Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council - Agenda - 02/05/1991 xkt �'e k 2.a$ a..3xx Ra.T .m ffi� R 0.� W H.i Jeff r5 zd"u 4e3xS e{ �N p�. . g� City of Kent �R City Council Meeting A � Agenda CITY OF ws _ d1S�II�� Mayor Dan Kelleher Council Members �g Judy Woods, President re Steve Dowell Paul Mann Christi Houser Leona Orr Jon Johnson Jim White February 5, 1991 a x� Office of the City Clerk CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 5, 1991 Summary Agenda City of Kent Council Chambers Office of the City Clerk 7 :00 p.m. NOTE: An explanation of the agenda format is given on the back of this page. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL 1. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ,A. Boy Scout Troop 237 B. Proclamation - Amy Magruder and Michelle Laudenbach Week -C. Employee of the Month 'D. Arts Commission 1991 Grant Award Recipients '/E. Artist Dana Boussard and Spirit Song VF. Chamber of Commerce Foundation G. Perfg7ing Arts Center Task Force 2 . PUBLIC HEARINGS IO 0 LID 337 Westview Terrace/McCann's Westview Sanitary Sewer dtX&VB. Emerald City Chemical Appeal Iva C. Pacific Ventures Street Vacation ,,�Venl 1 3 . CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes B. Bills Fervice -iC. Public Defens tract; D. Sanitary Sewer Duplexes OrdZc na/v, CQ_ � Radio Tower and Radio Equipment Bui i F., Golf Complex Fee Structure Human Services Commission Appointment H. Planning Commission Reappointment I. Conservation Futures Grant for Parkside Park J. Recycling/Composting Demonstration Site K. Reith Road Guardrail L. Utility Construction Agreement - SR 516 M. Transportation Improvement Board Grant - Central Avenue N. Bill of Sale - Van Doren's Center O. Bill of Sale - The Greens P. Bill of Sale - Neil Swift Building 4 . OTHER BUSINESS -T-- A. -Street Uti Resolution ,-, ) 5. IDS rJ w\. 6. CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS 7. REPORTS W�Z� A 8 . EXECUTIVE SESSION. There will be an executive session of approximately ten minutes to discuss litigation. 9. ADJOURNMENT PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS Citizens wishing to address the Council will, at this time, make known the subject of interest, so all may be properly heard. A) Boy Scout Troop 237 B) Proclamation - Amy Magruder and Michelle Laudenbach Week C) Employee of the Month D) Recognition of City of Kent Arts Commission 1991 Grant Award Recipients E) Recognition of Artist Dana Boussard and Spirit Song F) Recognition of Kent Chamber of Commerce Foundation G) Recognition of City of Kent Performing Arts Center Task Force Kent City Council Meeting Date February 5. 1991 Category Public Hearings 1. SUBJECT: LID 337 WESTVIEW TERRACE/McCANN'S WESTVIEW SANITARY SEWER 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This date has been set for a public hearing on the creation of LID 337. The City Clerk has given the proper legal notification to the affected property owners. The Director of Public Works will review the scope of the project and proposed manner of assessments. 3 . EXHIBITS: Memorandum from Public Works Director, Vicinity Map 4. RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO It YES FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS: OPEN HEARING: PUBLIC INPUT• CLOSE HEARING: 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION Councilmember I _� moves, Councilmember [tJ4 seconds that the City Attorney be directed to prepare the ordinance creating LID 337 for Westview Terrace/McCann' s W I el view Sani- tary Sewers. 11r' r DISCUSSION• , r ACTION• Council Agenda ' Item No. 2A DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS January 31 1991 TO: Mayor Kelleher & City Council FROM: Don Wickstrom RE: LID 337 - Westview Terrace/McCann' s Westview Sanitary Sewer - 96th Ave. S. ; 98th Ave S. ; S. 216th St. and S. 214th St. Resolution No. 1267 adopted by City Council on January 2 , 1991 established February 5, 1991 for the public hearing on L. I.D. 337 . All of this was the result of a petition received in June, 1990 and subsequent contact with property owners whi—ct indices-ted sufficient support. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS Sanitary Sewer Improvements Description: Includes the installation of 8-inch sanitary sewers, 6-inch side sewers and related appurtenances. ON FROM TO 98th Avenue S. S. 216th St. 200 ' South of S. 213th P1 S. 216th St. 96th Ave. S. 98th Ave. S. 96th Ave. S. S. 216th St. 200 ' Southwest of S. 213th S. 214th St. 96th Ave. S. East to end of cul-de-sac Easement 96th Ave. S. 150 ' West of 96th Ave. S. near S. 216th St. Easement West end of 130 ' south easement above PROJECT FUNDING ---This__.p-ro�ect is proposed to be 100o LID financed. The estimated L cost is $312 , 901. 44 . There are 48 lots included; therefore, the assessmen per-Iot is $6, 518 . 78 . It should be noted that this cost and extent of construction is based on the fact that the proposed plat of Garrison Heights will provide easements and will extend the sewer approximately 175 feet to the point of connection for the LID. Should this developer extension not be made, additional costs will be incurred by the LID, resulting possibly in higher assessments. As an alternative, the City would pick up these additional costs. METHOD OF ASSESSMENT Each property serviced is being assessed. Since each lot is a single family residential lot each receiving one service, the benefit is equal for all parcels. Therefore, the cost is evenly spread over all lots within the LID. L' 2Cr PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENT Upon Council passing the ordinance confirming the final assessment roll (after completion of the construction) , there is a 30-day period in which any portion or all of the assessment can be paid without interest charges. After the 30-day period, the balance is paid over a ten year period wherein each year's payment is 1/10th of the principal plus interest on the unpaid balance. The interest `will be what the market dictates. NEED FOR IMPROVEMENT i ct The property location is a developed residential area composed of single family lots on septic tanks. For years, it has been known that the septic systems in the general Westview Terrace area function poorly or now all. Previous attempts to install sewers t�ri'hin the entire area-have_fa.11,ed._ However several years ago LID 322 and 323 for sewers were formed for the neighborhood adjacent to LID 337 . It has been reported by residents that there is raw sewage on the surface of the ground and that septic odor is a real widespread problem. The Seattle-King County Department of Public-.Health has identified various failing_ .septic systems within the general area. These problems are a threat to everybody who lives in the area. Most of the problems are not repairable and are expected to become worse and more widespread. The only economically feasible alternative is to install a public sewer sys _e-m A—s_ the situation deteriorates further, people may be forced from their homes. f • ; _.,_, r ,:+.f Knowing the severity of the problem, property owners within the proposed LID came to the City to request sanitary sewers. The Engineering Department requested that a petition be circulated. A petition for sewers was received with signatures to proceed with the formation process. 2 SUPPORT FOR LID Initially a larger LID boundary was proposed. However, following a property owner meeting, the Owners completed Questionnaires regarding their continued support for the LID. There was insufficient support for the entire LID, however, the majority of the supporters were grouped so that a revised boundary provided a reduced area with sufficient support. Within the proposed boundary, 22 out of 48 property owners (45. 8%) requested that the City proceed with the LID formation, which is greater than the 40% required to allow the LID formation. BENEFIT TO PROPERTIES Generally speaking, for two otherwise identical properties, the one with sewer would have a higher value or potential sale price. There are several reasons for this. With sewer in place, the cost of the sewer installation has been addressed so the potential of a future expense of installing sewers has been eliminated. Another way of looking at it is the sewer is another improvement to the property which adds to the overall value, as would be the case with the addition of a room, a fireplace or paved driveway or any other improvement. Why is it an improvement or benefit if the property has a working septic system? The main consideration in this regard is the history of the general area. If numerous septic problems have occurred and numerous problems exist, it is more difficult to sell a property for a given price. With a history of problems, even though a given septic system is still functioning, there would be a concern over how much longer it will function. Also, problems at a particular location can cause sewage and the related odors to appear on another property which would be a deterrent to a sale. So even though a residence has a functioning septic system, the installation of sanitary sewer will boost or protect the property value and potential sale price particularly in an area such as the proposed LID area where numerous septic problems have occurred. GRAVITY SERVICE The entire LID area will be serviced on a gravity basis. Based on our preliminary review of the project area and the available information including topographic maps, it is anticipated that pumping will not be needed. For the worst cases noted the main floor of the houses are at road level to approximately 5 feet below. Basement floors are usually 8 to 10 feet below the floor above. Plumbing beneath the basement floor is then 10 to 17 feet below the street surface. Allowing 1 to 2 feet of fall to the street for the side sewer in the worst case, the main line would be in the range of 11 to 19 3 feet deep for this project. This is very typical for a sanitary sewer installation. In fact, for some projects, installations reach 30 feet deep. The sewer installed several years ago at SE 213th and 103rd Ave. in this neighborhood, is an example of a 30 foot deep sewer. In less critical areas, the sewer could be as shallow as 7 to 8 feet. MANDATORY SEWER CONNECTION The City code states that all residences whether within or outside the City limits, located within 200 feet of a City of Kent sanitary sewer shall be required to connect to the sewer and shall be billed for the service. The code provides that compliance with this provision be within 90 days after the date of official notice to do so. In the case of a public health or safety hazard compliance shall be within 20 days of official notification. Following construction of the project, should the LID be formed, the City will send each property owner an official notice that the sanitary sewer service is available and is within 200 feet of the house. Following the compliance period, all properties which have not applied for a side sewer permit will automatically be added to the sewer billing list. EASEMENT ACQUISITION The construction of the project will require an easement to reach the existing sanitary sewer. The property involved will be appraised followed by negotiation between the City and Owner. Final settlement can be a direct payment to the Owner or can be a credit toward the LID assessment for the property, thereby reducing the amount of the yearly payments. REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL This proposed LID is outside of the City limits but is within the city' s sewer franchise area. However, the final approval of this specific project by the King County Boundary Review Board will be required. -To satisfy the Review Board, the City will require each person applying for a sewer permit to execute a "Petition for Annexation and Declaration of Covenant. " This means that in the case of an annexation attempt, the property will be counted as a "yes" vote and once enough covenants have been signed, an annexation could proceed. The covenant procedure is an alternative to requiring actual annexation prior to formation of the LID and expedites the sewer installation. 4 PROJECT SCHEDULE Property Owner Meeting August 30, 1990 Resolution by City Council January 2 , 1991 Public Hearing February 51 1991 Passage of Formation Ordinance February 19 , 1991 Ordinance in Effect March 19, 1991 Construction 1991 5 ------ Y 2 ' I SCALP:: 1"=100' ,- o 6)41 opq` - --- 1151i_- 1 I I '•.. �3�`�c3)�.., ' �1-' I I 14J _- PROPOSED 8" SANITARY SEWER (LID) (WITH 6' SIDE SEWER STUBS TO EACH PROPE TYI J sl,�r \- - �li ��3�•' ' _ (43 MENT NUMBER °;* ASSESS H 5 27 .�� �/' 40) Ow �,� 2j 2� Il2Ul ° _. < i ' it I I i i ! it � 1: � ✓ l• -- �G ; r. PROPOSED SANITARY J SEWER BY OTHERS -t 04 I I0 ;0 EXISTING SANITARY r SEWER L.I.D. BOUNDARY CITY OF KENT NOTES: L.I.D. 337 I. THE'PROPOSED SEWER IS ONLY SHOWN TO DEFINE THE LIMITS AND EXTENT OF PROJECT.ACTUAL LOCATION OF SEWER WITHIN ROADWAY WILL BE WESTVIEW TERRACElMcCANN'S WEST VIE DETERMINED DURING FINAL DESIGN STAGE. SANITARY SEWER 2.ASTERISN (*) INDICATES PROPERTY.OWNER SIGNED PETITION. 3.DOT*) INOICATES PROPERTY OWNER RETURNED 96TH AVE. S. ; 98TH AVE. S. QUESTIONNAIRE REQUESTING THE CITY PROCEED WITH THE L.I.D.FORMATION. S. 216TH ST. AND S. 214TH ST. Milo IF lm 10J• cl. LO I'DW III b VIL- 12 0 L IMLIL III AOLA 3 12 18 17 A 13 13 3 lo ff"r K NT 1'918 PET 918 PO ATICOM 19,400 A 13 LIE. 7 23J2 YnRR Tr EAST HILL CENTER 1, A X, LID 337 WESTVIEW TERRACE SANITARY SEWERS • 1 L I"IL - 1 Kent City Council Meeting Date February 5. 1991 Category Public Hearings 1. SUBJECT: EMERALD CITY CHEMICAL TU-90-1 APPEAL 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: This public hearing will consider an appeal by Emerald City Chemical from the Hearing Examiner's recommendation of approval to extend until April 15, 1991 an application for an extension of an authorized temporary use permit. The subject property is located between 77th Avenue So. and the Burlington Northern right-of-way to the north of vacated Harrison Street. 3 . EXHIBITS: Appeal letter dated November 9, 1990, appeal form, findings and conclusions, staff report and verbatim minutes of 10/17/90 4. RECOMMENDED BY: Hearing Examiner, 10/31/90 (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO x YES FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ None SOURCE OF FUNDS: OPEN HEARING: PUBLIC INPUT• CLOSE HEARING: 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds to approve/deny the appeal made by Emerald City Chemical of the Hearing Examiner's approval to extend temporary use permit to April 15, 1991. DISCUSSION• ACTION: i ; Council Agenda �� �{ �L�l"�� �'t' '� Item No. 2B 1� 13 1990 QPRjO`�cffice of the City Clerk «�� 220 S . 4th ?�ga1 8-7-z-3370 CITY OF KENT City . of Kent CITY CLERK Order for Transcript for Appeal from Decision of Hearing Examiner i Resolution 896 ' Ordinance 2233 Date Appeal filed ),w9fl Appellant '•s Name ' Address 20832 77th Avenue Phone (206) 872-5511 Hearing Examiner ' s File No . TU-90-1 Date of Hearing Examiner Public Hearing 10 17 90 Date of Hearing Examiner' s Decision 10-31-90 Notice of appeal must be filed with the City Clerk within 14 days of the action taken by the Hearing Examiner and must be accompanied by a $25 filing fee. Treasurer ' s Receipt 4 / lJF± -� Within 30 days of the Hearing Examiner ' s decision, the appellant shall order from the City Clerk a full transcript of the hearing held before the Hearing Examiner and must post at the time of the order , security in the amount of $100 for each tape to be transcribed. If the actual cost incurred by the City exceeas the amount posted, the appellant shall be required to reimburse the City for the excess amount- If the cost is less tham the amount posted , any credit due will be returned to the appellant. Order for Transcript received /II �I`TU Treasurer' s Receipt # (100 . 00) ,�Jt ECCI Scientific November City Clerk City of Ken�� 220 4th Avenue South Ksrt, Hash���t�n 95032 City of Kent Clerk : 7 our right of appeal to the decision of the Kent Hearing Examiner, �n file "Emereld City ChemicaI #7U-90-1 ' . I am basing my appeal on errcrs of int=-rpretEtion of the co�e, omissions from the recon±, and unfounded concIusions . Al � o� whIch have �e�d �� a decision that is countered bY invalid and ina�propriat� condition� . PIea�e prcvide me with the date and time of the �p�IicabIe c�uncil mee�ing as soon a� possible. ' �len A. Dodge / GAD/�jr 21O0O77THAVE. SOUTH, KENT' VVA98832, (20S) 872'5511. FAX (206) 872'8554' (US)8O0^431-5511 crry cF TAtzd CITY OF KENT OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION FILE NO: EMERALD CITY CHEMICAL #TU-90-1 APPLICANT: Glen Dodge REQUEST: An extension of an authorized temporary use as provided in Section 15. 08 .205 B 5 b of the Kent Zoning Code. LOCATION: The subject property is located between 77th Avenue S. and the Burlington Northern right of way, to the north of vacated Harrison Street. APPLICATION FILED: 10/1/90 DEC. OF NONSIGNIFICANCE ISSUED• N/A MEETING DATE: 10/17/90 DECISION ISSUED: 10/31/90 DECISION: APPROVED to April 15, 1990 STAFF REPRESENTATIVE: Fred N. Satterstrom, Planning Department Carol Proud, Planning Department Larry Webb, Fire Marshal Bob Hutchinson, Building Official Linda Hoffman-Gross PUBLIC TESTIMONY: Glen Dodge WRITTEN TESTIMONY: None INTRODUCTION After due consideration of all the evidence presented at public hearing on the date indicated above, and following an unaccompanied personal inspection of the subject property and surrounding area by the Hearing Examiner at a time prior to the public hearing, the following findings, conclusions and decision are entered by the Hearing Examiner on this application. 1 Hearing Examiner Findings and Decision Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 FINDINGS 1. The applicant, Emerald City Chemical Company, requests the extension of a temporary use permit to allow the continued storage and use of six cargo containers on the subject property located between 77th Avenue S. and the Burlington Northern right-of-way. A temporary use permit was first issued by the City Planning Department on November 28, 1989 to begin on April 15, 1990. It was valid for 90 days. On July 11 1990, four days before expiration of the temporary use permit, the applicant requested an extension. The permit was extended by the Planning Department for 90 days beginning July 15, 1990. The temporary use permit expired on October 15, 1990. This request for an extension was filed with the Hearing Examiner as required in Section 15. 08 . 205 (B) (5) (b) of the Kent Zoning Code. That section authorizes the Hearing Examiner to extend a temporary use for up to one additional year "if such an extension will be consistent with the requirements of paragraph C of this section" . The applicant filed his request for an extension on October 1, 1990. The earliest hearing date avail- able following public notice requirements was October 17 , 1990 . The applicant continues to use the cargo containers for lab equip- ment and storage and distribution of hazardous substances without a permit pending review of this request for an extension. This continued use until a decision is reached has been agreed to by the Planning Department so that no enforcement activity as authorized by Section 15. 09 . 100 of the Kent Zoning Code has yet occurred. 2 . In addition and prior to issuance of the temporary use permit, the applicant also received a conditional use permit for construction of a 8, 358 square foot building on the subject property. The building would be designed to contain hazardous substances. A conditional use permit was approved by the Kent City Council on July 18 , 1989. The conditional use permit expired on July 19 , 1990 because no construction activity was undertaken by the applicant. The applicant testified that this was due to the failure of his architect to deliver building plans which, in turn, has affected his ability to obtain financing. The matter now before the Hearing Examiner is only the question of the request for an extension of the temporary use permit for up to one additional year. If the applicant is to undertake construction of the facility he proposed in his request for a conditional use permit, a new application must be reviewed and approved. The facts as to the status of the conditional use permit are relevant in this matter only as to the actions of the applicant on the site during the time period of the temporary use permit. 2 Hearing Examiner Findings and Decision Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 3 . The applicant has operated his business out of an existing office building on the subject property and the temporary cargo containers since April 15, 1990 when a temporary use permit first became valid. At the time of the initial request, the applicant requested approval for temporary storage for a nine month period pending completion of our warehouse" . See, Letter of Applicant dated November 7, 1989 (attached and made part of this decision) . That letter stated that "our architect will have the drawings completed soon, so allowing two months for plan review and six months for construction, the nine month request will allow for a small buffer. " As noted in Finding No. 1, the applicant has not yet prepared any building plans. 4 . The applicant agreed to work with the Kent Fire Marshall as to the conditions of temporary use of cargo containers for hazardous substances. See, Letter of Applicant dated November 7, 1989 . The Fire Marshall reviewed the proposed use and, in a letter dated November 7, 1989, imposed seven conditions on the use of the containers for storage of hazardous chemicals. See, Letter from Larry A. Webb dated November 7 , 1989 (attached and made part of this decision) . These include: - Storage for a maximum of nine months beginning with the first day of occupancy; - No mixing or dispensing of materials; - Restrictions on type of storage and size of containers; - Clear marking of all containers as to their contents. This nine month period referred to by the Fire Marshal expires January 15, 1990. The Fire Marshal also required compliance with three conditions applied by the Planning Department during environmental review of the conditional use permit request. These included a requirement for a Tier II report on the chemical inventory of the site per SARA Title III (a federal law relating to hazardous substances) ; completion of a facility plan before issuance of a business license; and inventory and labelling of all chemicals. These conditions were first applied as part of a Mitigated Declaration of Nonsignificance issued April 14, 1989 . 5. Representatives of the Kent Fire Department testified that the applicant was not in full compliance with the conditions imposed, 3 Hearing Examiner Findings and Decision Emerald City Chemical JTU-90-1 but that he could probably come into compliance ' fairly quickly once appropriate forms are completed as to types of chemicals. The applicant has submitted an emergency facilities plan but had not yet completed the required hazardous substance reporting form as of the date of the hearing. The Fire Department has no objection to an extension of a temporary use if all conditions they have noted are complied with. 6. The containers sit in an open parking lot next to the office building. The container doors are left open during the work day and the contents of the trailers are easily viewed from the street. Activities surrounding the subject property include a hauling business with frequent truck traffic on the property to the south; construction activity on the property across the street; a concrete plant and hazardous waste disposal activity down the road to the north; and rail traffic immediately to the east of the subject property. There is no residential use nearby. The subject property exists in an exclusive, active industrial area. The closest neighbor to the subject property, Metro Hauling, Inc. , testified in writing that the storage containers "are of beneficial use" and that "their continued use is quite acceptable" . See, Letter from Scott Jewett dated October 15 , 1990. The Planning Department testified that "from a strictly land use perspective, locating temporary storage trailers on the subject property would be consistent with (the temporary use permit criteria) " . See, page 4 of Planning Department report dated October 10, 1990. However, that report noted that public health and safety may be impacted adversely by the type of hazardous substances placed in the storage containers. Information as to the type of these materials was not available at the time of the report. The Planning Department report also noted that the storage containers are no longer consistent with the purpose of temporary activities in that continued extensions have allowed them to become a substitute for permanent on-site storage. The Planning Department thus recommended that the request for an extension be denied. 5 . Oral testimony presented at the public hearing included that of the Planning Department, the Fire Department and the applicant. CONCLUSIONS 1. A temporary use permit is intended to permit "occasional, temporary uses, activities and structures when consistent with the purpose of the Zoning Code and when compatible with the general vicinity and adjacent uses. " Kent Zoning Code, Section 15. 08 . 205 4 Hearing Examiner Findings and Decision Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Section 15. 08.205 (B) (5) (b) of the Kent Zoning Code authorizes the Hearing Examiner to allow an extension of a temporary use permit for up to one additional year if the criteria for issuance of the temporary use permit are met. These criteria are: a. The use will not impair the normal, safe, and effective operation of a permanent use on the same site; b. The use will be compatible with uses in the general vicinity and on adjacent properties; c. The use will not impact public health, safety, or convenience, or create traffic hazards or congestion, or otherwise interrupt or interfere with the normal conduct of uses and activities in the vicinity; d. The use and associated structures will be used in a manner compatible with the surrounding area; e. The use will comply with all applicable standards of the Seattle King County Health Department. 2 . The use of the site by the applicant will not impair the effective operation of a permanent use of the site and is compatible with other uses in the area. The use does not create traffic hazards or congestion and does not interfere with normal conduct and uses in the area. 3 . The use of temporary cargo containers for hazardous substances may impact public health and safety if conditions are not attached to a temporary use permit. The conditions should . address all concerns of the Kent Fire Department and the Seattle King County Health Department. Removal and transport of the hazardous substances to a different storage location may present a higher risk to public health than keeping the materials at the existing site. However, storage conditions at the existing site should be improved to allow continued safe storage and operation. 4 . A temporary use permit is for occasional, temporary activities only. The applicant is pushing the limit of what might be considered a temporary use. The applicant has used the temporary use permit to allow operation of his business in Kent for over six months and, in fact, states that he intends the site to become his permanent business site. The City Council determined that a 5 Hearing Examiner Findings and Decision Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 temporary use may exist for up to 18 months if specific approval is given at the three month and six month periods. Although the applicant states that he intends to operate permanently on the site, the applicant has not demonstrated his intention to construct a permanent building on the site by any action. It is reasonable to expect some action toward construction of a building on the site in order to authorize an additional extension of the temporary use permit. 5. The conditions imposed by the Kent Fire Department for use of the temporary storage containers are reasonable and should be enforced. The letter from the Fire Marshall imposing the conditions would authorize the temporary use of the storage containers through January 15, 1991 if those conditions are met. It is reasonable to allow the temporary use at least until that 0time based on the representations of the Fire Marshall. 6. It is reasonable to authorize an additional extension of the temporary use beyond January 15, 1991 to allow for construction of a permanent facility if: (1) any applicable standards of the Seattle King County Health Department are met; (2) the Kent Fire Department determines that the conditions imposed in its letter of November 7, 1989 have been met and will continue to be met so that public health and safety are not negatively impacted and; (3) the applicant demonstrates substantial progress toward construction of a permanent storage facility including architect' s plans, construction financing and steps toward obtaining required permits. It is appropriate to require the applicant to report to the Planning Department and the Hearing Examiner on or before January 15, 1991 as to the progress of the applicant' s project in order to authorize the temporary use beyond January 15th (the date authorized in the letter of the Fire Department) . This reporting is necessary because of the record of the applicant to date in failing to comply with conditions attached to both the conditional use approval (now expired) and the temporary use permit. This reporting will also help ensure that the public health and safety is protected in the event that there is continued storage of hazardous substances in the temporary cargo containers. 6 Hearing Examiner Findings and Decision Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 7. A reasonable period of time to allow for all permits to be obtained to allow construction of a building on the site is six months or until April 15, 1991. In no event should the use of the temporary cargo containers for storage and distribution of hazardous substances be allowed after that date. If storage and distribution of hazardous substances is undertaken by the applicant after that date, it should be at another site during the period of construction or in a permanent protective storage building constructed on the site. DECISION The request for an extension of a temporary use permit to allow the storage of hazardous substances on the site in six temporary storage trailers is APPROVED until April 15, 1991 subject to the following conditions: 1. On or before November 15, 1990, the applicant must obtain a report from the Kent Fire Department which finds that the applicant has complied with all conditions imposed in the November 7, 1989 letter from Larry Webb (attached to and made part of this decision) and that the public health and safety will not be negatively impacted by a continuance of the temporary use until April 15, 1991 as long as those conditions are complied with. 2 . On or before January 15, 1991, the applicant must obtain a report from the Seattle King County Health Department which states that all applicable standards associated with the storage and distribution of hazardous substances are complied with by the applicant. 3 . On or before January 15, 1991, the applicant must report that substantial progress_ toward construction of a permanent facility on the site has occurred including the preparation of architect's plans written commitments to financing of construction and 3o`cumented progress toward obtaining necessary permits. The reports must be delivered to the Planning Department and the Office of Hearing Examiner on or before the date specified. If the reports are received and not responded to within 10 days following receipt, they shall be deemed approved and the applicant may continue the temporary use with written approval of the Hearing Examiner until April 15, 1991. If the reports are not received or are disapproved within 10 days following receipt, the temporary use permit shall expire on January 15, 1991. 7 Hearing Examiner Findings and Decision Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Dated this 31st day of October, 1990. THEODORE PAUL HUNTER Hearing Examiner APPEALS FROM HEARING EXAMINER DECISIONS. Request of Reconsideration Any aggrieved person may request a reconsideration of a decision by the Hearing Examiner if either (a) a specific error of fact, law, or judgment can be identified or (b) new evidence is available which was not available at the time of the hearing. Reconsideration requests should be addressed to: Hearing Examiner, 220 Fourth Avenue S. , Kent, WA 98032 . Reconsiderations are answered in writing by the Hearinc Examiner. Notice of Right to Appeal The decision of the Hearing Examiner is final unless a written appeal to the Council is filed by a party within 14 days of the decision. The appeal must be filed with the City Clerk. Usually, new information cannot be raised on appeal. All relevant information and arguments should be presented at the public hearing before the City Council. A recommendation by the Hearing Examiner to the City Council can also be appealed. A recommendation is sent to the City Council for a final decision; however, a public hearing is not held unless an appeal is filed. 8 CITY OF November 71 1989 t Cr Glen Dodge Emerald City Chemical, Inc. 1409 E Madison Seattle WA 98122 Dear Mr.' Dodge: As per a verbal agreement with Chief Berg, Code Enforcement, we will allow you to temporarily store hazardous chemicals for nine month trial period with the following stipulations: * This will only take place for a maximum. of nine months beginning with the first day of occupancy. * There will be no mixing or dispensing of materials. * All units will be in containers of five gallons or less except for 10o pound units of swimming pool chlorines . * Shelves will have retaining wire to prevent accidental spills. * The corrosive single units will be placed on polyethylene trays to prevent interaction and contain possible spills. * Steel cargo containers will be of a maximum 20 feet. * Containers will be conspicuously marked as to oxidizer, corrosives, flammable liquids, etc. If I can be of further assistance, please call me at 859-3360 . Respe t ully, Larry A. Webb, Fire Marshal Kent Fire Prevention L/j f L 220 4th AVE.So.,/KENT,WASHINGTON 98032-5895/TELEPHONE (206)859-3300 1 EMERALD CITY CHEMICAL INC. November 7 , 1989 City of Kent l . Planning Department 220 4th Ave S. °' Kent, WA 98032-5895 ATTN: Laurie Anderson ++ IMIZGc.Pi�U(.t5 (�-'p_S(t� ,A1 111 �'tS�lj- (iYcv1'1 Dear Ms. Anderson: This is a follow up to my verbal request for us to move our corporate offices and associated storage to our offices at. 21000 77th S. This move is necessary to reduce over head costs by eliminating the rental of extra offices and to maintain control of the construction of our new warehouse. To do this temporary storage would be needed for a nine month period pending completion of our warehouse. O:r .archite,ct will have the drawings compLeted soon, so allowing two months for plan review and six months for construction, the nine month request allows for a small buffer. We have found the best units for storage to be shipping cargo containers. This holds true from the standpoint of security as well as structural unity. We currently own and use these containers and are completely satisfied with their suitability. After the containers are placed the area will be fenced as additional security. The access to these containers will be by foot traffic only and there is no heed ;.or ut.ilicy hookups. The area east of the office is currently graveled which is suitable as a container base , along with the end of the concrete parking lot. As discussed our first concern -was the storage of limited quantities of labeled chemicals . Through continued discussions with Chief Berg we have come up with a suitable plan to allow for separated chemical storage. These 3 twenty foot cargo containers will be arranged as indicated on the attached plot plan. In .addition we will need non regulated storage for equipment and materials which we believe can be accomplished by locating three 40 ' cargo containers to the east of the offices as shown on the plan. 1409 East Madison • Seattle, Washington 98122 206-328-2040 • Wash. Toll Free 1-800-562-6794 Although this amount of storage space- is a significant reduction from our current facility, we believe we can maintain our ability to serve our customers until the warehouse is able to be occupied. She look forward to your response. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Glen A. Dodge President GAD/ljc City of Kent - Planning Department � t vl ! V \ m W S\ :-- 202ND ST \1 5 V • Ix Iz t < !,^ n 1 W .J S 206TH ST S 206TH ST m 1� Z >` S ` 1 6 S 208TH ST ` 200TH ST -P y<t SITE I1 ti i 1 J l*moo a ( I LA I {* 'A 212TH ST l � 1'• O'E3RIEN \- r l W J ( • W 1 ~Vf N S 11 f n } S 218T11 ! - , ST + I ` 1 - APPLICATION NAME: Emerald City Chemical NUMBER: TU-90-1 DATE: October 17, 1990 REQUEST: Temporary Use LEGEND Application site VICINITY MAP zoning boundary City limits -111W City of Kent - Planning Department 1 I .$ � iio°O II � •I .ss.i ' l l I I d 1 A.1 1 I i I q 7n;•; 1 1 1 9l • i 1 4:1.5CA .:,.. ry 1 II ' 421.4 I I ,- .21. - FEE1T ss.r .Is.i al.: �s 11 I•hs., I I _ m.s j I I! •— '' 1� I I 42,A421.9 — 1 � / 21.1) D 4, ,11.2 n ff .11.3 ° .20 APPLICATION NAME: Emerald City Chemical NUMBER: TU-90-1 DATE: October 17, 1990 REQUEST: Temporary Use LEGEND Application site ZONING / TOPOGRAPHY MAP Zoning boundary City limits .1. City of Kent - Planning Department oFia1ER STO[KfE / —CcuasiVe FIZZ1 I Ir O / ��FC1y�N.iN.e'A.�73�lzS fSTcOE UN s::"jco<A« GYGiOY<FCYGE i✓Ou-w740=.S I I LfT cFii� euiLcwG I . `W/OEVECOrc'77 f � FYIUUVy LDT • S/O IVROON � ' � I cyC/L�OUE. V w<TE< Illllll/////!P $�YT-OGF.�"� I —i 5,Ce�4 VZAW J L-1f/4 OX WIVE O �uoE 4wrE5 777 AVENUE SOUTH i S�_ l7Evccc i:NE•u- r2a.v .. � ---GJE/.ALD GAT/(VEs11CAL ING .3J APPLICATION NAME: Emerald City Chemical NUMBER: TU-90-1 DATE: October 17, 1990 REQUEST: Temporary Use LEGEND Application site SITE PLAN Zoning boundary City limits '! crrr of Td CITY OF KENT _ PLANNING DEPARTMENT (206) 859-3390 STAFF REPORT FOR HEARING EXAMINER MEETING OF OCTOBER 17 , 1990 FILE NO: #TU-90-1, EMERALD CITY CHEMICAL APPLICANT: Glen Dodge REQUEST: An extension of an authorized temporary use as provided in Section 15.08. 205 B.5.b. of the Kent Zoning Code. STAFF REPRESENTATIVE: Carol Proud STAFF RECOMMENDATION: DENIAL I, GENERAL INFORMATION A. Description of the Proposal The applicant received temporary use approval to place six storage trailers on the subject property beginning on April 15, 1990. The temporary use permit was valid for 90 days. A verbal extension of the permit authorizing an additional 90 days was granted beginning July 15, 1990. According to the applicant, three of the storage trailers are forty feet long and contain miscellaneous lab equipment and other non-hazardous materials. The remaining three are twenty feet long and store materials that are considered hazardous substances. The trailers are located to the rear of the subject property adjacent to the Burlington Northern right-of-way. B. Location The subject property is located between 77th Avenue S. and the Burlington Northern right- of-way, to the north of vacated Harrison Street. 1 Staff Report Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 C. Size of Property The subject area is approximately 1.2 acres in size. D. Zonincr The property is currently zoned M3 , General Industrial. E. Land Use Surrounding land uses include the Central Pre-Mix Concrete Plant, a vacant lot, and the Metro Hauling facilities. F. Area and Site History The subject property was annexed to the City of Kent in 1959 as part of a 2 , 990 acre annexation. The subject site is developed with a 3 , 224 square foot office building and related parking that was constructed in 1979 . The applicant has received conditional use permit approval (#CE-89-7) as a result of an appeal to the Kent City Council to construct an 8 ,358 addition that will include among other things an area for mixing, storing and distributing more than 20, 000 pounds of hazardous substances. The conditional use permit expired on July 18, 1990. The original temporary use permit was issued November 28, 1989 subject to the conditions established by the Fire Marshall and the following conditions noted in the mitigated DNS (#ENV-89-22) issued for the previously mentioned conditional use permit: 2 . Submittal of a Tier II report on the chemical inventory of the site as per SARA Title III and the City of Kent Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) within 60 days of occupancy. 3 . Cooperate with the Fire Department in the preparation of a facility plan as required by the LEPC and SARA Title III. Completion of 2 Staff Report Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 the Plan shall occur before issuance of a business license. 4 . The proponent shall keep current inventory records, and label and date the containers that may be readily accessed by the Fire Department during an emergency. The applicant requested on March 20, 1990 that the start date for the temporary use permit be changed to April 15, 1990. The Planning Department approved this request on April 10, 1990. The applicant submitted a business license application April 12, 1990 for the current facility and operations. The Planning Department approved the application on April 16, 1990 and forwarded it to the Fire Department for their review. As of this writing the Fire Department has not approved the business license application and as a result Emerald City Chemical is operating without a valid business license. The Fire Department authorized the placement of the storage trailers on site for a maximum of 9 months from the day of occupancy of facility. This authorization expires in January, 1991. According to Fire Department records and conversation with Fire Officials, the applicant has not complied with the minimum conditions required of the applicant for the siting of the storage trailers on the subject property nor with conditions noted on the original zoning permit. II. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REVIEW A. Criteria for Temporary Use Approval When authorized by the Hearing Examiner, a temporary use may operate additional one (1) year if it found that such an extension will be consistent with the following requirements: 1. The temporary use will not impair the normal, safe, and effective operation of a permanent use on the same site. 3 Staff Report Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 2 . The temporary use will be compatible with uses in the general vicinity and on adjacent properties. 3 . The temporary use will not impact public health, safety, or convenience, or create traffic hazards or congestion, or other wise interrupt or interfere with the normal conduct of uses and activities in the vicinity. 4. The use and associated structures and living quarters will be conducted and used in a manner compatible with the surrounding area. 5. The temporary use shall comply with all applicable standards of the Seattle King County Health Department. Planning Department Comment From a strictly land use perspective, locating temporary storage trailers on the subject property would be consistent with the above mentioned criteria. Emerald City Chemical is located in an area that is developed with other uses that also has a considerable amount of similar outdoor storage. Because of their location on the subject property, the storage trailers would not impair the safe operation of the business. If the storage trailers contained only miscellaneous equipment and non-hazardous materials the use would not impact the public health or safety. From the information available at the time of writing this report, Planning Department staff is unable to determine whether or not the three storage containers containing hazardous materials is safe. Conflicting reports regarding compliance with Fire Department requirements and noted SEPA conditions were obtained after conversations with both the applicant and Fire Department Officials. Temporary use approval was originally based on the assumption at the time of application that the applicant was pursuing a conditional use permit and the necessary building permits for permanent on- site storage. As previously mentioned, the 4 Staff Report Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 conditional use permit has expired. The applicant would not be able to obtain conditional use approval and relevant building permits prior to the expiration date established by the Fire Department for the temporary storage containers. Further, it is the Planning Departments position that the storage containers are no longer consistent with the purpose of a temporary use which is intended to permit occasional, temporary structures or activities. The storage containers are not a substitute for permanent on-site storage. III. PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION Upon review of the merits of this request and the Code criteria for granting an extension of temporary use permit, the Planning Department recommends that the temporary use be DENIED. KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT October 10, 1990 5 City of Kent - Planning Department t In s ;__ . zozno sT i s x ; i N Y < J S 206TH ST = S 206TH ST A A t x Z W 200TH ST 1 6 S 208TH ST . k SITE �• +, I dl t t i l' 0TRIEN �. J J < 1 f � 1 \ n ` S 218TH . ST I •� t t i �\ y IYI l 1 � lJtl A t APPLICATION NAME: Emerald City Chemical NUMBER: TU-90-1 DATE: October 17, 1990 REQUEST: Temporary Use LEGEND Application site VICINITY MAP zoning boundary City limits '� City of Kent - Planning Department r I i a ea. 423. II 1 1 425.7II �I °O1z .215 It i I .xss a .a :\:, f ii .xx.s I .z 421. Q � 1 sz.s � — o t I/ „• ��......... , n I 423.3 4 I. II ; I 1 .x,.s P I ti O u ' 0 11 xs.s427.2 i 4 I 423.3 dl ill ( ° }i ° x�. Ir: iI APPLICATION NAME: Emerald City Chemical NUMBER: TU-90-1 DATE: October 17, 1990 REQUEST: Temporary Use LEGEND Application site ZONING / TOPOGRAPHY MAP Zoning boundary City limits .� City of Kent - Planning Department Q5:0<M -RAIN Op02ER 5%OeACjE—� GO<)OS/yC S%C<A C,E FiR: E[..F� ETlST/NC,GL_� / (1 NNAdL TO<AC/E 1 � iZAA O.WfiL I g c//�I✓CY.N«ASJOVS GwcH:�+L ZTOL546 GYGtOYC FFYGE IVOY.wAYI<tOuS I L 7 G � Emu cFFI[E Eu/coul[/ . a Q I L UYCEVELOOc`D] f FARX/Vy LOT ' SNCWR'JOH � Q_. 1 GyL W/E.FEVGE W<%R rc{ Dzn/Al -/ v?le o� /o'w DE, 0 _ 5u0©4ASE5 77Tw AVENUE SOU7N !j/f (7EVELOFe"HEAr -LAA/ it � - `°`EHE4ILD Gry C.vcH�uc /Nc 21oco-w'.- 5 SEacne "'2ronc: ENc/...ISEz/I14 Ll szcc.<Tc5 a-� i$ ly..u. yow: urt A...-9�cs• � APPLICATION NAME: Emerald City Chemical NUMBER: TU-90-1 DATE: October 17, 1990 REQUEST: Temporary Use LEGEND Application site SITE PLAN Zoning boundary City limits -0- CF Y OF 79jen4 CITY OF KENT OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER (206) 859-3990 Zia EMERALD CITY CHEMICAL #TU-90-1 VERBATIM MINUTES of October 17, 1990 meeting Ted Hunter, Hearing Examiner: O.k. , the application before us now is a request . for an extension of a temporary use, Emerald City Chemical Company, it' s item #TU-90-1. We have. . .we will follow the same order of procedure. We have Carol Proud from the Planning Department representing the City. Good afternoon, Carol, do you swear and affirm to tell the truth and the whole truth in the testimony that you give. Carol Proud: I do. Hunter: Please proceed. Proud: For the record my name is Carol Proud. I 'm senior planner with the City of Kent Planning Department. Before you this afternoon is an application for an extension of an authorized temporary use as provided in Section 15. 08 . 205 B 5.b of the Kent Zoning Code. The applicant received temporary use approval to place six storage trailers on the property. The permit was conditioned again on April 15, 1990. I have before you a site plan that roughly indicates the location of those storage trailers. They are located to the west, excuse me, east of the. . .of an existing building and in an eastern portion of an existing parking lot. The temporary use permit was valid for 90 days. A verbal extension of the permit was authorized in. . . for an additional 90 days was granted beginning July 15, 1990. According to the applicant, three of the storage trailers are 40 feet long and contain miscellaneous lab equipment and other nonhazardous materials. The remaining three are 20 feet long and store materials that are considered hazardous substances. The trailers are located to the rear of the property as I pointed out. The subject property is located on the east side of 77th Avenue S. , adjacent to the west side of the Burlington Northern Railroad right of way and the subject property is within an M3 zoning district. Some of the surrounding land uses are somewhat similar in natures. They include the Central Pre-Mix concrete plant, a vacate lot, Metro Hauling facilities, South Seattle Auto Auction, storage yard and their main facilities are located to the north and south of the subject property on the west side of 77th. There's also a peat operation located in the vicinity. As the staff report indicates there' s a substantial history involved with this process and I 1 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes would like to touch on a few of the items and try to clarify a few points before the Fire Department makes their comments. The applicant received a conditional use permit as a result of an appeal to the City Council to construct an 8 , 300 square foot addition that would include, among other things, an area for mixing, storing and distributing more than 20, 000 pounds of hazardous substances. The conditional use permit was granted on July 18 , 1989 and unless construction has commenced or other development permits issued for this site, the Zoning Code states that a conditional use permit expires within one year. So, the permit expired July 18 , 1990. The original. . .going back through Planning Department records, the original temporary use permit was issued November 28 , 1989 , subject to some conditions that are. . .that were established by the Fire Marshal that were tied back to the original environmental review mitigated DNS for the conditional use permit and these included submittal of a Tier II report as required by Sarah Title III and to cooperate with the Fire Department in the preparation of the facility plans required by Sara Title III provisions. And, then, it also stated that the completion of the plant should occur before issuance of a business license and then also, the proponent keep current inventory records and label and date the containers that may be readily accessed by the Fire Department during an emergency. There' s since been some question that' s arisen between the applicant and Fire Department and I hope they will get to some kind of understanding that. . . . Its my understanding that the applicant is not, because of the amounts of hazardous substance, isn't directly required to comply with Sara Title III provisions but as a condition of approval of the temporary use permit, somewhat similar to what we require a developer to comply with the King County Surface Water manuals as kind of a guideline the Fire Department uses that we've requested the applicant submit these things as if they were subject to them for safety reasons. So, the applicant requested in March of 1990 that the start date for the temporary use permit be changed to April 15. There was some change in their plans, when they were going to go on the site and a former senior planner for the City of Kent authorized that and, I think, there' s a letter in your file saying that. . . approving the request on April 10 , 1990. The applicant then also submitted a business license about that time for the current facility and operation and we, the Planning Department, approved the business license and forwarded it on to the Planning. . .or to the Fire Department which is typical procedure and, as of this writing, the Fire Department has not approved the business applications and, as a result, Emerald City Chemical is 2 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes operating without a valid business license but the Fire officials are here to explain how their procedures work and why that is current. The Fire Department authorized. . . it is my understanding that Mr. Dodge approached the Fire Marshal and requested their approval as well as going through our temporary use proceedings. From a land use standpoint and the Fire Marshal indicated that trailers could be stored on site as a temporary use for a maximum of nine months from the date of occupancy of the facility and to , the best of the Fire Department's knowledge that occurred. Let see. . . it may be May 5 of 1990. In your review of the criteria for temporary use approval, there are three. . .excuse me. . .five criteria and the Planning Department has analyzed these. . . .the proposal in light of these and from strictly a land use perspective, locating these temporary trailers on the subject property would be consistent with the noted criteria. The Emerald City Chemical is located in an area that is developed with other uses that are also. . .has a considerable amount of outdoor storage. Storage trailers in and of themselves would not impair the safe operation of the business and if, say for example, there were just inert storage material on the property, the Planning Department would have no problem with recommending approval of this. Now, this brings us to the contents of. . .of the materials and the criteria that we need to look at in terms of addressing the public health and safety issue. And, its from the information available after talking to the applicant and the Fire Department, the Planning Department staff is unable to determine whether or not the three storage containers containing hazardous materials are safe; conflicting reports regarding compliance with Fire Department requirements and noted SEPA conditions were obtained after conversations with both the applicant and the Fire Department officials. And, in my sitting down and trying to write a report to you, it was just. . .the applicant saying we had the blessings of the Fire Department and the Fire Department saying, "No, they haven't" . So, it took quite a bit of research to come up with what was going on out there. The temporary use approval was originally based on the assumption, at the time of application, that the applicant was pursuing a conditional use permit and the necessary building permits for permanent on-site storage and, as previously mentioned, a conditional use permit has expired. The applicant would not be able to obtain conditional use approval and relevant building permits prior to the expiration date established by the Fire Department for the temporary storage containers. And, its my 3 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes understanding that they are pretty firm on that February 5th date. Further, its the Planning Department' s position that the storage containers are no longer consistent with the purpose of a temporary use which is intended to permit occasional, temporary structures or activities. The storage containers are not a substitute for permanent on-site storage and that' s pretty much the crux of the matter. Its not the intent of a temporary use provision for the proponents to operate a distribution facility or even a storage facility out of temporary type structures. Which brings back to another, again, the land use issue, that if. . . if the applicant were, in fact, storing storage containers, if it were appropriately fenced, then there would be no problem with having on-site permanent storage. It' s just kind of the nature of what is the business is and what's inside these containers that is the distinguishing line here. So, for, based upon the above review, the merits of the request and the Code criteria for granting an extension of a temporary use permit, the Planning Department recommends that the temporary use be denied. I 'd be glad to answer any questions that you have. Hunter: Well, it sounds like we'd better , hear from Fire on this. . .what' s going on. Proud: They're here too. I don't know if they any presentation, but, maybe they might be able to answer a questions after Mr. Dodge. . . Hunter: Would you prefer to go that way or would you like to. . . . o.k. We' ll hear then from the applicant. Do you swear, affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth in the testimony that you give? Glenn Dodge: Yes, I do. My name is Glenn Dodge. I 'm president of ECCI Scientific, Emerald City Chemical. We do reside our business at the aforementioned location. We have been in a process of moving to Kent for about three years now. We've seen you before and on through. . . in the middle of that process we had to switch locations due to some other criteria and we're put in the position of a new law that the Council had written or had signed for which came we came before you and you couldn't act, it went before Council and the Council mitigated for us. It seems like every, this being my fourth time up here, I 'm almost ready to get a 4 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes complex about adversarial positions with the City and that puts me in a position, I feel, that, in some instances, I have a hard time speaking where I got to work with these same people later on based on statements that were made in the past. I ' ll do my best. These storage containers are, at this particular time, very essential to our operation. The original project was started after acceptance of the conditional use permit in August of 1989. At the same time, though, our architect was also working on the project for Zep Materials. Because we had to stop our movement forward when we had for and obtain the conditional use and the time required through the hearing process, they because exceptionally involved in the process with Zep and continued to do so clear through the end of last year and into the late spring of this year and, thus, were not able to work on our project. We had already spent considerable money with them getting the preliminaries put together and it was no. . .had no basis. . .monetary or otherwise to start over again and have somebody start anew. Thus, putting a delay to our project. We. . . I wrote a letter in July requesting the extension of our approval for conditional use permit and in addition, requesting the extension then of the storage containers for an equal period and that was for a period of two years which was based on my opinion of what had through with Zep, what time period we would take, what it would need to finish our drawings now and the like, and verbally, after that was a couple of weeks old, we were told that we had that extension. The extensions were approved as requested. Over the next two months, I requested through my office staff making phone calls, that we receive a written copy for that so that we had verification and it cumulated somewhere in the 20th region of September that we still had not received that letter and so, my staff made a call again and it was said it would be forthcoming and then the next week, Ms. Proud gave us a call and informed us that there had been some misunderstanding in the approval of our application and that was not available to do that and I better hurry up and get the request in for this hearing so that we didn't fall out of compliance within that. We worked very hard to do so, Ms. Proud worked to help us get, make sure we got the right papers to get on this agenda and we got that in. In our last conversation though, I had the perception that we kind had a basic. . .not agreement. . excuse me. . .that it appeared to me that it was going to be opted for approval. But that somewhere up in the echelons in some fashion it was decided that it should not be pressed that way. I don't. . . Hunter: Maybe I can cut this a little bit short. 5 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical JTU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes Dodge: O.k. Hunter: Because I do want to get right to the issue here. This seems a lot of preliminary discussion about where you've been and where it' s gone. But, whether, you know, your knowledge of it or not this is what we are using. Dodge: I understand. Hunter: Which is the Zoning Code which include conditions of a temporary use. Dodge: O.k. Hunter: I think you are familiar with that section, are you not, the 15. 08 . 050? Dodge: I did read it originally, yes. Hunter: Yes, that no temporary use shall occupy a site or operate within the City for more than 90 days within any calendar year except and then item A, when authorized by the Planning Director, a temporary use may operate an additional 90 days. Dodge: O.k. Hunter: If it is found that certain conditions are met and then, B, if authorized by the Hearing Examiner, a temporary use may operate an additional one year if it is found that the extension is consistent with the same criteria that were referenced earlier. Dodge: O.k. Hunter: Do we need to discuss anything further about two years and whose. . . Dodge: Well, my only statement is that I was given verbal approval that I had that two-year extension and then I came up to this point. Hunter: All right, can we rely on what' s in the City ordinances and use that as our basis for discussion today? Dodae: That is fine. 6 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes Hunter: Isn't that appropriate? Isn't more than fine, isn't that appropriate? We need some guide that we have the same set of rules that we are operating under and that's what I'm going to refer too and if we can operate under the same set of rules, communications will be a lot smoother. Anything that made promises about two-year extensions and anything like that would have been outside the scope of any authority, isn't that correct? Dodae: I didn't know that. Hunter: It' s not in the ordinance. Dodge: Well, that' s that's due to interpretation. Hunter: Well, that' s my perspective on this. I 'm operating under . the City ordinances which the City Council has directed that we operate under in hearing this matter. Dodge: O.k. Hunter: so, if we look to that Code for a guidance, I think, we will be on the same track. And, I 'm here today to hear what is the extension for an additional period of time up to one year. Dodge: O.k. Hunter: That's the starting point for today' s hearing. As far as what happened in the past, unless you can show me how that' s relevant to today, I 'm not sure we need to go into that. Dodge: O.k. Hunter: Do you see some relevance to it? Dodae: I thought there was from a history stand point on how we ended up here and based on information stated whereby. . . .there' s a statement made in the report that there is some contention that my conditional use permit having been overrun that I would not have time to obtain a conditional use approval prior to a date established by the Fire Department. If I had two months ago known this then I might have had a chance. Now, I 'm also prepared to state that in this particular case I have no need and I ' ll move on from today' s date, I guess, in our particular request we have no need for a conditional use permit to use these containers. They. . . we do not store materials sufficient enough to overrun that Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes requirement and require a conditional use permit to continue the use of these containers. The. . .we maintain these containers of volume regulated under the Building Code for a B2 operation which also gives, although limiting our quantities allows us some leniency as to the storage conditions that these (unclear) fall under. We still have to maintain them carefully and the like but some of the conditions that would come into the case through the conditional use permit and the reasons for that permit would not full under this. The general area is a trucking area, many trucks, many containers, containers are a standard to the area. They are, in only a few cases that I 've seen, seem to be sitting on the ground and either storing material or waiting for some other faction but they are around the area in this fashion. The. . . Hunter: Let me. You made a point. You say a temporary use permit is not required for the type of use that you are undertaking, do I hear you right? Dodge: That isn't what I said. Hunter: Just trying to listen. Dodge: Although I will bring up a point about that in a minute here too. It is my full believe that under the provisions, as I understood them, up until a few days ago, that the temporary use was there and that there were no, I found, no criteria that would allow for denial of my request. We are still in the process of working on getting this building project on line again. We are now going to have to go through a conditional use permit review to do so for the new building but not for this temporary storage at this time. Hunter: O.k. , that's why we are here today. Dodge: I understand. Hunter: To look at those criteria; on-going temporary use. Dodge: Right. Hunter: Correct? Dodge: That is. . .that is the on-going use of these containers. That is correct. 8 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes Hunter• Right. Dodge: The, I think, Ms. Proud clarified a problem that I had with the, and maybe you didn't perceive it that way, but I kind of got the perception now that this one paragraph about our business license that we were 'operating illegally for some reasons and I wanted to clarify that is not my belief, and, so. . . Hunter: That's not in front of me either. I won't make any decisions on that, that's not. . . Dodge: Well, but its. . . its a submittal to you for helping you make a decision and that's why I 'm addressing it. Hunter: You don't have a business license, is that your point? Dodge: No, my point is that, at this time, there are other reasons why I don't have that business license. I am operating under what is normal for the City at this time. Hunter• O.k. Dodge: I 'm not operating illegally to my knowledge. Hunter: O.k. , so the fact is correct but implications of that fact, you want to make sure. . . Dodge: Yes, yes. Hunter: Aren't made. O.k. Dodge: My last statement, I guess, is back to whether I need a temporary use permit or not. This didn't come up by myself but through some constituents in the area and the like were surprised that I was in this position in that storage containers are the norm for the area. This is a trucking area. I could put the storage containers on the property with no other provisions, to my knowledge, for this storage. But, for some reason, if I want to put something in them. . . for• some reason we are falling under a different guideline and this is the point and I believe that you would have more knowledge or you will review it as you look that I may not be here. . . I may not need to be here on the basis of temporary use since these types of fixtures are, in the general industrial area, an accepted use of the area. 9 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical ITU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes Hunter: Well, again, we need to look at Code here and I would urge you to. . .maybe the starting point is to sit down and look at the section we are operating under. Dodge: Certainly, I 've read it. Hunter: It' s 15. 08 . 205 and other sections that references. Dodge: That's correct. Hunter: And, you know, I understand your point that others may not be in compliance, why should you. Dodge: No, that' s not my point. Hunter• O.k. Dodge: I 'm just saying that it is a common use in the area and I. . . it was brought up to me that maybe I 'm here, that maybe I shouldn't be here in this position because it is not a temporary use. I am allowed. . .by rights should be allowed to have these containers in this property zoning. Hunter: O.k. Dodge: For whatever I want to put them on the property for. Hunter: I see. And you're aware of others that are doing that without temporary use permits but. . . Dodge: I have no idea what their permit basis is. I just said that I had seen containers setting on the ground in other locations. I don't know whether they've obtain. . . Hunter: Well, tell me a little bit about what you're using. Is it a mobile trailer unit. Is it a. . . Dodge: These are cargo containers. Hunter: Portable structure. . .would you call it a portable structure, mobile trailer unit or. . . Dodge: No, these are cargo containers designed to be put on ships to ship them across the seas. And, they are. . .well, I guess, in and of themselves they are. . .you could label them as structure. 10 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald city Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes But, they are shipping containers they are not structures. They are used for containing materials and hauling materials and so they operate both ways. Hunter: O.k. You know, I assume, that what we are looking at is a temporary use permit required for a temporary use of a mobile trailer unit or similar portable structure for a nonresidential purposes located in districts where the use is a permitted use. Dome: O.k. Hunter: That, you seem to fall under that. . . is there something you're arguing that should. . .you're not required? Dodge: Well. . . Hunter: To comply with that section of the Code? And, I 'm curious because you apparently have applied for the permit and received it in the past, are you know saying that perhaps you should not have applied for one? Dom: No, I 'm saying perhaps I did not need to and I figured that you would have a better feel for that on your review process, that' s the only reason that I brought it up. Hunter: O.k. I understand that you know you are suggesting that maybe you are not required to have one and that' s one reason to hold a hearing to allow you to make those arguments. I need to hear why not? What is you reasoning for why shouldn't have one. Dodge: Because my reasoning is I believe that these are permitted use on M3 properties. That these cargo containers are legal to be set on these properties, to be used on these properties for the purposes that of a business in the M3 zoning. Hunter: O.k. and you've read the M3 Code provisions? Dodge: I have. Hunter: And did you find. . . Dome: I see nothing that limits. . .that does not allow that. Hunter: O.k. , is that expressly permitted or just not prohibited. 11 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes Dodae: Its not prohibited. Now, as I say that, in light or an exception to, if you find that I do need a permit or do need to apply for a permit for this then my previous statements were to that effect that we do need the additional use of these containers, they do meet the criteria of the zoning as far as the condition. . .the five conditions outlined for approval by the Hearing Examiner. That we are storing materials - in an safe fashion. We've had no problems over the last six months that would dictate to Planning that we should do otherwise and on that basis I request that you approve our request. Hunter: Let me ask a couple of other questions because, you know, I 'm open. I want to hear both sides of this. Is your facility one that. . . looking at the definitions in the Code, a hazardous substance land use facility? Dodge: No, no. Hunter: Is one that is involved in the processing or handling of hazardous substances? Dodge: And excepts. . . . I believe that you will find that it says in excess of 20, OOO pounds at any one time. Hunter: Hazardous substance is the treatment, manufacture, compounding synthesis or storage of hazardous substances in excess of the following amounts in bulk quantity: 5, 000 pounds of solid hazardous substances, 500 gallons of liquid hazardous substances, 650 cubic feet of gaseous hazardous substances. Dodae: No, we are not in excess of those. Hunter: O.k. Is there anything further you wanted to say about the criteria then for an extension. Dodge: No, I don't believe there is any limiting criteria that should set precedent for a denial of our cause. I believe .should. . .all points to approval. I do have a letter I will submit to you from our neighbor just as a reference. Hunter: O.k. When do you anticipate now that there would be a permanent facility constructed. Dodge: Well, I have been put under a limit now, assuming that this goes the way I propose to have that conditional use back in place 12 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes and a building permit within one year. I will need all of that time. Hunter: Is there some particular hardship that has occurred that hasn't allowed any construction progress to begin? Dodge: Yes, the hardship of the architect being sidelined to another job and subsequent with the delays involved with that, the monetary hardship with putting together $250, 000 of building, not having the architect finish our drawings, we have not been able to go to monetary facilities to request that and we have had a discussion in the last month subject to finding out that we do not have these approvals back from July to get that process going again. Hunter: O.k. What are your other options. Are you operating facilities in any other part of the County? Dodge: We do have a warehouse facility in Seattle. It does not have provisions to accept these materials any more than we have here. Hunter: What do you mean? Dodge: I 'm just saying that. . .assuming the next questions is, could you move the materials that you have stored here to another facility? Maybe I shouldn't make assumptions at this point, but at this point, no. Our goal is to move to Kent. We have been working on it for three years. We see it as the only move to maintain our business and to serve the surrounding area with the business that they need. Hunter: You are still operating out of Seattle but your plan is to eventually have all operations in Kent. Dodge: We want all operations that we have in Seattle, Renton and Kent and everything is temporary based on getting Kent up and running. Hunter: In the event that I 'm not. . .this is on a speculation. . .on the decision which way we will go, I don't really know, but, if you did not receive an extension of the permit then your activities would have to cease in Kent until such time as you. . . 13 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes Dodge: I do not believe. . .there is one possible alternative that would create more hardship on our operation but we do have a building at the back end of the property that, through discussion with the Fire Department, if they saw it the way I saw it, these containers holding the hazardous materials could be moved into that building but the functioning of our operation would be seriously hampered by moving them so far away. There is one other possible alternative and that may be an alternative depending on what our discussions come over the next five months with the Fire Department with using these containers as the storage of our materials as we had set up with them it may come to that even before the year is up. Hunter: O.k. , do you want to comment on that a bit. The temporary use permit, we've heard testimony that it has not been complied with fully in terms of the attachments to the temporary. . . .the conditions attached to the temporary use permit, Sara Title III requirements which basically want a notification, a listing of materials and certain containment provisions. Dodge: The three items that were listed, Sara Title III with relation to Tier II reporting, we have complied with. The compilation or the compliance with it, is the fact that we didn't have to send anything in, we don't fall into the levels that required us to do anything with that. The second item was a submittal of a facilities plan which we did submit, I believe, back in April or the first of June in consistency. with this and, I believe, Ms. Proud found that in a box from the ex-City planner and that was forwarded to the Fire Department within the last couple of weeks. We are also working with as of a month ago, Lynn, and, I 'm sorry, I don't remember her last name, with the Fire Department. She had sent me, because she didn't find this form that I had sent before, a City form, we have that 98 percent completed and that is to be finalized and given so that it is in a similar format to what she has seen before. But, we did. . . . Hunter: What is that deal with that final element that. . . Dodge: That' s the emergency response plan, what happens in case there is a problem, who will be notified in the neighbor. . . neighborhood, that type of plan. Hunter: How much longer will that take to get complete. Is it 98 percent complete? 14 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes Dodge: The. . . in the format that the City Fire Department had it is 98 percent complete. I did submit a completed form back at the beginning of this project. But, I agreed with Lynn to fill out her form so that it is in a formate that she is familiar with and can put into, I believe you have a computer programming now, that allows for easy access. Hunter: O.k. Is that near completion? Dodcte: As I say that is 98 percent complete in that form: Hunter: And is there any problem with completing it? Dodge: No. Hunter: Is it a matter of another date and time would do it. Dodge: Mid -next week it could be done. Well, let's put it this way, it will be done. And the third item is the labeling of containers and the like and those are maintained. Our inventory is maintained on computer and, in the past, inventory. . .computer printouts have been submitted to the Fire Department on those items. Hunter: So your inventory is up to date? Dodge: That is correct. Daily. . .every two days, at least. Hunter: So your testimony is that you have, in fact, complied with those conditions. Dodge: I have complied with those three conditions. We did have in our preliminary discussions with the Fire Department, we set a list of conditions which I wrote out most of. We found in an inspection, well we've been trying since last May to get together with the Fire Department, and at the times we prescribed one or the other party couldn't make it so until two weeks ago, we had no official visit by the Fire Department. We had the local engine company out so they knew what was going on. And, we came last week and it was realized we had offered and it has been accepted to wire all our shelves so the possibility of an earthquake which would be the main reason for doing so that we would hopefully stop any containers from rolling off the shelves, we had not got that done. Within two days it was done. Our hazardous materials shelves which was the main concern to us anyway and it is preceding to date to 15 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes finish all the other shelves no matter what's on them. And so, I believe that was the statement of our meeting two weeks ago. Hunter: O.k. Dodae: And the. . . it was my understanding from Mike Evans of the Fire Department that the Fire Department was fully willing to continue their agreement through January - February of next year and we have had no conversation other than that statement as to. . .between us what provision we should allow for, what provision should we try to change to. . .as far as past that date. Hunter: There are now three 20-foot long trailers or storage containers on the site. Dodge: That is correct. Hunter: And you don't intend to expand that number over the next year then? Dodge: No. We put it in and applied for on the minimum that we thought we could get by with and we are maintaining that minimum. Hunter: O.k. You made some comments as you first appeared about adversarial nature, do you feel you could be treated fair in the process, now? Or is there some. . . . Dodge: Oh, I certainly think so. I think my comment was. . . it seems tough. We have other problems with our property that aren't related here. The City Engineering department is proceeding to taken 20, 000 square feet of our land which I consider an illegal obtainment and so, you know, I came up before Don Wickstrom in the City Council meeting two weeks ago and had to express my opinions and now I 've set up a meeting with Mr. Larry Lubovich to try to work that out further also. But, it seems that every time I 've come before the City in what seems to be a very simple idea. An idea that is reasonable to the continuation of, business and promoting business in the City of Kent, we've come up as an adversarial position and that was the basis for my comment. Hunter: O.k. I just want to give you an opportunity if you don't feel you're being treated fairly in the process that you should put that on the record and ask that somebody else be appointed to make decisions. But, if that's not the case, then we will accept your testimony and we will be prepared to make a decision. 16 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes Dodae: At this point, I feel confident that we can work this together and will reserve to a later date to request that if need be. Hunter: O.k. and you understand that the point of this process is to apply criteria that the City Council has adopted as appropriate for reviewing this kind of situation. That's what we are doing here. Dodge: I understand. I believe that I also understand that I have the ability to take this up with the Council by putting it on their agenda if I think I need further help. Hunter: Correct. Dodge: And so I 'm learning. Hunter: Thank you for your testimony. Dodge: Thank you. Hunter: Is there any further clarifications or testimony. You wanted to submit this letter from a neighbor and its a sealed letter. Is it appropriate to open it. I ' ll submit the letter rather than the sealed envelope. Dodge: That 's fine. Hunter: As the exhibit. Dodge: Thank you. Hunter: ' Any further testimony? Yes, Ma 'am. Do you want to step forward? Swear in first. . .do you swear, affirm to tell the truth and the whole truth in the testimony that you give? Lynn Hoffman-Gross: Yes. My name is Lynn Hoffman-Gross. I 'm the Program Manager within the Code Enforcement Division of the Fire Department and I 'm here to address the issues regarding the emergency planning and the Tier II submittals under Sara Title III only. Mr. Dodge stated that they had stated a plan and I had several conversations with him and members of his facilities on the phone because I had not received a copy of that plan. It was found, in fact, that the plan had been submitted to the Planning Department back in April and I did receive that one week ago today. 17 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90=1 Verbatim Minutes Hunter: This is the facilities plan? Hoffman-Gross: This is the facility emergency plan. I received it on October 11 which was last Thursday. Hunter: Do you know what date it was submitted to the Planning Department. Hoffman-Gross: April 16th of this year. O.k. The information that was submitted in the plan was not in complete agreement with the criteria that we have established for planning. However, over the last week I 've gone through and reviewed that and made up a document in the format that we've adopted as a City with highlighted areas for Mr. Dodge to complete. He has not received a copy of that yet because it has taken me this long to get through it. It was the intent of the conditional use permit that emergency planning be done consistent with Sara Title III requirements and did not have anything to do with whether or not Emerald City Chemical had to comply under the Federal regulations with Sara Title III but, in fact, that is the planning format that we have adopted to use within the City and we use that as a reference. Hunter: When would he be able to receive your revised report form? Hoffman-Gross: I have a copy with me today for him that he can go through. I don't see that it would take him very long to complete it and get it returned. With regard to the submittal of the chemical inventory, I do have a chemical inventory. However, it is not in the format which we use which is in pound quantities rather than in the format which he submitted which includes gallons and kilograms and a variety of types of weights and measurements which we don't accept as part of an inventory. Hunter: Are those conversions difficult to make? Hoffman-Gross: Well, they are not so difficult to make. They are very time consuming given the fact that there are many, many chemicals and probably 15 pages of submittal in that format. It x would probably take me two or three days to go through and redo that. Other than that, I guess that' s it. Hunter: So, those were the areas required. .Let' s see, the current inventory records, label and date the containers. . . 18 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes Hoffman-Gross: Labeling and dating the containers was a requirement of the Fire Marshal' s Office and he can address that better than I can. Hunter: O.k. And your position, again was? Hoffman-Gross: Program Manager with the Kent Fire Department. I address emergency planning issues which encompass a variety of hazardous materials issues. Hunter: O.k. So, do I understand your testimony correct that there has been some efforts with compliance with the temporary use permit conditions. What we have is a disagreement about the format and the type of reporting that might be required. You're in an on- going dialogue at this point. . . Hoffman-Gross: Yes, I 'm not sure that there was any disagreement at all to begin with. It was just the fact that I pertained that we had not been submitted a plan when, in fact, the Planning Department did have a copy and it was just never submitted to us because of the turnover of the Planning staff in the Department it was set aside. Hunter: O.k. Do you have a position. . .you have reviewed the criteria for temporary use permits in the Code. Are you generally familiar with those? Hoffman-Gross: Yes. Hunter: And do you have a position on whether an extension,,of the permit would violate any of those conditions? Hoffman-Gross: With regard to the amount of hazardous materials on site I would say no. There are some other. . .other Fire Code issues that would probably need to be addressed through the Fire Marshal 's Office with regard to storage in the trailers, however. Hunter: I would think the key criteria would be whether the temporary use would impact public health, safety or create other type hazards. Hoffman-Gross: My purpose is to prepare the emergency plans so that the health and safety of the public is addressed to as great an extent as possible with any sort of facilities that have 19 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City •Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes chemicals in them and through this process a lot of the problems that could occur are mitigated. Hunter: So, if these facility's plans are prepared and filed along with inventories that is designed to mitigate any damage there might be to surrounding public or property. Hoffman-Gross: Yes. Hunter: O.k. Thank you very much. Yes, sir. And do you swear, affirm to tell the truth and the whole truth in the testimony that you give? Larry Webb: I do. Hunter: Please proceed. Webb: Larry Webb, Fire Marshal. I guess I ' ll start in. . .now, we would treat this company probably as any other company who was coming in and was not going to be able to get to Code right away or an existing facility that we found to be in violation of the Code. Rather than just slamming the door we give them time to work on it. This was the case of hazardous materials. We felt better knowing where they were than having them come in the dark of the night and being in a warehouse and nobody knowing about them. So, we signed a letter for nine months and knowing that it is not a legal operation but we know where they are at and they are going to build a building and when the building is built it will be up to Code. The business license, it is the policy of our department we do not give a business license until we see a business up and running. We are very leery of A & J Smith Company coming in and saying we're going to make toys and we give them our approval and then it doesn't turn out that way. So we know Emerald City Chemical is, I won't call it illegal, but we know what they are doing and it's not up to snuff but we will go along with it. The containers are not legal storage of hazardous materials. We know that. There' s articles in there that would have to be in certain kinds of room. He has poisons, flammable solids, other stuff that would have to be compartmentalized, separated in a new facility. We were working with him. We made the agreement. . .I made the agreement to. . .what is it. . .January, February 15 . We will hold true to that agreement. If he was buying a car and said I ' ll pay you in a year, o.k. , one year. We are going to hold to that agreement. We've been out to see the facility. The only real problem that we saw was the wiring in case of earthquakes. They are working on that. . . .come January 20 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes and when the lease is up and the agreement is up, there would probably be either new rules that would be very much more stringent, harder, expensive, so on and so forth or it would be a flat no. . .you had nine months, we had not seen any indication of any building permits, requests to. . . .any prints come in or anything like that. So, I can't look now and answer for January but we would like to see some action and at this time we have not seen any. I guess I said the containers are not legal as far as storage of hazardous materials. I believe they are wooden floors, if something was to go through the floors, they would be out and into the drains and onto the concrete. Hunter: O.k. , I want to make sure that I 'm with you as far as the extension of this. What I have in' the file is a letter. . .well, a number of letters. But, you are mentioning the January date and. . . Webb: I guess I 'm putting January as nine months from April 15 but I believe that Carol said it was May 5. Move in dates and dates on paper changed a little bit. Hunter: Right. Webb: But. . . Hunter: And the way we have it described is beginning April 15 for 90 days and then an extension for an additional 90 days beginning July 15. Webb: O.k. , do you have a copy of a. . . Hunter: So, we are actually looking at. . . Webb: Do .you have a November 7th letter. Hunter: 1989, that one. Webb: Yes. From me, the Fire Marshal, which just says nine months. First day of occupancy. Hunter: Right. Webb: o.k. Our comments have nothing to do with Planning's. Our' s was just a flat nine months, we know you're going to build and. . . 21 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical JTU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes Hunter: Dated November 7 , 1989? Webb: . No, that's the day the letters were written. I guess we were the planning stages then. Hunter• O.k. Webb: We said from day of occupancy. When you first start getting in here and that happened, I believe, April 15. Hunter• I see. Webb: O.k. , May. Hunter: O.k. So that' s how you. . . Webb: And that's going to be day one, what' s we are going to use as. Hunter• O.k. Webb: Next time we write a letter, it will be on such a date. Take away the confusion. Hunter• Right. Webb: We also know there' s more. . .there' s a 40 foot. . .couple of 40 foot trailers in there. We know that they are not hazardous material type trailers. Hunter: O.k. So, what I 'm going to look at are the criteria for the temporary use permit extension and it references a couple of items to what the Fire Department, whether there' s compliance for certain facility reports and chemical registrars and that sort of thing that we talked about. What you're talking about is a separate review by Fire Department as far as occupancy of the facility. I think that's what's going on. Webb: I 'm sure its two separate issues. Hunter• Yes. Webb: Two separate agreements and our Fire Department is not a legal, binding City ordinance. A handshake between two parties. 22 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes Hunter: Right. As far as your assessment of the conditions applied to the temporary use permit about the reporting requirements, the facility' s emergency response planning and that sort of thing, testimony that we've heard is. . . is it your opinion that those were complied with. We've heard some testimony they haven't been but we sure can do it soon. But, if that is, in fact, the case, then would that allow operation of the facility without threat of public health or safety. I think what I hear your response is, well, yes, as long as these additional requirements noted in your November 7th letter also are complied with. Is that what I'm hearing? Webb: Right. It sounds to me like the paperwork was a snafu as it. . .because of people jumping ship and going to Federal Way, the paper work got lost. As far as the Fire Department' s concerned, I will hold on the agreement to the January date and feel good about that. Hunter: Yeah, and the conditions that you outlined in the November 7 letter seemed to deal with this similar issues that we have in front of us with the temporary use permit. That is continued safe operation of the temporary facility. And, I guess, what I. . .my question would be is if, in fact, these are complied with, then. . .what I think I hear you saying is yes, some use could be made, at least up until 'January but have we seen compliance with what's on the list? Webb• Yes. Hunter: O.k. And, then, what you would do is in January is reassess? Webb: Yes. But this was on the thought that there was going to be a building going to built. Hunter• Right. Webb: So that would definitely come into picture come January. Hunter: And actually we're looking at nine months since May 5, so. . . Webb: Yeah, maybe it' s February. Hunter: Yeah. O.k. , I think that helps. 23 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes Webb• O.k. Hunter: Thank you. Carol Proud. Proud: Again, Carol Proud, Kent Planning Department. A few clarifications. You are correct in assuming our pointing out that this , site potentially would be considered a hazardous substance. . .or. .a hazardous substance land use facility in that what they originally told us on our business license that they were 3100, I think it was, pounds were going to be stored on site. So, given that definition they wouldn't be, but, we can't determine by definition if they are considered that until the conversion occurs and it's Ms. Hoffman-Gross's responsibility to come back to us and tell us exactly how much material they do have out there. If they are a hazardous substance land use facility, there' s no problem with their locating in the M3 zoning district. The conditional use was required because in their new facility, Mr. Dodge indicated that they would be storing in excess of 20, 000 pound limitation so that' s why they went through the initial conditional use process to begin with. A couple other points were brought up. In an M3 zoning district, it specifically states that storage of the following kinds of goods are principally permitted uses: bulk storage of oil, gas, petroleum, butane, propane, liquid, petroleum gas and similar products in bulk stations and plants, used building materials, move equipment, relocated buildings and impounded vehicles and similar kinds of materials. Anyway, I think I 'm reading it wrong, actually, erase that. . .that Is part of the conditional use permit, seemed kind of excessive. Storage facilities in all of our industrial districts aren't listed as principally permitted uses in of themself. Pretty much they are considered accessory uses to a principally permitted uses and there' s certain criteria in the development standards that talk about what has to be for a storage yard and that talks about the improvement and maintenance of all open areas and that specifically outside storage or operations area should be fenced for security and public safety at the property line. They don't even require a 100 percent site-obscuring fence like they do in some zoning districts. The difference, you know, one of the fine hair- splitting that we need to do when we look at what constitutes a temporary use and, again, I ' ll go back to the definitions in the beginning of the Zoning Code which talks about specifically a temporary use. . . let me find it here. Use, temporaries: any activity and/or structure permitted in the provisions of the section that we have been dealing with which is intended to exist or operate for a limited period of time and which does not comply 24 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes with the Zoning Code development standards and requirements as specified for this zoning district in which it is located and, again, , we get to that land use question. That if, if we were dealing with just strictly storage of the containers themselves, for example, that didn't have anything in them, it would be a principally permitted use and the hair-splitting that we get into is describing what is the use that's occurring. These storage containers are dead storage, they are being used for a permanent warehouse, possibly distribution facility and a storage container isn't an acceptable permanent structure or facility for this kind of use. Typically, there' s Uniform Fire Code requirements, there' s different classifications the Uniform Building Code has for the containment of these kind of materials that are stored inside, so, the Planning Department doesn't see a storage container as the permanent facility for use in a. . .even in a warehouse type of operation and that's what the Planning Department' s interpretation is that what the chemical company is using is this. . .these containers as a facility on a temporary basis and that' s what they were authorized on the temporary use permit and so, given. . .and then I want to .address a couple of the other concerns that Mr. Dodge brought up and that is. . .and. . .and going through the verbal approvals. Typically, temporary use permits are. . .we, like the Fire Department, whatever, try to give the benefit of the doubt to new businesses relocating into the City and, you know, someone will come to the counter or calls upon the telephone and says, got a problem can i do this and we try to be pretty accommodating so the temporary use permit is something that I wouldn't classify it as loose but its liberally interpreted. We give people the benefit of the doubt and say, sure, move on board and we will do everything we can to help you. . . .accommodate you and that's how its used and in a more formal setting, a letter would have been required in July to formally say, yes, we have extended your temporary use permit and in the changing of the guard, so to speak, I inherited a new position and I was carrying four peoples weight trying to clean up a few things last summer and it was not a project that I had worked on and Mr. Dodge said, you know, can we do this and, saying, oh, sure, you know, that' s fine and finding where the letters are whatnot. So, he got the verbal o.k. to do the extension of the temporary use permit. Now, as far as looking into the extension of the conditional use permit, I was under the misguided assumption that something had commenced out there and I didn't see any problem and then looking in to it, going through the Code, as soon as I found out, I called up Mr. Dodge and informed him that. . .that my hands were completely tied, that nobody in the Planning Department had any authority to extend the conditional use provisions since no 25 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes development activity has occurred on the site, no permits have been applied for and I just couldn't see any way that the Planning Director had authority to grant him an extension of his conditional use permit and its an unfortunate technicality but that's just the nature of the beast that we work with and the same thing occurred with regard to extending the temporary use permit, the Code is pretty clear that, you know, we can. . .we can (unclear) the operations, say, sure, you can have this but if you need to go beyond what we can do. . . .the Planning Department has to go through the formal hearing so, did a lot of fast scrambling to get this item here to you today so that we would meet the intent of the law. Hunter: You are recommending denial. Proud: Right. And, after getting into the whole process, o.k. , which in my opinion, seemed like, you know, listening to Mr. Dodge . and going through what we typically usually do that, under further analysis, site visits, discussing the matter with the Fire Department, looking at what constitutes a temporary use, the Planning Department just said, you know, there' s too much going on out there that we don't feel comfortable that what's being done out there is. . . its gone beyond the scope of what a temporary use, time elapsed and, although I can commensurate with. . .with Mr. Dodge' s concern about his architect being preoccupied in other projects, I also know that several architectural firms run several projects simultaneously and I can understand where' s he coming from, but we have no provisions to take that into consideration when we interpret what's being used out there and that' s why we bring it before you and say, all right, enough is enough, as far as we are concerned we can see no why that that Mr. Dodge can. . .can. . .he should go find himself some permanent storage somewhere until he can get his project on line in light of the criteria. . . . Hunter: What. . .what, if in fact, temporary use extension was denied, do you see happening next? Proud: That there are other places in the Kent valley that have the proper Uniform Building Code, I 'm not an expert in that but there are other warehouse facilities where tenant space is available for lease and I know its costly. On the other hand, the City of Kent's provisions with adopting the standards that we do that sort of the old days of what Kent used to be, where, you know, you can pretty much get by and do what you want out here, we ended up with there superfund sites and a whole bunch of other things that we've just tightened' up our standards and we look at these 26 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-9a-1 Verbatim Minutes very, very carefully and we feel that its the nature of even a small operator that Mr. Dodge' s business is such that we're dealing with chemical, we're dealing with. . .with hazardous situations, potentially, and we just have to look at it carefully and make proper permanent solutions to potentially hazardous situations. Hunter: So, your recommendation remains denial. Part of what we heard today is that there may be compliance with the conditions, it seems that part of your recommendation of denial was based on noncompliance or there could have been noncompliance. . . . Proud: Could have been. . .but there's also. . . Hunter: But, what I 'm hear you say now is there is a land use. . . Proud: There' s also the temporary use definition and what constitutes temporary use and, again, you know, Mr. Dodge' s intent of complying at some point and following through and there' s also the question of whether or not the Fire Department would even extend beyond the February date. Hunter• O.k. Proud• O.k. Hunter: Thank you. You want another opportunity? O.k. , Mr. Dodge. Dodge: Thank you. Mr. Dodge, again. The statement in relation to not . continuing on, not showing a process that shows us moving forward. Until two weeks ago, I didn't know I had too. I had a. . . basically somebody told me that they had accepted my request, that allowed for a two-year extension so I changed my plan basis and was not worrying about this point. Now that I know, we will have to immediately turn our processes around and start working towards that means and so to that means we need to retain this storage on an operational basis. Hunter: Are you generally familiar with building construction and time periods. Have you done this before? Dodge: I am learning. This has been a. . . like I say, a three year process. 27 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical ITU-90-1 verbatim Minutes Hunter: Certainly you have begun to look. You've talked to an architect. You have building designs. . . Dodge: We have basic building designs, we have. . . Hunter: What the requirements are, terms on how the construction has to go. . . Dodge: In October of last year we went through a building. . .don't remember the term for it, but there' s a process where they give us their guidelines. . . . Hunter: So you've made some steps. Dod e: We've done all that and then we got held up with our architect and the like and other business applications and so that's why I wrote the letter -in July asking for this extension and now, I find, I erroneously wrote the letter. . . Hunter• Right. - Dodge: And I erroneously received. . . . Hunter: Is there anything that would prevent construction from beginning even in the winter months? Dodge: Yes, they can't pour concrete at the height of the* cold or something is my believe from a construction standpoint. And, the drawings still have to be finished, they still have to be submitted to the City, the finals. We have to go get bank approval, there's a whole list of criteria that now will have to take place quite quickly but it isn't something that goes quickly. I got to get a new conditional use permit now which is 120 day process at minimum from the request, I believe, from what I remember last time and I ' ll ask Carol as we get off the record here about some deals _ involved with that. There's a long. . .there's a full year's process just getting us going now that we know we've got to step on it. Hunter: Well, the time period is always a function of a lot of different items one of which is permit processing, others of which are independent from any City control or maybe your control. One thing that I 'm trying to look for is what mile stones are possible. It appears there hasn't been any progress made in terms of getting building plans, final design plans. . . 28 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical #TU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes Dodge: Very minimal, very minimal, since what happened to the end of last year, that is correct. Hunter: If that is accelerated one would think over a period of a few months, even, one could begin to see these are final plans, architectural design, solicited financing to obtain preliminary commitments, those things are certainly possible. Dodge: I don't know what those time periods are. Before I can get financing, I got to get the conditional use permit by rights. Presumably it will be approved as it was before but that's what got us caught last time was that we. through a new law into the works between my first and second application. Hunter: One can certainly approach a financing institution without having a conditional approval permit in hand, certainly you can get preliminary. . . Dodge: That's my understanding that not' s possible based on. . .you would have to have, I don't remember the term but an estimated value and until the drawings are completed and that type of thing, you can't go get a. . . Hunter: I agree, until the drawings are completed but whether appropriate permits are in place is a different matter. Dodge: That is true, yes. Hunter: O.k. , well, I think we are getting there. Thank you. Carol Proud had another comment. Proud: Yeah, just for a point of information, these are in your file. There is a letter dated from the applicant, July 11, requesting a three-month extension and he said the current permit runs through July 15 and that's where the verbal communication came that' s fine and our letter was dated July 20 and received by the Planning Department July 23 , 1990, that goes on to say that in reviewing our architect' s progress and our understanding of the time involved, we will not •ready to commence construction until the Fall of 1991, we are requesting extension of our conditional use permit authorization through September 1, 1992 . And, I apologize for not responding in a timely manner to Mr. Dodge on this but by the time this letter to the Planning Department, the conditional use permit had already expired and so, again, in talking with people, you know, I will go out of my way and say, yeah, I will try 29 Hearing Examiner Minutes Emerald City Chemical JTU-90-1 Verbatim Minutes to do something or we' ll see if there's anything possible and then further researching will the matter and finding out there hadn't been any construction activity at all brought forth that, in fact, times up before this letter. The conditional use permit had, in effect, expired by the time we received this letter. Hunter: O.k. Well, I 've got a lot of stuff in front of me on this one, I guess. I ' ll try to sort it out. I think one thing that' s. . .that' s clear is, and I suppose its trite but true, you know, that communications can be improved. I would think, though, Mr. Dodge, especially operating the type of business that you are operating now and in the City of Kent that has, by Council action, really made a special point of hazardous substances are more closely looked at that one should be very aware of what the Zoning Code requirements might say. Conditional uses do expire, temporary uses do expire, there are processes for continuing. I understand the frustration of dealing with all these processes but what we're trying to do is to make them work smoothly and work well. It takes a hand on both sides so that means understanding and reading the Code and approaching it in that direction rather than just in verbal, discussions. I think that will be helpful for all concerned. It helps my position when participants in this process reference to that, this is why it should be approved; this is why we're here today. Those types of things that we can all agree on because they are in front of us and its the direction of the Council that we are working with and I think that would have helped in this situation had everyone been familiar with the Code including yourself and I 'm hoping that this results in your looking in at what requirements you have in operating a business in the City of. Kent when it comes to dealing with hazardous substances. I think its timely that we review that again. I will take all of what I 've heard today into consideration. I think we have a couple of different levels of operation; the Fire Department's expressions and concerns in the November 7th letter that they've run through the period of about February 7th or so are somewhat independent from the temporary use although I think they are also related because they address that issue of can this facility operate in the public safety without harming the .public. so, I 'm going to try to bring those two together and I 'm also very aware of the Planning Department' s recommendation that this continued use be denied, so we' ll try to balance all of those factors and your testimony about hardship and need to continue and come out with a decision fairly soon. . . in any event within two weeks from today' s date. O.k. , thank you for coming and adjourned. 30 r"t Kent City Council Meeting Date February 5. 1991 Category Public Hearings 1. SUBJECT: PACIFIC VENTURES STREET VACATION STV-90-5 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: An application has been made by Pacific Ventures Incorporated to vacate a portion of So. 212th Street (STV-90-5) as mentioned in Resolution 1264 as shown on the (k4lcompanemap. This is located at the 8700 block of So. 212th Street. 3 . EXHIBITS: Application, staff report with map 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Staff (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X_ YES FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ None SOURCE OF FUNDS: OPEN HEARING: PUBLIC INPUT• CLOSE HEARING: 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds to approve/disapprove/modify the Planning Department's recom- mendation of approval with three conditions on an application to vacate a portion of So. 212th Street No. STV-90-5 and to direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance upon receipt of compensation. DISCUSSION• ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 2C Cm OF CITY OF KENT gyp, PLANNING DEPARTMENT (206) 859-3390 MEMORANDUM January 29 , 1991 MEMO TO: Mayor Dan Kelleher and City Council Members FROM: James P: Harris, Planning Director SUBJECT: Report and Recommendation on an application to vacate a portion of S. 212th Street #STV-90-5 Recommendation: APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS I. Name of Applicant Pacific Ventures, Inc. P. O. Box 3407 Bellevue, WA. 96009 II. Reason for Requesting Vacation The applicant states, "The portion of South 212th Street described is not needed for the public roadway system. Vacation would enhance .the ingress and egress of Pacific Ventures, Inc. ' s adjacent property. " III. History An identical application to vacate the very same portion of S. 212th Street was filed in 1987 (Resolution 1143) and was denied by the City Council on October 6, 1987 . Prior to that action, the Council had approved a vacation application for the westerly one half of this area of S. 212th Street (Ordinance 2694) This application was made by LeRoy A. Bowen. Subsequent to that vacation the Bowen Business Center placed required offstreet parking and landscaping in the vacated area. Ingress and egress to both the Bowen Center and the Pacific Ventures, Inc. property now goes over the area Pacific Ventures, Inc. wants to vacate. In order to prevent blockage of access to the Bowen Center at this point an easement over the proposed vacation area would be necessary. MEMO TO: Mayor Dan Kelleher and City Council Members SUBJECT: Report and Recommendation on an application to Page 2 vacate a portion of S. 212th Street #STV-90-5 IV. Staff Recommendation After reviewing comments from the following departments and agencies: . Public Works . Fire . Police U S West Communications and conducting our own review, the Planning Department recommends that the request to vacate a portion of South 212th Street as mentioned in Resolution 1264 and shown on the accompanying map, be APPROVED with the following conditions: 1. Compensate the City of Kent for the full appraised value thereof. 2 . Construct the curb along S. 212th Street so that it conforms to a. City of Kent standard driveway section. 3 . Retain easement rights over, upon and under the area proposed for vacation for utility and vehicular/pedestrian ingress and egress purposes, including the right to grant said rights to others. MAIL To: ' } APPLICANT: Gerald 0, McCaughan Name PACIFIC VENTURES, INC. CITY OF KENT , 220 So. 4th Ave. Address: P. 0. Box 3407 Kent, WA 98032 Bellevue , Washington 98009 Phone: (206) 455-5506 STREET AND/OR ALLEY VACATION -APPLICATION AND PETITION Dear Mayor and Kent City Council: We, the undersigned abutting property owners hereby respectfully request that *certain part of So. 212th hereby be vacated. .General Location) Legal Description Exhibit "A" attached BRIEF STATEMENT WHY VACATION 1S BEING SOUGHT The portiop of South 212th Street described is not needed for th'e public roadway system. Vacation would enhance the ingress and egress of Pacific Ventures , In'c. ' s adjacent property. Sufficient proof', copy of deed contract etc. supported by King County Tax Roils shall be submitted for verification of signatures. Without these a "CURRENT"title report shall be required. When Corporations,- Partnerships etc. are being signed for, then proof of individuals authority to sign for same shall also be submitted. Attach a color coded map of a scale of not less than 1" = 200' of the area sought for vacation. (NOTE) Map must correspond with legal description. ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNERS TAX LOT N ' SIGNATURES AND ADDRESSES LOT, BLOCK A PLAT/SEC. TWN. RG tl6V — 71990 PUNNING DEFARPAUCITY()FgNI :; By�IF NT RES Lot 7 , Block 9102 ,P�� Section 7 T22N R5E W.M. is ar Boyer King County, Secretary Washington #150.00 Fee Paid Treasurer's Receipt 11114, Appraisal Fee Paid Treasurer's , �a,n� Yalua Paid ,., ,,_s,;,;;�,� Treasurer's R p�,I►1A�s . . u.wd AacepNed bate^ PITAHE„�_ Trade Acceptod Date TREASURY i 7— LeCal Description for Portion of So. 212t1i Street Vacation That portion of Government Lot 2, Section 7, Township 22 _North, Range 5 East,14.11. in King County, Washington lying within that portion of land deeded to the City of Kent recorded in instrument under King County Recording No. , 7111230435 described as follows: Commencing at the northwest corner of said Government Lot 2; thence N 89056110" E along the north line of said Government Lot 21 a distance of 536. 82 feet; thence S 00051' 16" W, a distance of 50.00 feet to a point on the north line of vacated South 212th Street as described in City of Kent Street Vacation Ordinance No. 2694; thence N 89056'10" E f 3.47 feet to the northeast aiong said north line, a distance o corner of said street vacation and the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence N 89056' 10" E parallal .to the north line of said Government Lot 2, a distance of 136.26 feet to an angle point which is 50 feet southerly from the north line of said Government Lot 2; said point is also ty of on the south line of-said land deeded to th?111230435 ethenceoaaongin instrument under King County Recording No. said south line the le pointgwhichsis 60 feet ,southerly distance of north 85.59 feet to an angle p line of said Government Lot 2; thence S 30°24"23" W, a distance of 52.20 feet to an angle point'which is .105 feet southerly from the north line of said 'Government Lot 2; thence S 89056' 10" W parallel to said north line, a distance of 26.05 feet to a point on the east line of said vacated street per City of Kent Ordiance No. 2694; along said east line, a distance of 55.00 feet thence N 01015' 10" E to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING and containing 2, 683 square feet more or less. The undersigned, Jeffrey R. Harstad, hereby certifies that the petition to vacate a portion of South 212th Street herein described has been signed by the owners of more than two-thirds (2/3) of the property abutting upon the part of such street sought to be vacated. l ' ffrey R. Harstad Date A� R. HAgsr ,{ fc D W4 �. GIs J� /J ��S�NAL 1.I.. j I ' m N _ Z O- 00 m n O� "'v o'n n z -1 zJA � m 1-C1 fTl '"1...1 I NI O - Jm O 90� 30 m m D > ,° Z mm -Z 0=+ in L•1' zm 3 A cnm n�0 00 -ice M O� mmz T O A o w 0 - A O I I i >-m m m c I. n W O. RZ n Z O X O a .D m m z -1 m —�. I � 0 767.62p., m -9 rc�nz n R 'O M n 0 0000 I <mm I 0p01 n 3m . me N-,m z-4 z Z AmS Z9- o m � �o zAf �• i <� > o� ; N -00 > n Z O m N : z n to m A - i Z O O p Z7 � e�m avE.5. 107 I I 7 O O 'p WEST LINE ` i Z _ NWI/4 SECTION 7 z <0N p W n c N m w >0A n n 0 0 < 50' <0z0 N S�pYdrf N - O2Zy n o sTerf��,.� �• m =: I a p i i � r m D D ON q, v = _ -• .z.. '[Tpf1 1ova N my M m Z f! =AN mN z D�N i`q m CD mS n F9 U y={ D N 00'51' 16" E m - 55,00 - 1 m � -- 50.00 0 m� _ o w— —— —- ;0 ail m0 �' N I'IS .EO'T __ 0 m m 0.00 h �7 1 J m C 00'0 O1 ° Y I _ -I i"I. W 3: /mmm; ACV. ,I 3 00n iom r: W z z G, 0M 0. ? °o DOr p aomr s m Lm- :< "0 Jz- ?3• n z ::., �o Iv-im f mmm p AA A 0 O. m(l ra)z h ?IOA CD 1 �DIA`1 000 . ._Am mr) Z Aim -1<A .. A CD m DS2 W O� NA2 �'.Z< z nN0 0 m Z > z C7 ai•. % m z c_'0 n to A 0 D 5 o z z 0 W m - y r y G D C m z C 50' 0 z Tfansooftanon ano Traffic fnoineermg PLANNING • O F S t G N I he Transpo February 5, 1991 TG: 87315.50 Mr. Carl Volpe Pacific Ventures, Inc. 700 - 112th Avenue NE. Suite 207 Bellevue,WA 98004 SUBJECT: PACIFIC BUSINESS PARK ACCESS - RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION Dear Mr. Volpe: At your request, The TRANSPO Group has reviewed the possible impacts to traffic opera- tions resulting from the proposed vacation of the existing right of way at the western drive- way to the Pacific Business Park in Kent. Vacation of the right of way in itself would not affect traffic operations since it would strictly be a change in property ownership and con- trol and not a change in the physical characteristics of the driveway. However,we under- stand one of the options if the vacation is granted would be the elimination of access from the driveway to the adjacent Bowen Business Center(BBC). This option would divert BBC traffic which currently makes use of this driveway to its other existing driveways. Use of the driveway by BBC traffic was identified when TRANSPO was first asked to review operations at this location in December 1987, and January 1988. Copies of letters to you and Robert D. McWhirter summarizing the initial reviews are enclosed for your reference. Included among the observations summarized in the letters are the following situations in which BBC traffic made use of the driveway in question: • BBC traffic uses the driveway to access the BBC site. As was noted in the let- ters, the location of the driveway in relationship to property lines requires that vehicles exiting from the BBC site traverse a portion of the Pacific Business Park site in order to exit safely. • BBC traffic also uses the driveway to access parking on the Pacific Business Park site since parking on the western edge of the Pacific Business Park is con- veniently located for patrons of the tavern in the BBC development. In addition, the BBC site as a whole has insufficient parking to serve the restaurant and retail uses on the site. If access to the BBC site from this driveway was eliminated, BBC traffic currently using the driveway would divert to one of three other driveways serving the BBC site. One of these driveways is located approximately 240 feet to the west on S 212th Street. The other two driveways are located on 84th Avenue S. Three driveways should provide adequate capac- ity to serve a development of that size (29.000 sf commercial; 46.000 sf mini-storage; and 165 parking spaces). BBC traffic would most likely divert to the remaining driveway on S 212th Street. This driveway is served by the center two-way left-turn lane and eastbound right-turn lane on S 212th Street. Westbound traffic queues caused by the signal at 84th Avenue S may extend past the driveway during the morning commute period. However, the BBC restau- rant and retail uses generate very little traffic during this time period and should not be The TRANSPO Group,Inc. 14715 Bel-Red Read,Suite 100 Bellevue.vVashington 98007 FAX 2061747-3688 2061641-3881 Mr. Carl Volpe The February 5, 1991 Page 2 Transpo Group significantly impacted by the queues. During the afternoon commute period, traffic flow on S 212th is predominantly eastbound with little queueing occurring on the westbound approach. if, however, congestion were to become a problem at this driveway, the two driveways on 84th Avenue S would provide alternative access routes. A telephone conversation with Mike Evans,Assistant Fire Marshall with the City of Kent indicates that elimination of access to the BBC site from the western Pacific Business Park driveway would not cause any concerns on the part of the Fire Marshall. However, they would need to review a site plan of the proposed change in order to confirm their approval. I trust this information will be useful in evaluating the situation. Please call if you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely, The TT2ANSPO Group, Inc. M; l{ --t- .4- �K4L_ Milton G. Lim Transportation Engineer MGL/mlc Enclosures cc: John L. Hendrickson, Preston Thorgrimson Shidler Gates &Ellis Tran,purialinn Planning h Trottic Engirnrrin- Cun,uli,ln(, , R " SPO February 16, 1988 T6: 87315.00 Mr. Carl Volpe President Pacific Ventures, Inc. 700 - 112th Avenue NE, Suite 207 Bellevue, WA 98004 SUBJECT: PACIFIC BUSINESS PARK WEST ACCESS Dear Mr. Volpe: On Friday, January 29, we stationed a traffic analyst on the subject site to observe traffic and parking conditions at the northwest side of the site. The purpose of this site visit was to supplement our December 16 letter report on driveway modification options with observations of actual operations. Our analyst observed operations between 11:45 AM and 12:45 PM and from 4:00 to 5:00 PM on that Friday. His primary interest was to observe use of the Pacific Business Park site by customers and visitors of the adjacent Bowen Business Center site. Summary of Observations -- 11:45 AM to 12:45 PM (See Attachment 1) During this one-hour period, 66 vehicles used the "joint-access" driveway. About 58 percent of the vehicles were associated with activities on the Bowen site -- four entering vehicles and 34 exiting vehicles. Another nine vehicles circulated between the Pacific and Bowen sites on the internal drive system, most of which were Bowen site generated vehicles using more easterly access drives to the Pacific site. Of the 28 driveway trips accessing the Pacific site at this "joint-access" driveway, eight were large tractor/semi-trailer trucks destined to/from the warehouse building on the south portion of the Pacific site. Another six entering vehicles parked on the Pacific site to use facilities on the Bowen site. A total of 12 vehicles were observed parked on the Bowen site around noon which were related to activities on the Bowen site. The majority of these vehicles entered the Pacific site from the Bowen site. The pub on the Bowen site was the major attractor. Apparently these drivers found parking on the Pacific site as the more convenient parking access to the pub. The IRA%SP0 Group, im. • 14715 Bel-Red Road. SWIC 1()0, Belle%ue. 1Va>hingInn 98007%39-10 (2(I0)647-M81 ■ ■r I� _S PO Mr. Carl Volpe February 16, 1988 Page 2 We have video taped these access and parking conditions during this obser- vation period. Summary of Observations - 4:00 to 5:00 PM (See Attachment 2) During this afternoon observation period, 68 vehicles used the joint-access driveway, of which 38 percent oriented to/from the Bowen site. Of the 23 vehicles entering the Pacific site, all parked on the Pacific site and walked to the pub. These were joined by a number of vehicles that entered the Pacific site from the Bowen site and used the Pacific site parking to access the pub. By 5:00 PM when our observer left, he counted 35 vehicles on the Pacific site that were associated with pub customers. Many of these customers circulated to the rear of the Pacific site and back again to its front in search of a more convenient parking space relative to the pub. All Pacific site spaces adjacent to the pub were filled by 4:30 PM. Upon completion of observations at 5:00 PM, our observer surveyed parking use on the Bowen site before leaving the vicinity. Of the 82 parking stalls available along the north side of the Bowen site, only seven spaces were vacant at 5:00 PM. He did not observe parking use on the southwesterly por- tion of the Bowen site. Significant Findings and Conclusions Access. The majority of traffic using the westerly access to the Pacific Park site are vehicles associated with activities on the Bowen site. Attachments 1 and 2 illustrate driveway access movements. Most of the driveway movements between the access drive and the Bowen site represent vehicles exiting the Bowen site. The vehicles must cross a corner of the Pacific Park property in making the exit movement. Of the trips entering the Pacific Park site, many are Bowen site customers midday and all were Bowen site customers during the late afternoon observation period. Parking. The Bowen site has a grossly inadequate parking supply for its retail and restaurant uses. Though its appears that only about 40 percent of its three buildings facing S 212th Street are currently occupied, they gen- erate a parking demand 35 to 50 percent in excess of the total available on-site parking supply for these buildings (on a Friday afternoon) . Given the existing layout of the Bowen site and its convenient access to the Pacific site, the Pacific site becomes the most convenient location for parking over- flow from the Bowen site. TRANSPO Twp Mr. Carl Volpe February 16, 1988 Page 3 We have reviewed the approved (4/l/87) site development plan for the Bowen site. We note that Buildings A, B, C, and H are approved for office uses. Buildings D, E, F, and G were approved for mini-warehouse uses. The overall site parking ratio is slightly over 2.0 spaces per 1,000 gross square feet (gsf) of building floor area. The available parking ratio for Buildings A, B, and H is about 4.5. We believe that these parking ratios would have been adequate for the office/warehouse building uses proposed for the Bowen site and approved by the City. We are, however, mystified by the occupancy of the office portions of the site by retail and restaurant uses. Restaurants create a demand of between 10 and 15 spaces/1,000 gsf for midday use and up to 20 spaces/1,000 gsf for evening use. The existing restaurant (food and drink related) uses of Buildings A and H have already usurped more that the total available on-site parking supply for Buildings A, B, and H; yet these three buildings appear to be only about 40 percent occupied. This portion of the Bowen site appears to be headed toward a very severe parking crises, even if no further restaurant activity is included. A substantial parking shortage already exists. Given the current easy access to Pacific Park parking for Bowen site customers and given the parking limitations on the Bowen site, we would find it very difficult to mitigate the parking overflow problem that currently exists. Prohibitive use signing of Pacific Park parking spaces may provide some relief; however, it would not eliminate the problem unless a continuous and aggressive tow-away program is instituted. A more effective means for protecting the Pacific Park site from Bowen site parking overflow would be to close the driveway access between the two sites and construct a 6-foot high fence along the joint property line which would serve as a barrier to pedestrian access to the pub from the Pacific Park parking facilities. When the Bowen parking is full along its S 212th Street side, pub and restaurant customers would be more likely to search for parking in the southwest sector of the Bowen site rather than simply and easily driv- ing onto the Pacific site and using its parking facilities. Pedestrians could still circulate around the fence between the two sites via the street side- walk. The landscaping along the Bowen site frontage should be redesigned to discourage pedestrian circulation through it. Parking restriction and tow- away signing would likely still be needed also along the westerly parking zone of the Pacific site. Another alternative would be for the Bowen site owners to secure access and parking easements from Pacific Ventures to accommodate its inadequate parking supply program. Summation In summary, we are mystified by the restaurant and retail uses of the Bowen site sectors which were approved for office use. This has resulted in an Y, TnANSPO lm�lp Mr. Carl Volpe February 16, 1988 Page 4 inadequate on-site parking supply for even the 40 percent or so occupancy of its Buildings A, B, and H. Parking overflow onto the Pacific Park site is occurring out of necessity during the afternoon and early evening hours. The driveway interconnect and easy pedestrian access between the two sites further encourages and facilitates this currently unauthorized use of the Pacific site by Bowen site customers. The majority of trips using the joint-access driveway to access the Bowen site are exiting vehicles from the Bowen site. These vehicles must cross a portion of the Pacific site in order to make a safe exit movement. Closure of the driveway interconnect between the two sites and construction of a pedestrian barrier between the two sites appear to be the only effective means to significantly reduce use of Pacific site parking and access by Bowen site customers. Parking restriction and tow-away signing and enforcement would also likely be necessary as part of a more effective mitigation program. Very truly yours, The TRANSPO Group, I,Inc_. ' s . MacIsaac, P.E. /�'ame Wrincipal Engineer cc: John Hendrickson PACIFIC N PAIZK S1rF N N r t -W G =PgA6 Cus7o,ner5� 24 aJ J {. V Q �� Q1D�• � / CPR3) �► BOW EA) 51 M 1► A TTACNMF_NT i t)1;1vEwAY TRIPS )1: 45 — (2',9SPr+m FPl,)AY �ANuARY Z9 PACIFIC PARK StrF N N ' b 1 + � 23 (233 = Pub �usfo,Kers� \\ 2 v tl z c�N 5 21 J �i� QLDCs 14 ( Pu3) f! 1► !I BOU)F—ij 51T7,= 1! I ,4T rAC Fi M EuT 2 DRiUEWAYo TA►Ps 4 - S pm FRIDAV) JAMMARY 29 lei Transportation Planning & Trani( Engineering ( onr ull,lnt, TRANSPO 9" December 16, 1987 TG: 87315.00 Mr. Robert D. McWhirter President Pacific Ventures, Inc. 700 - 112th Avenue NE, Suite 207 Bellevue, WA 98004 Dear Mr. McWhirter: The TRANSPO Group was retained by Pacific Ventures to review access conditions for your Kent business park and that for the Bowen Business Center adjoining your property on the west. Both properties lie along the south side of S 212th Street between 84th Avenue S and the SR 167 freeway. The focus of our attention is the westerly access to your site to/from S 212th Street. This access functions partially on your property and par- tially upon City-owned right of way, as illustrated on the attached drawing. The driveway is aligned with the internal circulation system of your Pacific Business Park. In addition to serving employee and visitor vehicles, it also serves large trucks carrying goods to and from the warehouse building on the south portion of your site. The public right-of-way portion of this access drive is half of an asym- metrical public right of way that once existed in anticipation of a potential public street. The west half of that right of way was vacated to acquisition by the Bowen Business Center. The east half was not vacated by the City. We understand that you were required to reconstruct the previously existing street stub into the driveway access configuration that now exists, excluding the subaccess into the Bowen site. When the Bowen Business Center site plan was approved by the City, the site plan included secondary access from your westerly access drive. Though the Bowen site access opens totally onto the odd shaped public right of way, exiting traffic from the Bowen site cannot safely exit without traversing a corner of your property. We understand that no easement was acquired from your property to legally allow this egress traffic movement from the Bowen site. Such egress traffic also poses a potential safety hazard, since vis- ibility can be blocked by vehicles parked along the west periphery of your site immediately adjacent to the Bowen access drive. The only portion of the Bowen Business Center that is convenienced by this joint access is Building H on its site plan. However, we understand that this building will be occupied by a pub or tavern, rather than the office use shown on the approved site plan. This will lead to higher traffic volumes and a The TRANSPO Group, Inc. 1471-3 Bel-Red Road, Suite 100, Bellevue, Washington 98007-3940 (206)641-3881 TRANSPO GPIFF Mr. Robert D. McWhirter December 16, 1987 Page 2 potential shortage of patron parking on that corner of the Bowen site. This will in turn increase the sight-impaired traffic hazard potential on the corner of your site; and it will likely lead to parking spillover from the tavern onto your site. We believe that both conditions lead to some liability risk on your property as a result of the adjacent development. We have explored several options for mitigating these circumstances. The options are as follow: 1. Widen the access drive westerly to allow Bowen site ingress and egress without necessitating encroachment onto your property. 2. Relocate the driveway westerly to center on an extension of the joint property line. 3. Construct a new parallel access drive to serve the Bowen site and close access to the existing access drive. 4. Eliminate the access to/from the Bowen site. The existing access drive is already unusually wide. Further widening (Option 1) would lead to user confusion. It would also cause ingress traffic to your site to misalign with your north-south internal circulation roadway. This would be particularly cumbersome for large trucks destined to your warehouse building. It would likely lead to loss of some parking spaces on your pro- perty to minimize the ingress "dog leg" on your site. Option 2 would be even more inconvenient for your site access since it would lead to "dog-leg" routing patterns for your egress traffic as well as ingress traffic. In our opinion, both Options 1 and 2 would be disadvantageous to your site access convenience and safety. Option 3 would result in two closely spaced driveways that represent a con- dition normally avoided, if possible, by most cities. Overlapping demands on the center turning lane of S 212th Street would impair options of both drive- ways, as well as that for the opposing driveway on the north side of S 212th Street. We recommend against this option. Option 4 may be the only option that would largely mitigate safety and parking overflow concerns on your property. This would mean that Bowen site Building H employees and customers would need to use the primary Bowen site access from S 212th Street, located approximately 150 feet west of the Bowen site north- east property corner. This access has full use of the center left-turn lane on S 212th Street; therefore, it has no access restrictions. It is also served by an auxiliary right-turn lane. TRANSPO almqp Mr. Robert D. McWhirter December 16, 1987 Page 3 Westbound signal queues caused by the signal at 84th Avenue S can impair both access drives during the morning commuter peak period. However, this time of day should be of little concern to the Bowen Business Center, since its retailing facilities generate little traffic during those hours. During the afternoon commuter peak period, traffic flow on S 212th Street is predomin- ately eastbound. Westbound signal queues are not expected to overflow the dedicated westbound left-turn portion of the center turning lane. In summary, we believe that Option 4 is the only option available to mitigate your concerns and liability problems associated with the existing joint-access situation. The alternative would be to agree upon a property purchase or access easement for the Bowen site that would legalize its existing joint access. You would need to consult with your attorney as to what actions would fully alleviate your potential liability. These latter actions, however, would do little to mitigate potential parking overflow onto your site as a result of Building H employee and customer options. We hope that this opinion will be helpful to you, the City, and the Bowen Business Center owners in better understanding the joint-access problem and in seeking resolution. We stand available to assist you in further discussions if you should so desire. Very truly yours, The TRANSPO Group, Inc. �(/. James W. MacIsaac, P.E. Principal Engineer JWM/ndl Attachment 84TH AVENUE S v or r-x o m n n r m a z I o I II I N N V N --I IN 11 I I F 2 N N I f7 m z -7 m z I I I I I II I I CONSENT CALENDAR 3 . city council Action: G`cIIirci3nree moves, o fid soles that Consent C endar Items A through P be proved ' i� i o^ Discussion Action b V3A. Approval of Minutes. Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of January 15, 1991, with the addition of the following item which was inadvertently omitted: (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3F) Delinquent Accounts Receivable. AUTHORIZATION to write off $35,443 . 05 in accounts receivable and to solicit collection agency assistance in the collection of other accounts, as discussed with the Operations Committee at their January 8 committee meeting. The write-off amount includes $24, 173 .21 on a bankruptcy for which additional collection effort is pointless, $10,376.00 for parking sites for amounts between $5 and $25 issued before December 31, 1988, and $893 .84 for 24 miscellaneous accounts over 15 months old. The collection agency proposal calls for paying $8.45 per account for which Transworld System, Inc. would write a series of collection letters prior to initiating more stringent collection efforts at a negotiated amount per account between 35 and 50 percent. The Finance staff and the IBC feel this proposal will establish a more consistent City accounts receivable collection effort. 3B. Approval of Bills. Approval of payment of the bills received through January 31, 1991, after auditing by the Operations Committee at its meeting at 4 :30 p.m. on February 12, 1991. Approval of checks issued for vouchers: ' Date Check Numbers Amount V � \v Approval of checks issued for payroll: �a J Date Check Numbers Amount �J �j Council Agenda Item No. 3 A-B 3A Kent, Washington January 15, 1991 Regular meeting of the Kent- City Council was called to order at 7 :00 p.m. by Mayor Kelleher. Present: Councilmembers Dowell, Houser, Johnson, Mann, Orr, White, and Woods, City Administrator Chow, City Attorney Lubovich, Planning Director Harris, Public Works Director Wickstrom, Fire Chief Angelo, Acting Police Chief Byerly, Finance Director McCarthy, Personnel Director Olson, As- sistant City Administrator Hansen, Information Services Director Spang and Deputy City Clerk Jacober. Parks Director Wilson was not in attendance. Approximately 35 people were at the meeting. PUBLIC The flag salute was led by members of Boy Scout COMMUNICATIONS Troop 888. There .was then a moment of silence in honor of . the troops in the Persian Gulf. The Mayor distributed to Councilmembers a Mis- sion Statement as presented by Dr. .George Dan- iel, Superintendent of the Kent School Dis- trict. He noted that the mission statement says that we, as a community, will work together to pursue appropriate levels of support for our children. WOODS MOVED that the Mission State- ment be adopted. Houser seconded and the mo- tion carried. CONSENT CALENDAR WOODS MOVED that Consent Calendar Items A - I be approved. White seconded and the motion carried. MINUTES (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3A) Approval of Minutes. Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of January 2 , 1991. HEALTH AND (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3G) SANITATION 124th Avenue S. E. Water Main Extension. ACCEP- TANCE of the bill of sale and warranty agree- ment submitted by John E. and Phyllis J. Banks for continuous operation and maintenance of ap- proximately 670 feet of water main extension constructed in the vicinity of 124th Avenue S.E. and S.E. 284th Street and release of the cash bond after expiration of the one-year maintenance period. 1 January 15, 1991 HEALTH AND (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3H) SANITATION Waterford Apartment at the Lakes. ACCEPTANCE of the bill of sale and warranty agreement sub- mitted by Waterford L.P. for continuous opera- tion and maintenance of approximately 4, 109 ft. of water main extension, 11282 feet of sanitary sewer extension and 1,525 feet of street im- provements constructed in the vicinity of So. 236th Street and Lakeside Boulevard East for the Waterford Apartments at the Lakes and release of the cash bond after expiration of the one-year maintenance period. STREET (PUBLIC HEARINGS - ITEM 2A) VACATION Pacific Ventures Street Vacation STV-90-5. A letter received on December 20, 1990 from Richard Boyer of Pacific Ventures, Inc. re- quests that the hearing of street vacation pe- tition STV-90-5 be delayed and put on the agen- da for the City Council meeting of February 51 1991. The Planning Director concurs. WHITE MOVED to approve the request to delay the hear- ing of Street Vacation STV-90-5 to February 5, 1991. Woods seconded and the motion carried. TEMPORARY USE - (PUBLIC HEARINGS - ITEM 2 B) APPEAL Emerald City Chemical Appeal. A public hearing has been set for this date to consider an ap- peal filed by Emerald City Chemical. Mr. Dodge had asked to have a time extension of two years for an authorized temporary use permit. The Hearing Examiner has recommended an extension to April 15, 1991 and Glen Dodge has appealed this. He has now requested that this hearing be held over to the February 5, 1991 meeting. WHITE MOVED that the public hearing be held over to the February 5 meeting. Woods sec- onded and the motion carried. Mr. Dodge requested that the Council consider giving the Planning Director the authority to extend public hearings and inform the affected parties so they are not required to attend the Council meeting to be sure the extension was allowed. GROWTH MGMT. (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3D) ACT 961 Growth Management Act Funds. AUTHORIZATION for appropriated funds from the Growth Management 2 January 15, 1991 GROWTH MGMT. Act of 1990 to be distributed to the City of ACT 961 Kent through King County and for the Mayor to sign the related service agreement. The ser- vice agreement establishes the process by which grant funds will pass through King County to the City of Kent. HUMAN SERVICES (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3I) COMMISSION Human Services Commission. CONFIRMATION of the Mayor' s appointment of Susan Ramos to Kent Hu- man Services Commission. Ramos replaces Alice Gregory who served as a representative of the business community and who resigned. TRAFFIC CONTROL (OTHER. BUSINESS ITEM 4A) Traffic Safety. Requests have been received that both James Street (between Central Ave- nue and 104th Street) and Central Avenue at 259th Street be moved from their present sta- tus to a high priority within the Public Works Engineering Department in order that the cur- rent safety hazards may be quickly and effec- tively addressed and resolved. Mann noted that the Public Safety Committee has received a petition containing 421 signatures requesting a signal light at the intersection of S. 259th and Central Avenue. White added that a petition has . previously been received regarding James Street. MANN MOVED to author- ize the Public Works Department to upgrade to a high priority the resolution of traffic safe- ty problems at the intersection of S. 259th and Central, and that the safety of our pedestrians on James Street also be upgraded to top priori- ty and that both of these areas become targeted for completion within two years. White sec- onded. Jimmy Cordova stated that it is very difficult to cross Central Avenue and that because there is no stop light from Willis Street to Auburn, people tend to drive faster than the speed lim- it. Carol Anne Fellers noted that an employee of Pay-N-Pak was seriously injured at this lo- cation, and submitted another petition for a traffic signal which contains over 400 signa- tures. WHITE MOVED to make the petition a part of the record. Woods seconded and the motion 3 Januaryl5, 1991 TRAFFIC carried. Elizabeth Lindaren stated that this is CONTROL a very dangerous situation and expressed hope that the signal can be installed this year. Johnson suggested including this project in the Six-Year Transportation Program in July. White stated that the Council is eager to solve these problems, as well as others in the City. Mann's motion then carried. DONATIONS (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3E) Donation Ordinance. ADOPTION of Ordinance 2961 establishing a procedure for accepting dona- tions, as discussed with the Operations Commit- tee at their January 8 committee meeting. The ordinance was prepared to provide a vehicle for City acceptance of donations and to provide some guidance for 'individuals making donations to the City. FIRE DEPARTMENT (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3C) Sole Vendor Authorization. APPROVAL of L.N. Curtis and Sons as the sole vendor for the pur- chase of fire hose. The 1991 Budget has $35, 000 budgeted for the purchase of fire hose. The amount of funds in- volved usually dictates that the purchase is done through the bid process. In this case, the bid process would be redundant. Only one ven- dor in the Western United States can supply hose that meets the Kent Fire Department' s needs. FINANCE (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3B) Approval of Bills. APPROVAL of payment of the bills received through January 17 , 1991 after auditing by the Operations Committee at its meeting at 4 : 30 p.m. on January 30, 1991. Approval of checks issued for vouchers: Date Check Numbers Amount 12/14/90 99349 $ 366.76 12/18-12/28/90 99785-99800 103 , 372 . 52 12/31/90 99804-100253 427 , 576 . 45 $531, 315. 73 4 r January 15, 1991 FINANCE Ap roval of checks issued for payroll: Date Check Numbers Amount 1/4/91 1148700-1149345 5598,535. 33 REPORTS Public Works Committee. White noted that ac- tion recently taken on the Parkside Division No. 2 Walkway was discussed at thetPublic Works Committee meeting today, and that the problem has not been solved. He noted that the Public Works and Legal Departments will meet with cit- izens to work out a solution, and this item will be brought back to the Council for recon- sideration. (Housing Grants) Planning Committee. Johnson announced that the City has received grants in the amount of $200, 000 from the King County Housing opportu- nity Fund and $265, 000 from the Washington State Housing Trust Fund. He noted that these funds will be used for senior housing units and for services for the frail elderly. He con- gratulated the Planning Department, who ini- tiated the applications for these grants. (Impact Fees) Johnson announced that King County is consider- ing an ordinance dealing with school impact fees. He noted that their ordinance imposes fees in unincorporated areas as well as incor- porated areas, and said he feels cities should have the option of imposing such fees within their boundaries. A resolution supporting the action of King County to adopt legislation relating to the imposition and collection of impact fees from new residential development was distributed to the councilmembers. JOHNSON MOVED for the adop- tion of Resolution 1269. White seconded. Dowell and White expressed concern about the wording of the resolution. A friendly amend- ment to change the wording as follows was ac- cepted by Johnson and White: "That the City Council supports the action of King County to address the problems of growth on schools through the adoption of legisla- tion to impose impact fees on residential de- velopment within its boundaries for school f-a- cil-i-ti-es districts provided that cities shall 5 January 15, 1991 (Impact Fees) retain the authority to levy such fees within their own boundaries. " The motion carried. (Annexation/ Johnson noted that the King County Council is Incorporation) proposing an ordinance which would prohibit an- nexation of rural areas to cities and which would prohibit rural areas from incorporating into cities. HE MOVED that the Mayor be di- rected to sign a letter to the County stating the City Is opposition to this ordinance. White seconded and the motion carried. Dowell indicated that he would like to have more time to study issues such as these. Johnson suggested a regional issues committee of the Council be formed to address these types of issues. Parks Committee. Dowell noted that the Parks Committee will meet on January 16 at 4 : 00 p.m. in the Courtroom. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7 : 25 p.m. Brenda JJyVClerk , CMC Deputy 6 Kent City Council Meeting Date February 5. 1991 Category Consent Calendar J 1. SUBJECT: PUBLIC DEFENSE CONTRACT 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Approval to enter into a contract for public defense with Sampson Wilson & Combs, Inc. , P.S. , Attorneys at Law. The purpose of the contract is to provide public defense services at Aukeen District Court in conjunction with the City's prosecutorial services. Sampson Wilson & Combs currently provide our public defense services. Bids were solicited for services to be rendered during 1991. The City received two responses; one from Sampson Wilson & Combs, with a bid of $8,500 a month, the current fee, and one from the firm of Tucker and Steip, P.S. , Inc. , with a bid of $15, 000 per month. �'t C .4t-iT recommend d that Sampson Wilson & Combs, Inc. be retained and that the Council authorize execution of a contract irra as negotiated between the parties in the amount of $8, 500 per month for 1991. 3 . EXHIBITS: Draft contract for public defense 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Law apartment, operations Committee (Committee, Staff, xaminer, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL PERSO L IMPACT. NO X YES FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Rec mmended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $8 5500\ SOURCE OF FUNDS: 1991 Budget 7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, C6,uncilmember seconds DISCUSSION• 1 ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 3C✓ CONTRACT FOR PUBLIC DEFENSE This Agreement is entered into by and between the City of Kent, Washington, a municipal corporation, herein referred to as "City" , and SAMPSON WILSON & COMBS, INC. , P.S. , herein referred to as "Attorney" . In consideration of the mutual agreements and covenants set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Scope of Services. All defendants charged under ordinances of the City who qualify for appointed counsel shall be referred to the Attorney. The Attorney shall provide legal representation for each of these defendants from arraignment through trial, sentencing, post trial review and any appeals to the Superior Court. The Attorney shall also visit the Kent Corrections Facility to meet with clients at a minimum of three (3) hours per week. The hours of visitation shall be arranged at the jail ' s convenience. 2 . Applicant Screening. Determinations of indigency for eligibility for appointed counsel under this contract shall be determined by an independent screening process established by the City. Such appointments shall be in accordance with state law. 3 . Attorney's Offices. The Attorney currently maintains offices at Old Milwaukee Substation, Suite 200, 450 Shattuck Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055 . Should the Attorney move its office from Renton, the Attorney shall arrange for meetings with defendants in close proximity to its former address. 4 . Associated Counsel . Any counsel associated with or employed by the Attorney shall have the authority to perform the services called for herein, and Attorney may employ associate counsel to assist him or her at Attorney's expense. Attorney and all associate counsel or attorneys hired pursuant to this section shall be admitted to practice pursuant to the rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Washington. No legal intern shall perform the services called for herein without the prior approval of the City. Sufficient counsel shall be provided to represent defendants during vacations, illnesses and settings in more than one courtroom. 5 . Proof of Professional Liability Insurance. During the term of this agreement and any extension thereof, the Attorney shall secure and maintain a policy of comprehensive professional liability insurance with an insurance company licensed to do business in the State of Washington. Said policy shall a. provide protection and indemnification against any and all claims arising out of the Attorney' s representation pursuant to this agreement; and b. have policy limits not less than $500, 000. 00 . 6. Indemnification. The Attorney shall indemnify, defend, and hold the City, its elected officials, officers and employees and agents harmless from any and all claims whatsoever arising out of the Attorney' s performance of obligations pursuant to the agreement, including claims arising by reason of accident, injury or death caused to persons or property of any kind occurring by the fault or neglect of the Attorney, his agents, associates or employees, and occurring without the fault or neglect of the City. 7 . Compensation. The City shall provide to Attorney for services rendered under this contract the sum of $102 , 000. 00 for the period from January 11 1991 through December 31, 1991, to be paid at the rate of $8,50o. o0 per month. 8. Discovery Provided. The City shall provide to Attorney one copy of all discoverable material concerning each assigned case except matters related to sentencing. Such material shall linclude, where relevant, a copy of the abstract of the defendant' s driving record. 9 . No Assignments or Subcontracts. No assignment or transfer of this contract, nor of any interest in this contract shall be made by either of the parties, without prior written consent. 2 10. Attorney Conflict. In the event the representation of defendant hereunder raises a conflict of interest such that the Attorney cannot represent the defendant, said defendant shall be referred back to the City for further assignment. 11. Term of Agreement. a. This agreement shall commence on the 1st day of January, 1991, and shall be in force and effect through December 31, 1991, unless terminated earlier pursuant to the provisions hereof. b. This contract may be extended for additional terms upon the mutual agreement of the parties. 12 . Termination. a. For Cause: Either party may terminate this agreement in the event the other fails to perform its obligations as described in this agreement, and if such failure has not been corrected to the reasonable satisfaction of the other in a timely manner after notice of breach has been provided to such other party. b. Notice: Notice of termination pursuant to this section shall be given by the party terminating this agreement to the other not less than 120 days prior to the effective date of termination. 13 . Reports. The Attorney shall submit quarterly reports to the City of the number of separate cases handled by and the actual appearances made by the Attorney. Such report shall be submitted to the City ten (10) calendar days from the end of the quarter. 14 . Amendments. No modification or amendment of the provisions of this agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by authorized representatives of the parties hereto. 3 15. Entire Agreement. This instrument contains the entire agreement between the parties and may not be enlarged, modified or altered except in writings signed by the parties and endorsed hereon. DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR LOREN D. COMBS CITY OF KENT SAMPSON, WILSON & COMBS, INC. , P.S. 220 Fourth Ave. S . 450 Shattuck Ave. S. , Suite 200 Kent, Washington 98032-5895 Renton, Washington 98055 Date: Date: pubdef.doc 4 Kent City Council Meeting Date February 5, 1991 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: SANITARY SEWER SERVICE � rj 2 . S STA s recommende by the Public Works i Committ"'p, doption of Ordinance # amending Kent City Code establishing charges for sanitary sewer service to duplexes within the City�1 I 3 . EXHIBITS: Excerpt from Public Works Committee minutes, ordinance 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES FISCAL/PERSONNEL N6TE: Recommended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDg: 7. CITY COUNCIjj ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION: ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 3D✓ Public Works Committee November 20, 1990 - Page 2 plans have included Jason as a north-south extension to 228th and if carried out would include a signal at James and Jason. Because of staff constraints we would not be able to do a study of all of James in a short time frame. White asked if some alternatives could be developed - from simplest to most complex - with proposed costs in the next couple of weeks and bring it back to Committee. Utility Bill 415-421 Cloudy Street Wickstrom reminded the Committee that this item is in response to a property owner being upset over a high sewer bill for his duplex. The operating policy is that if a duplex is on one meter it is charged a commercial rate for sewer which is based on water consumption. A separate meter could be installed such that each unit would be charged a residential rate. The policy could also be updated such that anything up to a triplex be considered a single family residence which would be consistent with Kent City Code for business license requirements. Wickstrom stated he would have no problems with that. White asked if we had received other similar complaints. Lindsey said there had been a few. White suggested that a written policy be developed such that for purposes of utility billing units up to triplex be considered single family residences. It was determined the policy should be developed by the Finance Department. Carol Morris suggested amending our utility service ordinance to address this rather than just a policy. This will be brought back before the Committee for review. Recycling Emblem Karen Siegel submitted the winning design for a City recycling emblem to the Committee for their approval. The Committee concurred with the final design. Entry Way Signs Heydon and Olson presented a design for entry way signs to the Committee. The Committee concurred with the color choice of blue and green and the design. The Committee recommended approval to the full Council. Request for Vacation of Walkway - Parkside Division 2 Wickstrom proposed relocating the fences, regrade the walkway, remove the stumps, install a catch basin, develop a gravel walkway and install lights. The cost for these improvements would be approximately $5, 500 which could be paid for from existing operating budget. He will take this to IBC for their approval as ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent, Washington, relating to sanitary sewer , services; amending Kent City Code Section 7 . 05. 310 (Ordinance 2374 , as last amended by Ordinances 2446, 2510, 2596, 2679 , 2827 , 2873 and 2951) , establishing charges for sanitary sewer service to duplexes within the City. WHEREAS , it has been the City's past policy to distinguish between single family dwelling unit customers and all other types of sanitary sewer customers in determining the service rate to be charged; and WHEREAS, the Public Works Committee, after making relevant inquiry and upon due consideration, has responded to recent citizen comments on the subject of sanitary sewer service charges to duplexes by recommending to the City Council that each unit of the duplex be charged the single family rate, as set fort in KCC 7 . 05 . 280 ; and WHEREAS , the City Council considered the recommendations of the Public Works Committee at a council meeting on January 15, 1991 and approved the above revision to the City's sanitary sewer rate formula ; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASH INGTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS : l . Section 1. Section 1 of Ordinance 2374 , as last amended by Ordinances 2446, 2510, 2596, 2679 , 2827 , 2873 and 2951 is hereby amended to read as follows: 7 . 05. 310 . SCHEDULE OF CHARGES - WITHIN CITY (1) Single Family (Residential) : $19 . 20 per month (2) Duplex (Residential) ; each unit shall be separately charged: $19 .20 per month 3) Single Family (Residential)/ Lifeline: $17 . 00 per month Eligibility criteria for Lifeline rate shall be established by City Council . ) Other than single family (Residential) shall be billed in accordance with the consumption of water and at the following rate, except that no monthly bill shall be less than $19 . 20 . All others: $1. 38 plus $1.98 per too cubic feet per month. Section 2 . The provisions of this ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section or portion of this 2 - i i I . i ordinance, or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this ordinance, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. Section 3 . Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. I DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR ATTEST: MARIE JENSEN, CITY CLERK IAPPROVED AS TO FORM: ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY PASSED the day of , 1991. APPROVED the day of 1991. PUBLISHED the day of , 1991. 3 - Kent City Council Meeting Date February 5. 1991 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: RADIO TOWER AND RADIO EQUIPMENT BUILDING 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Acceptance as complete of radio tower and radio equipment building and authorization to release retainage upon receipt of the appropriate State documents. 3 . EXHIBITS: E cutive summary 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: re Administration Public Safet Committee (Committee, Sta , Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 1� 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PER SONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: f al r)avment has been made to the contractor for the radio\building construction. Retaina a of approximately 1 685. 68 it being withheld. SOURCE OF FUNDS: 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moveA, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 3EV EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FEBRUARY 5, 1991 TO:• MAYOR KELLEHER, COUNCIL PRESIDENT WOODS, COUNCILMEMBERS WHITE, DOWELL, JOHNSON, HOUSER, MANN, ORR FROM: NORM ANGELO, FIRE CHIEF✓�cN-1 r� SUBJECT: ACCEPTANCE OF CONSTRUCTION OF RADIO TOWER AND RADIO EQUIPMENT BUILDING --------------------------------- -------------------------------- INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND Bid for the tower fabrication and erection was awarded to Microflect Company, Inc. on June 19, 1990. Bid for the construction of the radio equipment building was awarded to C.E. Skinner, Inc. on September 41 1990. These projects were completed within contract and within time schedule. RECOMMENDED ACTION Council accept these projects as complete and authorize the release of the retainage held for C.E. Skinner upon receipt of appropriate documentations from the Departments of Labor & Industries and Revenue. SIGNIFICANCE The completion of site development is one of the final phases in the implementation of the City's public safety radio and mobile data terminal projects. BUDGET/ECONOMIC IMPACT This project has been budgeted through the bond levy with no impact on the general operating budget of the department. ALTERNATIVES/CONSEQUENCES None Kent City Council Meeting \ \ v Date February 5. 1991 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: GOLF COMPLEX FEE STRUCTURE 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Adoption of the proposed Riverbend Golf Complex fee structure as presented and approved by the Parks Committee and the Operations Committee. ,A y J " LC( k.C_�'max_ ._C �� `1 1.6'_�_ 3 . EXHIBITS: Proposed fee schedule and Finance Department fiscal note 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Park Department Staff Parks Committee and Operations Committee (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: ,, NO YES _ FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: RecommendeKO .INot Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS: 7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 3F✓ City of Kent, Washington Kent City Council Meeting Date 2-5-91 Category Consent 1. SUBJECT: GOLF COMPLEX FEE STRUCTURES 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Adoption of the proposed Riverbend Golf Complex fee structure as presented and approved by the Parks Committee and the Operations Committee. 3 . EXHIBITS • Proposed Fee Schedule �15Ge NaTG 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Parks Department Staff Parks Committee Operations Committee 5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended 6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: SOURCE OF FUNDS : 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION: RIVERBEND GOLF COMPLEX CURRENT AND PROPOSED FEES - 1991 INCLUDING SALES TAX CURRENT PROPOSED INCREASED REVENUE PAR 3 COURSE GREEN FEES Weekday First 9 holes 4 . 00 5 . 00 Second 9 holes 3 . 00 4 . 00 Seniors Over 62 and Students Under 16 First 9 holes 3 . 00 4 . 00 19, 500. 00 Second 9 holes 2 . 00 3 . 00 Weekend and Holiday First 9 holes 5. 00 6. 00 Second 9 holes 4 . 00 5. 00 CLUB RENTAL 3 . 00 5. 00 5, 229 . 00 BAG RENTAL 1. 00 2 . 00 42 . 00 PULL CARTS 1. 00 2 . 00 21943 . 00 TOTAL $ 27 , 714 . 00 DRIVING RANGE BUCKET OF BALLS 3 . 50 4 . 00 60, 936 . 00 CLUB RENTAL 1. 00 2 . 00 51016 . 00 MINIATURE GOLF Adults 2 . 50 3 . 00 Children- under 12 1. 50 2 . 00 71544 . 00 Seniors over 65 1. 50 2 .00 TOTAL $ 73,496.00 GRAND TOTAL $196, 675.0 RIVERBEND GOLF COMPLEX CURRENT AND PROPOSED FEES - 1991 INCLUDING SALES TAX CURRENT PROPOSED INCREASED REVENUE 18-HOLE COURSE GREEN FEES Weekday For 18 holes 15. 00 16. 50 For. 9 holes 10. 00 11. 00 Weekend and Holiday For 18 holes 18 . 00 19.50 77,528.00 For 9 holes 12 . 00 13 . 00 Monday and Tuesday- Senior Rates For 18 holes 12 . 00 13 . 00 For 9 holes 8. 00 9 . 00 POWER CARTS For 18 holes 16. 00 18 . 00 10, 358. 00 For 9 holes 8 . 00 9 . 00 CLUB RENTAL 10. 00 12 . 00 1, 016. 00 PULL CARTS For 18 holes 3 . 00 4 . 00 6, 563 . 00 For 9 holes 1.50 2 . 00 TOTAL $ 95, 465.00 Message. Dated: 01/30/91 at 1614. Subject: GOLF COMPLEX FINANCIAL STATUS - FISCAL NOTE Sender: Tony MCCARTHY / KENT70/FN Contents: 3 . Part 1. TO: Pam RUMER / KENT70/PK Helen WICKSTROM / KENT70/PK Barney WILSON / KENT70/PK Part 2 . THE FISCAL NOTE FOR THE GOLF COMPLEX REVENUE INCREASES FOR THE 2/5 COUNCIL MEETING. Part 3 . AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1990, THE GOLF COMPLEX HAS BEEN AUTHORIZED A $700, 000 LINE OF CREDIT TO PROVIDE CASH FOR OPERATIONS. THE LINE OF CREDIT HAS BEEN AUTHORIZED TO ESTABLISH A MERCHANDISING INVENTORY ($167, 366) , COMPLETE THE ACQUISITION OF CAPITAL ASSETS INCLUDING SOME COST OVERRUNS ASSOCIATED WITH FACILITY'S DEVELOPMENT ($220,850) , PAY GOLF COURSE DEBT SERVICE ($701, 458) , AND PROVIDE FOR OPERATIONAL EXPENDITURES INCLUDING $64 , 115 IN INTERDEPARTMENTAL CHARGES. CURRENT PLANS ARE FOR THE LINE OF CREDIT TO BE ELIMINATED WITHIN TWO YEARS . THIS WILL NOT BE EASY AND WILL REQUIRE SOME INNOVATIVE OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS. TO IMPROVE THE FINANCIAL PICTURE, BOTH THE EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE PICTURE MUST BE ADDRESSED: 1) COST FOR THE COURSE CONTINUES TO RISE DUE TO COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENTS AND INFLATION COST INCREASES. TO AVOID LOOSING MORE GROUND, GOLF RATES TIED TO INFLATION MUST BE CONSIDERED. 2) CURRENT GOLF RATES INCLUDE THE AMOUNT FOR SALES TAX, APPROXIMATELY $200, 000 PER YEAR. THE SALES TAX RATE WAS RAISED IN KING COUNTY ON NOVEMBER 1, 1990 BUT THE GOLF RATES HAVE NOT BEEN RAISED. THIS ERODES A REVENUE BASE THAT ALREADY CAN'T MEET ALL THE EXPENDITURE COMMITTMENTS . 3) GOLF RATES ARE SENSITIVE TO PUBLIC PERCEPTION. IN ONE SENSE GOLFERS SHOULD NOT BE SUBSIDIZED BY THE TAXPAYING PUBLIC BUT SETTING THE RATES TOO HIGH MAY DECREASE PLAY AND NOT GENERATE THE REVENUE NEEDED. THEREFORE THE LINE OF CREDIT CAN NOT BE ENTIRELY PAID OFF WITH REVENUE INCREASES ALONE. IN ORDER TO INSURE FINANCIAL STABILITY AT THE GOLF COMPLEX AND SATISFY THE REVENUE BONDHOLDERS, THE IBC RECOMMENDS BOTH REVENUE INCREASES AND A REVIEW OF EXPENDITURES. THE REVIEW OF EXPENDITURES SHOULD INCLUDE A STAFFING ANALYSIS. THE OVERALL REVIEW SHOULD DETERMINE THE APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF CITY SUBSIDY SO THAT AMOUNTS CAN BE INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET FORECASTING FOR THE EFFECTED FUNDS . Kent City Council Meeting N Date February 5. 1991 f 11 Category Consent Calendar V 1. SUBJECT: HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION APPOINTMENT 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Confirmation of the Mayor's appointment of Alla Mironyuk to the Kent Human Services Commission replacing Sharon Atkins, whose term has expired. 1 3 . EXHIBITS: ' Memo from Mayor 4 . RECOMMENDED B Mayor Kelleher (Committee, aff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) t 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL ERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES FISCAL PERSONNEL N E: Recommended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REOUIRED: $ None SOURCE OF FUNDS: 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember mo es, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION: ACTION• 1 Council Agenda Item No. 3G✓ M E M O R A N D U M TO: JUDY WOODS, CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR)�aw"'--� DATE: JANUARY 17 , 1991 SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT OF ALLA MIRONYUK TO HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION I have recently appointed Alla Mironyuk to the Kent Human Services Commission. Ms. Mironyuk will replace Sharon Atkins, whose term has expired. She will represent the user of services category. Ms. Mironyuk, has lived in Kent for the past 15 months after moving here from the Ukraine. Her husband is a Minister in the Russian Congregational Church and she studied at a Polytechnical Institute in the Soviet Union. Since arriving in Kent, she has been very active as coordinator for other Ukrainian immigrants. She devotes much of her time to helping them with medical appointments, making sure they have proper documents, helping them find and get established in apartments, etc. Her appointment to the Commission will become effective immediately and continue through 1/1/94 . I submit this for your confirmation. DK:jb Kent City Council Meeting Date February 5. 1991 Category 'U Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION REAPPOINTMENT 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Confirmation of the Mayor's reappointment of Tracy Faust to the City of Kent Planning Commission. 3 . EXHIBITS: Memo from Mayor 4 . RECOMMENDE Mayor Kelleher (Committee,) Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FIS PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES FISCAL PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE RE UI D: $ None SOURCE OF FUNDS• 7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 3H✓ M E M O R A N D U M TO: JUDY WOODS, CITY COUNC PRE DENT CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ` FROM: DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR DATE: JANUARY 16, 1991 SUBJECT: REAPPOINTMENT OF TRACY FAUST TO PLANNING COMMISSION I have recently reappointed Tracy Faust as a member of the Kent Planning Commission. The appointment will become effective immediately and continue through 12/31/93 . I submit this for your confirmation. DK:jb (� Kent City Council Meeting l � Date February 5 1991 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: CONSERVATION FUTURES GRANT FOR PARKSIDE PARK 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Acceptance of a $100,000 King County Conservation Futures Grant to be matched by the $100, 000 City CIP Fund earmarked for a West Hill park, for the purpose of acquiring a two-acre parcel on West Hill titled Parkside Open Space. The project site is adjacent to a 20-acre wetland site being purchased by the City of Des Moines under the King County Open Space Bond Program. 3 . EXHIBITS: ing County Motion 8120, approving funding; Parks Committee Mutes, January 16, 1991; and Finance Department Fiscal Note \ 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staf Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL PERSO L IMPACT: NO X YES FISCALIPERSONNEL NOTE: %1000,000 mended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REOUIRED: $ budgeted for West Hill Park in 1989 and carried forward in ccount P50-C76-6110 SOURCE OF FUNDS: \ 7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: \ Councilmember moves, C uncilmember seconds DISCUSSION: ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 3I✓ October 4, 1990 Introduced by: GREY NICKELS KA:clt:OSADVCOM.MOT Proposed No. : 1 MOTION NO. 8 2 0 2 A MOTION supporting the Open Space Advisory 3 Committee's allocation of conservation futures 4 levy proceeds to suburban cities for the purpose 5 of providing funding for open space acquisition 6 activities. 7 WHEREAS, state law grants counties the right to levy a a conservation futures levy for the purpose providing funds for 9 open space acquisition, and 30 WHEREAS, conservation futures levy revenue is collected by it King County, and 12 WHEREAS, King County Ordinance 8867 established the 13 county's policies regarding distribution of conservation future 14 levy proceeds to incorporated cities, and 15 WHEREAS, King County Ordinance 9128 appropriated funds for 16 incorporated cities to use for open space acquisition and 17 related expenses, and 18 WHEREAS, King County ordinance 9128 called for the open 19 Space Citizens Advisory Committee to review all requests for 20 conservation futures levy proceeds, and 21 WHEREAS, the Open Space citizens Advisory Committee has 22 reviewed and approved requests from several cities. 23 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT MOVED by the Council of King County: 24 A_ The King County council hereby approves the allocation .25 of conservation levy proceeds as shown on the attached list. • ��l'�LSu U�n JAR 0 2 1990 �U) KING COUNTY OFFICE OF OPEN SPACE 8120 1 B. The King County executive is authorized to enter into 2 and execute contracts and interlocal agreements which may be 3 necessary-for the distribution of these funds. 4 PASSED this /O day of o e'er:��?--- , 1990. 5 KING COUNTY COUNCIL b KING COUNTYr WASHINGTON y — g Chairman 9 ATTEST: 10 11 Clark of the Councll 12 - 13 14 2 1989 coNSERVATION FUTURES SUBURBAN SHARE Bellevue Cougar Mountain Community Park $ 100,000 Kent Parkside Open Space 100,000 Kirkland Forbes Lake 100,000 Mercer Island Mercerdale Greenbelt or 1001000 S.E. 53rd Place Greenbelt Redmond Redmond Watershed Access 100,000 Renton May Creek or 106,950 Black River -Forest wetland $ 606,950 cougar Mountain community Park is a 13 acre meadow proposed for sports field development, .located in the Cougar Mountain Community. Parkside Open Space is a 2 acre wetland natural area addition to the City of Des Moines open space bond, project called Parkside Wetland. Forbes Lake is a 2.7 acre acquisition on Forbes Lake which expands the city's existing ownership on the lake. - Mercerdale Greenbelt is a heavily wooded area providing a buffer between communities. - S.E. 53rd Greenbelt is 21 acres of heavily wooded property with a year round stream. It will remain in its natural state. - Redmond Watershed Access site will provide access and.parking for cars and horse trailers to the county Is• regional trail system and the Redmond Watershed. - The May Creek acquisition by Renton includes 4 lots totaling about 10 acres which are inholdings in the county's May Creek Park. These purchases will complete'May Creek Park from I- 405 to coal Creek Parkway. Black River Forest Wetland is an important roosting and feeding area for a large heron rookery. Acquisition would include a portion of an existing 40 acre parcel and will provide necessary buffer to a neighboring proposed development. \JC1t1Cr5U88RR.AA/10-04-90 Parks Committee Minutes January 16, 1991 Page Five CONSERVATION FUTURES GRANT FOR PARKSIDE PARR Helen Wickstrom informed the Committee that the City received a request from the citizens of Salt Air Hills to develop a park on Kent's West Hill. She reported that the City of Des Moines will ' purchase a 20-acre site just north of Salt Air Hills through the King County Open Space Bond Issue program. There is a 2-acre site adjacent to it which is located within the Kent City limits. Combining the two properties would allow for a better park to serve both the Des Moines and Salt Air Hills residents. Wickstrom said that the Department applied for King County Conservation Futures funds to acquire the 2-acre site and has received approval of a matching grant awarded in the amount of $100, 000. The City has $100, 000 in the West Hill Park budget which could be used as the local match. White inquired about a budget to develop the property. Wickstrom said that there is no budget now and that the Department will have to request it later. She emphasized that the important thing now is to acquire the property. She reported that other property north of this parcel is being developed into multi-family housing. Wickstrom mentioned that the Council did approve the interlocal agreement at a Council meeting two weeks ago. This allows for the transfer of funds from King County. White moved to accept the $100, 000 matching grant from King County, to be matched by the $100, 000 City budget earmarked for West Hill Park. Johnson seconded. The motion passed unanimously. White recommended that the City not just purchase the property and sit it. Dowell suggested that the City include acknowledgement on the park site that the City of Kent is involved with the process and will develop the site. Pat Colgan from Salt Air Hills liked the idea and agreed to take the information back to the Salt Air Hills community. PERFORMING ARTS CENTER TASK FORCE Thorell gave an update on the Performing Arts Center Task Force and their progress on the Cultural Center Study and the Cultural Plan. She said that the task force interviewed up to 100 folks in the community and most felt that a cultural center is necessary. L Kent City Council Meeting Date February 5 1991 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: 'KING COUNTY RECYCLING/COMPOSTING DEMONSTRATION SITE 2 . S _ -- -- s---racommended to the Public Works Committee,' uthorization for staff to coor ina a wi ing \ on he development of a permanent Recycling/Composting Demonstration site within Kent _ l 3 . EXHIBITS: Lett*r from King County i 4. RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staff Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: ecommended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $�� SOURCE OF FUNDS: 7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember move`s, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 3J✓ DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS February 11 1991 TO: Public Works Committee FROM: Don Wickstrom RE: King County Recycling and Composting Demonstration site King County has requested that Kent host a permanent site for a Recycling and Composting Demonstration Facility. The facility would be used to provide on-going education to the community on waste reduction, recycling and composting methods. King County is currently conducting their fourth Master Recycler/Composter training class here in Kent and it is hoped that class would be able to begin construction of the demonstration facility in mid-March. King County will be responsible for the costs involved in constructing the facility. They have requested that the City remove the sod from the selected site. The County will agree to maintain the facility for a three year period after which, if the City does not wish to take over the maintenance, the County will restore the site to its original condition. Working with Kent Parks Department, a portion of the Burlington Green has been identified as meeting the criteria for such a facility. Upon your approval to proceed with the project, we will continue to work with the County and Parks Department to determine a final location. 'l CITY OF J_Q)LU-2 u Dan Kelleher, Mayor Don E. Wickstrom, P.E., Director of Public Works • a The City of Kent Celebrates Its First too Years 1fiYW1P'%T January 23 , 1991 s Cheryl Waters Lead Program Coordinator King County Solid Waste Division Department of Public Works 450 King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 RE: King County Recycling and Composting Demonstration Site Dear Ms. Waters: I wanted to bring you up to date on my activity in response to your December 21 request that the City of Kent host a site for a Recycling and Composting Demonstration site. Your consultant, John Watson, Helen Wickstrom of Kent Parks Department and myself, met on January 9 to review several possible sites for the Demonstration Facility. The one site preferred by Mr. Watson is in an area called the Burlington Green on the corner of Smith Street and S. Railroad Avenue. The City of Kent Parks Department has agreed to the use of a portion on the northerly section of the Burlington Green the terms and of the City' s ith Burlington bo Northern for the property.conditions have enclosed a copy eofwthe lease for your information. Initial investigations indicate it will be necessary for our Planning Department to review the site plan and landscape design for which there is a $25 . 00 fee. There may also be the need to acquire a street use permit for which the fee is $50 plus a $100 sh the nd Public Works This would be dependent upon the review by ary reviews and permits will be the Department. Securing the necess responsibility of King County to obtain. However, the design of the composting demonstration facility should continue to be coordinated through my office. � �0 1�lilflsil� I 220 4ch AVE.SO— !KENT.WASHINGTON 98032-5895!ENGINEERING (206)859 3383 1 OPERATIONS(20C>)859-3395 1 FAX M 859-3334 xl Cheryl Waters K.C. Solid Waste Division K.C. Recycling and Composting 1 Demonstration Site January 23 , 1991 Page 2 Please let me know if this site would be acceptable for your program. If so, I will pursue formal approvals by the Public Works Committee and Kent City Council on February 5. After which, I understand you will prepare a letter of agreement for the City outlining the County' s obligations for the facility. Please let me know if you have any questions. Very truly yours, Karen Siegel Administrative Assistant cc: John Watson, Washington State Energy Office Helen Wickstrom, Kent Parks Department xV 5 + �1 k. W ti King County I Solid Waste Division -- Department of Public Works 450 King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue Seattle,Washington 98104 (206)296-6542 December 21,, 1990 Ms. Karen Siegel City of Kent Department of Public Works 400 West Gower Street Kent, WA 98032 RE: King County Recycling and Composting Demonstration Site Dear Ms. Siegel : As a follow-up to your meeting with our consultant, John Watson, I would like to confirm King County's interest in locating a community recycling and composting demonstration site in Kent and to enlist your help in getting necessary buy-off from City officials. As you know, the King County Solid Waste Division is conducting a community education program called Master Recycler Composter (MRC) in Kent this winter. The purpose of the program is to educate residents about managing garbage in the home through waste reduction, recycling and composting. The program has many elements, among them a training program for volunteers, a permanent demonstration site, and a community outreach effort. The Solid Waste Division will provide all of the program elements, but would like the City of Kent to consider hosting the permanent demonstration site. The site will provide examples of backyard composting systems and feature displays on recycling and waste reduction concepts. The City! of ECent's irL.ol've,-.,e_nt in this , uucation effort is important to us. We think the site will benefit the city and its residents by providing informational resources and activities on waste reduction, recycling and composting. We would like to work closely with the cities to maximize the effects of this program in Kent and to meet any outreach needs you may have. We would like to begin construction of a demonstration site in mid-March of 1991. Based on our past experience, we know that there are many steps in the process from site selection to final construction. We hope that an initial decision to locate a site in conjunction with the city can be made soon and would like to offer assistance in any way that we can to assist you in presenting this program to city officials. Attached is a proposal sheet offering information on the Master Recycler Composter program elements. Ms. Karen Siegel December 21, 1990 Page Two We hope you will consider joining with us to host the demonstration site. I look forward to hearing from you soon. Sincerely, Cheryl Waters Lead Program Coordinator CW:kcA kentmrc Enclosure cc: Cynthia Putnam, Washington Energy Extension Service Rodney G. Hansen, Manager, Solid Waste Division ATTN: Gary T. Kiyonaga, Assistant Manager Susan Gulick, Waste Reduction and Recycling Manager MASTER RECYCLER COMPOSTER (MRC) EDUCATION PROGRAM The King County Solid Waste Division is conducting a Master Recycler Composter (MRC) education program in communities throughout King County. The purpose of the program is to provide citizens with the information they need to make wise choices about waste management in the home. It seeks to change behavior by raising awareness of the solid waste problem and providing the tools necessary to minimize resource consumption and waste generation. The education program has three elements, including a training program for volunteers, permanent demonstration sites and a community outreach effort. Master Recycler Composter Training Program The education program will train a core of community volunteers in practical waste reduction, recycling and composting techniques. In return for the training, the volunteers will be asked to share their knowledge with others in the community. This will be done through a structured outreach plan developed in coordination with a volunteer coordinator. To date, King County has trained three groups of volunteers. A fourth training program will start in Kent in January 1991 . Recycling and Composting Demonstration Site As part of the MRC training program, participants construct a recycling and composting demonstration site in the training community. Two sites have been built to date -- one at the Redmond City Hall and a second at the Lake Hills Community Gardens in Bellevue. Just a few paces from recreational trails, the sites are inviting and attractive. Visitors can take self- guided tours of the displays and compost bin systems at any time. On selected weekends throughout the year, MRC volunteers staff the site, conducting workshops, leading tours and answering visitors' questions. The demonstration sites were developed in coordination with the City Parks Departments who provided assistance with the groundwork and ongoing maintenance. King County will publicize the sites as a resource for citizens in the comniuiiity. Community Outreach The recycling and composting demonstration site serves as a focus for community outreach and education activities. MRC volunteers will conduct community workshops at the sites to share information about home recycling and waste reduction techniques, and compost preparation and storage systems. Finally, the sites are complemented by informational materials at the local King County Public Libraries, offering publications and resources on recycling and composting. CN:kca mrc n P Kent City Council Meeting Date February 5 1991 Category Consent Calendar i 1. SUBJECT: REITH ROAD GUARDRAIL 2 . S -STA MAIM-Na: _ -As--recommended_by- the Public�IQrkz-- ,C&mmittee, 14uthorization for staff to proceed with installation" guardrail on Reith Road and to transfer $5, 000 from the asphalt overlay project for this project. The remaining $4,000 required will be transferred from the Frager- ad Guardrail project upon its completion. \ 3 . EXHIBITS: Excerpt from Public Works Committee Minutes, IBC Note 4. RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL PERSONNEL FACT: NO YES !L FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Rec ended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ % SOURCE OF FUNDS: i 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:/ Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION: - Council Agenda Item No. 3K DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS February 1, 1991 TO: Public Works Co ittee FROM: Don Wickstrom. RE: Reith Road Guardrail At your December 18, 1990 meeting, you directed staff to investigate funding options for this project. We have since been informed by WSDOT that Hazard Elimination Funds (HES) will not be available this year to local agencies. By reducing the length of guardrail to be installed it is believed the project costs can be reduced to $9, 000 . It has been proposed and approved by IBC to transfer $5, 000 from the Asphalt Overlay project for the Reith Road guardrail project and to transfer the remaining $4 , 000 from the Frager Road Guardrail project once it is completed. Public Works Committee December 18 , 1990 Page 5 parked in the City Hall lot. Tony McCarthy stated there is no where else for them to park when the employees need to be at City Hall. There are no assigned spaces in the Centennial Building parking garage for these vehicles. It was suggested that something could be worked out to share those stalls in the Centennial garage. Arterial Classification - 196th Corridor and Lind Avenue Wickstrom stated that in order to get TIB funding we need to have the route classified on the Federal system. We are proposing to have it classified as a principal arterial. In addition, in conjunction with our EVH improvement, we will have a TIA grant application and need to classify Lind Avenue as a minor arterial in order to be eligible for funding. The Committee unanimously recommended adoption of the ordinance classifying these streets as proposed. Mrs Snodderly Claim - Property on Alexander This resident has filed a claim for $25 to reimburse her for mowing the grass on City property .on Alexander Avenue. Wickstrom explained that we do not have sufficient City staff to mow the property weekly but we do maintain it two to three times a year. The Committee felt there must be some way to express appreciation for what Mrs. Snodderly did and to encourage the residents of the City to care for their area. The Committee asked staff to put together some type of award program whereby Mrs. Snodderly could be recognized for her efforts. Guardrail - Reith Road Ed White stated there have been several requests to install guard rail at two locations on Reith Road. We can apply for Hazard Elimination funds for this guard rail project or transfer funds from other safety improvements. An original estimate for the project was $151000. However, by reducing the length of the guardrail the cost can be brought to approximately $9, 000. Jim White stated he would like to know which safety improvements projects we would be transferring funds from. The Committee recommended this item be brought before Council with a list of those projects from which the funds would be transferred. F_raaer Road and Russell Road Closure Along S . 212th Street John Bond stated that the accident ranking of the intersections of Frager Road and Russell Road at S. 212th has been on the State' s Message. Dated: 01/30/91 at 1608 . Subject: REITH ROAD GUARDRAIL Sender: Tony MCCARTHY / KENT70/FN Contents: 3 . Part 1. TO: Paul SCOTT / KENT70/PW Karen SIEGEL / KENT70/PW Don WICKSTROM / KENT70/PW Part 2 . THE FISCAL NOTE FOR THE REITH ROAD GUARDRAIL PROJECT FOR THE 2/5 COUNCIL MEETING. Part 3 . THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, AT THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE'S SUGGESTION BASED ON CITIZEN REQUESTS, IS ASKING FOR $9, 000 TO INSTALL A GUARD RAIL ON A PORTION OF REITH ROAD. THEY ARE ASKING THAT $5,000 COME FROM ASPHALT OVERLAY FUNDS PREVIOUSLY ALLOCATED TO THE FRAGER AND RUSSELL ROAD CLOSURE PROJECTS AND THAT $4 , 000 COME FROM THE FRAGER ROAD GUARD RAIL PROJECT IF IT IS COMPLETED WITHIN BUDGET. THE IBC APPROVES THE FUNDING SCENERIO SO THAT THE PROJECT CAN PROCEED AHEAD. IF IT TURNS OUT THAT FUNDS FROM OTHER PROJECTS DO NOT PROVIDE THE TOTAL NEEDED, THE IBC SUGGESTS THAT MINOR RECONCILIATIONS BE WORKED OUT BETWEEN PUBLIC WORKS AND FINANCE. 1 Kent City Council Meeting Date February 5. 1991 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: UTILITY CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT SR 516, 160th AVENUE S.E. TO S.E. WAX ROAD 2 . : -� As recommended b the blic Works Committee u o za ion for a Mayor to sign an agreement with the S ate to include the replacement of that portion of the City's Kent Springs Transmission Main that falls within the scope of their Kent Kangley widening project and for the City to reimburse the State expenses for same, r-, 3 . EXHIBITS: Excerpt from Public Works Committee Minutes, copy of agreement 4. RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staff, ExamiAer, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL PE NNEL IMPACT: NO _ YES FISCAL PERSONNEL NOT Recommended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REOUIRSD: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS: 7. CITY COUNCIL A=ION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 3L✓ Public Works Committee January 15, 1991 Page 4 and 42nd Avenue South. The City can only provide sewer service to this property by pump and it is not financially feasible to do that. In order for Federal Way Water and Sewer District to service the property, they are requesting a franchise agreement be developed and signed by both cities. The Committee unanimously recommended the franchise agreement be developed allowing Federal Way Water and Sewer District to provide sewer service to the property in the vicinity of 272nd and 42nd Avenue South and that the Mayor be authorized to sign same. UTILITY CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT SR 516 160TH AVENUE S.E. TO S.E. WAX ROAD Wickstrom stated that the State will be improving Kent Kangley (SR 516) in the Covington area between Wax Road and 160th. The City' s Kent Springs Transmission Main lies within the alignment of this road improvement. The City has budgeted $650, 000 to contruct a new It is proposed t main in this area. he State include the replacement of 'the Kent Springs Transmission Main in their contract. The State has prepared an agreement whereby the City will reimburse them for the construction costs. It is recommended the Mayor be authorized to execute same. The Committee unanimously recommended approval. OTHER ITEMS Leona Orr asked about the status of the Downtown signs that have been previously approved. She stated she has been contacted about drainage problems at 120 North State Street and asked if staff would investigate and report back to her. D"rtmem d Trrrportatbn 700 ORGANIZATION AND ADDRESS UTILITY CONSTRUCTION CITY OF KENT AGREEMENT 220 4 th Ave. S . WORK BY STATE—ACTUAL COST Kent, WA 98032 AGREEMENT NUMBER SECTION/LOCATION SR 516 160th Ave . SE to SE Wax Rd STATE ROUTE CONTROLSECTION DISTRICT NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER Install waterline . 516 1797 1 ADVANCE PAYMENT AMOUNT $ 74 , 170 . 16 This AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of 19 , between the STATE OF WASHINGTON, Department of Transportation, acting by and through the Secretary of Transporta- tion, by virtue of Title 47 RCW, hereinafter called the "STATE", and the above named organization, hereinafter called the "UTILITY." WHEREAS, the STATE is planning the construction or improvement of the State Route shown above, and in connection therewith it is necessary to remove and/or relocate or construct certain UTILITY facilities as set forth in the attached plans, and WHEREAS, it is deemed to be in the best public interest for the STATE to include the necessary items of work for relocating and/or constructing the UTILITY's facilities in the STATE's construction contract, and WHEREAS,the STATE is obligated for the relocation of facilities where the UTILITY has a compensable interest in its facilities and right-of-way by virtue of being located on easements or UTILITY owned right-of-way, the UTILITY is obligated to reimburse the STATE for any relocation costs required for facilities not on easements or UTILITY owned right-of-way. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms,conditions, covenants and performances contained herein,or attaci. and incorporated and made a part hereof, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: I The UTILITY agrees, upon satisfactory completion of GENERAL the work involved, to deliver a letter of acceptance which hwa Program Manual, Volume 6, shall include a release and waiver of all ' .ture claims or Federal-Aid Hi g Y g demands of any nature resulting from the performance of the Chapter 6, Section 3, Subsection I (FHPM 6-6-3-1), and work under this AGREEMENT. amendments thereto, determine and establish the definitions and applicable standards for this AGREEMENT and pay- II ment hereunder, and by this reference are incorporated PAYMENT . hereby and made a part of this AGREEMENT for all in- An itemized estimate of cost for work to be performed tents and purposes as if fully set forth herein. by the STATE,marked Exhibit "B" is attached hereto, and The STATE, as agent acting for and on behalf of the by this reference made a part of this AGREEMENT. UTILITY, agrees to do the work in removing, relocating The UTILITY, in consideration of the faithful perform- and/or constructing the UTILITY facilities, in accordance with and described in the specifications marked Exhibit "A" once of the work to be done the STATE, agrees to eed and plans marked Exhibit "C" attached hereto, and by this burse the STATE for the actual direct and related indirect reference made a part of this AGREEMENT. cost of all work which is the financial responsibility of the UTILITY as defined in Exhibits "A" and "B". Plans, specifications and cost estimates shall be pre- Partial payments shall be made by the UTILITY, upon pared by the STATE in accordance with the current State of request of the STATE, to cover costs incurred. These pay- Washington Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and ments are not to be more frequent than one (1) per month. It Municipal Construction, and adopted design standards, un- is agreed that any such partial payment will not constitute less otherwise noted. The STATE will incorporate the plans agreement as to the appropriateness of any item and that, at and specifications into the STATE's project and thereafter the time of final audit, all required adjustments will be made advertise the resulting project for bid and, assuming bids are and reflected in a final payment. received and a contract is awarded, administer the contract. The UTILITY agrees to pay the STATE the "Advance The UTILITY hereby approves the plans and specifica- Payment Amount" stated above within 20 days after the tions for the described work as shown on Exhibits "A" and „C„ STATE submits its first partial payment request to UTILITY. The advance payment represents approxima,., ; The UTILITY may, if it desires, furnish an inspector on fifteen (15) percent of the estimate of cost for which the the project. Any costs for such inspection will be borne solely UTILITY is responsible, and covers costs incurred by the by the UTILITY. All contact between said inspector and the STATE in the initial stages of the project. The advance pay- STATE's contractor shall be through the STATE's repre- ment will be carried throughout the life of the project with sentatives. final adjustment made in the final payment. VIII III RIGHT OF ENTRY EXTRA WORK The UTILITY hereby grants and conveys to the In the event unforeseen conditions require an increase in TE the ht on land ch the UTILITY the UTILITY's reed to o cost obbi�atB n this AGREEMENTrw Il be h spin erest,rwith of the rright ofaway of het highway, for he e from that ag purpose of improving and/or constructing said highway. modified by supplement AGREEMENT covering said in- p P crease. As noted in Exhibit "A" the UTILITY will, after relo- t of te and de- Inthe event work is determined this that an) EEMENT s re- liv from the er to theion /STAor TE a quit clam deed r�etmoving all UTILITY description quired,approval must be secured from the UTILITY prior to interUponr r E's right of e completion of the wok outlined herein, all future the beginning of such work. Where the change is substantial, operation and maintenance of the UTILITY's facilities shall written approval must be secured. Reimbursement for increased work and/or a substantial be at the sole cost of the UTILITY and with expense to change in the description of work shall be limited to costs the STATE. IX covered by a written modification, change order, or extra EASEMENT, PERMIT OR FRANCHISE work order approved by the UTILITY. IV The STATE will issue the UTILITY an easement, per- SALVAGE mit or franchise,as provided in Exhibit"A",for those UTIL- es which on or ross All materials removed by the STATE shall theSTATE and shall become the property way folloe reclaimed ITY wing completionnof thecworkhoutl nedEherein.right of or dispose y X of the STATE.If the UTILITY desires to retain these mate LEGAL RELATIONS rials,and the STATE concurs, the UTILITY shall reimburse the STATE an amount not less than that required by the The UTILITY shall indemnify and hold the STATE FHPM 6-6-3-1. and its agents, employees,and/or officers harmless from and V shall process and defend at its own expense any ne tied BETTERMENTS claims, demands, suits at.law or equity, actions, pti If adjustment of the UTILITY's facilities does consti- losses, damages, or costs, of whatsoever kind or nature, lute a betterment as defined in FHPM imate 1, the better- with, or iht ncidentainst he to to tthep,execution TE of this out of, ment credit will be included in the estimate of cost. and/or the UTILITY's performance or failure to perform VI any aspect of this AGREEMENT.Provided, however,that if ACCRUED DEPRECIATION such claims are caused by or result from the concufrent neg- If adjustment of the UTILITY'S facilities does involve a lig ence of (a) the UTILITY and (b) the STATE, its agents, employees valid and enforceable only to the extent of the negligence of and/or officers, this indemnity provision shall be credit due for the accrued depreciation of the facility being replaced, this value will be included in the estimate of cost. the UTILITY, and Provided further, that nothing herein VII shall require the UTILITY to hold harmless or defend the COMPLIANCE STATE, its agents, employees and/or officers from any claims arising from the sole negligence of the STATE, its The UTILITY agrees to comply with all applicable re- agents, employees, and/or officers. quirements of the STATE which shall be in accordance with the Utilities Accommodation Policy, Chapter 468-34 WAC, No liability shall attach to the STATE or the UTILITY and amendments thereto, and said policy and amendments by reason of entering into this AGREEMENT except as ex- are hereby and in an mad ea part of tis fully AGRErE; pressly provided herein. arENT f herein. cuted this AGREEMENT as of the day and year first above written. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have exe STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. UTILITY By: By: Title: Date: Form 226-062 DOT Revised 8/86 QX A-115 EXHIBIT "A" AGREEMENT UT 0304 SPECIFICATIONS AND SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS The work proposed under this Agreement contemplates the installation of a new water supply pipeline by the State' s contractor at the expense of the City of Kent, as described herein. WORK BY STATE Supply materials and install a new 24" diameter ductile iron pipe waterline, cathodic test stations, connections, valves and a watermain drain system from Sta. 224+22 . 4 , 10 Ft. Rt. to 261+75, 23 Ft Rt. See Exhibit "B" , Sheet B-1 for an Estimate of Costs See Exhibit "C" , Sheet 1 of 7 for Vicinity Map See Exhibit "C" , Sheet 2 for SN U3-11 U3-31 U3-41 U3-5 11356 LF 24" DI Pipe for Watermain 11344 CY Bank Run Gravel for Trench Backfill 25,754 SF Shoring & Cribbing 2 EA Cathodic Test Stations 1 EA Combination Air Release/Air Vacuum Assembly 1 EA End Connection for Watermain See Exhibit "C" , Sheet 3 for SN U4-1, U4-2 , U4-3 , U4-4 , U4-5 11525 LF 24" DI Pipe for Watermain 1,911 CY Bank Run Gravel for Trench Backfill 32 , 643 SF Shoring & Cribbing 1 EA Combination Air Release/Air Vacuum Assembly 1 EA Remove Existing Vault and Meter See Exhibit "C" , Sheet 4 for SN U5-11 U5-21 U5-31 U5-4 , U5-5,U5-6 6 LF 18" DI Pipe for Watermain 700 LF 24" DI Pipe for Watermain 515 CY Bank Run Gravel for Trench Backfill 11, 093 SF Shoring & Cribbing 1 EA 18" Butterfly Valve 1 EA Cathodic Test Station 1 EA Watermain Drain System 1 EA End Connection for Watermain EXHIBIT "A" A-1 UT 0304 See Exhibit "C" , Sheets 5 and 6 of 7 for drainage profiles See Exhibit "C" , Sheet 7 of 7 for drainage details WORK BY UTILITY None. FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY The Utility is responsible for all costs to perform the work as detailed in Exhibit "B" of this agreement, Estimate of Costs. Actual costs will be based on bids received. In the event that the bid prices in the require an increase Utility's cost obligation of 25% or more from that agreed to on "B" , the Utility can be released from this agreement upon Exhibit request received within 30 days of execution receipt a written of the State's contract. FRANCHISE OR PERMIT The utility shall apply for and the State shall convey the or franchise pursuant to Chapter necessary statutory permits 47 . 44 RCW required for installation of such facilities that remain on or cross the State highway right of way. EXHIBIT "A" A-2 UT 0304 EXHIBIT"B" AGREEMENT UT 0304 UNIT PRICE AMOUNT ITEM NO GROUP QUANTITY UNIT IT DESCRIPTION $IT PRICE $AMOUNT 1 6 1 LS Mobilization 31,576.29 37 6 3670 CY Bank Run Gravel for Trench Backfill $5 0 0.00 $36,700-00 00.00 39 6 1 EA Butterfly Valve 18 In. 42 6 6 LF DI Pipe for Water Main 18 In. Diam. $44.00 $264.00.00 , .00 $207698 43 6 3581 LF DI Pipe for Water Main 24 In. Diam. $$58$58.00 07,698.00 44 6 3 EA Cathodic Test Station 45 6 2 EA Comb. Air Release/Vac.Assemb 6 In. $$0000.00 $4,000.00 8 ,000-00 46 6 2 EA End Connection Water Main 1 ,000.00 20000.00 47 6 1 EA Remove Existing Vault&Meter ,000.00 48 6 1 EA Water Main Drain System $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $0.50 102 6 69490 SF Shoring/Cribbing or Extra Exc Trench $353,783 29 SUBTOTAL $ WSST @ 8.1% , . GROUP 6 SUBTOTAL $382,43939.73 CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING AT 15% $57,365.96 CONTINGENCIES @ 5% $19,121.99 bb AGREEMENT SUBTOTAL $$37, 2 INDIRECT OVERHEAD @ 8.22% $37,723..86 "TOTAL ESTIMATED FOR GROUP 6 $496,651.53 MOBILIZATION AND ENGINEERING COSTS WILL BE DETERMINED BY A PRORATION OF THE MOBILIZATION AND ENGINEERING COSTS OF THE ENTIRE PROJECT TO THE CONSTRUCTION COSTS OF THE WORK COVERED BY THIS AGREEMENT. "NO BETTERMENT OR SALVAGE VALUE ARE INCLUDED IN THIS WORK. EXHIBIT"B" B-1 AGREEMENT UT 0304 AMkk Duane Berentson MT Washington State Secretary of Transportation I Department of Transportation District 1 15325 S.E.30th Place Bellevue,Washington 98007-6568 (206)562-4000 - CITY OF KENT December 12 , 1990 VC I 7 1990 ENGINEERING dpt; City of Kent 220 4th Ave. S. Kent, WA 98032 -Att: Dean Falkner SR 516 CS 1797 160th Ave SE to SE Wax Rd State Project Agreement UT 0304 Mr. Falkner: Two originals of the referenced agreement (brown covers) are enclosed for your signature. Please have these originals signed on behalf of the City of Kent and return to this office. A copy (blue cover) is enclosed for your temporary records. When the agreement has been signed by WSDOT, we will return an original to you. Do not write the date in on the front page as this will be entered by the State upon final execution. If you have questions or need more information, please call Jodi Matthews at 562-4258 . Sincerely, Ja utz , P. E. District Utilities/ Developer Services Engineer JEM Attach. cc: * File (SIGN0304) DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS January 10, 1991 TO: Publiq Works Committee FROM: Don Wickstrom RE: Utility Construction Agreement SR 516, 160th Avenue S.E. to S.E. Wax Road The State is planning on widening Kent Kangley between 160th Avenue S.E. and S.E. Wax Road with construction anticipated to begin later this year. A portion of the Kent Springs Transmission Main which the City intends to replace currently lies within the alignment of this road. We are proposing to include the replacement of this portion of the line in the State project thereby effecting considerable savings for restoration, etc. to the City. The State has prepared an agreement whereby they will include the installation of the new water line in their project for which the City will reimburse them. The estimated costs to the City are $496, 651. 53 . is50 recommended udthe tMayor rbe authorized to execute the Agreement.� it A i Kent City Council Meeting 1 Date February 5. 1991 t Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT BOARD GRANT - CENTRAL AVENUE - GOWE TO TITUS 2 . STATEMENT: As recommended to the Public Works ; Committe , . thorization for the Mayor to sign agreement with B to accept a grant of $129, 280 for the Central Avenue improvement project and to establish a budget for same 3 . EXHIBITS: Copy of agreement 4. RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staff,. Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCALL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: �1ryd1 NO YES X FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended \ Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE UIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUN PS: J� 7 . CITY COUNCIJ ACTION: Councilmem er moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION t ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 3M - State of Washington Air � Transportation Improvement Board I Transportation Building XF-01 urfi Olympia, Washington 98504 CIN OF KE1�1 (206)753-7198 SCAN 234-7198 JAN 25 1991 January 22, 1991 %GINEERING DEPT. Mr. Don Wickstrom, P.E. Public Works Director City of Kent 220 - 4th Avenue South Kent, WA 98032-5895 Transportation Improvement Project TIB No. 8-1-106(22) Central Avenue Gowe Street to Titus Street City of Kent Dear Mr. Wickstrom: We are pleased to advise you that the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) has authorized the above-referenced project for development with financial assistance from the Urban Arterial Trust Account (UATA). The total amount of UATA funds authorized for the preliminary proposal is $129,280. The estimated amount for construction phase is $388,240, providing a total of $517,520 in UATA funds. . The Board has adopted rules that will affect the development of this project. The rules allow the board to over-obligate funds to projects and allow for increases at various stages. This may affect the availablity of funds for construction phase approval. A Value Engineering Study was required for this project, therefore the costs incurred by the city since May 19, 1989 for preliminary engineering to prepare for the study and the cost of the study are reimbursable at eighty percent (80%). Please submit a progress billing pertaining to the costs incurred prior to January 18, 1991. The billing is to include a detailed breakdown of work items, date performed, and cost of each item. The billing is to be submitted to the attention of the Program Engineer, so he may review and approve the submitted costs prior to payment. The work covered by this authorization is limited to the completion of the preliminary engineering, R/W appraisals, R/W acquisition and environmental assessment. Mr. Don Wickstrom, P.E. January 22, 1991 Page 2 This project was considered for authorization in accordance with the rules governing Transportation Improvement Board projects. The TIB rules provide that new projects authorized for financial assistance from the Urban Arterial Trust Account shall be capable of being placed under contract for construction within the amount of time requested by the agency. For this project the time will be 18 months from the date of authorization. This proviso is intended to avoid obligating Urban Arterial Trust Funds on projects that will be delayed in development. . TIB Guideline 3 states that the prospectuses for construction projects shall be received by the first day of the month in which authorization by the Board is proposed. However, it would be appreciated if you could submit the prospectus 15 days prior to the first to facilitate TIB staff review. 'Three copies of the revised construction prospectus forms are enclosed, please submit two copies to the TIB office and retain the third copy for your files. Sign the three enclosed project agreements and return to the TIB office by February 8, 1991. Upon execution by the Executive Director of the Transportation Improvement Board, one copy will be returned to your office. Sincerely, John Tevis, P.E UATA Program Engineer JMF:jjs Enclosures cc: Don Hoffman John Tevis NOW URBAN ARTERIAL TRUST ACCOUNT N ' Project Agreement for Preliminary Proposal PROJECT NUMBER SUBMITTING AGENCIES 8-1-106(22) PRIMARY City of Kent INTEREST AGENCY AUTHORITY NUMBER -- . JOINTAGENCY 91100481 JOINT AGENCY LOCAL NAME OF ARTERIAL Central Avenue Gowe Street to Titus Street FUNDS ALLOCATED FOR 1St QUARTER TOTAL AMOUNT OF AUTHORIZED U.AT.A.,FUNDS FOR PRELIMINARY PROPOSAL IN: 1991 $32,000 $129,280 ALLOCATION AND AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED EFFECTIVE FROM: January 18, 1991 IN CONSIDERATION of the allocation by the Transportation Improvement Board of Urban Arterial Trust Account(UATA)funds to the project and in the amount set out above,the agency hereby agrees that as condition precedent to payment of any UATA funds allocated at any time to the above referenced project,it accepts and will complywith the terms of this agreement,including the terms of this agreement,including the terms and conditions set forth in RCW 47.26;the applicable rules and regulations of the Board,and all representations made to the Board upon which the fund allocation was based;all ofwhich are familiar to and within the knowledge of the agency and incorporated herein and made a part of this agreement,although not attached. The officer of the agency(ies),by the signature(s)below,hereby certifies on behalf of the agency that local matching funds and other funds represented to be committed to the project will be available as necessary to implement the projected development of the project as set forth in the PRELIMINARY proposal prospectus,acknowledges that funds hereby authorized are for the development of the preliminary proposal as defined by Chapter 126,Laws of 1973,1st Ex.Sm.,and is subject to immediate cancellation by the Board if the project's development is delayed in relation to the schedule presented to,and accepted by,the Board at the time of project authorization. IN CONSIDERATION of the promises and performance of the stated conditions by the agency,the Transportation Improvement Board hereby agrees to reimburse the agency from allocated UATA funds and not otherwise,for its reimbursable costs during the ensuing quarteryear not to exceed the amount above specified. Such obligation to reimburse UATA funds extends only to project costs incurred after the date of the Board's allocation of funds and authorization to proceed with the project,except as provided for by the Board rules on projects that require a value engineering study prior to approval of the preliminary proposal prospectus. PRIMARY City of Kent TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT BOARD INTERESTAGENCY BY Sfgmtum of Mayor/Chapman Dafe Executfm Director Date JOINTAGENCY BY signature of Mayor/Chairman Date JOINTAGENCY , BY Signature of Ma yoriChaimsn Date TIB Form 190-009 Revised 01/90 URBAN ARTERIAL TRUST ACCOUNT J ► ' Prop OSa�I 1 Project Agreement for Preliminary SUBMITTING AGENCIES PROJECT NUMBER 8-1-106(22) TINTEREST Cityof Kent GENCYAUTHORITY NUMBER NCY 91100481NCY LOCAL NAME OF ARTERIAL Central Avenue Gowe Street to Titus Street FUNDS ALLOCATED FOR 1St QUARTER TOTAL AMOUNT OF AUTHORIZED U.A.T.A. FUNDS FOR PRELIMINARY PROPOSAL IN: 1991 $32,000 $1292280 ALLOCATION AND AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED EFFECTIVE FROM: January 18, 1991 IN CONSIDERATION of the allocation by the Transportation Improvement Board of Urban Arterial Trust Account(UATA)funds to the project and in the amount set out above,the agency hereby agrees that as condition precedent to payment of any UATA funds allocated at any time to the above referenced project,it accepts and will complywith the terms of this agreement,including the terms of this agreement,including the terms and conditions set forth in RCW 47.26;the al rules and regulations of the Board,and all representations made to the Board upon which the fund allocation was based;all of which are 6;thearto and within theknowledge of the agency and incorporated herein and madea part of this agreement,although not attached. The officer of the agency(ies),by the signature(s)below,hereby certifies on behalf of the agency that local matching funds and other(ands represented to be committed to the project will be available as necessary to implement the projected development of the project asset forth in the PRELIMINARY proposal prospectus,acknowledges that funds hereby authorized are for the development of the preliminary proposal as defined bya Chapter pre Laws ation to the of 1973,1st Ex.Sess.,and is subject to immediate cancellation by the Board if the project's development is delayed in rel schedule presented to,and accepted by,the Board at the time of project authorization. IN CONSIDERATION of the promises and performance of the stated conditions by the agency,the Transportation Improvement Board hereby agrees to reimburse the agency from allocated UATA funds and not otherwise,for its reimbursable costs during the ensuing quarteryear not to exceed the amou nt above specified. Such obligation to reimburse UATA funds extends only to project costs incurred alter the date of the Board's allocation of funds and authorization to proceed with the project,except as provided for by the Board rules on projects that require a value engineering study prior to approval of the preliminary proposal prospectus. PRIMARY City of Kent TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT BOARD INTEREST AGENCY BY FxecuCve Ofrecror Lute SignaNre o!Mayw/Chanrrun 61re JOINTAGENCY BY SigneRlre of MayvrlChainnan CIO JOINTAGENCY , BY Signeerte of W.yW1Ch8i~ C8re TIB Form 190-009 Revised 01/90 NOW URBAN ARTERIAL TRUST ACCOUNT Project Agreement for Preliminary Proposal SUBMITTING AGENCIES PROJECT NUMBER RY 8-1-106(22) P RIMARY GENCY City Of Kent AUTHORITY NUMBER CY 91100481 CY LOCAL NAME OF ARTERIAL Central Avenue Gowe Street to Titus Street FUNDS ALLOCATED FOR 1St QUARTER TOTAL AMOUNT OF AUTHORIZED U.A.T.A..FUNDS FOR PRELIMINARY PROPOSAL IN: 1991 $32,000 $129.280 ALLOCATION AND AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED EFFECTIVE FROM: 7 January 18, 1991 IN CONSIDERATION of the allocation by the Transportation Improvement Board of Urban Arterial Trust Account(UATA)funds to the project and in the amount set out above,the agency hereby agrees that as condition precedent to payment of any UATA funds allocated at any time to the above referenced project,it accepts and will complywith the terms of this agreement,including the terms of this agreement,including the terms and conditions set forth in RCW 47.26;the applicable rules and regulations of the Board,and all representations made to the Board upon which the fund allocation was based;all ofwhich are familiar to and within the knowledge of the agency and incorporated herein and made a part of this agreement,although not attached. The officer o[the agenry(ies),by the signature(s)below,hereby certifies on behalf of the agency that local matching funds and other funds represented to be committed to the project will be available as necessary to implement the projected development of the project asset forth in the PRELIMINARY proposal prospectus,acknowledges that funds hereby authorized are for the development of the preliminary proposal as defined by Chapter 126,Laws of 1973,1st Ex.Sess.,and is subject to immediate cancellation by the Board if the project's development is delayed in relation to the schedule presented to,and accepted by,the Board at the time of project authorization. IN CONSIDERATION of the promises and performance of the stated conditions by the agency,the Transportation Improvement Board hereby agrees l0reimburse the agency from allocated UATA funds and not otherwise,for its reimbursable costs during the ensuing quarteryea r not to exceed the amount above specified. Such obligation to reimburse UATA funds extends only to project costs incurred after the date of the Board's allocation of funds and authorization to proceed with the project,except as provided for by the Board rules on projects that require a value engineering study prior to approval of the preliminary proposal prospectus. PRIMARY - City of Kent TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT BOARD INTEREST AGENCY BY EXWL"Director Dare Signature of MayorlChan'man Date JOINT AGENCY BY Slgmtire of Ma,w/Chairman Dare JOINTAGENCY BY Signature d Mgor/Chaimvn Data TIB Form 190-009 Revised 01190 \ 1 June 20, 1989 (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3G) _ROL Transportation Improvement Board - 84th Avenue / Street Improvements (180th to 192nd) . AUTHORIZATION V for. the Mayor to sign the Transportation Improvement Board prospectus for grant funding for this project, as recommended by the Public Works Committee. (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3H) Transportation Improvement Board - 104th Avenue and S.E. 256th Street Intersection Improvements. / AUTHORIZATION for the Mayor to sign the r/ Transportation Improvement Board prospectus for grant funding for this project, as approved by the Public Works Committee. (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3I) REMOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER DOWELL -�� Transportation Improvement Board Central Avenue Improvements (Willis to Smith) . AUTHORIZATION for the Mayor to sign the Transportation Improvement / Board prospectus for grant funding for this project, as approved by the Public Works Committee. Upon Dowell ' s question, Public Works Director Wickstrom clarified the project' s turning lanes. DOWELL THEN MOVED for the adoption of Item 3I with clarifications as described. Houser seconded and the motion carried. WATER (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3F) Lake Fenwick Restoration Project. AUTHORIZATION to establish a budget of $65, 000 and transfer of funds from the unencumbered sewer funds to the Lake Fenwick Restoration Project. ANNEXATION Mortensen Annexation. This date has been set for a public hearing on annexation of approximately nine (9) acres in the vicinity of 98th Ave. So. and S. 218th. The City Clerk has -given the proper legal notification of this hearing. The Mayor declared the public hearing open. There were no comments from the audience and WHITE MOVED that the public hearing be closed. Johnson seconded and the motion carried. WOODS MOVED that the City Attorney be 4 Public Works Committee June 13, 1989 Page 2 a grant of $200,000. Kent's matching fund would come from commitments from development in the area. 3) Central Avenue Improvements (Willis to Smith) - The project consists of widening Central and constructing a northbound right / turn lane at Central and Gowe. The project is approximately V $1,516,000. TIB has offered a grant of $1,000,000. Kent's matching funds would come from drainage utility funds; WSDOT overlay participation and a reallocation of 1991 CIP funds from the 84th Avenue project. The Committee unanimously approved the Mayor's signature on the prospectus for these grant offers. Property Exchange - Union Pacific Realty Wickstrom explained that when the property was rezoned from MA to M11 the owners had'to deed right of way along 64th Avenue from 216th to 212th plus extra right of way for a future drainage . channel. In working with the Fisheries department on the lagoon, it may be possible to put the outlet into an existing channel on the west side of the lagoon. Union Pacific is willing to trade the equivalent right of way along the drainage channel in exchange for release of the right of way along 64th. The Committee unanimously approved the exchange. L.I.D. 336 - 64th Avenue Improvements - Interim Financing Wickstrom stated the original approval for interim financing was just for . right of way acquisition. We now need to hire consultants for design of the signal system for the project which will be approximately $49,000. Wickstrom requested the interim - financing be amended to include funds for the signal design. The Committee unanimously approved. L.I.D. 330 - 64th Avenue Improvements % Williamson stated he had previously prepared a statement as to how the Public Works Committee could accept the Environmental Task Force report without interfering with the SEPA process. After meeting with Sandra Driscoll and Dan Stroh of Planning, Williamson stated he felt the Committee should not make a recommendation to Council but rather to the city's SEPA official, Jim Harris. Based on this, Williamson presented the action (copy attached) on which he would recommend Committee approval. The Committee approved Williamson's recommendation. Cow�� CckE��- rsL 3 M DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS February 1, 1991 TO: Public Works Committee FROM: Don Wickstrom RE: TIB Grant - Central Avenue, Gowe Street to Titus Street In June of 1989 the City submitted a prospectus to the Transportation Improvement Board for grant funding for the Central Avenue Improvement (Willis to Smith) project. We have just been notified that TIB has approved $129 , 280 for preliminary engineering for this project. Total project costs are estimated at $646, 900 of which the City's share would be $129, 380 . The City's share will come partly from DOT overlay funds (Central Avenue is State Route 516) , drainage utility funds (already budgeted) and monies reserved specifically for this project in the Willis Street (SR 516) Central to 4th Avenue Improvement and Smith Street (SR 516) Jason to Railroad Avenue Improvement projects. We are requesting the Mayor be authorized to sign the agreement with the State and that a budget be established for these funds. Kent City Council Meeting Date February 5. 1991 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: VAN DOREN'S CENTER 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: , Acceptance of the bill of sale and warranty agreement submitted by Union Pacific Realty for continuous operation and maintenance of approximately 3 , 905. 5 feet of water main extension constructed in the vicinity of West Valley Highway and S. 228th for Van Doren's Center and release of cash bond after expiration of the one year maintenance period. 3. EXHIBITS: Vicinity Map 4. RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PEkSONNEL IMPACT: NO_ YES FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOT IA: Recommended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: SOURCE OF FUNDS: 7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember imoves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agend Item No. 3N �T- f•.+K.Y�•r��}�r.r'. •� l }�.` '�I'i 1�J d 1'..•1 I { <' n •� I 4 t ". yi, ,A l� A�'A (yr.''J" .1'-. rSJ• ,S � ` �Y - .. r \r��,t1 • , fit, 1'_ 7 i �;++14L F, ♦.'iT L,! A ir` 1 rr _r !. G� 1 Mt G;Ir ^ICJ.\Y;` f �i v t '•. 4 : '',..1 �?;'�`t� rt ,�' Ifs ],�'Y ..:L tr t �,. i,.(�yjT�"✓,y'i`�� ., . 7 .� r. ;N�1 '�IJrl il'i r \�r1 1 r[.<'\T•� [�X J.. 4t\ 7.. il'•!* ^, q ` ? f• J .� tt � fp 'i. �� rY fJ,f•i n, a.1` 11 -�. •, t �. {�1� �, i 1.: ` - '; i r\ r �~�'ry�tl^i '�} 1 r•r•�.. J`Jiro,.r�,���:�Y �cA v � `� �. . i '1 ' tt<�f p'hi y.t �9, rt..f I `� ' � \ •: �� . �,1 1 yyH �tGF�IY iti i r • I .u' �i�kj 5v �T f� lR kryr rJ i,• � IG i t j'( i'.Ji �'fe J� ;.1 ,, S• .fi'S"J,S1J�*+' PV p4r � r r .1 t�S r T. �- + �, 3, Si��'rJ ( yitr i ��t~`'*�n•'v y( Y • nrt 1\ r i e~ [ r - ^f •}j 1 ! 1 J �fzi t. . yt�i'. qx 7l• f,-}1 4 1r {r�F' � Lr�fe ity .1l f r'! I. -h� a , :.t ii r ++I��wti•4 ,• r �IVNr��c)ir }'Yt.+e �(' ,r 5i\"M \ ), _a�"' �✓t4� .(" t' 7, i '' !e 'V 1 a 1., S G, r` 1 r. KE � I F•i•4`: .1.A r vi r `.J. rr 'n .+ 1 � f .. \i ! J' ) � '. � t\4 Is. r •r i ��Rf ti. } J rT1.. t ._.E., � yt ' , r ;•�� J � f i'I\ fvf I `I �V r �..•, R ` rf i�'� � s '- I > t.tt . . I S :` ) 1 `I j,b Tk ; ,r i $ ` 4 � .� .y u OW {{ \� ' r r' a •/� \ •"1 � it r v L �? 'i < .�•v� a. � i ; A , rrr s i • .'� • m i 1i ♦`y\.' G ,•'Yi4,= I..`�; '♦ ``1' � Q ... !: NiW1f1f0� s err �I - i T 11• it ,r r, rt i,.,.. .rY _ .'. .`}' VAN DORENS CENTER Kent City Council Meeting n Date February 5 1991 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: THE GREENS 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Acceptance of the bills of sale and warranty agreements submitted by Lakeridge Development for continuous operation and maintenance of 3, 031.5 feet of offsite sanitary sewer extension constructed in the vicinity of Kent Kangley and 128th place S.E. and 2,896 feet of onsite sanitary sewer extension constructed in the vicinity of 129th Court S.E. and S.E. 264th Street for The Greens development and release of cash bond after expiration of the one year maintenance period. 3 . EXHIBITS: Vicinity Map 4. RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL PE ONNEL IMPACT: NO YES FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE Recommended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS: , \l 7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: \ Councilmember movies, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 30 J ! acly.0 1 '�IV1(IkIM,1 i: x \yam . �'• � I 9 Y•y4' v. ? 4 r': 'TMr�n-,1g15 L. ja, si N Mir9rh Ul u{� P'D,o Y F"q� I _t rep• _sr .�'lLO�/ ti� I6 6•,w.Y J l 1l yl' �1w\r 1r \ �` l�• 15 l s S[7ET1/ •B 1 Sf Si' Titill:fl n a 0 '� a>r sc ; In 1 tx : Nlorlafl T/OIN V Pit) SE'1;LNU R G c : - !• S l�' T ra 1q+' auuv. 1 !L 11.1. r. it L� ; a - �a '� 4t17 '� �, 1,1.. 7' fll'��'L i i w 1I..•.i� � „„'a `Jw _ .. -' , 1 ••.l'1'•'t i (. w ( i A f1 1 + P. �l rfi" — " I N.7.1 w p(a )1'f:jl� fib" ` f•la I iy ..iva nwd � a•ye ¢>_s .��r 't;.e:. trnlal;� l i ' rye "Z311 a. /flr'��t''k�l 1'f 4� �a 1 _(�• _ ..1,nl. P VICINITY MAP SCALE: 2" 1 MILE± THE . GREENS 1 I) / Ul�- �� V' Kent City Council Meeting C Date February 5 I Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: NEIL SWIFT BUILDING 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Acceptance of the bill of sale and warranty agreement submitted by Neil and Vicki Swift for continuous operation and maintenance of approximately 140 feet of street improvements and 145 feet of storm sewer improvements constructed in the vicinity of S. Central Avenue and E. Morton Street for the Neil Swift Building and release of cash bond after expiration of the one year maintenance period. 3 . EXHIBITS: Vicinity Map 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL PERSO L IMPACT: NO YES FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Re ommended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REOUIRED: $ \ SOURCE OF FUNDS: 7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves;. Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION: — Council Agenda Item No. 3P ✓ �a..SAN1E1.5 did. SMIT ST. 1 , 3 V.(1 LLI y Sr. 6 E.MOFt.TON sSC. Q G j 5.'LSgT'^ er, J� NEIL SWIFT BUILDING Kent City Council Meeting Date February 5. 1991 Category Other Business r'I cl 1. SUBJECT: STREET UTILITY J J 2. SUM11my STATEMENT: �ttee-t+a ftrl�-6a��i.3,.-..t.o _gins.._diraati®rr-=ttx : _ _ The City has received preliminary grant approval in the amount of $14, 000,000 for construction of the 272nd Corridor project and two segments of the 196th Street Corridor project. Implementation of these projects would provide significant relief to the City's traffic congestion problem. Traffic congestion is the City Council's #1 target issue. The Growth Management Act requires concurrence between the City's land use plan and its transporta- tion system. Future growth of the City is jeopardized unless concurrency is achieved. Implementation of these corridor projects is a critical ingredient for achieving said concurrency. The 1990 gas tax legislation authorized the creation of a street utility to which service charges can be levied for the operation, maintenance, construction and reconstruction of the City's Transportation system. These projects are estimated to cost $40, 000, 000 for which, if implemented, the utility would fund $4,900,000. 1 The Public Works Department recommends passing Resolution 11.; 'O denoting Council"s intent to create a street utility. �.___. 3 . EXHIBITS: Memorandum from Public Works Director, IBC Note 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES X FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended_ Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS: 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: I Councilmember moves, Councilmember !j seconds n Resolution 0 be adopted denoting Council's intent to create a street utility. DISCUSSION: ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 4A DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS January 31, 1991 TO: Mayor Kelleher and city Council FROM: Don Wickstrom'�) �V RE: Street Utility/Corridor Funding Implementation of a street utility has been before the Public Works Committee whereupon it was felt that full Council needs to ascertain the direction thereon. Transportation and traffic congestion has and is a significant problem in Kent. It has been a top priority target issue for council for many years. An opportunity, however, now exists to do something about it. The carrot for acting is $14 , 000, 000 in grant funding. The stick for not acting is not only the loss of said funds but more importantly the ramification associated with meeting the concurrency requirement of the Growth Management Act. Presently, the City has received preliminary grant funding approval for the following projects: PROJECTS TOTAL GRANT LID OTHER COST 27 2 / 27 7 $16, 280 $ 4 , 247 $ 5,530 $ 6, 503 Corridor - Auburn Way North to SR 516 19 6 / 2 0 0 5, 605 2 , 424 1, 761 11420 Corridor - Orillia Road to WVH 1 9 6/ 2 0 0 17 , 500 7 , 295 5 , 331 4 , 874 Corridor - WVH to EVH TOTAL $39 , 385 $13 , 966 $12 , 662 $12 ,797 (in thousands) Mayor Kelleher and City Council Street Utility/Corridor Funding January 31, 1991 Page 2 These are T. I.B. (Washington State Transportation Improvement Board) grant funds and, as such, they are over obligated at a ratio of 3 : 1 (first one into the pot gets the money) . Also, recently T. I.B. has ascertained that the original approved project list has now doubled in cost and now a prorlches their_total._ 10-year revenue forecas - While they have deferred approving new projects for 9 , they will entertain same for 1992 . The bottom line is that the grant funding is eroding and delays in acting upon these grants increase the probability of losing- me. The utility is the key - and last - financial element necessary for assembling the $12 , 797 , 000 needed to implement these projects over the next five years. Cash (1) $ 51800, 000 Gas Tax (2) 11515, 000 Vehicle Registration Fee (3) 11418 , 000 Street Utility 4 , 064 , 000 $12 , 797 , 000 (1) 2 ,8001000 Existing Cash on hand 3 , 000 , 000 Approved Councilmanic bond issue 5,800, 000 (2) The additional revenue related to the increase in the gas tax. (3) Revenue related to recently County enacted vehicle registration fee. As noted earlier, not acting will not only result in the loss of these grants but more importantly, it will make meeting the concurrency requirement of the Growth Management Act a hardship on all. The Growth Management Act requires concurrency of the land use ,plan with the transportation system. It specifically denotes that the City must prohibit development if it would reduce the transportation level of service below comprehensive plan standards unless the improvements can be in place with the development or a financial commitment is in place for completion of the improvements within six years. The city' s presently adopted service level is D- minus. Two years ago, the City had thirteen key intersections at level of service E or F (see attached map) and the improvements instituted since then probably have not significantly changed that number. In fact, with the growth we have been experiencing that Mayor Kelleher and City Council Street Utility/Corridor Funding January 31, 1991 Page 3 total number has probably increased. The bottom line is our existing transportation system doesn't have the capacity to handle additional developmental growth. It is the Public Works Department' s judgement that the transportation system needed to handle the City's existing land use plan will minimally require implementation of all the corridor projects plus a demand management program. Thus, implementation of a street utility as a financial source for the development and maintenance of the City's transportation system is critical for continued growth of the City. By State law a street utility service charge is capped at a maximum of either $2 . 00 per month per single family residential unit or employee (for businesses) or half the City' s street maintenance and operation budget whichever generates the least revenue. Based on same, the maximum service charge the City could levy is estimated to be between $1.88/month and $1. 91/month. The total annual revenue therefrom is estimated at $1, 208 , 000. Said revenues can only be used for transportation purposes and can not be used to supplement the use of existing City funds within the Street budget. It should be noted, however, that both Metro and King County have the authority subject to voter approval to levy an employee tax for which the street utility would have to give full credit therefor. Were such to occur the annual revenue generated by the street utility would then be reduced to $343 , 000. While no other cities have instituted a street utility, there is interest in same by both Seattle and Issaquah. Some cities such as Renton and Bellevue have, however, instituted similar type charges via their B&O taxing authority. Renton has an employee tax of $4 . 35 per employee per month and Bellevue' s is $3 . 35 per employee per month. The revenue from these charges is dedicated for transportation improvements. The utility seems to be more equitable means for distributing the cost of the transportation system to all users. To ease the financial impact of the street utility, it is proposed that the City' s utility tax on the City ' s sewer and water utility be absorbed by the utilities instead of being passed on directly to the customer as it is presently done. A rough analysis on the street utility rate implication is given in the attached table. It should be noted, however, that because the City' s doesn't provide these utility services to all its constituents, not all will benefit from the proposed utility tax relief. While such customers represent a minority with respect to the City wide customer base, Mayor Kelleher and City Council Street Utility/Corridor Funding January 31, 1991 Page 4 the largest concentration would be those residences and businesses situated westerly of I-5 . What's presently before the Council is not the enactment of the street utility per se but a resolution denoting Council 's intent to implement same. If Council concurs the actual implementation thereof including the rates would be targeted for January 1, 1992 . As such, the ordinances required to do so would be before Council in the latter part of this year. Prior to said time, however Council action will be needed on the following items in order to secure the grants and move the projects toward implementation. It is the department' s intent that upon passage of the resolution these items would first be acted upon by the respective Council subcommittees before seeking formal Council action thereon: 1. Establish a corridor improvement fund to capture the following revenue sources: a. Starting in January, 1992 , allocate $305, 000 per year from the City gas tax revenues. This represents the increase in our gas tax allocation attributed to the increase in the gas tax rate. b. As they become available, all vehicle registration fee revenues; c. As they become available, all street utility revenues; d. Transfer $800, 000 from the monies originally budgeted from the 272nd/277th Corridor project. These funds would then be dispersed to the following projects as expenses occurred: 1. Street Utility formation 2 . 272nd/277th Corridor Improvement - Auburn Way North to SR 516 3 . 200th/Russell/196th Corridor Improvement - Orillia Road to WVH 4 . 196th Street Improvement - WVH to EVH 2 . Establish the following project budgets: (in thousands) a. Street Utility Formation $ 80 b. 272/277th Corridor Improvement Auburn Way North to SR 516 16 , 280 C. 200th/Russell/196th Corridor Improve- ment Orillia to WVH 5, 605 Mayor Kelleher and City Council Street Utility/Corridor Funding January 31, 1991 Page 5 d. 196th Street Improvement WVH to EVH 17,500 3 . Authorize the following staffing additions including approval of the respective budgetary changes as noted earlier. Said budgetary changes would relate to increasing both the expenditures and revenue of the Public Works Engineering Division's budget, thus, netting out any impact on the City's general fund. 1. Engineer II (FTE) $ 66, 080 2 . Engineering Tech III (FTE) 56, 892 3 . Office Tech II (increasing an approved PT position to FT 12 , 613 $135, 585 4 . Concurrence with the balance of the staffing needs denoted below and recognition that because these projects are being financed on a cash flow basis as portions of the funding therefor become assured, it will be necessary to implement these positions (independent of full funding being secured) to keep on the respective implementation time schedules. 1. PT Accounting Assistant II $ 19, 208 2 . Engineer II (Design) (FTE) 56, 875 3 . Engineer I (Design) (FTE) 53 , 702 4 . Engineering Tech I 42, 751 5. Construction Inspector (FTE) 59,533 6. Survey Party Chief (FTE) 53 , 413 7 . Survey Technician (FTE) 49, 942 8 . Transportation Planning Eng I 50, 717 (Increase the funds approved for consultant to fund a FTE - Department originally requested a FTE) Finally, attached for Council ' s convenience is a summary sheet which highlights the key points. f !. MItYXI M " d CRITICAL L O S rurrNl ' Y� ( INTERSECTIONS v wMrt g YYlen a l a x n � � p1X Y I [Ip,x It x IYx[ ar RiY r E g a YM )f 1 TM Il C x pM 1 1 pTh a, e I C = C I I E i Jrw/w(M01Ar i W W W I C V i 1 tpMg > f len BOEJN6 mmse9FE R F t ir a n +• rw-x IAWfAYw INNF Yx (i(w. J[AgOI a(w. awe Nr - , � x s � � f g g r— .M al )I11M li ax aM al p i1,M Y O I x M _ LA ON 1 ' t [NefN 9 1 x IT � nY S C" C MM., '[ i 1 x ux n tt xxaTh Y uaM n 6 E [ rxrr P P J[ I a i NrsL P nr iY rwY r 5 iI'm 1 g C Mn x [ NENNN ( q 1 ixxM al INNN r [nTh ry r LN FJFLO= p a _ nxu p g alx nvs raprs tIfml TM T� •{[pp E E 9 Iltr +a .M4S[ll rwY a g in)M r rxxN YYY wror M 1 .xvn to rt r urt(Yw B C R Il [{([Iplf( i a uTh ar C WIY.IY It ,a w /J flK 4 IT F a�r rwN( = x x Newt F EN/O/NN A mrx u [rwr [rrl CENFEA '; [FMrcIr JYM f(N xF City of Kent Utility Tax Options Current Proposed Incre se 1990 Utility Utility (Decrease) Revenue Tax Tax Difference ---------- --------- --------- ---------- Water Revenue 5, 926 , 700 183 , 728 207 , 435 23 , 707 Sewer Revenue 61483 , 584 188, 024 226,925 38 , 901 Storm Drainage 21054 , 127 71, 896 71, 894 (2) ---------- --------- --------- ---------- Total 14 , 464 , 411 443 , 648 506, 254 62 , 606 ---------- --------- --------- ---------- ---------- --------- --------- ---------- High User Single Family Residential: ----------------------------------- $600/year e 3 . 50% ' (21) Street Util @ 1 . 72/m 21 Total Increase (0) 1990 Est. Street Increase Typical Business Utility Estimated Utility (Decrease) Utility Customers Tax Employees Fee * Difference ----------------- --------- ---------- --------- ------- Typical Customer Customer # 1 30, 948 12 , 000 247 , 680 216, 732 Typical Customer # 2 16,463 172 31550 (12 , 913) Typical Customer # 3 13 , 716 135 2 ,786 (10, 930) Typical Customer # 4 3 , 370 157 31240 (130) Typical Customer # 5 3 , 411 150 3 , 096 (315) -- ---------- --------- --------- 67 , 908 12 , 614 260, 353 192 , 445 All Other 375, 740 31, 580 651, 811 276, 071 --------- ---------- --------- -7------- 443f648 44 , 194 912 , 164 468 , 516 --------- ---------- --------- --------- --------- ---------- --------- --------- Single Family Total Total Overall Impact: Residential Business Users City --------------- ----------- --------- ----------- --------- - Utility Tax (85, 000) (358 , 648) (443 , 648) 62 , 606 Street Utility Fee 103 , 200 912 , 164 11015, 364 11015 , 364 Total 18 , 200 553 , 516 571, 716 11077, 971 * Maximum amount generated not to exceed 50% of the Street Maintenance Budget. FACT SHEET COUNCIL TARGET ISSUE: TRAFFIC CONGESTION PROJECTS TOTAL GRANT* LID OTHER COST 27 2 / 2 7 7 $16, 280 $ 4 , 247 $ 5, 530 $ 61503 Corridor - Auburn Way North to SR 516 19 6/ 2 00 51605 21424 11761 11420 Corridor - Orillia Road to WVH 196 / 200 17 , 500 7 , 295 5 , 331 4 , 874 Corridor - WVH to EVH TOTAL $39, 385 $13 , 966 $12, 662 $12 ,797 *TIB a) over-obligates grant funding 3 : 1 b) 1992 will approve additional projects Other: Cash 5,800 Gas Tax 11515 - 5 year forecast VRF 1,418 St. Util. 4 , 064 12 ,797 Growth Management: 0 13 key intersections at E/F service level (no available capacity for additional growth) 0 Concurrency (6 year financing in place) 0 Corridor Projects - 5 years to implement o Prohibit development Street Utility: Maximum, Rate - Residential: $2/month/residential unit - Other: $2/month/employee Maximum revenue can not exceed half street operation and Street Utility/Corridor Funding Fact Sheet Continued maintenance budget (maximum revenue $1, 270, 962 - $1.88-1.91) Proposed Rate: $1.70 - $2 . 00 o Must give full credit for HOV and HCT employee tax if implemented by Metro or King County. o Money's generated can only go towards transportation M&O and construction. o Can't divert existing monies out of street budget. Offset Financial Impact o Both the Sewer and Water utilities can absorb the City' s 3 .5% utility tax. o City doesn't provide these utility services to all its constituents. Implementation Target Date: January, 1992 Other Cities Renton $4 . 35/employee/month tax on just businesses via B&O authority Bellevue $3 . 35/employee/month tax on just businesses via B&O authority Neither have charge on residences. Council Action: Now: Pass Resolution denoting Council intent to create a street utility Future: Near term, upon Committee review, approve budget changes and personnel requirement Latter part of 1991 pass street utility ordinance including establishing rates Approve the absorption of the utility tax by the sewer and water utility Message. Dated: 01/30/91 at 1612 . Subject: STREET UTILITY - FISCAL NOTE Sender: Tony MCCARTHY / KENT70/FN Contents: 3 . Part 1. TO: Paul SCOTT / KENT70/PW Karen SIEGEL / KENT70/PW Don WICKSTROM / KENT70/PW Part 2 . THE FISCAL NOTE FOR THE STREET UTILITY FOR THE 2/5 COUNCIL MEETING. Part 3 . THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IS REQUESTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A STREET UTILITY AS A MAJOR FUNDING COMPONENT OF THE 272ND AND 196TH CORRIDOR PROJECTS. THESE PROJECTS ARE ANTICIPATED TO COST ALMOST 42 MILLION DOLLARS . FUNDING SOURCES ARE IDENTIFIED BELOW. AMOUNTS ARE TO BE GENERATED OVER A 4 YEAR PERIOD. STATE AND FEDERAL GRANTS 15. 9 MILLION CASH ALREADY ALLOCATED 2 . 8 PLANNED 1991 COUNCILMANIC BOND ISSUE 3 .0 LID' S ASSOCIATED WITH CORRIDOR MITIGATION 13 . 2 KING COUNTY VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEES 1.4 PLEDGING CITY SHARE OF NEW STATE GAS TAX 1. 5 ESTABLISHING A STREET UTILITY 4 . 0 41.8 MILLION THE FUNDING SOURCES REPRESENT A PACKAGE WHICH MUST BE CERTIFIED TO THE STATE IN ORDER TO RECIEVE THE GRANT FUNDING. WITHOUT AN IDENTIFIED LOCAL MATCH THE GRANT FUNDING WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE IN ITS ENTIRETY. THE IBC KNOWS THAT THE CORRIDOR PROJECTS ARE THE COUNCIL'S NUMBER ONE TARGET ISSUE. THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IS PROPOSING A 10% LOCAL MATCH TO MAKE THESE PROJECTS A REALITY. THE ONLY OTHER OPTION SEEMS TO BE A ONE MILLION DOLLAR A YEAR DEDICATION OF THE CITY' S CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. THIS WOULD REQUIRE A RESTRUCTURING OF THE ADOPTED CIP AND DEFERRAL OF MANY ALREADY APPROVED PROJECTS . ANOTHER OPTION MAY BE TO LOOK AT THE OPTION OF IMPLEMENTING A STREET UTILITY IN CONJUNCTION WITH ELIMINATING THE UTILITY TAX AS A SEPARATE ITEM ON THE CUSTOMER'S BILL. THIS COULD PROVIDE FOR A NET NO TAX INCREASE WHILE STILL PROVIDING A FUNDING OPTION FOR THE COUNCIL'S TOP PRIORITY. THE IBC RECOMMENDS THAT THIS OPTION BE EXPLORED BEFORE ESTABLISHING THE STREET UTILITY. RESOLUTION # A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Kent,. Washington, relating to the City ' s Transportation System and the intent to create a Street Utility. WHEREAS, the City Council is responsible for the public health, safety and general welfare of the people of Kent; and WHEREAS, the City's traffic congestion problem is a significant and serious problem; and WHEREAS, traffic congestion results in accidents involving both personal injury and property damage; and WHEREAS, resolution of the City' s traffic congestion problem is the City Council ' s number one target issue; and WHEREAS, presently many City intersections and some streets are operating at or beyond their .capacity; and WHEREAS, future traffic projections indicate that without significant improvements to the City' s transportation system the traffic congestion problem will only be exacerbated; and WHEREAS, the City' s 1984 Comprehensive Transportation Plan and the 1988 Green River Valley Transportation Action Plan denote the necessity of constructing three additional east/west cross valley corridors as a means of relieving the City' s congestion problems; and WHEREAS, transportation financing has always been an obstacle per addressing the City' s traffic congestion problems; and WHEREAS, the 1990 State Legislature authorized several optional financial means to assist in addressing the needs of the local transportation system; and WHEREAS, one of the local options is the establishment of a street utility under RCW 82 .80. 040 et. sea. , which requires that the local government develop and adopt a specific transportation program in order to levy or expend transportation funds; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby ordered and resolved by the City of Kent as follows: Section 1. The Council finds that traffic congestion is a major and serious problem within the City of Kent. Section 2 . The Council further finds that a critical element of the solution to the problem is the implementation of transportation improvements. Section 3 . The Council further finds that additional revenue sources will be required in order to implement and maintain these improvements. Section 4 . The Council hereby declares its intent to create a street utility and directs staff to proceed with the development of the necessary studies, plans, reports, ordinances, etc. associated therewith. ADOPTED at a regular session of the Council of the City of Kent this day of , 1991. CONCURRED in by the Mayor of the city of Kent this day of _ 1991. Dan Kelleher, Mayor ATTEST Marie Jensen, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Roger Lubovich City Attorney IV "Zee Z 'k RESOLUTION NO. k 7 A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, in support of the troops involved in the conflict in the Persian Gulf. WHEREAS, on January 16, 1991, the United States, with the allied support of many of the world 's nations, entered into armed conflict with the country of Iraq to oppose Iraq's aggression against the citizens of Kuwait; and WHEREAS, men and women, citizens of the United States and citizens of the City of Kent, who are members of the nation's armed forces, have been called to action to defend the interests of the United States and its allies against Iraq; and WHEREAS, these troops are now defending the interests of the United States and its allies at great personal risk under conditions of war; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and the City Council of the City of Kent wish to express their appreciation, support and respect for those troops and their families who are involved in this conflict for the benefit of us all; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City of Kent wishes to express its sincere gratitude for the efforts of its citizens who are serving in the United States armed forces and for the efforts of the citizens of all nations. Section 2 . The City of Kent also wishes to express its support for the friends and families these troops have left behind. They are left to care for and maintain their homes, to hold their families together, and to wait for the return of their loved ones. The efforts they make and the loss they feel at home are recognized and appreciated. Section 3 . Finally, the City of Kent wishes to express its hope that this conflict will be a speedy one and that these men and women will return home soon and return home safely. Passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington this day of , 1991. Concurred in by the Mayor of the City of Kent, this day of , 1991. DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR ATTEST: MARIE JENSEN, CITY CLERK 2 - APPROVED AS TO FORM: ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. , passed by the City Council -of the City of Kent, Washington, the day of , 1991. (SEAL) MARIE JENSEN, CITY CLERK 3 - 10Qe C�)- February 5, 1991 To: Judy Woods, President and Members of the City Council From: Jim Hansen, Assistant City Administrator Subject: Centennial Center Furniture Bids Please find attached a bid tab for the Centennial Center furniture. Charlie Lindsey, our Customer Services Manager, has recommended that all seven bids be rejected and that we rebid the furniture as soon as possible. (This item was originally scheduled to be on the Operations Committee agenda next week and before the Council on the 19th. However, two weeks can be saved by taking action tonight. ) The furniture selection committee began researching a variety of products more than one year ago. During this process we became increasingly aware of chemicals (especially Formaldehyde) commonly found in many products. We also have a number of employees who have raised concerns about this issue. Literature on this topic offers a variety of conclusions concerning health impacts. Our goal all along has been to provide our employees with a healthy and productive work environment at a reasonable cost. At this time the bids submitted fail to provide the best combination of quality, function and cost. This was partially due to some confusion on the criteria. This has been discussed with the Law Department, the committee and the vendors. We feel confident that one or more vendors can meet this goal given the opportunity to submit another bid. The new request for bids will ask for products with and without Formaldehyde to provide the Council with the full range of options. However, it is clear to the vendors that the staff recommendation will be for a Formaldehyde free product that meets our expectations for quality, function and cost. / ? k k 7 0 Co. \ \ 2 \ % \ (DI co / k :3 ) / % 2 \ ® � § / ° ) . n \ % % % % @ (Z) 9 CA) ® @ \ 54 / 00 N \ \ \ 2 q \ q q I k / p p p p p k k � � m k Q m ? D � ƒ � \ 0 0 0 0 o t / \ R � 7 CC) R 2 q k / N p p p p 4 O / / -IL m % CA) \ ƒ ;04 R k Cr) / a CD \ R p > p N p # R R \ R (31 R / Co OD § ƒ CT, 2 \ E K 0 o G o a o CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS A. R E P O R T S A. COUNCIL PRESIDENT B. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE C. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE D. PLANNING COMMITTEE E. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE F. PARKS COMMITTEE i G. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS � ` V OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MINUTES January 8, 1991 4P4,eel;�- COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Christi Houser �S Jon Johnson Paul Mann 1r STAFF PRESENT: Jed Aldridge C �� [[��✓✓ Norm Angelo Tom Brubaker Kevin Garling Joy Honeycut Charlie Lindsey Roger Lubovich Tony McCarthy Alana McIalwain May Miller Kelli O'Donnell Don Olson Tom Shepard Ron Spang Don Wickstrom John Willits The meeting was called to order at 4:35 pm by acting chairperson Paul Mann. The following items were added to the agenda: o Contract for Public Defender o Defense Agreement for CETA Lawsuit o James Street Crossing 0 259th and Central Crossing o Military Leave Consideration Approval of Vouchers All claims for the period ending December 31, 1990 in the amount of$531,315.73 were approved for payment. Reorganization in Information Services Information Services Director Spang updated the Operations Committee on the reorganization of the department. The reorganization plan had been presented to Council during the 1991 budget process at which time the Council had approved 1.0 additional FTE plus additional funds supporting the reorganization, pending administrative approval. The reorganization has been reviewed and approved by the Personnel Department and the Internal Personnel Committee. The IPC approved the reorganization and authorized immediate implementation of the reorganization with the exception of the additional Production Services Supervisor position. The Operations Committee was 1 Operation Committee Minutes - January 8. 1991 informed that this position represented a .5 FTE increase from budget authorization levels. However, the funds for the position are within the Council authorized budget limits. Committeemember Mann asked if there had been any further action on personal computers for the Councilmembers. Finance Director McCarthy noted that this item had not been rated high in the 1991 budget process and had not been funded. Information Service Director Spang stated that he was available to address this issue with the City Council and Administration. Ordinance on Procedure for Accepting Donations Finance Director McCarthy outlined the Citys need for an ordinance establishing a procedure for accepting donations, devises and bequests. In the past, the City has accepted donations noting that the contributor should consult their certified public accountant as to whether their donation was tax deductible. Assistant City Attorney Brubaker noted that while researching the matter an ordinance was needed to provide a vehicle for contributors to give tax deductible donations but it does not declare such contributions as tax deductible outright. The ordinance also set guidelines for the acceptance of donations by the City. Gifts over a $5,000 value would be accepted by the City Council. For amounts under $5,000, acceptance by the Council is optional. Committeemember Johnson made a motion to recommend approval of the ordinance. The motion was seconded and passed by a vote of 2-0. Delinquent Accounts Receivable Collection Agency and Writeoffs Finance Director McCarthy reviewed the current delinquent accounts receivable position. The Internal Budget Committee had recommended exploration of the use of a collection agency to recover some accounts for the City. The Finance Department has researched this issue and recommends the use of Transworld Systems Inc. to start a pilot collection program. Under the collection agency proposal, the City would pay them $8.45 per account for which the company would write a series of collection letters. Their success rate for letter writing alone is 56% which if applied to 24 selected accounts totalling $26,935.19 for the pilot program which could generate $15,083.71 for the City at a cost of$202.8. Following the letter writing process the company may be engaged for other collection efforts such as garnishments and court action at an additional cost of 35% to 50% on an account by account basis. If the pilot project is successful, the company may be used for additional business as they are collection experts and thus should reduce the magnitude of future writeoffs. Finance Director McCarthy also reviewed the proposed request for writeoff authorization which includes accounts over 15 months old; the EPA clean up site bankruptcy; parking cites before 12/31/88; for a total writeoff of $33,279,86. It was further requested authorization be given to contract with Transworld Systems Inc., Collection Division. The Committee asked if Transworld Systems Inc. had any experience with other cities. Finance Director McCarthy replied that they had worked with Lynden, Bellingham and also some cities in Oregon and had a local office in Bellevue. Statistics show that receivables are 80% collectible at 60 days but declines to 20% at 240 days. 2 Operation Committee Minutes - January 8, 1991 It was moved and seconded to recommend authorization for writeoffs and authorization to contract with Transworld Systems Inc., Collection Division. The motion passed with a vote of 3-0. November Monthly Financial Report Finance Director McCarthy reviewed the recommendation of the Internal Budget Committee to update the Operations Committee on behalf of the Council on a monthly basis for the previous month. It was recommended that the previous month be reviewed at the second monthly meeting of the Committee. After receiving the Committee's concurrence, he reviewed the November highlights with the Operations Committee. Finance Director McCarthy outlined a number of factors which were pointing toward a shortfall in the estimated revenue. The 1991 budget was based on July figures. Revenues have not met the estimates. There has also been a decline in sales tax revenue since August. There have been a few unusual expenditures including the salary reclass. Additionally, there were extraordinary weather related expenses for December including increased overtime. Development and implementation of a budget cutback plan was recommended to the Committee. Finance Director McCarthy outlined a suggested action plan which included an immediate hiring slow down and a freeze in the CIP funds from the general fund. These actions would allow further data to be collected to decide if more drastic measures are necessary as 1991 progresses. Committeemember Johnson suggested that there could be an evaluation of positions rated high during the budget process that show a critical need. The same could be done with projects and non-essential expenditures being deferred to mid-year. Finance Director McCarthy concurred and added that monthly updates of the financial position would help in deciding how long to continue slow downs. He also notified the Committee of a proposed change in accounting for utility tax accruals to comply with the Government Accounting Standards Board and is currently working with the state auditor to decide if it should be implemented or wait to a later date. CETA Litigation City Attorney Lubovich reviewed a proposed agreement regarding apportionment of liability and defense costs in the lawsuit regarding the handling of CETA grant funds in the early 1980's. The municipal attorneys of the various defendants have been meeting to discuss how to procedurally handle this litigation and have proposed an agreement to share costs and liability for this litigation. The proposed agreement would apportion costs and liability based on voting power granted to each of the consortium's members. Upon approval by all parties this proposal would limit the City of Kent's liability to$30,713.56 plus expenses with the grand total possible liability of all parties being $564,136.55. If a judgment is rendered against any one or more of the parties, the percentages would be applied as agreed. The City Attorney recommended approval of this agreement. After further discussion, it was moved and seconded to authorize acceptance of this agreement. The motion passed with a vote of 3-0. Contract for Public Defense City Attorney Lubovich requested authorization to renew a contract with Sampson Wilson&Combs, Inc., P.S. for public defense services. The contract reflects an increase from $6,500 per month to $8,500 a month which has been in effect the last four months of 1990. Other proposals were in the $12,000 per month range. The increase in cost of services was negotiated based on increased case load and will hold firm throughout 1991. 3 Operation Committee Minutes - January 8, 1991 Motion was made and seconded to authorize renewal of the contract. The motion passed with a vote of 3-0. Military Leave Consideration Personnel Director Olson informed the Operations Committee of the firefighters' request to review the City's Military Leave Policy. The City is required to grant 15 days leave for military training to reservists which has been negotiated in five out of the six union contracts to which it applies. The contract with the Fire union had not resolved this issue. The Fire Department currently has two members who have been called to active duty and are requesting consideration of 15 days paid leave to be applied against statutory reservist pay. After further discussion, the City Attorney noted there was a question as to the legality of signing away a statutory right and the possibility of a double hit when reservists returned and were required to put in an additional 15 days training. City Policy also needs to be revised if consideration is given for active duty. City Administrator Chow added that the issue had been raised at IBC and IPC and the firefighters had been advised to feel free to contact the City Council directly. Committeemember Mann asked what the total cost to the City would be. It was estimated that fifteen employees could be eligible with only two currently active. Committeemember Mann made a motion to grant active duty leave pay. During discussion of the motion John Willits, President of the local firefighters union, addressed the committee in which he noted that the money will be spent now or later. The firefighters take an approximate 65% cut in pay when on the military payroll which is even greater when the reduction in benefits is added. He also asked the Operations Committee to consider implementation of a leave sharing policy. Committeemember Johnson requested that leave sharing be looked at as well as the financial impact to the City of such a policy. Further, what would be the financial cost of paying the difference in pay for active duty employees as an employer benefit for no fault active duty and the cost of benefits. Committeemember Houser agreed noting that the leave question needed to be settled immediately. Fire Chief Angelo stated that he would not be replacing employees called to active duty for a minimum of six months so there would be some budgetary reserve to cover some actions. A discussion followed as to what amount of shift time would be considered for the fifteen days. Personnel Director Olson suggested that payment be started immediately for fifteen, eight hour shifts and a reimbursement could be made in the future if more was granted. A motion was made to grant fifteen, eight hour shifts for active military leave with research as to budgetary and legal impact being brought back to the Operations Committee for further consideration. The motion was seconded and forwarded to the City Council by a vote of 3-0. James Street Crossing; 259th and Central Traffic Light Committeemember Mann informed the Committee that the Public Safety Committee had recently received a petition signed by 421 citizens for a traffic light at 259th and Central. Additionally, another petition was received signed by over 400 citizens for a crossing on James Street. The Public Safety Committee had voted to make these items a priority. Committeemember Mann recommended a motion supporting reprioritization of funds to address these issues. 4 Operation Committee Minutes - January 8, 1991 Committeemember Johnson asked if any suggestions had been made as to which items should be moved or replaced for such a reprioritization. A discussion followed as to how these projects could be funded. Committeemember Mann put forth a motion to target these areas for completion within the next two years. The motion passed with a vote of 3-0. Chancre of Meeting Time Chairperson Houser requested that the Operations Committee be changed from 4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m. It was agreed that the meetings would be held at 4:45 p.m.with the next meeting on January 22, 1991. The meeting was adjourned at 5:55 p.m. 5 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE JANUARY 15, 1991 PRESENT: Jim White Ed White Leona Orr Tim Heydon Steve Dowell Jerry McCaughan Don Wickstrom Mimi Castillo Roger Lubovich Barbara Brumbach Jim Hansen Patricia Roemmich Gary Gill Anne Timlick Carol Morris Jim Timlick Tom Brubaker Jon Brumbach Dennis Byerly Jim and Joy Dickson Harry Venables ENTRY SIGNS Mr. and Mrs. Timlick addressed the Committee with their comments regarding the design of the Entry Signs. They indicated they felt the sign did not have real eye appeal and violated good design principals and felt it should be developed graphically. Mr. Timlick stated they have not seen the actual sign only what was printed in the paper. A color copy of the intended design was shown to the Timlick' s. Mr. Timlick pointed out areas he felt were problems - shading of colors, letter spacing, etc. Steve Dowell stated that inasmuch as the Council as a whole has already/approved this sign, the Timlick' s should come before the Council and ask for a reconsideration of the sign. Jim White stated his concerns were how much longer this would take, how much more it will cost. Wickstrom stated that if it is determined the sign should be reworked we would have to open it up for other designers as well . Dowell stated a time line could be set and perhaps this is important enough to receive more community input. White stated he felt the sign has already been through a process. Orr stated that in that process we used staff time saving a considerable amount of money. Starting over means that time has been wasted and a waste of taxpayers dollars. If we reopen it we will have to reopen it not only to the Timlick' s but the community at large and that could take months and months. Dowell suggested the Timlick's volunteer to work with our graphic designer to make suggested changes. Mr. Timlick stated he could reiterate what he has already said but basically his living is made in the graphic design field. Heydon stated that a major process was involved in the development of this sign, thinking of the things in Kent that make it unique and trying to incorporate them into this sign. Dowell stated that if it involves a commercial enterprise situation where dollars will have to change hands he has difficulty with it but if it could be a voluntary thing on the part of the Timlick' s to cooperate with our graphic designer he could support that. After further discussion, Public Works Committee January 15, 1991 Page 2 White stated that if the Timlick' s would like to they could bring it to the entire Council to see what their feelings were. Dea Drake made comments regarding the Timlick's concerns. Mr. Timlick said he would be willing to spend an hour or so with Dea. Mrs. Timlick added she still didn't feel it was a proper sign design. White reiterated they were welcome to bring it before Council at their meeting this evening. PARKSIDE DIVISION #2 WALKWAY - MRS BRUMBACH'S CONCERNS Harry Venables, as Mrs. Brumbach' s father, addressed the Committee on this issue. Mr. Venables referred to incidents that occurred during development of the plat and establishment of the walkway which may be the reason for the fences being in the wrong place. Mr. Venables read to the Committee a document he had prepared regarding the rights and duties of cities to property owners stemming from a 1972 request from the City for a garage to be moved from right of way. Mr. Venables continued his presentation referring to the plat for Parkside Division #2 • Mr. Venables stated the City has been putting in new 8-foot tall fences without authority and that the plat states no fences should be over 5-feet tall . It was later determined that the City has not installed any fences at all in this area so if the existing fences are 8-feet tall it is what the property owners have themselves installed. Mr. Venables presented photos of the area which he indicated demonstrated that the jogs in the fences provided places for muggers to hide. Staff clarified for the Committee that the jogs are there because the property owners have constructed their fences in the easement beyond the existing property lines and these jogs would be eliminated when the fences are moved back to the property lines. Mr. Venables stated that his daughter had been a victim of a burglary in which the burglars had escaped over the fence and through this walkway. He stated a chain link fence would be preferable and would like the idea of a walkway terminated entirely. Mr. Dickson referred to times when things have been thrown into his backyard from the walkway. He thinks it would be a waste to improve this area. Dowell and Wickstrom indicated that this proposed improvement was predicated by a vacation request from property owners in the area. This vacation request was denied by Council because it is the only access to Military Road between Reith and 248th. White added that there were citizens who requested the walkway be kept open because it is their only access to Military Road. Wickstrom clarified that the fences on the west half are constructed on the property lines. The ones on the east half (those three who received the notice) are those that the City planned to relocate. The December 21st notice gave the property owners until January 11 to respond so that we could address any Public Works Committee January 15, 1991 Page 3 concerns they had. The City would pay for the costs of relocating those fences and the property owner would be responsible for removing any landscaping they may have placed in the right of way. Heydon indicated the only work the City has done to date has been to clean it up, take out some of the brush, and install a catch basin to eliminate a place where people would trip. Responding to White's inquiry, Roger Lubovich indicated he felt that the City does have the right to maintain the area as a walkway. As to the fences, the City is only relocating the existing fences along the property lines. The height of the fence is probably a private covenant and a matter between the property owners. Leona Orr reiterated her concern about setting a precedent of moving the fences for private citizens. Mrs. Roemmich stated that what they wanted in the first place was to close the walkway but that the City staff has been very nice and cooperative in working with her. Dowell moved that a recommendation be made to the Council as a whole that the action taken be reconsidered and that the Public Works and Legal Departments meet with the property owners to determine a solution to this problem. White asked that staff then come back to the Committee with some alternatives. The Committee unanimously approved the motion. LEFT TURN - REITH AND SR 516 Ed White stated the issue of left turns backing up the traffic is probably not valid at this time. Recent traffic counts indicate that only 8% of the total traffic were making left hand turns. This equates to 85 vehicles turning left, 723 going through and 196 turning right. Eight percent does not justify modifying the signal to include a left turn phase. The cost for that would be approximately $50, 000. Signal timing changes have been investigated and the State will be requested to make these. City funds have been approved in the 1991 budget to add a right turn lane channelization. These two modifications should eliminate the ,left turn backups. White stated he has observed that when traffic backs up at this intersection it is usually doing so in all directions which would indicate that volume is the primary reason. White stated he would recommend that staff contact the State to extend the cycle length for that phase of the signal. Dowell moved that staff continue to work on the timing with the State and to pursue additional funding for the right turn lane. The Committee unanimously approved. SEWER FRANCHISE - FEDERAL WAY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT Wickstrom explained that Federal Way Water and Sewer District can provide gravity sewer service to property in the vicinity of 272nd Public Works Committee January 15, 1991 Page 4 and 42nd Avenue South. The City can only provide sewer service to this property by pump and it is not financially feasible to do that. In order for Federal Way Water and Sewer District to service the property, they are requesting a franchise agreement be developed and signed by both cities. The Committee unanimously recommended the franchise agreement be developed allowing Federal Way Water and Sewer District to provide sewer service to the property in the vicinity of 272nd and 42nd Avenue South and that the Mayor be authorized to sign same. UTILITY CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT SR 516 160TH AVENUE S.E. TO S.E. WAX ROAD Wickstrom stated that the State will be improving Kent Kangley (SR 516) in the Covington area between Wax Road and 160th. The City's Kent Springs Transmission Main lies within the alignment of this road improvement. The City has budgeted $650, 000 to contruct a new main in this area. It is proposed the State include the replacement of the Kent Springs Transmission Main in their contract. The State has prepared an agreement whereby the City will reimburse them for the construction costs. It is recommended the Mayor be authorized to execute same. The Committee unanimously recommended approval. OTHER ITEMS Leona Orr asked about the status of the Downtown signs that have been previously approved. She stated she has been contacted about drainage problems at 120 North State Street and asked if staff would investigate and report back to her.