HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Public Works/Planning - 03/07/1990 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE RECEIVED
MARCH 7 , 1990 w1AR 15 1990
CITY ADAI!f,,.I^TRATION
PRESENT: Leona Orr Carol Proud
Steve Dowell Marty Nizlek
Bill Williamson Bruce Malcolm
Don Wickstrom Charles King
Larry Webb
PARKING IN THE LAKES SUBDIVISION
Additional representation from Bridgewater of approximately 10
people were also in attendance for this item.
Steve Dowell opened the discussion by stating that we have a
parking issue and a public safety issue. Leona Orr questioned the
ownership of the streets with Don Wickstrom replying that the City
owns the streets. Leona then asked if the streets were ever
authorized for parking. Don commented that once the street is
opened all the way it is not to be parked on; there is a bike lane
on each side. It is a residential collector arterial street
through the area and it wasn't intended for parking. It was
intended to be a thru street with a bike lane on each side. As a
temporary interim measure, parking thereon wasn't any real problem
until the fire people could not get in to respond to emergencies.
This is what triggered our having to notify the residents that we
have a serious situation here; the City ends up with the liability
if we didn't take any immediate action and ,that' s why we took the
action we did.
Steve felt that the safety issue is important and has become the
primary concern. There is both a temporary problem and a permanent
problem to solve. The temporary problem would be what to do now
and hopefully we can have some time to figure out a more permanent
solution. After figuring the width of the street, the median, and
the bike paths that leaves only 25 feet left for cars. Steve asked
if it would be possible to remove, at least temporarily, the bike
path from one side or the other to make that one side of the street
a fire lane, allowing the cars to be parked on the opposite side
until a more permanent solution can be found. Steve also mentioned
that at the north end of the road, at the pump house, there is some
property there that could possibly be utilized for parking for
guests and resident permanent parking.
Steve asked the purpose of the bike lane with Wickstrom stating the
bike lane corresponds to the City's overall transportation plan and
part of the rezone for that area; these are designated bike routes
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
MARCH 7, 1990
PAGE 2
and are part of the amenities of the ultimate Lakes development and
ties in with the Green River. Bill Williamson stated that there
is also covenants which run with the property which Centron agreed
to years ago to provide so it' s locked in as enforceable property
rights as well.
Bill asked Carol Proud to explain the density requirements for
parking and how the figures were arrived at by the Planning
Department.
Carol explained that the Kent Zoning Code reviews both condominiums
and apartments the same way. If you are a project of 50 units or
greater, than the parking ratio is 1.8 parking stalls per unit.
If you are a project under 50 than you are required to have 2 . If
you have a recreational building in conjunction with your complex,
there is a requirement to have additional parking. The problem at
the Lakes is that it all came in under one permit so the developer
got the 1. 8 rate and they also do not have a recreational building
so the number of units were multiplied 1. 8 and that' s how many
parking stalls were required. The zoning code does not give the
authority to be able to require more parking from the developer.
Then it becomes a question of consumers choice of which apartment
or complex to move in. The other problem is that there are several
garages in conjunction with parking stalls and we have seen people
who have garages using them for storage and parking in the street.
The use of these garages is something that is established by the
complex association.
Steve asked if it would be feasible for the fire trucks and
emergency vehicles to get in and out, if the parking is allowed on
one side of Lakeside Blvd. and leave the other side completely
empty.
Larry Webb, Fire Marshall, stated that the trucks can get in but
they won't be able to exit. Coming out the same road would also
mean coming against on-coming traffic. Under an emergency
situation this would be a problem.
Marty Nizlek stated that a survey was taken by his staff and there
were more than enough stalls off the street for the 18 cars still
parked on the street.
After a great deal of discussion on this problem, Steve stated that
as it stands right now, there will be no parking on both sides of
that street, which is a safety situation. Steve also stated that
the Planning Dept. should review the problem of parking in all
future development as well as at Bridgewater; the Engineering
Department should review the possibility of changing the width of
the present median. Don stated we first need to find out if we
have the legal authority to make the suggested changes due to the
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
MARCH 7, 1990
PAGE 3
existing covenants.
Bruce Malcolm, as the representative for Bridgewater I has been
bringing forth complaints on the parking situation when the
approval for Phase 3 and 4 was given by the City. The same issue
was brought before Council; at that time the residents were told
to park in the street because the road dead ends. Mr. Malcolm
stated that on February 28th the residents received a letter
stating as of March 1st, parking will no longer be allowed.
However, because of the liability of fire, the action had to be
taken immediately.
Steve also asked Don about the possibility of an LID for parking.
Don explained that this was done in the municipal lots. The
members of the Bridgewater association would be paying for it.
Steve then stated, if the rule is that parking has to be off both
sides of that street until we can find a solution to this problem,
that' s the way it will be. However, we have to work towards
finding a permanent solution to the problem. Temporarily, however
the cars will have to be removed.
Steve asked Bruce Malcolm if he would be the representative for the
Bridgewater residents on the parking problem and suggested he stay
in contact with the City on the progress of solving the problem.
Mr. Malcolm agreed and will coordinate all efforts on this problem
with Bill Williamson.
It was recommended that this matter be taken to Council on 3/8/90
and that this problem be referred to the respective departments to
change the parking requirements. The Committee unanimously agreed.
EQUIPMENT RENTAL SURPLUS EQUIPMENT
Don stated there was an additional piece of equipment, a range
tractor, to be added to the present surplus list. Committee
unanimously agreed to recommend approval for the surplus equipment.
ESTABLISH HOV LANES ON I-5
Don explained that to use the existing lanes would constitute a
traffic problem. The intent is, to convert the existing lanes into
HOV - this would be a problem, plus we would never get potential
federal funding because the federal people would decide that HOV
lanes are already there. That is where the bulk of the funding is
coming from to build those lanes.
The petition was referred back to the Public Works Committee for
review and possibly have the State come in and discuss what the
ramifications would be. Recommendation by the committee was made
not to approve the HOV lanes at this time.
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
MARCH 7, 1990
PAGE 4
SPEED BUMPS ON 40TH AVE NORTH OF 270TH
Charles King brought forth concerns regarding speeding on his
street. He felt if the speed bumps were removed on 40th Ave. the
traffic would then divert back off from his street. Mr. King lives
south of 270th and the vehicles are using that way to go into
Cambridge East just to avoid the speed bumps. By putting in speed
bumps on 42nd we have created more traffic on Mr King' s section of
42nd by vehicles not travelling the speed bump route. However, Mr.
King is in the County and we do not have any authority in the
County. If we removed the speed bumps, the citizens would be back
before Council wanting their speed bumps installed again.
Actually, the problem on his street is more volume rather than
speed.
Steve suggested that Mr. King discuss the problem further with
Marty Nizlek and at this time there wasn't anything the Committee
could do regarding his problem.