HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Public Works/Planning - 11/01/1999 J
Item 2
Public Works/Planning Committee
11/01/99
No Parking Zone = Ordinance
Recommended Motion:
I move that the Public Works/Planning Committee
recommend that the Council repeal section 9.38.020 of the
Kent City Code, and adopt a new section 9.38.020 entitled
"No Parking Zones".
PUBLIC WORKS/PLANNING COMMITTEE
• 1. SUBJECT: No Parking Zone—Ordinance
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Section 9.38.020 of the City Code designates the
streets in which parking is prohibited. This ordinance eliminates provisions in the
existing code that are repetitive and designates additional no parking zones.
3. MOTION: To recommend that council repeal section 9.38.020 of the Kent City
Code, and adopt a new section 9.38.020 entitled"No Parking Zones."
i
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
Memorandum
To: Public Works/Planning Committee
CC: Roger Lubovich, City Attorney
Tom Brubaker, Deputy City Attorney
r
From: Arthur Pat Fitzpatrick, Assistant City Attorney
Be: No Parking Zone— Ordinance
08U: October 22, 1999
At the request of the Public Works Department, the City Attorney's Office has prepared a
new ordinance relating to no parking zones to replace the current ordinance. A copy of the proposed
ordinance is attached. For ease of reference, I have prepared a list of the substantive changes being
recommended.
Additions
In addition to the current no parking zones, the proposed ordinance adds the following as
areas in which parking would be prohibited (the numbers correspond to the numbers in the
ordinance):
2. East Gowe Street: from Railroad Avenue to Central Avenue (south side only) and
from Central Avenue to Kenneback Avenue (both sides).
3. SR 99 (Pacific Highway South): from Kent-Des Moines Road (SR 516) to the
intersection of South 272nd Street.
16. 108th Avenue Southeast: from Southeast 260th Street to Kent-Kangley Road (SR
516).
26. 58th Place South: from South 194th Street to South 196th Street.
33. South 206th Street: from 80th Avenue South to Burlington Northern railroad tracks.
38. 83rd Avenue South: from South 224th Street to south 228th Street.
r40. South 224th Street: from 83rd Avenue South to SR 167.
MEMORANDUM:
Public Works/Planning Committee
October 22, 1999
Page: 3
South.
35. South 218th Street: from 84th Avenue South to SR 167 ead�r�of stfeet.
37. South 228th Street: from Russell Road to 83rd Avenue South elldrjc )f St-Fee .
39. 88th Avenue South: from James Street 224 et to South 218th Street.
43. 64th Avenue: from the Green River to South 190th 212h Street.
45. South 259th Street: from 74th Avenue to east city limits.
46. James Street: from Russell Road to 148th 116h Avenue South.
47, South 216th Street: from 64th Avenue South crest Val e.,u: .h.,. .,to 72nd Avenue
South.
49. 100th Avenue South: from the north city limits to South 248th 240t Street.
52. 104th Avenue Southeast: from a point one hundred (100) feet north of Southeast
236th Street to the intersection of Southeast 272nd 26413 Street.
55. Military Road: from the intersection of South 229th Street to the intersection of
South 277th 268th Street.
57. Southeast 256th Street: from the intersection of 101st Avenue Southeast to the
intersection of 148th nth Avenue Southeast.
62, Lakeside Boulevard West: from the intersection of James Street to the
intersecting(intersection) of South 228th Street Russell Read t,. the inter-see
0
(inter-seetion) of Lakeside Beulevar-d
East.
63. Lakeside Boulevard East: from the intersection of James Street to the
intersecting(intersection) of South 228th Street Russell Read te the inter-seetin
(interseetion) of Lakeside Bela eyefd East.
ate.
69. South 216th Street: from the intersection of 84th Avenue South to South 212th Street
«d e f the ..Beet
70. 94th Avenue South: from the intersection of James Street SeTth 248th c to the
intersection of Canyon Drive.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of
Kent, Washington, repealing Section 9.38.020 of the Kent
City Code in its entirety and enacting a new Section 9.38.020
entitled "No parking zones" relating to no parking zones
within the City.
WHEREAS, the City Council has established no parking zones within
the City of Kent as authorized by state law; and
WHEREAS, the current code has provisions which are repetitive and,
therefore, are not necessary; and
WHEREAS, additional no parking zones are necessary for the
protection of the health, safety, and welfare of the public; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the City Code to update its
no parking zones; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON,
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. Section 9.38.020 of the Kent City Code entitled"No parking
zones" is hereby repealed in its entirety.
SECTION 2. A new section, Section 9.38.020, entitled "No parking
1 No Parking Zones
13. 97 h Place South: from the intersection of Canyon Drive to the intersection
of Crow Road.
14. 77`h Avenue: from the intersection of South 212`h Street to the end of 77'h
Avenue South.
15. Southeast 260`h Street: from 97`h Place South to 108'h Avenue Southeast.
16. 108th Avenue Southeast: from Southeast 260`h Street to Kent-Kan;Iey Road
(SR 516).
17. 70'h/72nd Avenue South: from South 228th Street to 43`d Avenue South
(South 108`h Street).
18. Reith Road/South 2591h Place/South 260`h Street: from SR 99 to SR 516
(Kent-Des Moines Road).
19. South 190`h Street: from 72nd Avenue South to 62nd Avenue South.
20. South 194`h Street: from 66`h Avenue South to Russell Road.
21. South 196`h Street: from SR 167to Orillia Road.
22 62nd Avenue South: from South 196`h Street to South 212`h Street.
23. 66`h Avenue South: from South 196`h Street to South 190`' Street.
24. 80`h Avenue South: from South 208'h Street to South 180`h Street (43`d
Avenue South).
25. 80`h Place South: from South 84`h Avenue to 80`h Avenue South.
26. 58`' Place South: from South 194`h Street to South 196`h Street.
27. South 188`h Street: from end of street to 80`h Place South.
28. South 190`h Street: from end of street to 80`h Avenue South.
29. South 192❑d Street: from end of street to 84`' Avenue South to SR 167,
30. South 194`h Street: from end of street to 84`h Avenue South.
31. South 208`h Street: from Burlington Northern railroad tracks to 96`h Avenue
South.
32. South 200`h Street: from 801h Avenue South to 84`h Avenue South.
33. South 206d'Street: from 80'h Avenue South to Burlington Northern railroad
tracks.
3 No Parking Zones
56. Canyon Drive: from the intersection of Hazel Avenue to the intersection
of 101" Avenue Southeast.
57. Southeast 256`h Street: from the intersection of 101"Avenue Southeast to
the intersection of 148`f'Avenue Southeast.
58. 54 h Avenue South: from the intersection of South 226`h Street to the
intersection of South 228`h Street.
59. South 226`h Street: from the intersection of 54`h Avenue South to the
intersection of 64`h Avenue South.
60. South 212`' Street: from the west city limits to the east city limits.
61. South 204`h Street: from the intersection of West Valley Highway to the
intersection of 72'd Avenue South.
62. Lakeside Boulevard West: from the intersection of James Street to the
intersecting(intersection) of South 228`h Street.
63. Lakeside Boulevard East: from the intersection of James Street to the
intersecting(intersection) of South 228`' Street.
64. South 236`h Street: from the intersection of Lakeside Boulevard East to the
intersection of 64`h Avenue South.
65. Landing Way: from the intersection of 64`h Avenue South to the
intersection of West Valley Highway.
66. South 234`h Street: from the intersection of West Valley Highway to the end
of the street.
67. Sixth Avenue South: from the intersection of South 228u' Street to the end
of the street.
68. Second Avenue South: from the intersection of South 228`h Street to the
end of the street.,
69. South 216`h Street: from the intersection of 84`1' Avenue South to South
212`h Street.
70. 94`h Avenue South: from the intersection of James Street to the intersection
of Canyon Drive.
5 No Parking Zones
87. 116`h Avenue Southeast: from Kent-Kangley Road(SR 516) to Southeast
277"'Place.
SECTION 3. -Severability. If any one or more sections, subsections, or
sentences of this Ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall
not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance and the same shall remain
in full force and effect.
SECTION 4: - Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in
force thirty(30) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by
law.
JIM WHITE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY
7 No Parking Zones
Item 3
Public Works/Planning Committee
11/01199
Nelson Annexation - Set Hearing Date
Recommended Motion:
I move that the Public Works/Planning Committee
recommend to the Council authorization to set a public
hearing date for November 16th to accept the 10% petition of
the proposed Nelson Annexation.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
November 1 , 1999
TO: Public Works/Planning Committee
FROM: Don Wickstroi4
RE: Nelson Annexation
We are in receipt of the Notice of Intent to Annex 23 acres adjacent to S. 277"'
Street. (See attached vicinity map) As required by state law, we are requesting
authorization to set a public meeting date accepting the 10% petition thereon.
MOTION: Recommend Council authorization to set a public meeting date for
November 16`h to accept the 10% petition of the proposed Nelson Annexation.
1\11,8099
i
0 W.RR a NAV. CO (I-
O-Ty y CLE OF KENRKT
iI d CfT
MIN*
,4----------
limb IZ3
sp
.... . ......
4F
9,
F,
81 S T ME. i *-I
_7 i
L
N
OCC680
0 • VALLEY t 3
- - - - - - - --- -
t t
Item 4
Public Works/Planning Committee
11101199
Interagency Agreement/Traffic Signal
Recommended Motion:
I move that the Public Works/Planning Committee
recommend to the Council authorization for the Mayor to
sign the Interagency Agreement for the traffic signal at 1201n
Avenue SE and SE 2401h Street, upon concurrence of the
language therein by the City Attorney.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
November 1, 1999
TO: Public Works/Plan(niin�a�Committee
FROM: Don Wickstrom �J"v
RE: Interagency Agreement/Traffic Signal
120`" Avenue SE Sc SE 240"' Street - Authorization
The purpose of the attached Interagency Agreement between the City and King
County Department of Transportation is to define the respective agencies' level of
responsibility with regard to the operation/maintenance of the traffic signal at 120"'
Ave SE Sz SE 240"' Street.
MOTION: Recommend Council authorization for the Mayor to sign the
Interagency Agreement for the traffic signal at 120"' Ave SE SL SE 240"' Street, upon
concurrence of the language therein by the City Attorney.
INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT FOR
THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT THE INTERSECTION OF
1201h AVENUE SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHEAST 240'h STREET
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between King County, a political subdivision of
the State of Washington("the County") and the City of Kent("the City").
RECITALS
A. The County owns the traffic signal located at the intersection of 120' Avenue Southeast and
Southeast 2401h Street in unincoporated King County bordering the City ("the Signal").
B. The City has requested that the County allow the City to control the timing setting of the Signal
in order to coordinate the Signal with other traffic signals located within the City.
C. Efficient coordination of the traffic signals in and around the City will provide benefits in the
public's interest.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE,the parties agree as follows:
1. Maintenance
King County Department of Transportation Road Services Division (RSD) will maintain the
Signal. The City will provide technical support for the IDC controller at RSD's request.
Whenever the City needs to get into a cabinet, a Signal Technician or Engineer will contact
RSD for approval.
2. Traffic Signal Operation
2.1 RSD will control the Signal display, the vehicle detection system, establish a range of
parameters for traffic controller timing settings such as minimum green, maximum
green, gap times, vehicle clearance times, pedestrian walk, etc. The City and RSD will
meet annually to review the operation of the Signal. All aspects of the operation will be
reviewed including efficiency and safety.
2.2 The City will control the Signal controller timing settings within RSD's traffic
operational parameters and establish the traffic signal coordination system using:
a. A family of pre-set coordination patterns (developed jointly by
RSD/City) operated by a time-of-day, day-of-week schedule; or
b. A real-time on line dynamic traffic control strategy based on current traffic flow
characteristics as measured by the system; or
C. A combination of a. and b, above.
2.3 The City will provide a system password to RSD that will allow for monitoring only. If
requested, City technicians will assist RSD personnel in familiarizing themselves with
system capabilities. The City will fax notification of any signal timing changes it makes
to RSD as soon as is practical after they are in effect.
4. Audits and Inspections
The records and documents with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement shall be
subject to inspection, review or audit by the County or the City during the term of this
Agreement and three years after termination.
5. Entire Aareement and Amendments
This Agreement contains the entire written agreement of the parties hereto and supersedes any
and all prior oral or written representations or understandings. This Agreement may be
amended at any time by mutual agreement of the authorized representatives of both parties.
6. Indemnification
Washington State law shall govern the respective liabilities of the parties to this Agreement for
any loss due to property damage or personal injury arising out of activities conducted pursuant to
it.
7. Duration/Termination
This Agreement will become effective upon signature by both parties and will remain in
effect until terminated by 30 days' advance written notice by either parry to the other party.
IN WITNESS,THEREOF,the parties have executed this Agreement effective as of the date last written
below.
KING COUNTY CITY OF KENT
Director, King County City Mayor
Department of Transportation
Date Date
Approved as to form: Approved as to form:
Deputy Prosecuting Attorney City Attorney
Item 5
Public Works/Planning Committee
11/01199
King County Agreement for
Inflow/Infiltration Program Study
- Authorization
Recommended Motion:
I move that the Public Works/Planning Committee
recommend to the Council authorization for the Mayor to
sign the Utilities Cooperation Agreement with King County
for the Inflow/Infiltration Program Study.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
November 1, 1999
TO: Public Works/Planning,,,Committee
FROM: Don Wicicstrom
RE: Utilities Cooperation Agreement
Inflow/Infiltration Program Study - Authorization
Attached is a copy of the Utilities Cooperation Agreement between the City of Kent
and King County for the Inflow/Infiltration Program Study. This agreement provides
authorization of King County contractors to access the City's sewer lines to collect
information on Inflow/Infiltration and to analyze the condition of the lines and
• structures.
As part of this agreement, King County is responsible for funding the program. The
term of this agreement is from the execution date until the completion of the study or
December 31, 2005, whichever occurs first.
MOTION: Recommend Council authorization for the Mayor to sign the Utilities
Cooperation Agreement with King County for the Inflow/Infiltration Program Studer.
NIP7999
UTILITIES COOPERATION AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN
CITY OF KENT
AND
KING COUNTY
FOR
INFLOW/INFILTRATION PROGRAM STUDY
This Agreement, is made and entered into this day of
1999 between the City of Kent, a municipality, in the State of Washington, (hereinafter,
"the City") and King County, a home rule charter county in the State of Washington,
acting through its Department of Natural Resources (herein after "the County", or
"Dila„
RECITALS
A. The parties have entered into a long-term Agreement for Sewage Disposal May 18,
1967, and amended thereafter(hereinafter referred to as the "Basic Agreement"); and
B. King County has determined that substantial amounts of extraneous water
(hereinafter "infiltration & inflow" or "I&I") enter local sewer systems which are
tributary to King County's wastewater conveyance and treatment facilities; and
C. King County believes cost savings can be realized by reducing infiltration &
inflow in some of the local sewer systems tributary to the County's system and is
willing to fund a study to gather information on these sewer systems; and
D. The City has determined that it is in its best interest to participate in this study to
identify these areas of I&I into the local sewer system;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed as follows:
Section 1. Purpose and Duration
1.1 The purposes of this agreement are (a) to provide for the entry of County
contractors into the City's sewer lines to collect information on I&I and to analyze the
conditions of these lines, and (b) to use reasonable efforts, as determined by the City,
to obtain consent to enter private property, if such access is deemed necessary by the
County, for the purpose of collecting information and analyzing the conditions
leading to Inflow/Infiltration into privately owned sewer lines.
1.2 The information referenced in subsection 1.1 above will be collected using
various methods, including, at a minimum, flow monitoring, smoke testing, dye
testing and television inspection of manholes and sewer lines.
0 �l ii li.1CJ l_VCU� ..c..alll _1�li;i;u ,lll ii/. llh,i JiI:U�
1.3 The duration of this agreement shall be from the date of execution until
completion of the study or December 31, 2005, whichever should come first. The
duration of this agreement shall not be exceeded without the written agreement of
both parties.
Section 2. County Responsibility
2.1 The County, as the party funding this I&I study, shall be responsible for its
contractor's performance in the local system and on private property, including
compliance with all applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations, and
ordinances. The County shall also ensure that specific responsibilities between the
County's contractor and the City will be defined before initiation of any work within
the City's sewer service area.
2.2 The County agrees to provide a copy of its contract with its contractor to the City
prior to the initiation of any activities under this Agreement. The County will require
in its contract with its contractor that the County and the participating City will be
added as an additional insured to the contractors' general liability policy(s).
2.3 The City agrees, understands and acknowledges that the County is fully self-
insured for its liability exposures. Should an incident occur involving the negligence
of County employees acting in the scope of their employment, the County's self-
funded program will respond.
Section 3. City Responsibility
3.1 The City shall make available to the County and its contractors, in a timely
manner, the best available information about the conditions of its manholes and the
other parts of its sewer system.
3.2 The City shall use reasonable efforts, as determined by the City, to obtain consent
to enter private property to ensure that the work required under this Agreement can be
accomplished efficiently.
3.3 The City shall use reasonable efforts, as determined by the City, to notify owners
of private property when access to such property is necessary to carry out the purpose
of the Agreement.
3.4 The City shall use reasonable efforts, as determined by the City, to contact the
owners of side sewers to provide reasonable public information related to the studies
or other activities performed under this Agreement.
3.5 The City shall use reasonable efforts, as determined by the City, to obtain consent
to enter any sewer service area to which the City provides sewer collection services
by contract or other agreement.
i
3.6 The City agrees that the service map attached hereto as Exhibit A is reasonably
accurate as of the date indicated on the map. The service map defines the area for the
I/I regional study.
Section 4. Indemnification
4.1 To the extent allowed by law, the County shall defend, indemnify and hold
harmless the City, its elected officials, employees and agents from and against any
and all suits, claims, actions, losses, costs, expenses of litigation, attorney's fees,
penalties, and damages of whatsoever kind or nature arising out of, in connection with
or incident to an act or omission of the County, its employees, agents, and contractors
in the performance of the County's obligations under this Agreement. In the event of
litigation between the parties to enforce the rights under this section, reasonable
attorney's fees shall be allowed to the prevailing party. This indemnification
provision shall include, but is not limited to, all claims against the City by an
employee or former employee of the County or its contractors and, as to such claims,
the County expressly waives all immunity and limitation of liability under title 51
RCW.
4.2 To the extent allowed by law, the City shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless
the County, its elected officials, employees and agents from and against any and all
suits, claims, actions, losses, costs, expenses of litigation, attorney's fees, penalties,
and damages or whatsoever kind or nature arising out of, in connection with or
incident to an act or omission of the City, its employees, agents, and contractors in the
performance of the City's obligations under this Agreement. In the event of litigation
between the parties to enforce the rights under this section, reasonable attorney's fees
shall be allowed to the prevailing party. This indemnification obligation shall
include, but is not limited to, all claims against the County by an employee or former
employee of the City or its contractors and, as to such claims, the City expressly
waives all immunity and limitation of liability under Title 51 RCW.
Section 5. Basic Agreement Unchanged
The City shall comply with all provisions of the Basic Agreement without qualification
or condition by reason of any provision or interpretation of this Agreement, it being the
intention of the parties that the Basic Agreement shall not otherwise be affected or
modified hereby.
•
Page 3 of 8 Utilities Cooperation Agreement for I&I Study
Section 6. Termination
i6.1 Termination for Convenience. Either party for its convenience may terminate this
Agreement in whole or in part with seven (7) business days advance written notice
delivered to the other party by certified mail, return receipt requested.
6.2 Termination for Default. In addition to termination for convenience, if either
party fails to perform or comply with any material provision of this agreement, the
other party may terminate this contract, in whole or in part, for default. Termination
shall be effected by serving a Notice of Termination by certified mail, return receipt
requested, on the other party setting forth the manner in which the other party is in
default and the effective date of termination; provided, that the other party shall have
ten calendar working days to cure the default.
6.3 Termination for Non-Appropriation. If expected or actual funding is withdrawn,
reduced, or limited in any way prior to the termination date set forth in this contract or
in any amendment hereto, either party may, upon written notice to the other party,
terminate the Agreement in whole or in part. Such termination shall be in addition to
the parties' right to terminate for convenience or default.
Funding for this agreement beyond the current appropriation year is conditional upon
appropriation by the County Council of sufficient funds to support the activities
. described in this agreement. Should such an appropriation not be approved, the
agreement shall terminate at the close of the current appropriation year. The
appropriation year ends on December 31 of each year.
Section 7. Notice
7.1 All Notices to the County required under the terms of this Agreement shall be
given in writing, addressed as follows:
King County Department of Natural Resources
Wastewater Treatment Division
201 South Jackson Street; MS: KSC —NR - 0501
Seattle, Washington 98104-3855
Attn: Gunars Sreibers, Program Manager
Telephone: (206) 684-2113
Fax: (206) 684-1741
•
Page 4 of 8 Utilities Cooperation Agreement for I&I Study
7.2 All notices to the City required to be given under the terms of this Agreement
unless otherwise specified herein, or as may be amended, shall be given in writing,
addressed as follows:
Mr. Don E. Wickstrom, P.E.
Director of Public Works
The City of Kent
220 4"' Avenue South
Kent, Washington 98032
Telephone: (253) 856-5500
Fax: (253) 856-6600
Section 8. Project Dispute Resolution
8.1 The parties' Project Managers shall use their best efforts to resolve disputes
related to or arising out of the studies or other activities conducted under this
Agreement. In the event that disputes cannot be resolved by the parties' Project
Managers, the County's Wastewater Treatment Division Manager and the City's
Public Works Director will apply their best efforts to resolve disputes on matters
between the County and the City arising out of or related to the Agreement. If the
Manager and Director are unable to resolve a matter within fifteen (15) days of the
time such a matter is referred to them in writing, the Manager and Director shall ask
the City's Public Works Director and the County's DNR Director to resolve the
dispute, subject to statutory, permit, or other requirements, policies or procedures.
8.2 The County and the City agree to exhaust each of these procedural steps before
seeking to resolve disputes in a court of law or other tribunal, except to the extent that
these procedures conflict with formal administrative appeal procedures.
Section 9. Choice of Law
This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the
State of Washington and the venue of any action brought hereunder shall be in the
Superior Court of King County.
Section 10. Amendment,Waiver
This Agreement shall not be amended except in writing, executed by both the County and
the City.
•
Section 11. Captions
�► Section titles and other headings contained in this Agreement are for convenience only
and shall not be part of this Agreement, nor considered in its interpretation.
Section 12. Binding Upon Successors
This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of, and be binding upon the successors and
assignees of both the County and the City.
Section 13. Counterparts
This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be
an original, but such counterparts shall constitute one and the same instrument.
Section 14. Waiver
No waiver by either party of any term or condition of this Agreement shall be deemed or
construed as a waiver of any other term or condition, nor shall a waiver of any breach be
deemed to constitute a waiver of any subsequent breach whether of the same or a
different provision of this Agreement.
.� Section 15. No Third-Party Beneficiaries
This Agreement is entered into solely for the mutual benefit of the County and the City.
This Agreement is not entered into with the intent that it shall benefit any other party and
no other such person shall be entitled to be treated as a third-party beneficiary of this
Agreement.
Section 16. Effective Date
This Agreement shall take effect when both parties hereto have executed this document.
Section 17. Entire Agreement
This document constitutes the complete agreement of the parties regarding the matters
described herein and there are no other agreements, express or implied, not contained
herein. The Agreement may be modified only in writing and signed by the parties.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of
Kent, Washington, providing for the acquisition of certain
property and/or property rights in order to construct, extend,
widen, improve, alter, maintain and reconstruct Southeast
256th Street from its intersection at 116th Avenue Southeast
to approximately 135d' Avenue Southeast, including
intersection work; providing for the condemnation,
appropriation, taking and damaging of such property rights
as are necessary for that purpose;providing for the payment
thereof out of the 256 h Street Project Fund(Fund R-77-E23-
5510); and directing the City Attorney to prosecute the
appropriate legal proceedings,together with the authority to
enter into settlements, stipulations or other agreements; all
of said properties located within King County, Washington.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT,WASHINGTON,DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. After receiving the report of City staff, and after reviewing
the planned improvements for the Southeast 256th Street Project (the "Project"), the City
Council finds and declares that the public convenience, use, health, safety and necessity
demand that the City of Kent condemn, appropriate, take and damage all or portions o
certain real properties located in King County, Washington, in order to acquire the
necessary property and/or property rights for the construction of the Project, including all
necessary appurtenances. These properties are legally described in Exhibit A, attached and
incorporated by this reference (the "Properties"). The purposes for which this
condemnation is authorized shall include,without limitation, all acts necessary to complete
1 256`h.Street Condemnation
P,rce.A 40 41
That portion of Lot 2, City of Kent Short Plat No.SPC-77-14 as recorded under King County
Recording No. 7708090530, being a portion of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of
Section 29,Township 22 North,Range 5 East, W.M.,King County Washington,described as
follows:
Beginning at the northeast comer of said Lot 2; thence South 02° 11' 24"West,along the east
line thereof, 30.00 feet; thence North 86° 49' 30"West,parallel with the north line of said lot a
distance of 430.88 feet; thence South 01 0 34'28"West 86.00 feet; thence North 880 25' 32"
West 60.00 feet; thence South 02° 30' 30"West 145.00 feet; thence South 860 53' 00" East
20.00 feet; thence South 030 07' 00"West 57.39 feet, more or less, to the south line of said Lot
2; thence North 860 49' 30" West,along said south line 154.18 feet, more or less, to the
southwest comer of said Lot 2; thence North 01° 49' 45"East, along the west line thereof,
320.09 feet to the northwest corner of said Lot 2; thence South 860 49' 30" East,along the north
line thereof, 627.89 feet to the Point of Beginning.
E,vr;HIBIT
P. Ux
Item 7
Public Works/Planning Committee
11101199
Transportation Improvement Board
Grant - Authorization
Recommended Motion:
I move that the Public Works/Planning Committee
recommend to the Council authorization for the Mayor to
sign the TIB Grant Agreement and authorize staff to accept
the grant and establish a budget for the funds to be spent
within said road improvement project.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
November 1, 1999
TO: Public Works/Planning Committee
I
FROM: Don Wickstrom
RE: Transportation Improvement Board (TIP) Grant
Southeast 256"' Street (1 16"' Ave SE to 132"' Ave SE)
TIB No. 9-P-017(102)-1
We have received a grant agreement from the TIB for the construction phase of
Southeast 256" Street from 116"' Avenue SE to 132"d Avenue SE. At this time, "ve
are requesting authorization for the Mayor to sign the grant agreement, direct staff to
accept the grant and establish a budget for the funds to be spent within said road
improvement project.
MOTION: Recommend authorizing the Mayor to sign the -NB grant agreement,
authorize staff to accept the grant and establish a budget for the funds to be spent
within said road improvement project..
Nu>es99
i Transportation Improvement Account (TIA)
Project Agreement for Construction Proposal
Lead Agency
City of Kent
i
Project Number Authority Number
9-P-017(012)-1 9115219P
Project Title & Description
Southeast 256th Street
116th Ave SE to 132nd SE
Total Amount Authorized Authorization to Proceed Effective From
$2,031,358 October 19, 1999
IN CONSIDERATION of the allocation by the Transportation Improvement Board of Transportation Improvement
Account (TIA) funds to the project and in the amount set out above, the agency hereby agrees that as condition
precedent to payment of any TIA funds allocated at any time to the above referenced project, it accepts and will
comply with the terms of this agreement, including the terms and conditions set forth in RCW 47.26; the applicable
rules and regulations of the Transportation Improvement Board, and all representations made to the Transportation
Improvement Board upon which the fund allocation was based; all of which are familiar to and within the knowledge
of the agency and incorporated herein and made a part of this agreement, although not attached. The officer of the
. agency, by the signature below hereby certifies on behalf of the agency that local matching funds and other funds
represented to be committed to the project will be available as necessary to implement the projected development of
the project as set forth in the CONSTRUCTION PROSPECTUS, acknowledges that funds hereby authorized are for
the development of the construction proposal as defined by Chapter 167, Laws of 1988.
If the costs of the project exceed the amount of TIA funds authorized by the Transportation Improvement Board, set
forth above, and the required local matching funds represented by the local agency to be committed to the project,
the local agency will pay all additional costs necessary to complete the project as submitted to the Board. This shall
not prevent the local agency from requesting an increase in the amount of trust funds pursuant to applicable rules of
the Board.
Projects in clean air non-attainment areas are subject to air quality conformity requirements as specified in RCW
70.94.The lead agency certifies that the project meets all applicable Clean Air Act requirements.
IN CONSIDERATION of the promises and performance of the stated conditions by the agency, the Transportation
Improvement Board hereby agrees to reimburse the agency from allocated TIA funds and not otherwise, for its
reimbursable costs during the above referenced quarter year not to exceed the amount specified. Such obligation to
reimburse TIA funds extends only to project costs incurred after the date of the Board's allocation of funds and
authorization to proceed with the project.
LEAD AGENCY TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT BOARD
Signature of Mayor/Charrman Care +ecutr:e Gvecror
Dare
TIBm,aC.�s
Item 8
Public Works/Planning Committee
111a1/99
Change in Control of Tri-Star Disposal
•
Recommended Motion:
1 move that the Public Works/Planning Committee
recommend to the Council adoption of the resolution
ratifying approval of a change of control of Tri-Star
Disposal, upon concurrence of the language therein by the
City Attorney.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
November 1, 1999
TO: Public Works/Planning Committee
FROM: Don WickstromOj
RE: Change in Control of Tri-Star Disposal
Last Fall, Waste Management, Inc. acquired control of Tri-Star Dispoal. At that
time, following notification the City of Kent approved the transaction pursuant to
Section 4.4.2 of the Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Commercial Recycling and
Processing, and General Contract between the City of Kent and Tri-Star Disposal.
However the City has not yet taken formal action documenting its approval of the
transfer of responsibilities for performance under the contract to Waste Management..
In order to formalize the transaction, Waste Management has prepared the attached
draft resolution for the City's consideration and adoption.
MOTION; Recommend authorizing Council adoption of Resolution # upon
concurrence of the language therein by the City Attorney, which ratifies approval of a
Change of Control of Tri-Star Disposal.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, KING COUNTY,
WASHINGTON, RATIFYING APPROVAL OF A CHANGE OF CONTROL OF THE
CONTRACTOR .AND APPROVING AN ASSIGNMENT OF THE SOLID WASTE
COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL, COMMERCIAL RECYCLING AND PROCESSING, AND
GENERAL CONTRACT.
WHEREAS, Tri-Star Disposal Company, Inc. is duly authorized by the City of Kent to
perform services under the Solid Waste Collection and Disposal, Commercial Recycling and
Processing, and General Contract with the City of Kent ("the Contract");
WHEREAS, the City of Kent received notification that Waste Management, Inc. acquired
control of Tri-Star Disposal Company, Inc. and the City subsequently issued its approval thereto;
WHEREAS, Waste Management, Inc. now desires to undertake corporate consolidation
by which the entity performing services under the Contract would be "Washington Waste
Hauling & Recycling, Inc d/b/a Tri-Star Disposal";
WHEREAS, pursuant to the acquisition of control of Tri-Star Disposal Company, Inc., by
• Waste Management, Inc. and the subsequent corporate consolidation, Washington Waste
Hauling & Recycling, Inc. d/b/a Tri-Star Disposal, a subsidiary of Waste Management, Inc.
assumes all obligations as set forth in the Contract;
WHEREAS, the parties have asked for a resolution ratifying the City's consent and
approval of such change in control and providing the City's consent and approval of such
assignment through corporate consolidation;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, KING
COUNTY, WASHINGTON, IN A REGULAR MEETING DULY ASSEMBLED, HEREWITH
RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City of Kent hereby consents to and approves the acquisition of control
and assignment to the extent such consent is required by the terms of the Contract and applicable
law, provided that Washington Waste Hauling & Recycling, Inc. d!bia Tri-Star Disposal, a
sui�sidiary of Waste Management. Inc., confirms that it v,iII be bound 1) the terms and
conditions of the Conti-act, and amendments thereto.
Section — TIIe Nlavoir is hereby authorized to implement such administrative proceciures
as may be necessary to carryjout the directives of this tegislation.
DATED and SIGNED this day oI' 1999.
CITY OF KENT: ATTEST:
By: By:
Item 9
Public Works/Planning Committee
11101/99
Alpine Vista Parking Survey
Information Only
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
November 1 , 1999
TO: Public Works/Planning Committee
FROM: Don Wickstrom _�� `1,
RE: Alpine Vista Parking Survey
Revised Questionnaire Results
We are in receipt of the revised questionnaires regarding the No-Parking signs posted
in the Alpine Vista area near Lake Meridian. The residents have suggested additional
options in addition to those originally proposed. (See attached memorandum).
. From the responses, there is no clear solution other than 77% want some form of
parking restriction or control.
MOTION: ??
MI'S 194
i
PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING
MEMORANDUM
October 21 , 1999
TO: Don Wickstrom
Gary Gill
Tim LaPorte
FROM: Merrill Vesper MV
RE: Alpine Vista Parking Survey
(Revised Questionnaire Results)
The residents have returned the questionnaires regarding the no parking signs in Alpine
Vista near Lake Meridian. The results of the survey and comments received are shown
on the attachments. The voting results are also plotted on the enclosed map. I have
reviewed the responses.
The survey results can be summarized as follows.
20 - Restrict or control parking in some manner(various options)
4 - Remove signs and return to unrestricted parking
2 - No preference
26 Total
From the voting and comments it is clear that most residents (77%) do want parking
restrictions or some method to control or eliminate lake user parking in the
neighborhood.
The issue then, is how to deal with the unwanted parking. There is no one
overwhelmingly preferred option. The option receiving the most votes is #3, temporary
signs during special events. Second is #1 to keep the existing signs.
Temporary signs would require special effort to install and remove signs each time and
would have no effect on all other days. I assume parking problems occur on days other
than during special events.
The option I signs are already installed and are actually a temporary sign since the
restriction applies only during the peak season at the lake and during the peak time of
the day. The signs specify May 15 to September 15 from 12:00 noon to 8:00 p.m.
1
AIPnevista park ing.doc:mkv
File '0.1
Beside the five options offered in the survey, several others where suggested by the
residents. The resident suggestions are summarized below with the number suggesting
01 the idea.
4 - issue permits or stickers to identify legally parked cars
2 -install the signs only at the entrance to Alpine Vista specifying no parking or
residential parking only
2 - sign area of most used for lake parking (southern portion)
1 — install signs specifying resident parking only
1 - build more parking at the park
1 — buy my house, install parking lot
Signs at the entrance or resident parking only signs may deter some people but it would
be hard to deal with violators unless combined with the permit option to identify parking
violators.
If parking is restricted only on certain streets where the problem most occurs now, I
suspect the violators will simply move to the unrestricted streets.
The permit or stickers for the resident's cars could work for the residents but won't help
their guests or other visitors.
Construction of more parking lots is expensive.
There are a number of opinions, so we won't be able to satisfy everybody.
2
Alpine Vista Neighborhood
Summary
Votes
1 Keep signs and policy as they currently exist.
2 Remove signs and return to unrestricted parking. 4
3 Use temporary signs only for special events. 7
4 Restrict parking on only one side of the street. 1
5 Keep restricted parking, but change times from noon to midnight. 0
6 I do not have a preference. 2
7 Other.
Total 26
Comments
• Restrict parking on our side of the street. Why should our taxpayers be subjected to constant
park parking because the City didn't provide enough parking at Lake Meridian? Also we get
all kinds of trash thrown in our yard and in the ditch and the City never cleans up or mows
the grass in parking areas. What are our taxes paying for? Sorry we got in the City of Kent.
More taxes and no services.
• One sign at the entrance to cul-de-sac stating"Residential Parking Only". There is no ep rfect
solution that will please everyone.
• On street parking restricted to residents only, verified by permit stickers on vehicle, cost of
same to be paid by residents. We have asked for this now for over two years, meanwhile we
continue to put up with this problem.
• Signs for resident parking only.
• I don't believe our cul-de-sacs should be turned into a parking lot for the lake. Children play
here. We do not need all the congestion and increased danger.
• We think that temporary signage for special events would be the best possible option, much
like that on 144`h during the 4`h of July celebrations. Thank for the opportunity for input.
• Keep the signs on the most violated area on 150`h PI. between 272"d & 2701h seems to be used
most by park visitors.
i
• Have one main sign at entrance to Alpine Vista (corner of 15W" and 272") saying "No Park
Parking — Tow Away" and insure parking permits that we can hang on rearview mirrors for
residents so that we don't get towed away for parking on street. By having one main sign at
entrance we can take down the rest of the smaller signs and get rid of the sign clutter on the
streets.
• Permit parking for residents.
• I like them (signs and policy) the way they are. It keeps lake goers out of our area during the
peak months.
• Signs are now covered up with garbage bags. No need (to change restricted parking hours),
park closes at dusk. Original design was wrong, did not listen to people at Public Hearing.
Build more parking on all City land (not paved), north of boat ramp parking. Save as many
trees as possible (shade for users and cars). Revoke King County use of (lease) City land
(taxes we pay?) or let them pay half of cost so people can park for trail(?) See videotape
meeting in Fire Station#57. Put signs at entrance—"Parking for Residents Only".
• If I knew the street in front of my property was going to be used for parking (parking lot) for
a park, I wouldn't have bought my house. Maybe the City ought to buy my house and there
would be plenty of room for parking. My house and property has devalued since the park
was expanded.
• Prefer to have residential permit parking. Issue x amount of stickers. Don't worry about
renewals. Work on loss or moving renewal.
• Figure the parking that's the safest and try not to inconvience the locals, but the park is a
wonderful facility and should be used for everyone, the people living close must realize this
and short periods put up with the extras.
• We had not been impacted by traffic and parking, as we are in the cul-de-sac at the end of
150t'. However, we would like you to continue to enforce the "No Parking" in the cul-de-sac
behind our home. (Access via boat-launch parking lot). This area continues to be a haven in
summer months for people parking, dealing, partying and visiting the park from 11:00 PM.
Occasional sweeps into that area by law enforcement would be appreciated.
• Keep the restricted signs at south end of development, remove signs at north end of Alpine
Vista, accommodating as many residents preferences as possible.
• Sometimes I have guests and it's necessary to park in the street and #I conflicts most
definitely.
to , 'v
n — — _
'3 W
C
r /
E• 9',p9 � Z � � z /3
- �✓. S9-ss-o�E.
k,?
4ouD2�('1
pP. m °jz39.f2
C T
0
L
2
i4it
� �+
N.d1- 7-2�E S7 ��� ivo hn Q�� 20 �.
u89-U2.34N 400.10 ti 36.50 �� �, 8301310916
' KC.SP 183082 LoT¢ AC. Z 6�� ';� '° rza(,9a w
N:(N,OFJc.l9.6G8q .oF W.'4 or G.t. KC 5 P it93Tse.rcross JP.) c 44_zrE 1
588-
-fa.0 /G� SB6� G/tr— Goo. / -m- .R- rzr
h /ro
F FI
040 �O 7 0 0
7 0 0 ti rP
IZ. rb o ate.ea O
sea- ,�-zrE ►� �� S E . 270TH. PL. b $
o O 3 00050 +
O F
V II'
,so, rz 1 3
5 02
6 Z
011 q n - °°
.a S /69 01� \ //Oo �� 0 N W
Jr 00
! P` CL01 :6
19
of%o ati 7 Ba Lo 9 }°
/zo, zy S E. 271 ST P L.
//o ao, /2 P I o W
otp
Ao or
�o5 /6-9 0 02
h/c[�/ate iccttclS -r�y/oA.r /9 /.. f2 i...c/
SE, 272ND.ND. - `' S. S. H. N0. 5-A. " "
sae-s96-44-2r a.r z/F
- . . , E- �e-c.se — 1.� �.31 - ,I