Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Public Works/Planning - 06/18/1991 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE JUNE 18, 1991 PRESENT: Leona Orr Mr. and Mrs. Rust Steve Dowell Bill Doolittle Don Wickstrom Lyle Price Tom Brubaker Victor Scalzo Gary Gill Bruce Rayburn Jim Hansen Marvin Roysten Carol Morris Doug Sutherland Ed White Tony McCarthy Termination of Existing Easement for Well Site Wickstrom explained that the City has an easement on 104th for a 2- gallon per minute well which we acquired during the water shortage period when we were requiring development to furnish their off- setting water supply. We have never used this well and to do so would be more problem than the well is worth. As such, we are proposing to release the easement in order to allow the State to widen SR 515 (104th) . The Committee unanimously concurred. Central Avenue Improvement (Willis to Smith) Agreement with WSDOT The State had planned an overlay for this portion of Central which is also SR 516. The City has a TIB grant for the improvement and widening of Central Avenue from Titus to Gowe. We are using the State's overlay money as match for the project. We need to execute an agreement with WSDOT before July 1 in order to secure the funding. Dowell asked if this would make any change to the traffic at Gowe and Central as far as Titus is concerned. Wickstrom clarified this project would add a right turn lane eastbound onto Titus off Central. It probably won't increase traffic volume but will make it less congested. The Committee recommended approval for the Mayor to sign the agreement and establishment of the budget for the funding. 277th Water Main - Agreement with Auburn Wickstrom distributed copies of IBC 's note on this item. Auburn has a project out to bid for widening of 277th between Central and the Valley Freeway. The City has a water main in a portion of that road which we inherited when we took over Water District 87. We are proposing to rebuild the water main and tie it back into our system at 72nd in conjunction with Auburn's project. Auburn would include the water main in their specifications and the City would reimburse Auburn for their costs associated with the water main portion. We do have $90, 000 budgeted in the project fund. If the project exceeds that we can take the funds from the Miscellaneous Public Works Committee June 18, 1991 Page 2 Water Project fund. By proceeding in this manner, there is a savings of approximately $100,000. The Committee unanimously recommended approval for the Mayor to sign the agreement after review by the City Attorney. Coordinated Prevention Grant/Yard Waste Program Wickstrom explained that the Department of Ecology has made grant funds available for solid waste/hazardous waste programs. DOE requires that King County administer the grant application and if King County, suburban cities, Seattle, and Department of Health submit a unified application package there will be a bonus applied to the total grant funds available. Kent's per capita allocation from this grant if we apply would be approximately $98, 000 over the 92/93 biennium. We are proposing to apply for grant funds to offset 60% of the costs for the Solid Waste Coordinator position. This position is funded for 1991 but is on hold because of the City's financial situation. Dowell asked about the responsibilities of the Solid Waste Coordinator. Wickstrom explained that since we adopted the King County Solid Waste Comprehensive Plan the City has to have programs in place that will eventually lead to 65% reduction in the solid waste stream. We have to have 50% reduction by 1992 . It was determined that we currently are at about 20% with the existing recycling program. One program we have to institute is yard waste collection which would account for about 30% of the waste stream. Thus, by instituting that alone would bring us close to our 50% goal. We also are required to institute a multi-family recycling program, develop and adopt a procurement ordinance and amend the City's building code to allow space in future developments for recycling containers. The Coordinator position would address all those issues. The proposed yard waste program includes an ordinance that requires the separation of yard waste from other garbage and some penalty structure would need to be developed to encourage compliance. We are proposing a voluntary yard waste program where the service would be paid for by the user if they chose to participate. Residents could begin composting at home if they desired. Dowell asked if we were planning to hire this person before 1992 . Wickstrom stated that was the original, intent but it is on hold because it is funded from the Environmental Fund which Council could reallocate to the General Fund if it desired. We were just informed by DOE before coming to this meeting that they are skeptical about funding the position without any commitment on the part of the City to develop and implement the programs. So it is possible they may not allow our application for funds for this position. We do need to notify King County by the first part of July if we intend to participate in the unified grant application Public Works Committee June 18, 1991 Page 3 process. Orr asked if Wickstrom had any idea how long it would be before we would have multifamily recycling. Wickstrom explained that we do not have the staff to address any of the programs. We are in the position of dropping everything if we don't get the Coordinator's position filled. Orr asked what would happen if we don't get the position filled and the programs in place. Wickstrom explained there is the potential of being penalized by both King County and DOE. They are expecting us to fulfill the commitments we made when we adopted the Plan. Dowell asked about the use of the funds in the Environmental Fund. Wickstrom explained it is used for legal fees to oversee the cleanup operation of various sites. As well the City's current residential recycling program is funded 100% from this fund. Dowell asked about the balance of the account. McCarthy verified that the fund receives approximately $190, 000 year from the utility tax. As of mid June there is approximately $279,000 in the fund which includes the $250, 000 in reserve for legal fees. The Committee unanimously approved participating in the application for the grant funds. Kent/SeaTac Sewer Franchise Agreement Bruce Rayburn, Public Works Director from SeaTac, distributed a diagram of a 392 acre area they are proposing to be their new sewer service area which includes an areas they are proposing to annex (copy attached) . He described the manner in which service to the area is proposed. He added that by constructing a force main on 212th would possibly preclude any future development within the City limits of Kent. Dowell asked about the zoning of the proposed area which was determined to be currently Suburban Estates or 35, 000 square feet per lot. Rayburn continued that once sewer is provided to the area, he would anticipate seeing rezone applications to multifamily for the area. Hansen stated that the area identified for annexation by SeaTac had been identified by Kent in 1987 as being in our proposed annexation area. Kent's land use plan calls for it to be agricultural if on the valley floor. Dowell asked about the traffic impacts if that area wore developed as multifamily. Rayburn indicated they had not done any analysis at this time of traffic patterns. It was determined that SeaTac has a traffic mitigation plan. Rayburn continued that SeaTac has just selected a consultant to prepare a feasibility study and EIS for the connection of 200th and Orillia Road to at least Military Road. Dowell stated he feels the Council needs more time to study the issue. He expressed concern about traffic with the multifamily on the hillside. Hansen suggested since the annexation issue is new to the Committee, it be referred to the Planning Committee and the 1 100.1 Public Works Committee June 18, 1991 Page 4 Annexation Committee. Orr suggested the Annexation Committee review the issue and bring a recommendation to the Planning Committee. Wickstrom stated the annexation issue could be separated and just consider the sewer connection to service just the area in SeaTac as of a specific date; however, density seems to be a major concern for that area as well. The Committee unanimously recommended the Annexation Committee review this and bring a recommendation on the annexation issue to the Planning Committee. It was determined that the Annexation Committee would not meet again until July 10. Hansen added it might be a good idea to have a joint Public Works/Planning Committee meeting on this issue. irr SEAaOt,�,; 19215.28th Avenue South-SeaTac,Washington 98188•(206)878-9100-FAX(206)878-9416 Public Works Bruce Rayburn, R E., Director June 17, 1991 Donald Wickstrom, P.E. Director of Public Works 220 4th Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 Dear Don: ` As you know, cities in Washington State are presently under mandate from House-Senate Bill No. 2929 to "Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner". The City of SeaTac has identified six (6) such areas for possible annexation. One of these areas is generally bordered on the south by South 204th • Street, on the east by the Green River and on the northwest by Interstate Highway No. 5. This area is contiguous to the City of Kent's corporate limits. 98% of King County Fire District #24 (now City of SeaTac Fire Department) lies within the City of SeaTac. The remaining 2% lies within the unincorporated island between SeaTac and Kent. However, the City of SeaTac continues to provide this area with fire service. We are also working to provide the last link to the South 192nd/South 196th/South 200th Street cross valley corridor which runs through this area. The feasibility study for this project will begin shortly. At the present time, SeaTac's sewer service is being provided by various sewer districts. However, this area remains unsewered. With annexation in mind, the City of SeaTac can conceivably sewer this area along with the hillside to the south already within the present city limits. As we discussed in your office Wednesday afternoon, June 12, 1991 the City of SeaTac is not interested in changing the character of the valley floor from its' present agricultural status and would support your moratorium on sewers in the valley as we would only be attempting to serve the hillside area. Collection lines could be brought down the hillside at -various intervals to an interceptor built along the base of the slope carrying the effluent to a proposed pump station at the intersection of Orill.ia Road and 42nd Avenue S. The sewage would then be pumped through a force main east approximately 4100 feet across the Green River Bridge to an existing 27" "Metro" stubout manhole. By placing the pump station this far west, there should be little pressure by Kent residents ®C75d tern., farther east (along the force main) to connect. The suggested sequence of events would be as follows: 1) City of Kent approves SeaTac's general concept plan and would issue a "Certificate of Consistency" that our sewers would conform with the City of Kents' Comprehensive Sewer Plan. 2) City of SeaTac begins annexation of the area in question. 3) The City of SeaTac develops a Comprehensive Sewer Plan. This would then be approved by D.O.E. and Metro. 4) Complete formal agreement with Metro to take sewage from SeaTac. 5) City of Kent issues franchise to City of SeaTac to install sewers in their right-of-way. 6) City of Kent, Metro and D.O.E. approve plans, specifications and estimates. It is our intent to work with the City of Kent as a good neighbor. Should you have additional comments, please contact me at 878-9100. Sincerely, Bruce A. Raybur , P.E. Director of Public Works City Engineer Z AiZ o y �a tD m � � � t�► � Z � LA kh Is 91 A. 00 i a z �r Ayv7 37�Nb b� r - G ,� .5