Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Public Works/Planning - 08/23/1988 nY � PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE August 23, 1988 PRESENT: Jon Johnson Jim Hansen Berne Biteman Jerry McCaughan Don Wickstrom Alana MClalwain Brent McFall Mimi Castillo Gary Gill Jewel Melton Bill Williamson Tim Canfield Ken Morris MARI-PARK PLAT STREET VACATION Wickstrom explained that in order to develop the plat there is a need to vacate portions of the street. Mr. Canfield stated he had originally applied for vacation of all of S. 234th Street. This was denied because of the protest of an abutting property owner. He asked if the half of the street that abutted his property could be vacated. Bill Williamson explained that the term abutting property owners excludes the City's interest as a dedicated right holder of the street itself. If the City does not own the property on either side of the street then we are not an abutting property owner. Williamson continued it was his opinion that the City could not vacate one half of the street. Case study revealed no cases dealing with this specific situation; however, if at the time the street was dedicated no portion came off the property to the north then the current property owner may not be considered an abutting owner. Williamson said he would research the history of the property. It was clarified for Biteman that if it was all one parcel at the time the street was dedicated then the property to the north would be considered an abutting owner. It was suggested that Mr. Canfield obtain a title report. Mr. Canfield asked if the City could provide the date that the City was dedicated. UPDATE ON SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION ON S.E. 236TH PLACS Wickstrom stated that both property owners had been contacted. Benchmark Investment Company, the real estate branch of the bank, will be receiving bids for the sidewalk construction within the next two-three weeks. They will then turn the information over to the bank for further consideration. The property owner to the east has indicated he is not interested in pursuing the construction of the sidewalks. McFall asked if we would be able to force the construction of the sidewalks. Wickstrom indicated he felt the City had the authority to either force the Construction or construct them ourselves and put a lien against the property. That would be a decision for the Council. Public Works Committee August 23, 1988 Page 2 CANYON DRIVE LEFT TURN LANES Morris indicated he had spoken with WSDOT ,who indicated if the City passed an ordinance reducing the speed to 35 they would take it to the Highway Commission and proceed with reducing it to 35 and then the City could post it. The speed limit is currently 40 MPH from Jason to the top of the hill. WSDOT indicated they would like to have the speed limit consistent from Central. It currently is 30 MPH from Central to Jason. Biteman stated that sounded reasonable. Morris cited that from March of 1987 to August of 1i987 there were 11 accidents. For the same time period this year there have been only 3 . Biteman moved the speed limit be changed to 35 from Central to the top of the hill. The Committee concurred. There was discussion about vehicles cutting across the pylons. Johnson asked that a response be prepared for his signature to Dr. Huber's letter. PROPERTY ACQUISITION 72ND AVENUE VICINITY OF S. 196TH Wickstrom outlined the property and indicated it had recently be placed on the market for $390,000 which he is evaluating. The property lies in the proposed alignment of the extension of 72nd to connect it between 228th and 196th. Wickstrom indicated he felt it would be better to acquire the property now rather than letting it develop and have to condemn later. Biteman asked if we had any liability from Western Processing. Williamson indicated that the extension of 72nd is being addressed in the cleianup plans. Wickstrom requested authorization to proceed with the Acquisition. Biteman moved to approve the request. The Committee concurred. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 272ND/277TH CORRIDOR Wickstrom indicated the Attorney's office is preparing a memorandum of understanding with the County allowing Kent to act as lead agency for an alignment study from Central Avenue up to SR 516. Wickstrom requested the Committee's approval for the Mayor to sign the memorandum of understanding once it has been prepared. The' Committee concurred. UPDATE ON CITY'S RECYCLING PROGRAM McFall stated he wanted to bring the Committee up to date on this project and also relay a request by one of the collection companies. McFall reviewed that the City has negotiated a contract with Rabanco/Kent Disposal for a curbside residential recycling Public Works Committee August 23, 1988 Page 3 program. This was to provide recycling city-wide for single family residences and multifamily dwellings up to 4-plexes for which Kent would pay a fee to the collection company based upon the level of participation. Just before the contract was signed, a ruling issued by the Administrative Law Judges for the WUTC altered the territories of the two companies, allowing Kent Disposal to serve the original town site and areas annexed prior to 1957 and Tri-Star would service those areas annexed after 1957. one of the difficulties presented by this ruling is that part of our recycling agreement included a provision that Kent Disposal would petition with WUTC to include the recycling program into their rate structure. Secondly the term of the agreement was 18 months which would not be a reasonable length of time in light of the WUTC ruling for Kent Disposal to amortize their costs of the containers. If Council determines to continue the recycling program they would be committing to a continuation of subsidizing the program. McFall stressed the ruling is at this time merely a proposed ruling. The Commission itself has to make a decision so it is possible it will be a while before we know what the franchised territories for the two companies will be. McFall continued that Nels Johnson has requested the City submit to the WUTC an indication that the City would prefer a WUTC ruling allowing both companies to provide service to the entire city. WUTC has already taken steps to equalize their rates. McFall asked what the Committee would like to recommend to the Council as to the City's position on the ultimate WUTC ruling. Should the City submit a bri,ef, to the WUTC asking that both companies be allowed to serve the ''entire city or should we not do anything. Biteman asked if WUTC viewed recyclables as garbage. McFall replied he didn't think they had addressed that. MoFa,ll stated he did not think there would be a legal problem if we contracted for recycling services regardless of what happens with the franchise territory decision by WUTC. Kent would have to decide if they want to continue the subsidy of a recycling program over a long period of time. Biteman commented he would like to see one collector take care of the recycling program. McFall clarified that Biteman was suggesting we let "nature take its course" on the VUTC ruling but to renegotiate certain provisions of the Kent Disposal contract to make it feasible for them to provide the service over a specified period of time. Biteman stated an alternative would be for Kent to go back into the garbage business. Johnson stated another alternative might be to have the haulers petition the WUTC to have their rates increased to incorporate the cost of the recycling. McFall stated a potential problem with that is that Tri-Star has a rate for residential recycling that they can charge to those they .. .i,.... ......e,...... .w.s..+._.._. ....«».«...., .w--+.., ...4�.r.ti... .w .. .._....1!" y� J''4 i.'� �................. 1N M ` ' Ju 1 f W ;1 Public Works Committee August 23, 1988 Page 4 sign up as recycling customers. Johnson stated he would prefer having both companies allowed to serve the entire City. He stated he felt the customers would be better off by having the competition between the companies. Biteman stated he has no problems with separate territories for each hauler but he does ,wa}nt the City to have the opportunity to chose our own hauler for. the recycling program. Johnson suggested the question be put before the Council for them to decide which way they wished to proceed, on the WUTC ruling and to renegotiate the recycling contract. Biteman concurred. APPEAL OF KING COUNTY SEPA DETERMINATIONS wickstrom informed the Committee that we have been asking the County to require traffic mitigation of the impa pts that major developments in the County would have on Kent's streets through their SEPA reviews. The County has been denying our appeals based on the fact that there has to be an interlocal agreement for them to require any mitigation for impacts to the City. On one recent appeal the County upheld their decision but did confirm that SEPA statutes require them to look at all impacts independent whether they are in the County or City. The County now indicates they will consider any impacts to City streets on review, of future County developments. Wickstrom explained he originally placed this item on the agenda to inform them that we thought, we might have to approach the County Council on these appeals. However, in light of this recent information, it appears the County Will be more cooperative in addressing our concerns.