Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Public Works/Planning - 10/01/1991 OITY CLERK PUBLIC WORKS COIVIlVIIMlhrya� OCTOBER 1, 1991 OCT 1 15�1 CITY CLERK PRESENT: Jim White Gary Gill Leona Orr Ed White Steve Dowell John Bond Don Wickstrom Tony McCarthy . .Tom Brubaker Mr. and Mrs. Rust Carol Morris Don Rust Russ -Stringham Authorization to- Surplus-Equipment Wickstrom explained that in order to dispose of surplus utility equipment we must hold a public hearing and adopt a resolution declaring the material surplus and offer it for sale to the highest bidder. The Committee unanimously recommended approval to hold the public hearing and adopt the resolution declaring the material surplus. Mrs. Rust commented about the disposition of the shelves in the old library. Tony, McCarthy explained that we have had vendors submitting bids to purchase the materials. Jim White asked about the old furniture from the three departments that moved into the Centennial Building. Tony McCarthy commented that other departments took those items that could be used. We received bids from used furniture dealers to .purchase the remaining pieces of furniture. Jim White asked if the City has a written inventory of all the equipment and furniture. McCarthy stated that the departments have submitted lists of their furniture and equipment. As staffing levels and time permits, those will be inventoried. Sneed Limit Changes During Construction - Canyon Drive Wickstrom explained that we are proposing to lower the speed limits on Canyon Drive from 40 to 30 MPH during the construction period. This ordinance will be on the Council's agenda for October 1. The Committee unanimously recommended approval to adopt the ordinance lowering the speed limits. Implementation of Street Occupation Ordinance Wickstrom distributed a draft list of recommended charges for those issues addressed in the street occupation ordinance., The proposed changes are based on what our administrative costs 'would be to issue the permit. Some of the charges shown on the listing are PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE OCTOBER 1, 1991 PAGE 2 that charged by the City of Seattle. Staff is still working on those items to determine the proper fee for Kent. Wickstrom stated this is being presented to the Committee for their review at this time and it will be brought back before the Committee for approval. Dowell asked about the length of time the permit was good for. Wickstrom commented it would depend upon what the application was for. For instance, a banner might be for a week's period while a sandwich board permit could be good for one year. Russ Stringham asked about a second sign or whether a business owner is limited to one sign. Wickstrom stated that each application would have to be reviewed on its own merit since some locations could support a second sign while others could not. Jim White asked if this applied to all, real estate signs. Wickstrom replied that the ordinance referred to all signs in the public right of way. Stringham commented that if the permit fee for real estate signs is $75 the real estate companies will go ahead and put them up and let the City take them down. Carol Morris stated that if this turns out to be a problem, the present ordinance could be amended to include a provision setting penalties for certain companies that continue to violate. Stringham asked how the dimensions were determined. John Bond stated that the ASHTO site criteria was used. Ed White added these are nationally recognized standards. Dowell asked if the people on Meeker street would be charged for their awnings. 1ickstrom commented that the ordinance does address that use but we do not propose to go out on the streets to police it. However, if a complaint is brought to our attention, we will have to address it based on the ordinance. Stringham raised questions about the requirement of an indemnity bond and would a sandwich board permit require a 'bond. He stated this would incur more cost for the business owner. The certificate of insurance will add another $200 a year to his insurance costs. He wondered why both would be required. Carol Morris explained that each application would have to be reviewed on its own merits as each piece of property is unique. It was noted that the condition on destruction of any confiscated signs should be consistent with the ordinance. Jim White asked that this proposal be submitted to the real estate people and downtown businesses for their comments. He stated he is concerned about the costs from a business standpoint but on the other side the City has the costs of administering the ordinance and the potential liability. Dowell commented that the public has to be aware that when Council adopts ordinances such as this to meet specific needs, they are going to have* to support the costs involved: Often times these ordinances require departments to take on extra tasks for which they have either no staff or funding. Jim White asked this be brought back to the committee in a couple of weeks.