percent with every minute that passes without CPR and defibrillation.


Page 61

and the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) estimate flashover to occur most commonly between seven (7) to twelve (12) minutes.11

4.2.1.2. Level of Service Components and Measures

Washington State Law in Chapter 52.33 RCW requires substantially career fire departments to adopt level of service standards and report performance of those standards annually. Time to the onset of brain death in a non-breathing patient and time to flashover in a structure fire are the two elements required to be considered by the State when setting performance standards. The statute further recognizes the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), the International Fire Chief’s Association (IFCA) and International City/County Management Association (ICMA) for their work on establishing performance measures for fire and rescue services.

Chapter 52.33 RCW requires reporting of “fractile” performance at the 90th percentile. In simple terms, this would be the response performance of the 90th emergency response out of 100 if the response data of these incidents were stacked in order of response time from fastest to slowest. Response time performance of the 90th incident in the stack would be the agency’s performance at the 90th fractile or percentile. To measure emergency response performance and identify system deficiencies, KFDRFA has adopted response time standards based upon the concepts described in this section and performance is evaluated against the following four performance factors.

4.2.1.3. Turnout Time:

Turnout time refers to the elapsed time from when firefighters have received notification of an emergency until they are able to cease their current task, walk to the apparatus bay, don personal protective equipment, board their response vehicle, securely seatbelt themselves into the vehicle and begin driving away from their assigned fire station toward the dispatched emergency.

4.2.1.4. First Unit Travel Time; “Distribution”:

First unit travel time refers to the drive time required for the first emergency response unit to travel from a fire station to the address of the emergency it was dispatched to. The fire industry often refers to first unit travel time as “Distribution Time” which references the best practice of distributing fire stations and adequate resources across a fire departments service area so that all areas of the jurisdiction can be reached within the adopted time standard for the first unit to arrive on location of an emergency event. This time measure is sometimes referred to as the speed of attack or response.

11 Source: Time Verses Products of Combustion, NFPA handbook, 19th Edition


Page 62

The National Fire Protection Association establishes a 4 minute time standard for distribution or first unit travel time. This standard is to be performed 90% of the time in urban and suburban areas. The Center for Public Safety Excellence established a first unit travel time of 4 minutes in urban areas and 5 minutes in suburban areas to be performed 90% of the time.

4.2.1.5. Full First Alarm Travel Time; “Concentration”:

Full first alarm travel time refers to the elapsed drive time required for the last of all emergency units dispatched to an emergency to arrive at the dispatched address. The fire industry often refers to full first alarm travel time as “Concentration Time” which references the best practice of concentrating enough resources within distributed fire stations so that an adequate number of firefighting personnel and resources can arrive in time to stop the escalation of property and life loss. Concentration differs by response type, for instance, a structure fire requires more resources than a response to a sudden cardiac arrest. Concentration of resources is often referred to as the force of attack or response.

The National Fire Protection Association establishes a standard for concentration or full first alarm travel time of 8 minutes to be performed 90% of the time in urban and suburban areas. The Center for Public Safety Excellence establishes a full first alarm travel time in urban areas at 8 minutes and 10 minutes in suburban areas, both to be performed 90% of the time.

4.2.1.6. Resource Reliability; “Unit Availability”:

Reliability refers to the probability that the required amount of resources will be available when a fire or other emergency call is received. If all response resources are available at their assigned station every time an emergency call is received, they would have a reliability of 100%. If a fire station’s emergency response unit is out of the assigned station engaged in an emergency response when a second request for emergency response is received in that fire station’s service area, a substitute response unit from a fire station farther away will need to respond causing longer response times than if the original unit were able to respond. These simultaneous emergency calls are tracked to measure the effectiveness or reliability of fire station resources; as the number of emergencies in a given fire station’s service area increases, the probability of that station’s emergency response unit(s) being available decreases. A decrease in unit availability or “Reliability” leads to increased response times, therefore it is imperative that response units remain available or reliable at least as often as they are expected to perform their defined level of service. To achieve 90% performance, response units must be available to respond 90% of the time.


Page 63

4.2.1.7. Levels of Service by Community Type:

Turnout time, first unit travel/distribution time, full first alarm/concentration travel time and reliability are applied to categories of community densities. The fire service defines community types by urban, suburban and rural. KFDRFA uses the following community type definitions:

4.2.1.7.1. Urban Service Area: A geographically defined land area having a zoning and land use that allows more than 6 dwelling units per acre. This housing density can produce population densities greater than 8,000 or more people per square mile.

4.2.1.7.2. Suburban Service Area: A geographically defined land area having a zoning and land use that allows 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre. This housing density can produce population densities between 3,840 to 8,000 people per square mile.

4.2.1.7.3. Rural Service Area: A geographically defined land area having a zoning and land use that allows less than 3 dwelling units per acre. Population densities are less than 3,840 people per square mile.


Page 64

4.3. National, State, and Local Level of Service Expectations

4.3.1. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Levels of Service

NFPA Standard 1710 addresses deployment of fire suppression and emergency medical resources for career fire departments and establishes the following time objectives:

4.3.1.1. Full Unit to Arrive Objectives

• First Unit on Scene Fire: Turnout (1:20) + Drive Time (4:00) = 5 minutes 20 seconds, 90% of the time • First Unit on Scene EMS: Turnout (1:00) + Drive Time (4:00) = 5 minutes 0 seconds, 90% of the time

4.3.1.2. Full First Alarm Arrival Objectives

• Full First Alarm Fire: Turnout (1:20) + Drive Time (8:00) = 9 minutes 20 seconds, 90% of the time • Full First Alarm EMS: Turnout (1:00) + Drive Time (8:00) = 9 minutes 0 seconds, 90% of the time

4.3.2. Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE) Levels of Service

The Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE) establishes the following benchmark level of service standards through its Commission on Fire Accreditation International (CFAI) arm.

4.3.2.1. First Unit to Arrive Objectives to be performed 90% of the time

• Urban Service Area: Dispatch (1:00) + Turnout (1:20) + Drive Time (4:00) = 5 minutes 20 seconds • Suburban Service Area: Turnout (1:20) + Drive Time (5:00) = 6 minutes 20 seconds, 90% of the time • Rural Service Area: Turnout (1:20) + Drive Time (10:00) = 10 minutes 20 seconds, 90% of the time

4.3.2.2. Full First Alarm Arrival Objectives

• Urban Service Area: Turnout (1:20) + Drive Time (8:00) = 9 minutes 20 seconds, 90% of the time • Suburban Service Area: Turnout (1:20) + Drive Time (10:00) = 11 minutes 20 seconds, 90% of the time • Rural Service Area: Turnout (1:20) + Drive Time (14:00) = 15 minutes 20 seconds, 90% of the time


Page 65

4.3.2.3. Minimum Hourly Unit Reliability

• Urban Service Area: Units are available from assigned station 90% of the time • Suburban Service Area: Units are available from assigned station 90% of the time • Rural Service Area: Units are available from assigned station 90% of the time

4.3.3. Washington State Levels of Service

The State Legislature in RCW 52.33.010 communicates its intent for fire departments to establish Level of Service Standards that permit first responders to arrive in time to minimize or prevent "brain death" as it relates to EMS; and to prevent "flash-over" as it relates to fire suppression. The Legislature further acknowledges in RCW 52.33.020 the following benchmarks in its definitions section relative to these two critical emergency events:

Brain Death: As defined by the American Heart Association, means the irreversible death of brain cells that begins four to six minutes after cardiac arrest.

Flash-Over: As defined by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, means when all combustibles in a room burst into flame and the fire spreads rapidly.

* Flash-Over is dependent on many factors, (fuel load, oxygen supply, size of room, etc.) but is generally recognized as a likely event from 7 minutes to 12 minutes after ignition occurs.

4.3.4. Kent Fire Department Regional Fire Authority Levels of Service

KFDRFA has established benchmark and baseline performance measures following the guidelines established by the Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE) and published in their 8th edition of the Commission on Fire Accreditation (CFAI) Self-Assessment Manual. Benchmark performance represents Industry best practices and baseline indicates minimum standards capable of limiting the loss of life and property. Agencies performing below baseline standards are considered in response failure and are not eligible for Accredited Agency Status by the CFAI. The KFDRFA strives to attain benchmark performance but is currently having difficulty meeting baseline performance standards for first in units in the urban response areas.


Page 66

Upon evaluation of fire incident records between 2005 and 2008, it was found that structure fires occurring in the KFDRFA service area were generally controlled by the first three fire suppression units providing they arrived in a reasonable time. Because of this research and associated findings, the KFDRFA has established an additional performance measure that falls between the first arriving unit and a full first alarm assignment. This new performance criterion has been designated to measure the arrival performance of these first three units and is called a “Minimum Effective Response Force.” This name was chosen because timely arrival of a minimum response force of three suppression units has been proven to be effective at controlling common structure fires within the KFDRFA.

4.3.4.1. Benchmark Levels of Service (Fire, Haz-Mat, Rescue responses)

4.3.4.1.1. First Unit to Arrive Objectives “Benchmark” to be Performed 90% of the time

• Urban Service Area: Dispatch (1:10) + Turnout (1:55) + Drive Time (4:15) = 7 minutes 20 seconds • Suburban Service Area: Dispatch (1:10) + Turnout (1:55) + Drive Time (4:35) = 7 minutes 40 seconds • Rural Service Area: Dispatch (1:10) + Turnout (1:55) + Drive Time (7:35) = 10 minutes 40 seconds

4.3.4.1.2. Minimum First Alarm Arrival Objectives (first three units) “Benchmark”


4.3.4.1.3. Full First Alarm Arrival Objectives “Benchmark”


4.3.4.1.4. Minimum Hourly Unit Reliability “Benchmark”

• Urban Service Area: Units are available from assigned station 90% of the time. • Suburban Service Area: Units are available from assigned station 90% of the time. • Rural Service Area: Units are available from assigned station 90% of the time.


Page 67

4.3.4.2. Baseline Levels of Service (Fire, Haz-Mat, Rescue responses)

4.3.4.2.1. First Unit to Arrive Objectives “Baseline” to be Performed 90% of the time


4.3.4.2.2. Minimum First Alarm Arrival Objectives (first three units) “Baseline”


4.3.4.2.3. Full First Alarm Arrival Objectives “Baseline”


4.3.4.2.4. Minimum Hourly Unit Reliability “Baseline”



Page 68

4.3.4.3. Benchmark Levels of Service (EMS response)

4.3.4.3.1. First Unit to Arrive Objectives “Benchmark” to be Performed 90% of the time

• Urban Service Area: Dispatch (1:10) + Turnout (1:4535) + Drive Time (4:15) = 7 minutes 10 00 seconds • Suburban Service Area: Dispatch (1:10) + Turnout (1:4535) + Drive Time (4:35) = 7 minutes 30 20 seconds • Rural Service Area: Dispatch (1:10) + Turnout (1:4535) + Drive Time (7:3515) = 10 minutes 30 00 seconds

4.3.4.3.2. First Alarm Arrival Objectives “Benchmark”

• Urban Service Area: Dispatch (1:10) + Turnout (1:4535) + Drive Time (7:156:15) = 10 8 minutes 1030 seconds • Suburban Service Area: Dispatch (1:10) + Turnout (1:4535) + Drive Time (76:3045) = 10 9 minutes 25 30 seconds • Rural Service Area: Dispatch (1:10) + Turnout (1:4535) + Drive Time (8:30) = 11 minutes 25 15 seconds

4.3.4.3.3. Minimum Hourly Unit Reliability “Benchmark”


4.3.4.4. Baseline Levels of Service (EMS Response)

4.3.4.4.1. First Unit to Arrive Objectives “Baseline” to be Performed 90% of the time

• Urban Service Area: Dispatch (1:3020) + Turnout (2:001:50) + Drive Time (54:45) = 9 7 minutes 15 55 seconds • Suburban Service Area: Dispatch (1:3020) + Turnout (2:001:50) + Drive Time (65:3010) = 10 8 minutes 00 20 seconds • Rural Service Area: Dispatch (1:3020) + Turnout (2:001:50) + Drive Time (78:1520) = 11 10 minutes 45 30 seconds

4.3.4.4.2. First Alarm Arrival Objectives “Baseline”

• Urban Service Area: Dispatch (1:30) + Turnout (2:001:50) + Drive Time (8:00) = 11 minutes 30 seconds • Suburban Service Area: Dispatch (1:30) + Turnout (2:001:50) + Drive Time (8:15) = 11 minutes 45 seconds • Rural Service Area: Dispatch (1:30) + Turnout (2:001:50) + Drive Time (10:00) = 13 minut6:66es 30 seconds


Page 69

4.3.4.4.3. Minimum Hourly Unit Reliability “Baseline”



Page 70

4.4. Historical Fire Department Performance Issues and Efforts toward Concurrency

As a result of the Howard A Hanson Dam coming on line in 1961, and the growth that quickly followed, the Kent Fire Department began the process of trying to catch up with the impacts of development. Fire Chief Norman Angelo was hired in 1981 and began an assessment of the Department that resulted in the first long range planning document for the Kent Fire Department. The “Fire Department Master Plan” was published in 1984 and contained some key findings some of which still exist today. Too few resources existed to reliably handle the emergency response workload, performance objectives were not being met, heavy dependency upon mutual aid existed, a strong emphasis on fire prevention was needed to support too few resources, growth was happening faster than expected (1984 Master Plan predicts 84,000 population in 1990, actual was 95,018), traffic was a major issue in slowing response units, apparatus exceeding their life expectancy were still in service, and some facilities were outdated or undersized.

The Master Plan implemented the first performance measures in the Kent Fire Department. In 1983 it was estimated that a response time of 5 minutes was being met about 50% of the time. While better data collection and analysis was asked for in 1984, computer systems and databases were quite rare, a computerized records management system with reporting capabilities was not implemented until 16 years later.

With an accurate data base it was possible to begin to compare year over year response performance. Between 2000 and 2008, resource deployment was static yet the traffic impacts of growth and changes in the street network, increased fire response time from the same fire stations by more than 55 seconds. This erosion in service and a lack of capital funding triggered the need to begin looking at alternative methods of funding.

As a result of declining levels of service, a Stakeholders group consisting of local residents, business owners, property owners and fire department members was formed in 2007. In 2008 this group issued the “Regional Fire Protection Stakeholders Report”. The report identified declining levels of service and inadequate funding as major issues. Following is a complete list of the problems identified by the Stakeholders group.

• Population growth data for 1991 to 2006 showing an increase of 54%, and emergency incidents increasing by 65%, while daily staffing of the fire department increased only 8%.

• Budget trends from 1996 to 2006 that indicate fire services represent a declining portion of the City’s budget (from 27.4% to 25%), while overall budget levels have increased.

• Revenue limits, based on voter initiatives that have capped property tax increases to 1%. This is particularly limiting for the Fire District, which relies heavily on property tax, rather than the City of Kent, which has more diverse sources of revenues.


Page 71

• Performance levels, which show that Kent Fire/Fire District #37 is exceeding its 4 minute and 15 second drive time goal 35% of the time for EMS responses and 46% of the time for fire responses. Because of traffic congestion, drive times for fire responses have increased 59 seconds since 2000.

• Comparisons with six other fire districts/departments that show the Kent Fire/Fire District #37 has the highest level of daily incidents per firefighter of the group surveyed.

• Evaluations of future growth that show a potential increase in population by 2016 of 43,000 and a potential increase in commercial development of 38 million square feet.

• Evaluations of current and future needs for service based on anticipated growth through 2016 that identify specific locations for additional fire stations needed to address growth, and estimates of equipment and personnel required to meet level of service goals.

Achieving concurrency with community growth has been a problem since 1960. Because growth was thought to increase tax base and fire department revenues, growth was considered to be good for the fire department. The problem was that this increased revenue was never assessed against the increased fire and EMS service demands that community development brought with it. While this problem had been anecdotally considered, it wasn’t until the self-assessment process for fire department accreditation that performance measures were adopted and impacts of growth were considered against the need to maintain levels of service and prepare for future growth. In 2005, a concurrency study was funded by Fire District 37 and the workload impacts of new development across the Kent Fire Department were identified. Since the KFDRFA received status as an Accredited Agency from the Center of Public Safety Excellence (CPSE) in 2004, subsequent annual reports have revealed response performance well below national standards. In 2011, it became apparent that response times in the “Urban” areas were eroding below “baseline” standards of the CPSE placing the KFDRFA in jeopardy of losing Accredited Agency status.

4.5. Current Drive Time Response Performance

Current analysis of KFDRFA’s historical response data reveals sub-standard performance compared to both benchmark and baseline expectations. Two main factors contribute to this current sub-standard performance. First, performance cannot be met during peak hours where unit reliability is below the expected performance standard of 90%. Second, some areas of KFDRFA simply cannot be reached within the adopted time standards because of the distance from a fire station. Emergency response rates for the preceding three (3) years are identified in Tables 12, 13 and 14 using percentage achievement of response standards and green, yellow, red


Page 72

coloring. Green indicates the standard was met, yellow indicates performance was within 5 percent of the standard and red indicates performance was more than 5 percent below the standard. Data for this analysis was obtained from emergency response records of KFDRFA from 2010 through 2012.

Table 12 Benchmark and Baseline Drive Time Performance of Stations 71 to 7412

Count Benchmark Baseline Count Benchmark Baseline Count Benchmark Baseline

Station 71 6409 74.7% 85.6% 3597 68.3% 92.0% 243 91.8% 100.0%2010 1955 73.7% 84.7% 1220 69.4% 92.0% 80 92.5% 100.0%2011 2254 75.5% 86.7% 1152 69.9% 92.0% 73 91.8% 100.0%2012 2200 74.9% 85.4% 1225 65.7% 92.2% 90 91.1% 100.0%

Station 72 75 33.3% 57.3% 1289 73.4% 92.2% 44 86.4% 100.0%2010 26 30.8% 61.5% 450 74.2% 92.9% 14 100.0% 100.0%2011 21 42.9% 52.4% 350 70.3% 92.0% 16 81.3% 100.0%2012 28 28.6% 57.1% 489 74.8% 91.6% 14 78.6% 100.0%

Station 73 1493 58.1% 78.4% 2492 67.4% 90.9% 21 90.5% 100.0%2010 464 51.5% 73.9% 694 71.2% 92.8%2011 512 66.8% 84.6% 880 67.8% 92.2% 8 100.0% 100.0%2012 517 55.3% 76.4% 918 64.2% 88.1% 13 84.6% 100.0%

Station 74 5621 65.8% 84.4% 5640 65.4% 92.0% 1 100.0% 100.0%2010 1888 67.2% 84.6% 1863 63.3% 91.9%2011 1870 67.0% 86.2% 1815 67.9% 92.4% 1 100.0% 100.0%2012 1863 63.3% 82.4% 1962 65.1% 91.7%

System Performance by Station Area and Community: 2010 -2012Urban Suburban Rural

12 Performance is displayed in a stop-light approach, red equals failure, yellow is above failure but within 10 seconds of failure, green signifies that the performance expectation is being met.


Page 73

Table 13 Benchmark and Baseline Drive Time Performance of Stations 75 to 78

Count Benchmark Baseline Count Benchmark Baseline Count Benchmark Baseline

Station 75 1708 71.6% 88.3% 1568 76.7% 94.4% 162 92.6% 99.4%2010 564 75.7% 90.2% 491 80.7% 96.7% 56 91.1% 100.0%2011 580 71.7% 88.6% 510 77.3% 93.9% 44 95.5% 100.0%2012 564 67.4% 86.2% 567 72.7% 92.8% 62 91.9% 98.4%

Station 76 116 11.2% 36.2% 2442 59.0% 87.7%2010 28 14.3% 42.9% 799 59.3% 88.4%2011 45 11.1% 37.8% 830 60.4% 87.1%2012 43 9.3% 30.2% 813 57.4% 87.7%

Station 77 1002 55.4% 79.8% 2781 65.3% 92.7% 176 88.6% 96.6%2010 312 62.8% 83.3% 912 69.5% 93.3% 64 95.3% 100.0%2011 302 51.0% 77.8% 876 65.1% 94.4% 55 90.9% 98.2%2012 388 52.8% 78.6% 993 61.5% 90.6% 57 78.9% 91.2%

Station 78 426 76.5% 89.4% 1516 62.7% 88.7% 110 90.9% 99.1%2010 171 82.5% 90.1% 500 63.6% 88.0% 32 93.8% 96.9%2011 133 75.2% 90.2% 499 64.3% 90.4% 28 82.1% 100.0%2012 122 69.7% 87.7% 517 60.3% 87.6% 50 94.0% 100.0%

System Performance by Station Area and Community: 2010 -2012Urban Suburban Rural

Table 14 Overall Fire Department Benchmark and Baseline Drive Time Performance 2010-2012

CountBenchmark

4 min 15 secBaseline

5 Min 12 Sec CountBenchmark

4 Min 35 SecBaseline

6 Min 30 Sec CountBenchmark

8 Min 35 SecBaseline 13 Min

Grand Total 16850 68.2% 84.2% 21325 66.5% 91.4% 757 90.8% 98.9%

Department Wide (all stations) Drive Time Performance by Community Type: 2010 -2012Urban Suburban Rural


Page 74

4.5.1. Reliability of Deployed Resources to Performance Expectations

The Commission on Fire Accreditation International (CFAI) teaches accredited agencies to closely monitor unit reliability to begin planning for future resources. They suggest planning and funding for future resources should begin whenever unit reliability drops below 95% for a 90% performance standard.

Between 1991 and 2013 the number of emergency incidents per day increased from an average of 25.77 incidents per day to 47.34 incidents per day, an 84% increase in workload. While the workload for emergency responses has sharply risen, daily firefighter staffing has only increased by 25%. As a result of this increase in workload, reliability of deployed resources has declined, creating a ripple effect of resource failure across the KFDRFA service area. On a daily basis Stations 71 and 74 are depleted of resources during peak demand hours creating the need to call on resources from other areas of the KFDRFA and from mutual aid departments. The KFDRFA performance standards require performance at 90%, meaning that 9 out of every 10 emergency incidents should be reached within the response time standard. In order to achieve this, emergency response units must be available 90% of the time. Table 15 below identifies reliability performance between 2009 and 2012.


Page 75

Table 15 Current Response Availability/Reliability to Service Demand; 2009-2012

Performance is displayed in a stop-light approach, red equals failure to the standard , pink is on the verge of failure to the standard, yellow is above failure but within 5 percent of the standard and green signifies that the performance expectation is stable with reserve capacity.

UnitOut of

Service Minutes

Incidents Unit Reliabil ity

Out of Service

MinutesIncidents Unit

Reliabil ity

Out of Service


Reliabil ity

Out of Service


Reliabil ity

Out of Service


Reliabil ity

A71 60,864 2,378 88.42% 68,209 2,603 87.02% 68,982 2,663 86.88% 70,688 2,898 86.55% 268,744 10,542 87.22%A74 74,018 2,057 85.92% 80,915 2,006 84.61% 88,035 2,480 83.25% 77,239 1,993 85.30% 320,208 8,536 84.77%E71 53,884 2,706 89.75% 42,490 2,026 91.92% 45,571 1,964 91.33% 40,645 2,054 92.27% 182,590 8,750 91.32%E77 49,045 1,354 90.67% 43,426 1,892 91.74% 38,201 1,613 92.73% 46,543 1,946 91.14% 177,214 6,805 91.57%L74 45,964 1,209 91.25% 48,404 1,021 90.79% 41,860 862 92.04% 47,951 1,079 90.88% 184,180 4,171 91.24%E73 38,746 1,554 92.63% 38,266 1,413 92.72% 38,431 1,414 92.69% 45,858 1,475 91.28% 161,301 5,856 92.33%E75 38,610 1,231 92.65% 37,932 1,170 92.78% 35,748 1,171 93.20% 36,963 1,231 92.97% 149,253 4,803 92.90%E76 35,415 1,398 93.26% 33,626 1,372 93.60% 33,458 1,462 93.63% 33,368 1,461 93.65% 135,867 5,693 93.54%E78 22,937 831 95.64% 24,017 902 95.43% 22,898 844 95.64% 25,527 931 95.14% 95,380 3,508 95.46%E72 25,116 954 95.22% 23,094 928 95.61% 16,457 653 96.87% 25,822 1,015 95.09% 90,490 3,550 95.70%

Availability/Reliability of Resources to Demand 2009 - 20122009 2010 2011 2012 2009 - 2012

4.6. Conclusion of Need for Capital Resources

KFDRFA uses multiple indicators in determining the need for additional resources that will achieve and maintain level of service standards. KFDRFA continually looks at current and future growth patterns and has been analyzing emergency response data and conducting fire station location analysis for many years. This analysis process has evaluated past and current deployment of resources and various indicators of need, to arrive at recommendations for a future deployment of 12 fire station locations. This Plan will work to deploy 11 of 12 fire stations. Simultaneous emergency incidents are currently providing the biggest impact to the KFDRFA’s ability to meet level of service objectives. There is an immediate need for a 10-station deployment model that would add fire stations at 407 Washington and SE 217th and Benson Rd/108th Ave SE. Deployment and staffing of these two additional fire stations will alleviate the reliability problems at Stations 71, 74 and 77, bring response times within adopted standards and create


Page 76

capacity for additional growth. Full deployment and staffing of this 11 station model will serve to bring current response times up to adopted standards and meet the demand of future development and the capacity needed to maintain fire service concurrency beyond the life of this Plan.

The fire station location analysis and this Capital Facilities Plan have evaluated multiple variables of both KFDRFA’s service delivery model and the service area demographics to develop a rationale for the need of future resources. The variables considered regarding the KFDRFA service area include:

• The nature of fire and life safety risks by community types of urban, suburban and rural • Types of incidents occurring (fire, rescue, emergency medical services, etc.) and ability to deliver meaningful service • The magnitude of incident types and their need for resources • Types and sizes of properties and their specific risks (existing and future) • The ability of existing resources to match demand of incident types and property risks • Historic and predicted population and geographic growth

o Urban growth o Suburban growth o Rural growth

• Historic and predicted land development • Emergency call growth (historic and predicted) • Travel times from fire stations to emergency scenes (historic and predicted with future growth) • Availability of fire resources to demand for service (work load related, capacity of fire resources is limited)

o Current and historic unit reliability is and has been in failure • Responding unit types that are required • Transportation networks (existing and future), and their influence on emergency response • Geographic Information System (GIS) modeling of fire station coverage areas (provides for best placement of resources) • Historic and predicted response times (current and future deployment) • Requirements of CPSE Accreditation:

o Criterion 2A: The agency collects and analyzes data specific to the distinct characteristics of the community served and applies

the findings to organizational planning.


Page 77

Performance Indicator 2A.2: • The agency organizes the community into geographic planning zones for purposed of analyzing service

provision. Performance Indicator 2A.3 CC:

• The agency analyzes the community by service area/population density for the purpose of developing

total response time standards.

Performance Indicator 2A.5: • Demographics, such as populations, land use, topography, climate and occupancy groups are identified

and documented. Performance Indicator 2A.7:

• The water supply system that provides available fire flow for the planning zones, major risks, key risks,

and special hazard areas should be documented and included in the planning effort.

o CRITERION 2B: The agency assesses the nature and magnitude of the hazards within its jurisdiction and develops appropriate

response coverage strategies. Each significant fire risk should be categorized and listed to permit future analysis and study in determining

standards of cover and related services. Performance Indicator 2B.1 CC:

• Each planning zone and population area is analyzed and risk factors are evaluated in order to establish a standard of cover.

Performance Indicator 2B.2: • The frequency and probability of occurrence of fire suppression service demands are identified in each

planning zone. Performance Indicator 2B.3

• The maximum or worst fire risk(s) in each planning zone is/are identified and located, i.e., hazards that require the maximum amount of fire protection resources or that would result in the greatest loss of life or property;


Page 78

Performance Indicator 2B.5 CC • Agency baseline and benchmark total response time objectives for fire response conform to industry best

practices as prescribed on pages 70-71 for first due and effective response force (ERF). Performance Indicator 2B.6 CC

• Given the fire risk(s), areas of responsibility, demographics, economic indicators, fire loss data, water supply and automatic fire protection system information, an effective standards of cover strategy is established.

o Criterion 5A Fire Suppression: The agency operates an adequate, effective, and efficient fire suppression program directed at controlling and/or extinguishing fires for the purpose of protecting people from injury and death, and reducing property loss.

Core Competency 5A.1: Given the agency’s standards of cover and emergency deployment objectives, the agency meets its staffing, response time, pumping capacity, apparatus and equipment deployment objectives for each type and magnitude of fire suppression incidents.

Core Competency 5A.7: An appraisal is conducted, at least annually, to determine the effectiveness of the fire suppression program.


Page 79

5. Level of Service and Station Deployment Adopted

The KFDRFA Governance Board shall implement the Level of service expectations and resource needs identified in this Plan upon adoption of this Plan. The proposed new station locations are shown below in Figure 3. Figure 3 Proposed 11 Fire Station Deployment


Page 80

5.1. Needed Capital Projects and Purchases

As identified in section 5, eleven fire stations are needed to achieve and maintain level of service concurrently with development over the next twenty plus years. In total, KFDRFA needs to build five new fire stations (three new and two relocated) and implement several capital improvements to existing fire stations necessary to preserve current station capacity. In addition to station construction, all of the associated resources, special equipment and tools needed to deliver fire and rescue services from these sites are also identified below in this section. (Fire vehicles and apparatus are not part of the following fire station costs.)

5.1.1. Cost of New Fire Stations

The following costs are based on the General Services Administration’s estimates for size requirements of fire stations capable of meeting the National Fire Protections Associations standards for safe and effective fire stations. Cost of construction is based upon recent construction costs experienced by King County Fire Protection District #2, in 2012 and 2013 for construction of two fire stations. Land costs have been determined using current market factors based upon highest and best use of land as it is zoned in the area of the proposed new station construction.

5.1.1.1. Addition of New Kent Valley Fire Station

The third fire station to be located in the Kent Valley will be built on land currently owned by the KFDRFA at 407 N Washington, and one or two additional parcels that will provide access to West Smith and expand the current site and driveway access. The existing property was purchased in 2006 following extensive analysis based upon computer modeling using geographic information system (GIS) software. The modeling effort was validated by actual drive times and looked at four alternate valley locations; the main decision tool was an “Origin-Destination Matrix” (ODM) analysis, which looked at several variables related to emergency response. First, a response area was defined that would be removed from Station 71’s response area. Generally, this area is west of SR 167 and north of James Street and north to the Station 76 service area. Next, 5,584 emergency incidents occurring between 2004 and 2005 were located on a map. The GIS tool was then used to model distance and time to travel between the proposed station locations and the actual location of each of the 5,584 emergency incidents as shown below in


Page 81

Table 16: Criteria for Choosing Valley Station 3 Site

Proposed Station Site

Incident Count

Min. Minutes

Max Minutes

Average Minutes

Sum Minutes

Standard Deviation

Variance Minutes

Min Miles

Max Miles

Avg Miles

Sum Miles

407 Washington 5,854 0.210 8.587 4.044 23,671 1.880 3.536 0.091 4.902 2.084 12,197W James & 64th 5,854 0.128 8.540 4.250 24,881 1.908 3.640 0.016 5.033 2.184 12,785S 228 St & 64th 5,854 0.120 8.791 4.908 28,731 1.923 3.696 0.012 4.755 2.568 15,0335818 S 228 St 5,854 0.192 9.347 5.250 30,730 1.931 3.728 0.112 5.099 2.776 16,253

Valley Station Site Comparison using Optimized Destination Matrix

This new fire station location will solve several identified issues by shifting emergency response workload from Stations 71, 73 and 76 to this new location. Analysis shows that workload the first year this station is open will exceed 2,000 emergency incidents. In addition, substandard response times occurring in the “Urban” area west of SR 167 will be improved because of shorter response distances; response delays caused by traffic backups on Willis Street approaching SR 167 will be avoided, and response delays caused by train traffic on the Union Pacific rails will be reduced. An additional fire engine at the new location will improve pump capacity in the valley and increase unit reliability for Station 71, 73 and 76 resulting in better response times to the Kent valley floor, and Kent’s West Hill neighborhoods. Additional staffing at the new location will improve the availability of effective response forces and finally this new station will mitigate earthquake risk that could collapse freeway overpasses and trap Station 71 units on the east side of SR 167.

Steps toward construction should begin in 2014 with the selection and hiring of an architectural team to begin the design and engineering for this project. Design, engineering and land use permitting will occur in 2015. Site development of infrastructure such as sewer, water and storm water retention is scheduled for 2016 with hard construction beginning early in 2017. Final finishing and project acceptance is scheduled for fourth quarter of 2017 to early 2018.


Page 82

Table 17 Cost of New 407 Washington Station

Expense Type Quantity Cost TotalAdditional Land (1.12acres) 49,004 $15.00 $735,060.00Site Development (Sq. Ft.) 102,346 $12.00 $1,228,152.00Construction (Sq. Ft.) 9,221 $360.00 $3,319,560.00

$5,282,772.00

Expense Type % of Project Cost TotalFurnishing 7.00% $3,319,560.00 $232,369.20Printing & supply costs 1.00% $3,319,560.00 $33,195.60Contingency funds 12.00% $3,319,560.00 $398,347.20

$663,912.00Non-taxable Soft Costs

Expense Type % of Project Cost TotalArchitect & Engineering Fees 12.00% $4,547,712.00 $545,725.44Project Management 8.00% $4,547,712.00 $363,816.96Permits/Fees/Inspections 3.00% $4,547,712.00 $136,431.36

$1,045,973.76Taxable Cost Total$5,211,624.00 9.50% $495,104.28

$7,487,762.04

New 407 Washington Fire Station CostsHard Costs

Taxable Soft Costs

Washington Sales Tax

Total Project Costs (2013 Dollars)

Subtotal

Subtotal

Subtotal


Page 83

5.1.1.2. Addition of a New Benson Rd/SE 108th Ave Station

The need for a Benson fire station has been identified since 1982 when the Kent Fire Department Master Plan was published. At the time of publishing the 1982 Master Plan, a small volunteer station 74 was located approximately one hundred yards west of Benson Road on SE 217th street. This station was too small and outdated to meet existing Washington Administrative Code and was closed in 1991. Upon opening of existing Station 74 in 1991, volunteers assigned to volunteer station 74 were then re-assigned to new Station 74 until the volunteer program was phased out in 2003.

An extensive deployment analysis was conducted between 2006 and 2008 to locate the best site for this new Benson station. The location was to be within one thousand yards of the intersection of Benson Road and SE 217th Street. The analysis was concluded in 2008 when four lots were identified to be purchased and consolidated into a property large enough to construct a fire station on the northwest corner of Benson Rd. and SE 217th Street. Two of these four lots were purchased in 2008 and two more remain to be purchased.

The new Benson fire station will serve as a “Distribution” station filling the current response coverage voids between stations, 74, 76, 77 and the new 407 Washington Station. The final 2008 analysis predicts the workload at the new Benson station to exceed 1,700 emergency incidents per year when it opens, significantly reducing workloads at Stations 74 and 77 and increasing unit reliability.


Page 84

Table 18: Cost of new Benson Station

Expense Type Quantity Cost TotalLand (Sq. Ft.) 64,548 $8.75 $564,795.00Site Development (Sq. Ft.) 55,785 $10.75 $599,688.75Construction (Sq. Ft.) 6,608 $360.00 $2,378,880.00

$3,543,363.75




$685,070.81Taxable Cost Total$3,454,344.75 9.50% $328,162.75

$5,032,373.31



New Benson Fire Station CostsHard Costs

SubtotalTaxable Soft Costs

Subtotal

Subtotal


Page 85

5.1.1.3. Addition of a new Riverview Station

This new station is to be located at the southwest intersection of Riverview Blvd and S 231st Way and will improve current substandard service to the northwest Kent Valley but will primarily be located to bolster concentration resources and serve future development occurring in the Midway area. Kent’s plans for Midway include an additional underpass on Interstate Highway 5 that is critical to the response functionality of this station.

Table 19 Cost of New Riverview Fire Station

Expense Type Quantity Cost TotalLand Sq. Ft.) 65,340 $8.00 $522,720.00Site Development (Sq. Ft.) 65,340 $10.75 $702,405.00Construction (Sq. Ft.) 5,861 $360.00 $2,109,960.00

$3,335,085.00





$4,711,184.87



New Riverview Fire Station CostsHard Costs


Subtotal

Subtotal


Page 86

5.1.1.4. Addition of a New Covington Station

A new Covington fire station will be constructed on the southern end of Covington along or near the Covington Sawyer Road. This station will provide distribution coverage of central and southern Covington as well as quicker access to areas of the KFDRFA south of Covington. In addition, as Covington continues to expand and create denser development, this station will be capable of meeting the future demand of growth in that area.

Table 20 Cost of New Covington Station

Expense Type Quantity Cost TotalLand (Sq. Ft.) 46,312 $10.00 $463,120.00Site Development (Sq. Ft.) 46,312 $10.75 $497,854.00Construction (Sq. Ft.) 4,719 $360.00 $1,698,840.00

$2,659,814.00

Expense Type % of Project Cost TotalFurnishing 7.00% $1,698,840.00 $118,918.80Printing & Bid Supply 1.00% $1,698,840.00 $16,988.40Contingency funds 12.00% $1,698,840.00 $203,860.80




$3,745,785.51



New Covington Fire Station CostsHard Costs


Subtotal

Subtotal


Page 87

5.1.1.5. Re-Location of Station 75

Upon formation of the KFDRFA, the City of Kent retained ownership of fire Station 75 with hopes that if or when Station 75 was relocated, the property could be used to improve the sales tax base of the City of Kent. An agreement exists between the City of Kent and the KFDRFA where Kent would provide funding for the relocation of Station 75 in exchange for the commercially zoned property where Station 75 is currently located.

Moving current Station 75 west at the same time the new Covington station is implemented will maintain level of service standards in the Covington area, provide improved responses to the urban areas of Kent Kangley Road south of Station 74, and provide capacity necessary for future growth.

Table 21 Cost of Relocating Station 75

Expense Type Quantity Cost TotalLand (Sq. Ft.) 87,120 $12.00 $1,045,440.00Site Development (Sq. Ft.) 87,120 $10.75 $936,540.00Construction (Sq. Ft.) 13,807 $360.00 $4,970,520.00

$6,952,500.00

Expense Type % of Project Cost TotalFurnishing 7.00% $4,970,520.00 $347,936.40Printing & Bid Supply 1.00% $4,970,520.00 $49,705.20Contingency funds 12.00% $4,970,520.00 $596,462.40



$1,358,623.80Taxable Cost Total$6,901,164.00 9.50% $655,610.58

$9,960,838.38

SubtotalWashington Sales Tax


Relocation Costs of Station 75Hard Costs


Subtotal


Page 88

5.1.2. Capital Improvement Necessary to Maintain Fire Apparatus

The KFDRFA’s apparatus repair facility was built in 1989 at 20678 72nd Ave South with funds from the 1988 Public Safety Bond measure. The original reserve capacity of this facility was exhausted in 2010. Enclosing the 2600 square foot steam cleaning bay in 2013 has provided capacity for the mechanics to complete emergency and unscheduled repairs out of the weather. To support current operations, a larger facility is needed to maintain current standards of operation. To provide greater flexibility to the existing structure, portable lifts have been purchased to replace fixed vehicle lifts. Below is a cost estimate of the future apparatus repair facility.

Table 22 Maintenance Facility Costs

Hard Costs Sq Feet Cost TotalLand 87,120 $10.00 $871,200.00

Site Development 87,120 $11.00 $958,320.00New Construction 22,264 $275.00 $6,122,600.00

Subtotal Hard Costs $7,080,920.00Taxable Soft Costs Factor Cost Base Total

Furnishing and Equipment 10.00% $7,080,920.00 $708,092.00Printing/Reimbursables 1.00% $7,080,920.00 $70,809.20Contingency funds 12.00% $7,080,920.00 $849,710.40Architect and Engineering Fees 12.00% $7,080,920.00 $849,710.40

Subtotal $2,478,322.00

Project Management 10.00% $7,080,920.00 $708,092.00Permits/Fees/Inspections 3.00% $7,080,920.00 $212,427.60

$920,519.60Subtotal Soft Costs $3,398,841.60

Washington Sales Tax 9.50% $7,080,920.00 $672,687.40$12,023,649.00

Non-Taxable Soft Costs

Total Maintenance Facility Project Costs (2013 Dollars)


Page 89

5.1.3. Summary of New Construction Costs

Station Project 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 Totals407 Washington $0 $0 $0 $0 $651 $2,173 $3,578 $1,086 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,488Benson 0 $565 $429 $765 $2,574 $699 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,032Riverview $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $523 $403 $856 $2,293 $637 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,711Covington $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $463 $316 $619 $1,842 $506 $0 $3,74675 Move $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,045 $1,114 $1,207 $5,689 $906 $9,961App Shop $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $871 $1,360 $1,282 $7,004 $1,506 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,024Yearly Totals $0 $565 $429 $765 $3,225 $3,743 $4,937 $2,369 $7,527 $1,910 $856 $2,293 $637 $0 $463 $1,361 $1,732 $3,050 $6,195 $906 $42,962

20 Year Contstruction Cost Summary and Timline in Thousands of Dollars

5.1.4. Capital Improvement Necessary to Maintain Existing Assets

Capital improvements necessary to maintain existing assets includes lifecycle replacement of systems such as; heating, ventilation and air conditioning, siding, roofing, driveway maintenance, flooring, seismic upgrades etc.

Table 23: Schedule of Asset Preservation Projects, 2014 - 2030

Station 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 Total407 WA $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

71 $35 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $26 $0 $0 $0 $10 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25 $0 $0 $49 $0 $14572 $10 $17 $0 $0 $0 $22 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10 $2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15 $0 $0 $0 $7673 $6 $15 $15 $0 $0 $0 $0 $37 $0 $0 $0 $15 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6 $98 $0 $0 $19274 $33 $34 $15 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25 $0 $0 $0 $0 $101 $0 $15 $0 $0 $22275 $0 $42 $0 $25 $35 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $42 $0 $25 $35 $20476 $0 $15 $24 $30 $5 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $24 $30 $5 $14877 $10 $26 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8 $0 $0 $25 $10 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7978 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $43 $0 $0 $0 $10 $25 $0 $0 $0 $0 $88

Benson $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Covington $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

S 231st $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Shop $45 $10 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $55

Total $139 $159 $54 $55 $50 $22 $34 $37 $0 $25 $98 $32 $0 $0 $10 $151 $63 $137 $104 $40 $1,209

Capital Improvements Neccesary to Maintain Existing Assets


Page 90

5.1.5. Capital Cost of Special Equipment Required, 2014 through 2033

Table 25 below identifies total revenue needed between 2014 and 2033 to fund KFDRFA’s equipment purchase and replacement plan.

Table 24 20 Year Special Equipment Costs

Fire Equipment Quantity Avg Cost Total LifeCycles 20Yr CostFire Hose 1249 $208 $259,992 1 $259,992Fire Hose Nozzles 90 $935 $84,150 2 $168,300Rescue Tools 9 $27,428 $246,852 1.75 $431,991Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) 120 $8,213 $985,500 2 $1,971,000SCBA Air Bottles 300 $1,643 $492,750 2 $985,500SCBA Electronic Updates 120 $1,004 $120,450 2 $240,900Mobile Data Computers 35 $6,000 $210,000 5 $1,050,000Desktop PC's 174 $931 $161,951 5 $809,753Ballistic Vests 160 $525 $84,000 4 $336,000Mobile Radios 55 $5,000 $275,000 2 $550,000Portable Radios 168 $3,750 $630,000 2 $1,260,000Personal Protective Gear 350 $3,000 $1,050,000 2 $2,100,000Defibrillators 15 $17,000 $255,000 2 $510,000Thermal Imaging Cameras 12 $9,837 $118,044 2 $236,088

$10,909,523

20 Year (2014 - 2033) Special Equipment Costs

20 Year Total


Page 91

Table 25 Annual Cost of Special Equipment 2014 - 2033

Fire Equipment 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 TotalsFire Hose $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $260Fire Hose Nozzles $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $168Rescue Tools $0 $0 $54 $54 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $54 $81 $27 $81 $81 $0 $0 $0 $432Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) $0 $0 $986 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $986 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,971SCBA Air Bottles $0 $0 $492 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $493 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $985SCBA Electronics $0 $0 $60 $60 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $60 $60 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $241Mobile Data Computers $0 $0 $210 $0 $0 $0 $210 $0 $0 $0 $210 $0 $0 $0 $210 $0 $0 $0 $210 $0 $1,050Desktop PC's $40 $40 $40 $40 $40 $40 $40 $40 $40 $40 $40 $40 $40 $40 $40 $40 $40 $40 $40 $40 $810Ballistic Vests $17 $17 $17 $17 $17 $17 $17 $17 $17 $17 $17 $17 $17 $17 $17 $17 $16 $16 $16 $16 $336Mobile Radios $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $550Portable Radios $63 $63 $63 $63 $63 $63 $63 $63 $63 $63 $63 $63 $63 $63 $63 $63 $63 $63 $63 $63 $1,260Personal Protective Gear $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $2,100Defibrillators $26 $26 $26 $26 $26 $26 $26 $26 $26 $26 $26 $26 $26 $26 $26 $26 $26 $26 $26 $26 $510Thermal Imaging Cameras $0 $0 $30 $30 $30 $30 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $30 $30 $30 $30 $0 $0 $0 $0 $236

$300 $300 $2,131 $444 $329 $329 $510 $300 $300 $300 $570 $360 $1,862 $410 $566 $410 $380 $299 $509 $299 $10,909

20 Year Special Equipment Costs


Page 92

5.1.6. Capital Cost of Additional Apparatus Necessary for Concurrency

The table below identifies the life cycle of apparatus and the total revenue needed between 2014 and 2033

Table 26 Annual Apparatus Replacement Summary

Unit Type 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 TotalsAid Car/Ambulances $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $600 $0 $300 $0 $300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $600 $1,800Type I Fire Engines $0 $1,750 $875 $875 $875 $0 $0 $3,500 $0 $0 $875 $875 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,750 $0 $11,375Has-Mat Vehicles $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $645 $0 $0 $0 $0 $645

Flood / Water Rescue $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $23Ladder Trucks $0 $0 $1,200 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,200 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,400Light Trucks $0 $0 $50 $0 $0 $0 $150 $0 $0 $50 $0 $0 $100 $0 $150 $50 $0 $50 $0 $50 $650Pump Test $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $80 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $80

Command/Staff Cars $0 $75 $35 $35 $75 $0 $35 $35 $0 $75 $0 $0 $375 $75 $70 $0 $75 $0 $75 $75 $1,110Staff Support Cars $0 $0 $85 $99 $35 $35 $102 $134 $0 $50 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $85 $0 $625

Utility Trailers $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6 $0 $0 $25 $0 $0 $0 $28 $0 $0 $0 $59Ops Support Units $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $350 $25 $0 $0 $0 $400

Tender $0 $0 $0 $500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500Skyboom $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,900 $0 $0 $0 $1,900

New Station App $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $875 $0 $1,175 $0 $0 $0 $0 $875 $0 $300 $0 $0 $1,200 $875 $875 $6,175$0 $1,825 $2,245 $1,509 $985 $910 $287 $4,847 $0 $806 $875 $1,175 $1,455 $1,575 $220 $1,065 $2,028 $1,250 $2,785 $1,600 $27,742

20 Year (2014 - 2033) Apparatus Costs


Page 93

6. Six Year Funding Plan 2015 - 2020

Table 27: Six (6) Year Capital Needs

Cost/Funding Source 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 TotalsExpense Sources

Station Construction & Land Purchase $565 $429 $765 $3,225 $3,743 $4,937 $13,665Apparatus $1,825 $2,245 $1,509 $985 $910 $287 $7,761Equipment $300 $2,131 $444 $329 $329 $510 $4,043Asset Preservation $10 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10I.T. Capital $200 $150 $150 $150 $200 $150 $1,000Debt Cost $0 $0 $35 $35 $35 $65 $170

Revenue SourcesAnnual Tax Revenue to Capital $2,600 $2,421 $2,432 $2,732 $2,667 $2,696 $15,548Taxpayer Bond Funds $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Sale of Surplus Property $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Covington Impact/LOS Fees $275 $225 $215 $215 $215 $215 $1,360Kent Impsct/Los Fees $25 $1,000 $256 $1,778 $1,179 $1,179 $5,417Councilmatic Bonds $0 $1,309 $0 $0 $1,157 $1,859 $4,325

Expense $2,900 $4,955 $2,903 $4,725 $5,218 $5,949 $26,649Revenue $2,900 $4,955 $2,903 $4,725 $5,218 $5,949 $26,649Balance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Costs in thousands based on 2014 dollars

Summary of Revenues less Expenses


Page 94

7. 20 Year Financing Plan

7.1. Revenue Options to Fund Capital Purchases

The revenue options available to the KFDRFA are defined in Washington State Law and consist of the following:

7.1.1. Tax Levies

• General tax levies up to $1.50 per thousand dollars of assessed value (RCW 52.16.130, RCW 52.16.140, RCW 52.16.160). • Emergency Medical Services (EMS) levy approved by voters may be imposed up to $0.50 per thousand dollars of

assessed value (RCW 84.52.069) to specifically fund emergency medical services. This levy is limited by any levy imposed by King County Medic One.

• Excess tax levies for “Operations and Maintenance” (4 years) and “Construction” (6 years) may be imposed if 60% voter approval is obtained (RCW 84.52.130)

• Special Levy on Local Improvement Districts (LID’s) may be imposed in areas that are particularly benefited by the improvement purchased with the levy funds.

7.1.2. General Obligation Bonds

• An excess or special levy may be authorized for capital purposes and indebtedness of up to three quarters of one percent of the assessed value of the KFDRFA providing the amount to be levied to pay debt is approved by voters (RCW 39.36.050)

7.1.3. Contract Income

• The KFDRFA may contract with any governmental or private entity, person, firm or corporation to provide fire prevention, fire suppression, or emergency medical services (RCW 52.12.031(3)

•


Page 95

7.1.4. Fees and Charges

• Emergency Medical Service fees (RCW 52.12.131) may be assessed to capture reasonable charges for emergency medical services in order to reimburse the cost of those services.

• Hazardous Materials Service fees (RCW 4.24.314) may be assessed to capture extraordinary costs associated with the mitigation of a hazardous materials incident. These are rare and the KFDRFA has historically assessed these charges when they are incurred.

• Benefit Charges and a tax Levy of up to $1.00 per thousand dollars of assessed value may be imposed if approved by 60% of voters (RCW 52.26.180). The benefit charge can be assessed against personal property and improvements to real property and cannot exceed 60% of operating budget of the KFDRFA. Fire Benefit Charges may not be used for capital purchases but the levy associated with the Benefit Charge may be used.

• Impact Fees on new construction are authorized for KFDRFA use under RCW 82.02.050 but can only be implemented by the land use authority, i.e. the city or county with land use permitting authority who maintains a land use plan under RCW 36.70A.040.

• Mitigation Fees on new construction may be implemented under Chapter 43.21C and RCW 58.17.110.

7.1.5. Interest Income

• Revenue’s held within any fund of the KFDRFA may be designated for investment by the governing board. Investments custodian is the County Treasure (RCW 36.29.020).

7.1.6. Donations

• Tax deductible donations may be given and deposited into one of the KFDRFA funds (RCW 52.16.150). If the donated funds have no direction for their use, these funds can be spent at the board’s discretion providing they have been recorded as revenue and budgeted for such use.\

7.1.7. Grants

• Grants may be used for capital expenses providing the funds used are in compliance with the terms of the grant.


Page 96

7.1.8. Sale of KFDRFA Assets

• Assets that are no longer needed and declared as surplus may be sold and used as the governing board determines (RCW 52.12.021).

7.2. Debt Obligations

When funds are needed for the immediate purchase of equipment or land but those funds are not on hand, the KFDRFA has the option to incur debt. If it is reasonable to assume that one of the revenue sources in section 8.1 are adequate to service debt load and the debt will not exceed 3/8 of 1%, one of the following options may be used to incur debt:

• Short term loans/notes of up to 6 years (Chapter 39.50 RCW). • Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds (RCW 52.16.061). These bonds may extend out to 20 years and must be payable

with ordinary KFDRFA revenues. The amount of the debt cannot exceed 3/8 of 1% of the KFDRFA’s assessed valuation. • Contract purchases authorized under RCW 52.12.061 may be utilized for real or personal property through a sales

contract or promissory note secured by deeds of trust or mortgages providing the debt limit is not exceeded. • Leasing is authorized under RCW 52.12.021 and .031 for both real and personal property. Using sound judgment the

governing board may enter into any type of lease arrangement without a purchase clause. If a purchase clause is included bidding requirements and other laws may apply.


Page 97

7.3. 20 Year Funding Plan Table 28: 20 Year Cost/Funding Plan

Cost/Funding Source 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 TotalsExpense Sources

Station Construction & Land Purchase $0 $565 $429 $765 $3,225 $3,743 $4,937 $2,369 $7,527 $1,910 $856 $2,293 $637 $0 $463 $1,361 $1,732 $3,050 $6,195 $906 $42,962Apparatus $0 $1,825 $2,245 $1,509 $985 $910 $287 $4,847 $0 $806 $875 $1,175 $1,455 $1,575 $220 $1,065 $2,028 $1,250 $2,785 $1,600 $27,442Equipment $300 $300 $2,131 $444 $329 $329 $510 $300 $300 $300 $570 $360 $1,862 $410 $566 $410 $380 $299 $509 $299 $10,909Asset Preservation $750 $10 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $760I.T. Capital $200 $200 $150 $150 $150 $200 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $3,150Debt Cost $0 $0 $0 $35 $35 $35 $65 $115 $178 $279 $279 $248 $248 $248 $248 $248 $150 $0 $0 $129 $2,540

Revenue SourcesAnnual Tax Revenue to Capital $1,175 $2,600 $2,421 $2,432 $2,732 $2,667 $2,696 $2,747 $3,000 $2,019 $1,304 $2,800 $2,926 $958 $248 $1,809 $3,015 $3,323 $3,500 $1,837 $46,209Taxpayer Bond Funds $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Sale of Surplus Property $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Covington Impact/LOS Fees $75 $275 $225 $215 $215 $215 $215 $215 $225 $235 $240 $240 $240 $240 $240 $240 $240 $240 $240 $240 $4,510Kent Impsct/Los Fees $0 $25 $1,000 $256 $1,778 $1,179 $1,179 $1,179 $1,179 $1,191 $1,186 $1,186 $1,186 $1,185 $1,160 $1,185 $1,185 $1,185 $1,186 $1,007 $20,617Councilmatic Bonds $0 $0 $1,309 $0 $0 $1,157 $1,859 $3,640 $3,751 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,713 $0 $16,429

Expense $1,250 $2,900 $4,955 $2,903 $4,725 $5,218 $5,949 $7,781 $8,155 $3,445 $2,730 $4,226 $4,352 $2,383 $1,648 $3,234 $4,440 $4,748 $9,639 $3,084 $87,763Revenue $1,250 $2,900 $4,955 $2,903 $4,725 $5,218 $5,949 $7,781 $8,155 $3,445 $2,730 $4,226 $4,352 $2,383 $1,648 $3,234 $4,440 $4,748 $9,639 $3,084 $87,763Balance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Costs in thousands based on 2013 dollars

Summary of Revenues less Expenses


Page 98

7.4. Financial Feasibility of Capital Facilities Plan

The revenue sources identified in Table 29 are currently considered adequate to fund the improvements identified within this Plan. Washington’s Growth Management Act in RCW 36.70A.070 (3) (e) contains a requirement to reassess the land use element of applicable Comprehensive Plans if probable funding falls short of meeting existing needs. For the KFDRFA, this requirement is intended to ensure that the land use elements, this Plan and its financing methods and the capital facilities elements of the Comprehensive Plans of Covington, King County, and Kent are coordinated and consistent. While these planning requirements are burdens of Covington, King County, and Kent, in the case where funding is likely to fall short, the KFDRFA will make adjustments to; levels of service standards, timelines for implementation of the Plan, sources of revenue, or a combination of the previous to achieve a balance between available revenue, needed capital facilities and adequate levels of service prior to seeking remedies to the impacts of development that threaten fire service concurrency. Where protection of fire service concurrency is needed, the remedies will be pursued through Chapter 43.21C, 58.17 RCW or other statutes protecting the KFDRFA from the impacts of development.

To support and assist the Covington, King County and Kent Capital Facilities Elements, the KFDRFA will provide annual updates to Covington, King County and Kent that address KFDRFA’s ability to fund this Plan to assure coordination and consistency with each jurisdiction’s Comprehensive Plan. This policy constitutes KFDRFA’s response to RCW 36.70A.070 (3) (e).

8. Appendix A, 20 Year Apparatus Replacement Schedule

Table 29 20 Year Apparatus Cost and Replacement Schedule

Unit # Unit Type 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 Totals702 Aid $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300 $600703 Aid $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300 $600704 Aid $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300705 Aid $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300701 Air $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $350 $0 $0 $0 $0 $350723 Boat Tr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20745 Boat Tr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0750 Boat Tr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0765 Boat Tr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3

7606 Car $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $32 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $327610 Car $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $32 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $327620 Car $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $32 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $327624 Car $0 $0 $0 $32 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $327627 Car $0 $0 $0 $32 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $327201 CERT Tr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25 $0 $0 $0 $257107 Cross $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35 $0 $357202 Cross $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $357206 Cross $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $357608 Cross $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $357629 Cross $0 $0 $35 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $357630 Cross $0 $0 $0 $35 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $357635 Cross $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35706 Engine $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $875 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $875708 Engine $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $875 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $875 $0 $1,750710 Engine $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $875 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $875766 Engine $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $875 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $875767 Engine $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $875 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $875 $0 $1,750712 Engine $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $875 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $875727 Engine $875 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $875728 Engine $875 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $875730 Engine $0 $875 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $875731 Engine $0 $0 $875 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $875732 Engine $0 $0 $0 $875 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $875733 Generator $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25726 HM Decon $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $45 $0 $0 $0 $0 $45722 HM Tractor $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100716 HM Trailer $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500746 Jon Bt $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0747 Jon Bt $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0748 Jon Bt $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0749 Jon Bt $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0713 Ladder $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,200 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,200715 Ladder $0 $0 $1,200 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,200

7603 Mini Van $0 $0 $0 $0 $35 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $357614 Mini Van $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $357619 Mini Van $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $357621 Mini Van $0 $0 $35 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $357625 Mini Van $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $357628 Mini Van $0 $0 $0 $35 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $357632 Mini Van $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $357636 Mini Van $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35707 PU $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50 $100711 PU $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50738 PU $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50 $0 $0 $50764 PU $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50

7100 PU $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $507204 PU $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50 $0 $0 $0 $0 $507205 PU $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $507231 PU $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $507516 PU $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $507611 PU $0 $0 $50 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $507633 PU $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $507634 PU $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $509912 Pub Ed Tr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25729 Pump Test $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $80 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $80735 Rescue Boat $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

7101 Shelter Tr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25 $0 $0 $0 $25717 Skyboom $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $950 $0 $0 $0 $950718 Skyboom $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $950 $0 $0 $0 $950700 SUV $0 $75 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $75709 SUV $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $75 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $75 $150721 SUV $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $75 $0 $0 $0 $75724 SUV $0 $0 $0 $0 $75 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $75

7102 SUV $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $75 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $757103 SUV $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $75 $0 $757104 SUV $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $75 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $757106 SUV $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $75 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $757122 SUV $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $75 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $757203 SUV $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $75 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $759904 SUV $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $75 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $75714 Tender $0 $0 $0 $500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500756 Utility Tr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3 $0 $0 $0 $3763 Utility Tr $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6

7108 Van $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50 $0 $507218 Van $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $507612 Van $0 $0 $50 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50

New App $0 $0 $0 $1,175 $0 $0 $1,175 $0 $0 $1,175 $0 $0 $0 $2,375 $0 $875 $300 $1,200 $875 $300 $9,450$1,750 $950 $2,245 $2,684 $110 $35 $1,462 $3,672 $0 $1,981 $875 $1,175 $580 $3,950 $220 $1,940 $2,328 $1,250 $2,785 $1,025 $31,017

20 Year Apparatus Cost / Replacement Schedule

Total Annual Cost

Appendix-C:

9. Changes in Station Deployment Plans: 2008 compared to 2013

There have been significant changes in land use planning and fire department operations since this draft map was distributed as the 20 year solution for fire station deployment in 2008. Budget shortages have been one of the biggest impacts that have delayed implementation of deployment plan shown on the 2008 map in Figure 4. The 407 Washington Site and the Station 79 site are still the top two priorities in the 2013 11 station deployment plan shown in Figure 5, but the alternate sites listed on the map labeled Figure 4, have been reconsidered because of the following changes.

9.1. Movement of 2008 Alternate Fire Station Site “I”/2008, New Covington/2013

Alternate “I” has been moved west and south as a result of a proposed development in Covington known as the Hawk Project. The Hawk project will extend SE 256th street eastward to meet 204th Ave SE improving east west roadway access allowing units from Station 78 to quickly respond east to the eastern limits of Covington. As a result it makes more sense to have alternate “I” located nearer Covington’s proposed “Downtown Center” where high densities of development are now planned.

9.2. Movement of 2008 Alternate Fire Station Site “A”/2008, New 75/2013

As a result of moving alternate fire station site “I” west, alternate site “A” also needed to shift westward. This westward shift of alternate site “A” will provide adequate service to much of the area proposed to be served by Alternate G.

9.3. Elimination of 2008 Alternate “G”

Two issues affect the Alternate “G” fire station site. First, westward movement of Alternate A reduces the service area originally planned for Alternate G. Second, Valley Regional Fire Authority has expressed interest to possibly partner in a new station near the KFDRFA/VRFA border that could serve the southern area of Alternate G and the northern area of VRFA that borders KFDRFA. A new joint venture station somewhere near SE 277th and 108th Ave SE will also provide improved service to the north end of Auburn and assist in providing effective response forces along the 277th/272nd corridor that will benefit both organizations. This station is likely to be deployed in the next 20 year planning period, or as joint funding becomes available.


Page 101

9.4. Addition of Riverview Station Site/2013

Major changes in zoning and land use plans that were not available during the development of the 2008, twelve station deployment plan have required the need for a station capable of meeting the impacts of new growth for the joint Kent/DesMoines Midway plan. This plan when implemented will produce more than 11,000 new dwelling units and include an underpass of I-5 to allow direct access to the west side of I-5 from 231st way. The location of the Riverview site will also allow improved access to the Riverview development that is currently underserved. This new station site will also bolster effective response forces for the new, contractually combined Kent and SeaTac fire departments as well as existing areas of St 73 and the Valley stations of 71,76 and proposed 407 Washington.

Figure 4: 2008 Twelve Station Deployment Map


Page 102

Figure 5: 2013 Eleven Station Deployment Map

kent regional fire authority capital facilities and ... › wp-content › uploads › 2016 ›...

Documents