Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Public Works/Planning - 06/16/1993 PUBLIC WORKS COIVEMMEE JUKE 16, 1993 PRESENT: Jim White Roger Lubovich Paul Mann Tom Brubaker Don Wickstrom Ed White Gary Gill Charley Lindsey Tony McCarthy Jean Parietti Mr & Mrs Rust Councilperson Jim Bennett - Absent 76th Ave South Asphalt Overlay/Resurfacing Wickstrom stated that we are requesting authorization to sign an interlocal agreement to receive federal money for this project plus establishing the budget; essentially overlaying 76th Ave thru North 4th to 228th. Committee unanimously agreed to recommend execution of the interlocal agreement and recommended establishing the budget for the 76th Ave Asphalt Overlay/Resurfacing project. Garrison Creek Stormwater Control Project Condemnation Wickstrom said that we have acquired all of the properties to install the new trunk system, which is just a part of the overall project. He said the total project involves some detention facilities, essentially one major facility in the vicinity of 98th and 234th and a new trunk line thru the Benson Shopping Center. Wickstrom stated that the City has acquired all the easements except at Payless, which is in the shopping center at the southeast corner of 104th and 240th. Wickstrom requested authorization to condemn so we can go ahead and install the system. In response to Jim White, Wickstrom said that staff has been trying to contact Payless and they have not responded. He said we need to proceed with condemnation, while we are still trying to negotiate, in order to proceed with this project. Committee unanimously agreed to recommend adoption of an ordinance authorizing condemnation. 1 94th Avenue Storm Drainage Improvements Wickstrom requested that the 94th Ave Storm Drainage Improvements Project, the Watershed Fencing Project, the Downtown Infrastructure Watermain Replacement Project and the 1993 Asphalt Overlay Project be placed on the consent calendar of the July 6th Council meeting, assuming that the bids received are within the project budget. Wickstrom explained that due to the extra week in June we would miss the sequence of awarding by Council, if we have to come back to Committee and we would thereby miss an entire month of construction time. Committee unanimously recommended placing the 94th Ave Storm Drainage Improvements on the July 6th Council agenda, assuming that the low bid received is within budget. Committee unanimously authorized similar action for the Watershed Fencing Project, the Downtown Infrastructure Watermain Replacement and the 1993 Asphalt Overlay projects. Jim White asked about the location of the Downtown Infrastructure Watermain project. Wickstrom explained that this is the first phase of the Infrastructure Program that was approved and essentially brings in a feed from our 16" main on Willis and extends it. We will be extending the main on Saar St so we don't have the impact on Willis St, extending it down on 5th Ave up to Gowe and also south across Willis and continuing on the old Willis St and tying in another main across the freeway to Foster plat. Wickstrom said the second phase would bring in a new feed on James Street. Jim White asked about the location of the Asphalt/Overlay project. Wickstrom explained that this is in the LIDS at Hilltop Avenue and Westview Terrace. He explained that these LIDS have been closed out and it was too late in the year to complete the overlay, however we wanted to close the LIDS so we wouldn't have to continue interest bearing. OFC Mall @ Kent-Des Moines Rd & Highway 99 Mann stated he was approached by a Des Moines Councilmember regarding Kent's responsibility in that area. Mann said that he feels there is a very dangerous exit out of the mall. Wickstrom said that the south half of Kent Des Moines Road is in the Kent City limits; the north half is in Des Moines City limit. Wickstrom said that Des Moines wanted less stringent measures than we wanted on that intersection at that driveway exit. Gill stated that Kent tried to restrict the left turn exit however Des Moines and the State Highway Department insisted on the left turn exit. Gill said that Kent felt it was unsafe from the beginning of its design, however the store owner and Des Moines insisted on having that left 2 .R turn access out. Wickstrom explained that Kent Des, Moines Rd. and Highway 99 are both state highways, as such we have very little control over what is allowed. He said that State will dictate whether or not they will allow certain kind of access restrictions. Wickstrom said that because of this, the state has to approve our access control plan for the site. He said that because the City of Des Moines owns the north half, they also have a say. Gill suggested that letters from the Des Moines City Council and Kent City Council to the State Dept of Transportation requesting a revision would help. Ed White explained that this was a condition the City of Des Moines clearly put on that site. Gill stated that if the City of Des Moines Council feels this is an issue that should be revisited, he would encourage them to write a letter. He said if Kent City Council feels the same way than maybe the State might revisit that and possibly recommend a change. Ed White said there are no provisions for traffic going westbound. He said Des Moines wanted that access so people travelling from the site back to Des Moines, would have an access without going out to Highway 99. Committee directed staff to revisit the issue and come back with a recommendation. Nazarene Church Driveway on Alvord Street Ed White stated that he was approached by the Novak's regarding an action the City had taken in allowing access from the Church of the Nazarene on the south side of James Street between Alvord and Hazel. He said that they had originally approached the City about a year ago with a request to use a private easement located in the southeasterly portion of the parking lot, in order to gain additional access. Ed said that action had been taken in 1983 wherein Council had passed an Ordinance restricting the use of Cedar Street by the church, to use that for additional access. He said that when the church originally approached the City about a year ago, staff told them that if they chose to use the Cedar Street access, we would have to go back to the community and see if there was an interest there to allow this. He said about the first of this year, the church came back with the proposal for a grade and fill on Alvord. He said the church provided all the documentation showing there is a dedicated easement. Ed said this application was processed in the normal manner. Ed said staff did not inform the residents of this because they were dealing with a private easement. Ed said that he later learned that there was some action which was a part of the original Church of the Nazarene Addition, that did address that access and, at that point, about 1983, it was the recommendation of the Transportation Engineer that 3 this access be restricted. Ed said that staff did not have that information at the time the decision was made to go forward with the grade and fill permit. He said that the grade fill permit was issued on June 6, 1993 . Ed said he told Mrs. Novak that staff had considered this as a private property issue dealing with a private easement and he wasn't aware of any laws that gave the City power to restrict it. Brubaker said the grade and fill permit was issued as an almost perfunctory procedural matter. He stated that in 1983 when the City denied access on Alvord St. , the City did that predominantly because it was a neighborhood type street and we want to preserve the character of neighborhood streets. Brubaker said that the City still recognizes Alvord as a neighborhood type street. However, he said, in the past ten years there has been a tremendous amount of growth in Puget Sound region including the City of Kent and we have developed on James Street, some serious traffic problems. Brubaker said we need to do what we can to alleviate the pressures on James Street. He said that the City has reviewed the traffic impacts on Alvord and overall, it will be a benefit for the general area in terms of lessening the likelihood of accidents on James, and it won't have an unduly adverse impact on Alvord. Brubaker said that the grade and fill permit has been issued and it is the City's hope that by issuing this permit we will relieve some of the pressure on James and reduce some of the accidents. Brenda Cabot, resident of the house next to the easement, inquired as to the zoning laws concerning a driveway to a business in proximity to a residence. Cabot claimed that this driveway would cut off all access and availability to her driveway. Ed Kauff, owner of the property stated he has never received anything in the mail regarding this issue. Kauff also stated that he feels Alvord is too narrow and the easement is only 20 feet wide. Brubaker stated that one other issue is that the church has had an easement across the Kauff property for a long time. He said that this is a private right between the church and Kauff. Brubaker said the church has a pre-existing right to access Alvord Street thru that easement. He said that this is a private situation and that the church is exercising its rights as a property owner to access Alvord Street. Frank Novak, resident, stated that it is necessary to walk in the road on Alvord, Temperance or Hazel Streets. He pointed out that there are no sidewalks or shoulders. Mr. Novak said safety requirements should have been addressed before issuing the grading permit. Further discussion followed regarding the safety issue and questions were raised relative to the installation of a traffic light. Ed White stated that this is a small residential street with a limited number of cars accessing James Street from Alvord. 4 u He said that one of the measures used in determining the need for a traffic signal involves traffic on the main .street which is James, which is sufficient but we also have to consider the number of vehicles on the side street and we do not have a large volume of vehicles from James going north and south on Alvord, to meet the signal requirement. Jim White questioned if we installed a traffic signal without proper justification, do we then create liability on James Street? Brubaker responded that yes we do, if there is an accident and the City becomes named. Roger Lubovich stated that the specific issue at hand is the legality of the issuing of the grade and fill permit; whether or not we can revoke it; whether its a private or public access issue. Roger said that as of this point, the City has not found any legal basis for withholding or revoking the permit. He also stated that the Church has met the criteria for the permit; it was issued and we are exposed to liability if we revoke it without legal basis. Roger said that this is a private property issue and as of today, the only controlling factor we have over that driveway is that permit. Roger suggested that possibly the Church may agree to hold off on implementation to see if something could be sorted out. Committee directed staff to revisit the issue of installing a traffic light in the vicinity and also, to get together with the church and its neighbors to find some workable solutions. Sewer at Kent Covenant Church Tom Sharp stated that it was his understanding that Kent Covenant Church is installing a private force main for their church only. The main runs from the church, into the public right of way. Wickstrom said they are running it in the street but he does not know where the connection is. Sharp stated that it was a complete "revelation" to him and no one had contacted him concerning this. Sharp stated it was his understanding that there is an agreement between King County and the City which allows this private side sewer to go into the public right of way. Gill stated that he had informed Paul Morford of this private side sewer at the church several months ago. Wickstrom stated that the Kent Covenant Church is getting a side sewer on their own and they are executing an agreement and are putting up cash equivalent to their LID assessment, so the LID is still the potential for being extended. Wickstrom further stated that the Church is not getting any "special deal"; they are having to put up $40, 000 to pay for a future LID that may not even occur. Morford stated that there isn't any way that they could economically get sewer to their adjoining property, in this vicinity. Morford requested that the City work out something to get the sewer extended. Gill said the Morford's property can be 5 partially served by that sewer line going the other direction. He ` said that the Comprehensive Plan shows that this area could be totally served off of the extension that we are proposing with the LID. Gill explained that when there is a situation like the church's, as has been done on .numerous cases, we do not require them to extend the sewer all the way to their property line because the Comp Plan shows that the adjoining property would be serviced off of another basin. Gill said that we did require them to give us the easements so that if that property owner decided in the future, to serve a portion of the site, and the sewer is deep enough to serve the residence that Morford has mentioned, it could have been 8 feet deeper. Gill said that the adjoining residences to the south joined with the church and actually lowered the line down to nearly 20 feet to serve their entire parcel. Gill said that they tried to negotiate with Morford and others on paying for the extra costs for deepening the line however they chose not to participate. Sharp claimed that they were never contacted until the contract was released. Gill stated that the church spent a great deal of money extending the sewer line and we were not going to say that it was the church's obligation to keep that sewer 20 feet deep in order to serve half of the adjoining property owner's property. Wickstrom stated that Morford could go back and rebuild a portion of it; he had an opportunity to participate and chose not to and lower that section of the main and extend it to service his property, or he could continue to pursue the LID. Wickstrom said that the other church involved with a septic system or pump station, is still obligated to put up their cash so they don't destroy their intent for the LID. Wickstrom said that we are writing agreements in their joint agreement with us to make sure that this is covered so the incentive is there; they either have to do it within the 10 year period or they lose their estimated assessment plus interest. In response to Morford, Wickstrom said that Morford cannot go into the lift station since it is private. Wickstrom said that there is a moratorium on services outside the City limits, excluding non-profit agencies. Meeting adjourned at 3 : 30. 6