HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council Workshop - Agenda - 07/05/2000 CITY OF ) M��
Jim White, Mayor
rNVICTA
COUNCIL WORKSHOP
AGENDA
July 5, 2000
PLEASE NOTE CHANGE OF SCHEDULE: Because of the July 4th Holiday, the Council Workshop
will meet in Chambers East in Kent City Hall at 5:00 PM on Wednesday, July 5, 2000.
Council Members: President Leona Orr, Sandy Amodt, Tom Brotherton, Tim Clark,
Connie Epperly,Judy Woods, Rico Yingling
Speaker Time
1. Residential Street Standards Recommendation Gary Gill,Paul Lanspery 30 minutes
2. Civic and Performing Arts Center Presentation John Hodgson, Don Campbell 45 minutes
The Council Workshop meets each month on the first Tuesday at 5:OOPM and the third Tuesday at 5:30 PM
in Chambers East unless otherwise noted. For agenda information please call Jackie Bicknell at (253) 856-
5712.
ANY PERSON REQUIRING A DISABILITY ACCOMMODATION SHOULD CONTACT THE
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AT (253) 856-5725 IN ADVANCE. FOR TDD RELAY SERVICE, CALL
THE WASHINGTON TELECOMMUNICATIONS RELAY SERVICE AT 1-800-833-6388.
Nftw
220 4th AVE.SO., /KENT,WASHINGTON 98032-5895/TELEPHONE (253)856-5200
MEMORANDUM
•
b: v c To: Councilmemb/eyrs
WASH I NGTON c"i
From: Steve Mullen, Transportation Engineering Manager
PUBLIC WORKS Thru: Gary Gill, City Engineer
Don E.Wickstrom,P.E.
Director of Public Works
Date: June 29, 2000
Phone:253-856-5500
Fax:253-856-6500 RE: Council Workshop on Residential Street Standards
220 Fourth Ave.S.
Kenn,WA'98032-5895 Attached is a packet of information that will be presented during the Council Workshop on
July 5, 2000, related to proposed amendments to the street standards. The intent of
providing this information in advance is to allow you some time to review the materials.
We will have staff available to answer questions after a brief presentation by Paul
Lanspery, who facilitated the Residential Street Standards Advisory Group. Should you
have questions that you would like answered prior to the meeting, please give me a call at
856-5585.
Residential Street Standards
June, 2000
Background:
At the direction of City Council, staff has reviewed potential amendments for city
residential street standards. Specific goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan related to
this subject include:
• Better connections so there won't be as many dead end streets in the overall street
network,
• Layout of streets and wider sidewalks that are more pedestrian friendly,
• Landscaping and street trees incorporated into street design, and
• Narrower paved roadways in some residential areas.
In February, staff established an Advisory Group to solicit input on the review of the
residential street construction standards. Active participation was received from the ,
engineering and development communities and school district. General citizen
participation was limited (see attachment 1 for the participant roster).The group met on
four separate occasions to discuss this topic.
Analysis:
In developing the various options which are presented in the attached illustrations, staff and
the advisory group grappled with numerous issues. Specifically:
• How is emergency vehicle and school bus access affected by changes in roadway width?
• Can parking restrictions be effectively enforced if parking is allowed on only one side of
the street?
• What are the fiscal impacts and "costs" of various design alternatives which will be
passed on to the residential home consumer?
• Where is the appropriate location for landscaping and street trees? Who maintains these
enhancements?
• How can traffic calming devices be incorporated into new street designs?
• What are the requirements for utility locations and easements?
• Can the standards be flexible to address the challenges and opportunities of infill
development?
Recommendations:
Local Residential Street
As depicted in attachment 2, City staff is recommending that the local residential
standard be modified as.follows:
• The current 32' street width be reduced to 28', parking would be permitted on both sides
of the street.
• A 5' planting strip be installed between the curb and a 5' sidewalk.
• Other specific design elements and an analysis of them are noted and discussed in
attachment 2.
One note, the staff recommendation closely models the design standards of the Model Code
Provisions for urban streets &subdivisions prepared by the Department of Community,
Trade and Economic Development.
As depicted in attachment 3 the Advisory Group recommends a slightly different
standard.
• The current 32' street width would be reduced to 28', parking would be permitted on
both sides of the street (same recommendation as staff).
• A 5' sidewalk would be placed adjacent to the curb with a 5' planting strip on the
outside of the sidewalk (different recommendation from staff).
• Other specific design elements and an analysis of them are noted and discussed in
attachment 3.
Both staff and the Advisory Group recommend design standards that allow the addition of
traffic calming devices (chokers, traffic orders, etc.) where appropriate to address a specific
problem. It would be difficult to establish a.specific "traffic calming design standard", but
the opportunity to use these devices needs to be supported by the design guidelines.
Other Residential Street Standards
The Advisory Group did review the street standards for a residential cul-de-sac and briefly
discussed the current standards for residential collector and collector arterial streets.
Attachment 4 represents the Advisory Group and staff's recommendations for the
residential cul-de-sac standards (note: these standards reflect the city's current practice with
the exception of the street tree planting requirement):
• 28' Street width
• Parking on both sides of the street
• Rolled curbs (witi-i sidewalks) except at the intersection-vertical curbs with sidewalks
• Plantings on the outside of the sidewalk
0 600' maximum distance for a cul-de-sac
It is also recommended that shortplats with greater than 4 and not more than 9 lots be
permitted to be served by a private 20' asphalt street. A pedestrian walkway would also be
required as element of this standard (currently these types of in-fill developments must be
served by a minimum public street).
The Advisory Group recommended that the current standards for the residential collector
and collector arterial streets remain as is. The current standards for these street designs are
shown on attachments 5 and 6. Staff believes that the "key" issue for consideration by the
Council on these street standards is whether the planting strip remains behind the sidewalk
or gets placed between the sidewalk and the curb. One other issue is the actual width of the
planting strip. Currently it is 3 feet wide. Parks staff recommends a 4 foot minimum
planting strip (with 5 feet being the preferred width). If the width of the planting strip is
expanded, the ROW will expand, or, in the case of the residential collector arterial, the
sidewalk could be narrowed to 5 feet, the planter strip narrowed to 41h feet and stay with
the current 56' ROW.
From a design consistency standpoint, if the planting strip for the local residential street is
located between the curb and sidewalk, then it would make sense to do the same for the
residential collector and residential collector arterial streets.
In all cases, staff would recommend that planting strips be the maintenance responsibility of
the abutting property owner or Home Owner Association (this would require adoption of
an ordinance by City Council to enact this responsibility).
Attachment 1
Amendments to Residential Street Construction Standards
Advisory Group Members
Citizen Representatives
Mr. Howard Hawks
23727 94`h Avenue S
Kent, WA 98031
Ms. Bonnie Hams
26712 138`h Place SE
Kent, WA 98042
(253) 630-3744 -
Development Community Representatives
Wayne Jones
PO Box 146
Renton, WA 98057
(206) 399-7400
Nigel Southey
Southey & Associates
13527 SE 2501h
Kent, WA
(253) 631-9688
Gary Young
Polygon
11624 SE 5th Street, #200
Bellevue, WA 98005-5509
EnQineerina Representatives
Jim Jaeger
Jaeger Engineering
9419 S. 204`h Place
Kent, WA
(253) 850-0934
Shupe Holmberg
Baima & Holmberg
100 Front Street
Issaquah, WA
`- (425) 392-0250
School District Representatives
Don Walkup
Kent School District
12033 SE 256`h Street
Kent, WA
(253)
Facilitator
Paul Lanspery
CH2M Hill
777 108`h Avenue NE
Bellevue, WA 98004-5 1 1 8
(425) 453-5005 ext. 5309
Staff Support
Kent Public Works, Planning, Fire, and Parks Department staff
Attachment 2
LOCAL RESIDENTIAL STREET
(TYPICALLY A THROUGH-STREET)
3' 5' 0.5'
32' 5' 3'
UTILITY SIDEWALK TWO 9-FOOT TRAVEL LANES SIDEWALK' UTILITY
STRIP TWO 7-FOOT PARKING LANES
49'OVERALL R.O.W.WIDTH STRIP
CURRENT DIMENSIONS
o -
0.5' 5' 5' 0.5'
28' 0.5' 0.5'
5'
i 5'
SIDEWALK LAND- TWO 7-FOOT TRAVEL LANES LAND- SIDEWALK
SCAPING TWO 7-FOOT PARKING LANES SCAPING
PROPOSED ALTERNATE (STAFF)
• 50'RIGHT-OF-WAY
• 28'STREET WIDTH
• PARKING ON BOTH SIDES OF STREET
• VERTICAL CURBS
• SIDEWALKS OFFSET FROM ROADWAY
BY PLANTING STRIP
ANALYSIS
• REDUCED STREET WIDTH HELPS TO MODERATE SPEEDS(WIDTH NOT SUPPORTED BY FIRE SERVICE
FOR 20'FIRE LANE REASONS).
• PARKING ON BOTH SIDES HELPS TO AVOID ENFORCEMENT ISSUES AND MEETS NEEDS OF RESIDENTS.
• PLANTING STRIP HELPS TO PROVIDE A BUFFER FOR PEDESTRIANS,SEPARATING THE"VEHICLE SPACE"
FROM THE"PEOPLE SPACE",AND PROVIDES SUFFICIENT AREA FOR STREET TREES.
• DRIVEWAY RAMP OCCURS WITHIN 5'PLANTING STRIP WIDTH SO THAT SIDEWALK REMAINS LEVEL(AVOIDS
"ROLLER COASTER"EFFECT FROM CLOSELY-SPACED DRIVEWAYS).
VERTICAL CURB PROVIDES SOME MINIMAL PROTECTION FOR PEDESTRIANS(AS COMPARED TO ROLLED
CURB)AND PREVENTS PARKING ON THE SIDEWALKS AND PLANTING STRIPS.
• COMBINATION OF NARROWER ROADWAY,PARKING,STREET TREES,AND PLANTING STRIP PROVIDES
TRAFFIC-CALMING INFLUENCE.
Attachment J
LOCAL RESIDENTIAL STREET
(TYPICALLY A THROUGH-STREET)
3' 5' 10.51 32' 0.5' 5' 3'
UTILITY SIDEWALK TWO 9-FOOT TRAVEL LANES SIDEWALK UTILITY
STRIP TWO 7-FOOT PARKING LANES STRIP
49'OVERALL R.O.W.WIDTH
CURRENT DIMENSIONS
Y
1
I
0.5'
5 5 � 28' 0.5' I 5' I 5'
LAND- SIDEWALK TWO 7-FOOT TRAVEL LANES SIDEWALK' LAND-
SCAPING TWO 7-FOOT PARKING LANES SCAPING
SUGGESTED ALTERNATE (ADVISORY GROUP)
• 49'RIGHT-OF-WAY
• 28'STREET WIDTH
• PARKING ON BOTH SIDES OF STREET OPTIONS-
• VERTICAL CURBS NARROW UTILITY STRIPS TO 3"
• SIDEWALK ADJACENT TO CURB SIMILAR TO EXISTING(45'R.O.W.)
• PLANTINGS ON OUTSIDE OF SIDEWALK
ANALYSIS
• REDUCED STREET WIDTH HELPS TO MODERATE SPEEDS(WIDTH NOT SUPPORTED BY FIRE SERVICE
FOR 20'FIRE LANE REASONS).
• PARKING ON BOTH SIDES HELPS TO AVOID ENFORCEMENT ISSUES AND MEETS NEEDS OF RESIDENTS.
PLANTING LOCATION IS EASIEST FOR PROPERTY OWNER MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS.
• PREFERRED BY DEVELOPER COMPONENT OF ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
• RESULTS IN"ROLLER COASTER"EFFECT FROM CLOSELY-SPACED DRIVEWAYS
• VERTICAL CURB PROVIDES SOME MINIMAL PROTECTION FOR PEDESTRIANS(AS COMPARED TO ROLLED
CURB)AND PREVENTS PARKING ON THE SIDEWALKS AND PLANTING STRIPS.
• COMBINATION OF NARROWER ROADWAY,PARKING PROVIDES SOME TRAFFIC-CALMING INFLUENCE.
• CHEAPER TO CONSTRUCT.
Attachment 4
RESIDENTIAL CUL-DE-SAC
\JS
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
_ I
I
I
ROLLED CURB
i
TRANSITION -
I
r VERTICAL CURB
I
i
0 i
N
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
._._._._-_._._._._._._._--._.1._._._._._._-_._-_._._-_._._._
1
PROPOSED ALTERNATE
• 28'STREET WIDTH
• PARKING ON BOTH SIDES OF STREET
• ROLLED CURBS(WITH SIDEWALKS)EXCEPT AT INTERSECTION-
VERTICAL CURBS WITH SIDEWALKS
• PLANTINGS ON OUTSIDE OF SIDEWALK
• 600'MAXIMUM DISTANCE FOR CUL-DE-SAC
ANALYSIS
• ALLOW FOR MINIMAL LOT DESIGN DISRUPTION WITH UTILITIES.
• PARKING ON BOTH SIDES AVOIDS ENFORCEMENT ISSUES AND MEETS NEEDS OF RESIDENTS.
• PLANTING LOCATION IS BEST FOR MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS.
• CUL-DE-SACS ARE A"LIFESTYLE'AND NECESSARY DUE TO SITE TOPOGRAPHY.
• PARKING PROHIBITION IN CUL-DE-SAC NECESSARY TO INSURE MINIMUM FIRE DEPT.TURNAROUND.
Attachment 5
56' —
W 36' W
Z Z
J J
r �
w 18' 18' 10'
O CURB & GUTTER (TYP.) 7 3' o
(SEE STD. DET. 6-6) a
�—27- (MIN.) 29; (MIN.)
. 3' WIDE (TYP.)
\",--O.'25- AC/ CLASS "B" UTILITY STRIP
SURFACING (MIN. SECT) 6.5' WIDE (TYP.)
4" FCC
BASE CAN BE COMBINATION OF SIDEWALK W/ 4"
ATB AND/OR CRUSHED SURFACING. CRUSHED
MIN. THICKNESS OF 0.67' IF ONLY SURFACING TOP
CRUSHED SURFACING IS USED. COURSE MIN.
DEPTH
GRAVEL BASE AS NECESSARY
TO STABILIZE PAVEMENT.
RIGHT-CF-WAY CALCULATION
TYPICAL SECTION
2 TRAVEL LANES AT 11' = 22'
(SEE NOTE 1.)
1 TURN LANE AT 12' = 12'
CURB-TO-CURB WIDTH = 36'
2 SIDEWALKS AT 6.5' = 13'
2 UTILITY STRIPS AT 3' = 6'
STANDARD RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH = 56'
NOTES:
i
1•) CURB AND GUTTER ARE NOT INCLUDED IN LANE WIDTHS
AND SIDEWALK WIDTHS.
2.) ADO 12' TO STANDARD CROSS SECTION WHEN DUAL
LEFT TURN LANES .ARE REOUIRED.
3.) ADD 5' TO EACH SIDE WHEN BIKE LANES ARE
REQUIRED, Litt' of +Rrat
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
4.) THIS TYPICAL STREET CROSS SECTION DOES NOT "4 RESIDENTIAL
PROVIDE FOR ON STREET PARKING. ��
5.) ADD 10' BEHIND UTILITY STRIP. FOR A 810-SWALE W/ COLLECTOR ARTERIAL
3:1 MAX. SIDE SLOPE FOR STORMWATER TREATMENT CEStCNcO K SCatc N N� (STANDARD
REOUIR� OR�wN u
WHERE C ^D BY THE CITY OF KEN(. CNECxEu uw O.�tE 9/�i/g' IDETAIL
,WORO"EO IF4E NO. b—I OI
tt
5.3' I
w 36, w
z_ Z
� I �
18' 18, 8.5'
w I w
0 CURB & GUTTER (TYP.) 5.5' 1 3' 0
a (SEE STD. DET. 6-6) Ez
1 I 0.5' - ` I �
2% (MIN.) 29 (MIN.)
3' WIDE (TYP.)
0.25' AC/ CLASS "B" UTILITY STRIP
SURFACING (MIN. SECT) 5' w10E (TYP.)
0.17' CRUSHED SURFACING 4- PCC
TOP COURSE SIDEWALK W/ 4"
CRUSHED
0.50' CRUSHED SURFACING SURFACING TOP
I BASE COURSE COURSE MIN.
DEPTH.
GRAVEL BASE AS NECESSARY
TO STABILIZE PAVEVENT.
RIGHT—OF-WAY CALCULATION
TYPICAL SECTION
2 TRAVEL LANES AT 10' = 20'
(SEE NOTE 1.)
2 PARKING LANES AT 7' = 14'
CURB—TO—CUR? WIDTH = 36'
2 SIDEWALKS AT 5' = 10'
2 UTILI T( STRIPS AT 3' = 6'
STANDARD RIGHT—CF—WAY WIDTH = 53'
NOTES:
I.) CURB AND GUTTER ARE NOT INCLUOED IN LANE WIDTHS
AND SIDEWALK WIDTHS.
2.) ADD 12' TO STANDARD CROSS SECTION WHEN
LE=1 TURN LANES ARE REOUIP,ED. ("Tittg of +Rrnt
�ceeil��II ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
3.) ADO 5' TO EACH SIDE WHEN BIKE LANES ARE 7i
REOUIRED. RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR
4.) ADD 10' BEHIND UTILITY STRIP FOR A 810—SWALE W/ o�sc+Eo K
3:I MAX. SIDE SLOPE FOR STORMWATER TREATIMENT ORAwn s�E NAY° (STANDARD
WHERE REOUIRED BY THE CITY OF K-EN T. CHECKED juj —I DETAIL
,wPROVEO I F1lE
City of Kent Civic and Performing Arts Center
Bond Issue Calculation for 20 year bonds
Example Principal Issue 14,000,000
Interest Rate 4.85 - 5.9%
Term in years 20
Estimated Annual Levy Rate / 1000 Assessed Value 0.1867
Impact on typical homeowner :
Assessed Value Calculation Annual Tax (1) Monthly
100,000 18.67 1.56
170,400 (2) 31.82 2.65
(1) Tax calculated using Kent's 1999 certified assessed valuation of $6,468,731,941.
(2) Average of the typical residential assessed valuation of homes in both Kent School an
Federal Way School Districts per King County Assessor's office.
Perform ingArts Bond Estimate.xls 7/5/00
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of
Kent,Washington,providing for the submission to the voters
of the City at a special election to be held therein on
September 19, 2000, in conjunction with the State primary
election to be held on the same date, of a proposition
authorizing the City to incur indebtedness by issuing its
general obligation bonds in a par amount not to exceed
$14,000,000, payable by annual property tax levies to be
made in excess of regular property tax levies, for the purpose
of paying a part of the cost of designing, constructing and
equipping a civic and performing arts center and to levy those
excess property taxes.
WHEREAS, the City of Kent,Washington(the "City"),has proposed the
design, construction and equipping of a civic and performing arts center, and the City
desires to submit to the voters of the City a proposition authorizing the City to incur
indebtedness by issuing general obligation bonds for the same; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON,
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Proec. The City shall design, construct and equip a civic
and performing arts center (the "Project"). The total estimated cost of the Project,
including private funds raised by a non-profit organization in partnership with the City,
and/or funds from other sources, and the costs of issuing and selling the bonds authorized
by this ordinance, is declared to be, as nearly as may be, $24,000,000. The economic life
of the Project is expected to be at least 20 years.
1 Civic and Performing Arts Center
Ballot Proposition
SECTION2. Borrowing for the Prot. The City shall borrow, not to
exceed $14,000,000, on the credit of the City and issue and sell its general obligation
bonds in that principal amount for strictly municipal capital purposes, other than the
replacement of equipment,to provide part of the funds required for the Project. Costs of
engineering,planning, construction, financial, legal, equipping and other services lawfully
incurred incident to the Project shall be appropriate capital costs to be paid from the
proceeds of the bonds authorized by this ordinance.
The City Council declares that to the extent, if any, the City,prior to the
date bonds or other short-term obligations are issued to finance the Project, shall make
capital expenditures for the Project from funds that are not (and are not reasonably
expected to be)reserved, allocated on a long-term basis, or otherwise set aside by the City
under its existing and reasonably foreseeable budgetary and financial circumstances to
finance the Project, those capital expenditures are intended to be reimbursed out of
proceeds of the bonds or other short-term obligations issued in an amount not to exceed
the principal amount provided by this ordinance.
SECTION 3. General Terms of Bonds. The bonds shall be issued as a
single issue, as a part of a combined issue with other authorized bonds, or in more than
one series. The bonds shall be fully registered; shall bear interest payable as permitted by
law; shall mature within 20 years from their date or within any shorter period fixed by the
City Council; shall be paid by annual property tax levies sufficient in amount to pay both
principal and interest when due,which annual property tax levies shall be made in excess
of regular property tax levies without limitation as to rate or amount but only in amounts
sufficient to pay both principal and interest when due; and shall be issued and sold in the
manner, at the times and in the amounts as shall be determined hereafter by ordinance of
the City Council. The exact date, form, terms, option of prior redemption, if any,price,
interest rate, or rates and maturities of the bonds shall be fixed hereafter by ordinance of
the City Council. Pending the issuance of the bonds and receipt of their proceeds, the
City Council may authorize the issuance of short-term obligations pursuant to chapter
Ift'" 2 Civic and Performing Arts Center
Ballot Proposition
39.50 RCW, and the costs of those short-term obligations shall be included in the cost of
the Project for which the bonds are issued.
SECTION 4. Request to Hold Special Election. The City Council finds
that an emergency exists that requires carrying out the Project, and the Director of
Records and Elections of King County,Washington, is requested to concur in that finding
and to call and conduct a special election to be held in the City on September 19, 2000,
in conjunction with the State primary election to be held on the same date, for the purpose
of submitting to the qualified electors of the City for their approval the question of
whether or not the City shall borrow not to exceed $14,000,000, issue its general
obligation bonds in that principal amount for capital purposes only, other than
replacement of equipment, and levy excess taxes necessary to redeem the bonds as herein
set forth.
SECTION S. Ballot Title. The City Clerk is directed to certify to the
Director of Records and Elections of King County,Washington, at least 45 days prior to
the September 19, 2000, special election date a copy of this ordinance and the proposition
to be submitted at that special election in the form of a ballot title as follows:
PROPOSITION
CITY OF KENT
CIVIC AND PERFORMING ARTS CENTER BONDS - $14,000,000
The City Council of the City of Kent passed Ordinance No. ,
concerning construction and financing of a civic and performing arts center.
This ballot proposition, if approved, will authorize the City to design,
construct and equip a civic and performing arts center, issue no more than
$14,000,000 of general obligation bonds for that purpose maturing within
20 years, and levy annual excess property taxes to pay and retire such
bonds, all as provided in Ordinance No. Should this proposition be:
Approved...........................................................................❑
Rejected ............................................................................❑
3 Civic and Performing Arts Center
Ballot Proposition
SECTION 6: 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 7: Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in
force five (5) 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
PASSED: day of , 2000.
APPROVED: day of , 2000.
PUBLISHED: day of , 2000.
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. ,passed
by the City Council of the City of Kent,Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the
City of Kent as hereon indicated.
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
P:\Civ&Ordinance\CivicPa(ormArcCmw-BondAppro al.doc
4 Civic and Performing Arts Center
Ballot Proposition