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