Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council Workshop - Minutes - 03/05/2019 Approved City Council Workshop Workshop Regular Meeting Minutes March 5, 2019 Date: March 5, 2019 Time: 5:00 p.m. Place: Chambers I. PRESENTATIONS Council President Boyce opened the meeting at 5:03 p.m. II. CALL TO ORDER President Boyce opened the workshop at 5:03 p.m. Attendee Name Title Status Arrived Dennis Higgins Councilmember Present Les Thomas Councilmember Present Bill Boyce Council President Present Dana Ralph Mayor Present Satwinder Kaur Councilmember Present Brenda Fincher Councilmember Present Toni Troutner Councilmember Present Marli Larimer Councilmember Present 2. Sound Transit Project Updates Link Light Rail Liaison, Kelly Peterson gave a brief introduction of the Sound Transit Project Updates and tonight’s presenters. Sound Transit Second Parking Garage Senior Long-Range Planner/GIS Coordinator, Danielle Butsick presented an update on the Sound Transit second parking garage in downtown Kent, including: An Overview of progress since the December 12, 2019 meeting A letter was submitted to Sound Transit regarding the layout and capacity for future transit growth and concerns over the width of the road. Metro needs 19 bus bays - active and layover in the bus area Sound Transit and Metro adjusted the layout to accommodate 2025 needs for transit service - mainly the surface lot - if converted to bus layover space. Staff and Mayor accept this planning horizon and the wider streets if it supports the Downtown Subarea Plan - growing transit and creating a pedestrian-friendly environment. Butsick advised that she met with the Sound Transit project team, planner, and Hayley Bonsteel to discuss Downtown Design guidelines and talked City Council Workshop Workshop Regular Meeting Minutes March 5, 2019 Kent, Washington Page 2 of 7 through the concerns. Staff expressed interest in being flexible in interpreting downtown guidelines broadly. Details have yet to be worked out on the roadway design - analysis on pedestrian safety. The High Capacity Transit Facility code requirement of the bottom floor being built or convertible to commercial purposes is problematic for Sound Transit. Sound Transit does not have organizational capacity to be a landlord. The biggest problem for Sound Transit is the 14" clear height requirement. Bonsteel asked for guidance from the Council. Mayor and councilmembers do not want vacant storefronts and are open to creative solutions including interactive art/design. South Sounder Project Development Director, Melissa Saxe indicated the 14' height requirement would impact parking spaces on 1st level and that a 10- 11’ height requirement would impact parking spaces throughout the garage. Sound Transit will determine how it will impact design and construction costs and will look for opportunities to improve pedestrian-friendly access. The project is scheduled to be completed in 2023. Staff will research the pros and cons of 1st floor retail and the 14" height requirement and will return to a future workshop. Federal Way Link Extension Executive Project Director at Sound Transit, Dan Abernathy provided an overview of the Federal Way Link Extension Project. The extension is scheduled to open in 2024. Project corridor length is 7.8 miles and travel time will be 12 minutes 2035 daily ridership is estimated at 36,500 riders Abernathy reviewed the Kent/Des Moines, South 272nd Street and Federal Way Transit Center station areas Project timeline: Alternatives Analysis, Environmental Review, Pre-Construction, Design & Construction, Testing & Pre-Operations, start of service to Federal Way Transit Center in 2024. Issue Design Build Contract and issue a notice to proceed. Last week they demolition five houses along South 28th off 272nd Once design build team are under contract, trees will start coming down. City Council Workshop Workshop Regular Meeting Minutes March 5, 2019 Kent, Washington Page 3 of 7 Communications to public included meeting with neighbors over the last four years and will start again in late June informing them of the timeline. Once design builder is under contract, they will start planning for Transit- oriented development. Tacoma Link Extension The Operations and Maintenance Facility scoping period for the Environmental Impact Statement is open and staff are working on the comment letter. Council President Boyce advised that today he, along with other staff met with Sound Transit South Corridor Development Manager, Chelsea Levy. Boyce indicated Sound Transit will be transparent, trustworthy, honest, involve City at the right time - the City and Sound Transit are true partners. Levy indicated Sound Transit is in the early phases of this project and this is the first time Sound Transit is presenting to Council on this subject, and that they will return early and often through the planning process. Less than 3% engineering has been completed and a site has not yet been selected. The high-level of analysis done to date is intended to provide an indication of what sites might be viable and need to be studied further and which are not viable. This will occur over the next two years. There will be a SEPA EIS evaluation and there are currently a lot of unanswered questions. The potential sites are in highly developed areas - complicated areas to be building mega projects. Comments on the six sites identified are being sought from the public and stakeholders. Once the list is narrowed, they will need to study further on EIS. Official comment period is February 19, 2019 through April 1, 2019 which is 30 days beyond the 30-day requirement. Sound Transit is in the beginning of the environmental process. The Sound Transit Board is expected to decide at its May 23 meeting which sites move into a draft Environmental Impact Statement Phase. Sound Transit staff will not make a recommendation, but will present data and analysis to the Board. Sound Transit Project Development Director for the Tacoma Dome Link Extension Project, Curvie Hawkins Jr, provided the Council with information that included: City Council Workshop Workshop Regular Meeting Minutes March 5, 2019 Kent, Washington Page 4 of 7 Background This project was included in the ST3 plan. This is one of four OMFs planned for the region. Location and size supports system expansion of multiple projects There is a need for a strategic facility Open by 2026 OMF South status Very early in planning Specific Site has not been identified Preliminary sites identified Public comment scoping period February 19, 2019 through April 1, 2019 OMF Overview Establish a safe, clean, and comfortable ride for passengers Vehicles are cleaned and stored every night along with service and routine maintenance. OMFs also house staff and equipment for train operations and station and track maintenance 300+ jobs on site, 100+ during construction Typical OMF Configuration 10 storage tracks Maintenance building with 12 service lanes Track yard leads connecting to main lines Auto/truck access points Employee and visitor parking OMF South requirements Accommodate 130+ light rail cars 30+ acres or more based on-site conditions For operational efficiency Needs to be located in South King County Able to connect to operating track in 2026 OMF South evaluation process from early scoping in 2018 through scoping in 2019 Early scoping - April 2018 - 24 sites identified Pre-screening - July 2018 -Narrowed to 20 sites Results of alternatives evaluation - narrowed to 6 sites Sound Transit was aware of the Dick's development - July of 2019 Preliminary estimates - used to compare and inform sites, not meant to establish budget City Council Workshop Workshop Regular Meeting Minutes March 5, 2019 Kent, Washington Page 5 of 7 o Consistent methodology o Based on limited conceptual design o Does not establish a Project budget. Project budget established later in design Overview of sites for EIS scoping - advantages and disadvantages South 240th Street and SR 99 Comparison - Councilmember Higgins expressed disappointed there is no disadvantage identified regarding the loss of the transit area. Midway Landfill and I-5 comparison - Right-of-way considerations - cost driver is the construction of the concrete platform and there are no comparable properties based on surrounding property values. Sound Transit Project Director, Paul Bennett - Provided information on the existing OMF in SODO. It was a fill site, not a superfund landfill. Disadvantages - complex concrete platform to avoid digging into ground - moving dirt could open record of decision & would complicate the reaching of a schedule to get open. Bennett explained the differences between pile driver vs. excavating A consultant determined there was a need for the 3' thick slabs HDR is the consultant that came up with initial thought process Bennett talked about the concerns regarding of contaminates and groundwater issues in open areas and in buildings. Bennett indicated Sound Transit hires consultants to help develop projects. Sound Transit would welcome the City hire a consultant to come up with an analysis that would allow for the OMF to be placed on a landfill - they are open to ideas to evaluate together. Bonsteel indicated she received the HDR consultant document today from Sound Transit. Mayor Ralph expressed her concerns that Sound Transit has indicated they came up with the thought process that came up with 3' cap, but now say that HDR came up with cap recommendation. Council requested Sound Transit add the disadvantage of “less compatible with current zoning” for the Dicks location. Midway Landfill and SR 99 comparison that has similar advantages and disadvantages as the Midway Landfill and I-5 site. South 316th Street and Military road comparison advantages and the City Council Workshop Workshop Regular Meeting Minutes March 5, 2019 Kent, Washington Page 6 of 7 disadvantage of it requiring two tracks crossing of I-5. South 336th St and I-5 Comparison advantages and disadvantages, including it being less compatible with current zoning and the potential property impacts to the Christian Faith Center. South 334th St and I-5 Comparison advantages and disadvantages Property values are determined by the King County Accessor property values and neighboring property values Hawkins indicated the public can share their thoughts on 1. OMF South site alternatives 2. The purpose and need of the project 3. Social, economic, environmental and transportation issues that should be considered or evaluated during the environmental review of the project Public opportunities to participate: Online Open House OMFSouth.participate.online March 12, 2019 at 6-8 p.m. @ Federal Way Performing Arts & Events Center March 20, 2019 at 6-8 p.m. @ Highline College. Next Steps - Preliminary Schedule February 19 - April 1, 2019 - EIS scoping public comment period May 2019 - Sound Transit Board determines which sites to study in EIS 2nd/3rd Quarter 2021 - Final EIS released & Sound Transit Board selects OMF South Site Project timeline Voter approval in 2016 Planning, including public involvement 2018-2021 Design and Construction, including public involvement 2021-2026 Opening Date 2026 Council indicated it is important to get a breakdown for each of the site estimates, advantages and disadvantages, because the ones presented tonight don’t make sense. Bennett indicated that today is a preliminary briefing that included a listing of all six sites, summary estimates, unit costs, assessed values, and how Sound Transit assessed right-of-way costs. Sound Transit provided a copy of cost estimates SPU conducted from 2005 and indicated that Kent now has as much information that Sound Transit had and can evaluate cost estimates. City Council Workshop Workshop Regular Meeting Minutes March 5, 2019 Kent, Washington Page 7 of 7 Councilmember Higgins appreciated tonight’s presentation and dialogue and asked Sound Transit: 1. Document financial incentives that can be accessed for redevelopment on a Brownfield - try to get quantifications of those opportunities 2. Equity - The idea that this neighborhood that has been envisioned by Kent and Des Moines, adjacent to a light rail system, and the idea that half of that would be taken away. What is equitable? What are the needs of the City of Kent vs. Bellevue that have different demographics. Higgins indicated that, although tonight’s discussing was technical, we better not lose sight of the equity issue. Councilmember Fincher asked if Sound Transit has contacted the EPA, and if so, is that information contained in today’s materials. Sound Transit indicated they have communicated interest and have received information. The report will be shared with Kent. Council President Boyce indicated that Kent wants to be at the table and that the City of Kent engineers are really smart and there needs to be a dialogue before decisions are made. We need to look at the big picture and determine how you put a dollar value on equity. Sound Transit will return to a future workshop to present an update. 3. TMP Update Move to next meeting Meeting ended at 6:45 p.m. Kimberley A. Komoto City Clerk March 2019 Operations & Maintenance Facility South (OMF: South) 1Kent City Council Study Session | 3.5.19 Included in ST3 Plan One of four OMFs planned for the region Location and size supports system expansion of multiple projects (TDLE, West Seattle, and overall system expansion) Open by 2026 and connected to active line 2 Operations and Maintenance Facility South (OMF South) Very early in the planning process A specific site has NOT been identified Preliminary sites identified during public Early Scoping in April 2018 and project team workshops Public comment scoping period February 19 through April 1 OMF South status 3 Existing OMF in Seattle Establishing a safe, clean and comfortable ride for passengers Link vehicles must be cleaned and stored every night and regularly pulled out of service for routine maintenance OMFs also house staff and equipment for train operations and station and track maintenance 300+ jobs on -site; 100+ during construction OMF overview 4 18 storage tracks for 2 sets of 4 - car trains per track Maintenance building with 12 service lanes Track “yard leads” connecting to main lines Auto/truck access points Maintenance of way building Employee and visitor parking Typical OMF configuration 5 6 OMF South requirements Accommodate 130+ light rail cars 30+ acres or more based on site conditions For operational efficiency: •Needs to be located in South King County •Able to connect to operating track in 2026 (FWLE) 7 Sound Transit Board Identifies Sites for Study in Draft Environmental Impact Statement Study Several Sites in Environmental Analysis OMF South evaluation process* *Anticipated dates 8 Early scoping April 2018; 24 sites identified Pre-screening July 2018; Narrowed to 20 sites Does not meet minimum size and shape Precludes funded roadway improvements Regulatory constraints (cultural resources, wetlands, and sensitive areas) No ideal site! Sites in Federal Way, Kent, or unincorporated King County Sites under consideration are included in scoping Results of Alternatives Evaluation Narrowed to 6 sites 11 Purpose: To inform comparison of sites Preliminary estimates Consistent methodology (2018$; construction, real estate, etc.) Based on limited conceptual design (less than 3% design) Does not establish project budget Project budget established later in design Preliminary estimates 12 Project budget* Preliminary estimates (2019)Project Opening 2026 *dates are subject to change 13 Overview of sites for EIS scoping S 240th St and SR 99 Midway Landfill and I-5 Midway Landfill and SR 99 S 316th St and Military Rd S 336th St and I-5 S 344th St and I-5 14 S 240th St and SR 99 comparison Advantages •Adjacent to light rail track operating by 2026 (FWLE) •Minimal impacts on the natural environment •Lower preliminary estimate compared to other sites ($800 million*) Disadvantages •Property impacts including Lowe’s, Dicks Drive-In and mobile home park •Access to light rail track requires spiraling tracks *Preliminary estimate (in 2018$) are rounded and not project’s budget. For comparison purposes between options only. 15 Midway Landfill and I-5 comparison Advantages •Adjacent to light rail track operating by 2026 (FWLE) •Limited impacts to private property •No identified wetlands/streams Disadvantages •Likely needs complex concrete platform/structure •Superfund landfill site, hazardous materials concerns and ground settlement •Regulatory requirements could impact schedule •Higher preliminary estimate compared to other sites ($1,300 million*) *Preliminary estimate (in 2018$) are rounded and not project’s budget. For comparison purposes between options only. 16 Midway Landfill and SR 99 comparison Advantages •Adjacent to operating light rail track by 2026 (FWLE) •No identified wetlands/streams Disadvantages •Likely needs complex concrete platform/structure •Superfund landfill site, hazardous materials concerns and ground settlement •Regulatory requirements could impact schedule •Property impacts, commercial/residential •Higher preliminary estimate compared to other sites ($1,400 million*)*Preliminary estimate (in 2018$) are rounded and not project’s budget. For comparison purposes between options only. 17 S 316th St and Military Rd comparison Advantages •Across from light rail track operating by 2026 (FWLE) •Lower preliminary estimate compared to other sites ($750 million*) Disadvantages •Residential impacts •Less compatible with current zoning •Requires two track crossings of I-5 •Limited existing road access *Preliminary estimate (in 2018$) are rounded and not project’s budget. For comparison purposes between options only. 18 S 336th St and I-5 comparison Advantages •Light rail vehicle access and operating estimate better performing •No impacts to parks, trails or open space •Lower preliminary estimate compared to other sites ($750 million*) Disadvantages •Potential property Impacts include Christian Faith Center •Located 1.1 miles from light rail track operating by 2026 (FWLE) •Less compatible with current zoning *Preliminary estimate (in 2018$) are rounded and not project’s budget. For comparison purposes between options only. 19 S 344th St and I-5 comparison *Preliminary estimate (in 2018$) are rounded and not project’s budget. For comparison purposes between options only. Advantages •Light rail vehicle access better performing •No impacts to parks, trails or open space •Lower preliminary estimate compared to other sites ($800 million*) Disadvantages •Potential impacts to industrial and residential properties •Hazardous materials •Located 1.3 miles from light rail track operating by 2026 (FWLE) To share your thoughts on: OMF South Scoping: Feb. 19 –April 1 1)OMF South site alternatives 2)The purpose and need of the project 3)Social, economic, environmental and transportation issues that should be considered or evaluated during the environmental review of the project Public opportunities to participate: Now through April 1 | Online open house: OMFSouth.participate.online March 12, 6-8 p.m. | Federal Way Performing Arts & Events Center March 20, 6-8 p.m. | Highline College 20 Next steps* Final EIS released & Sound Transit Board selects OMF South Site Sound Transit Board determines which sites to study in EIS EIS Scoping Pubic Comment Period *dates are subject to change Preliminary Schedule Feb 19 through April 1 May 2019 2nd/3rd Quarter 2021 Project Timeline* *dates are subject to change Preliminary Schedule Mailer Email listserv Press releases Commitment to accessibility and translation services Notifications Posters Print and online ads Targeted door-to-door Website Social media SEPA official notice 23 Questions? OMFSouth.participate.online 24 TransportationMaster Plan CITY OF KENT Agenda. Background Setting up for Success TMP Process State guidance Key Considerations Priorities Next Steps A realistic plan that results in action What is the PROJECT? The City’s Transportation Master Plan (TMP) will provide a framework to guide transportation investments over the next 20 years in accordance with the community’s transportation priorities. What is the PROJECT? What will make this TMP successful? Transportation priorities that reflect the community’s values and vision for the future Meaningful public outreach to connect with diverse communities Emphasis on equity Prioritized project list that sets the course for future investments Realistic funding plan based on limited resources What is the PROJECT? Key components of the plan Legislative Process Public Outreach Existing Conditions & Data Priorities Performance Metrics Travel Demand Model Project List Funding Draft Plan Council Adoption Regional projects SR 509 Extension Federal Way Link Extension Second Sounder parking garage Local considerations “Rally the Valley” –visioning for Kent industrial valley Limited funding at the local, state, and federal level Shift to multimodality Social equity and environmental justice Unique Attributes of KENT Key attributes toconsider in the plan Travel forecasts align with land use assumptions Intergovernmental coordination Defines level of service objectives for all vehicles, transit, bicycles and pedestrians Projects align with level of service objectives Financially constrained GMA Requirements for TRANSPORTATION ELEMENTS Goals and polices define priorities in written terms. Address all modes of travel, transportation demand management, and funding. Goals State Guidance Policies& GMA requires development regulations, capital budget decisions to be consistent with goals and policies. Existing Plan’s GOALS Priorities Technical Workshop Workshop Themes Workshop Themes Input from the CITY COUNCIL Next Steps Drafting Priorities/Goals Develop Level of Service Standards Developing an Outreach Strategy Determine Transportation Demand Model Requirements Recruit members of Technical Advisory Board (TAB) Begin Public Outreach Develop Phase 2 Scope of Work