HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Public Works Committee - 06/20/2016 (2)Public Works Committee Agenda
Councilmembers: Brenda FincherDana Ralph•Dennis Higgins, Chair
Unless otherwise noted, the Public Works Committee meets at 4:00 p.m. on the 1st & 3rd Mondays of each month.
Council Chambers East, Kent City Hall, 220 4th Avenue South, Kent, 98032-5895.
For information please contact Public Works Administration (253) 856-5500.
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.
June 20, 2016
4:00 p.m.
Item Description Action Speaker Time Page
1. Call to Order -- Chair Higgins 01 --
2. Roll Call -- Chair Higgins 01 --
3. Changes to the Agenda -- Chair Higgins 01 --
4. Approval of June 6, 2016 Meeting Minutes YES None 03 03
5. Spoils Disposal Agreement with Republic
Services, Inc.
YES Jens Vincent 05 11
6. Complete Streets Ordinance YES Lacey Jane Wolfe 10 17
7. Crosswalk Recommendations YES Lacey Jane Wolfe 15 27
8. Mill Creek (Auburn) Bridge Change Order YES Eric Connor 05 47
9. Information Only/Grant Award NO Kelly Peterson 05 49
10. Information Only/FEMA Re-Mapping NO Mike Mactutis 10 51
11. Sewer Rate Discussion YES Paul Scott 30 53
12. Information Only/Quiet Zone Update NO Chad Bieren 05 55
1
This page intentionally left blank
2
Public Works Committee Minutes
June 6, 2016
1
Item 1 – Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 4:04 p.m. by Committee
Chair, Dennis Higgins.
Item 2 – Roll Call: Committee Chair, Dennis Higgins and Committee members Dana Ralph
and Brenda Fincher were present.
Item 3 – Changes to the Agenda: There were no changes to the agenda.
Item 4 – Approval of Meeting Minutes Dated May 16, 2016:
Council member Fincher MOVED to approve the minutes of May 16, 2016. The
motion was SECONDED by Committee member Ralph and PASSED 3-0.
Item 5 – Amendment to KBA Contract for Central Ave S Consturction Project:
Eric Connor, Construction Engineering Manager noted that the Central Avenue South
Pavement Preservation and Utility Improvements Project is a federally funded project
located on Central Avenue South between Willis Street and the Green River Bridge.
Connor gave a brief description of the project, noting that construction began the summer
of 2015. KBA, Inc. has been managing the construction of this project. The contract
amendment presented to the committee allows KBA additional funding to cover additional
costs for sub consultants and manage the balance of the construction project. In addition,
this will provide KBA funding necessary to prepare for the Project Management Review
(PMR) Audit that is forthcoming from WSDOT’s Local Programs Office, which is required for
Federal Funding portion of the project. Conner further noted that the project is under
budget and will be completed early.
Council member Ralph MOVED to authorize the Mayor to sign an amendment to
the agreement with KBA Inc. in an amount not to exceed $77,000 to provide
additional construction management services for the Central Avenue S. Project,
subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public
Works Director. The motion was SECONDED by Council member Fincher and
PASSED 3 - 0.
Item 6 – 2017 Business & Occupation List and Residential Asphalt Overlay:
Joe Araucto, Pavement Engineering Manager and Kelly Peterson, Transportation Engineering
Manager noted that the majority of the 2016 Business & Occupation and Residential Street
improvements, funded from previous Council authorization, are either under construction or
under contract. Continuing improvements include the James Street pavement overlay,
Pacific Highway & James Street landscaping, 80th Avenue South pavement rehabilitation,
sidewalks, and pavement markings.
3
Public Works Committee Minutes
June 6, 2016
2
B&O Recommended Project List:
2017 Completion of the pavement rehabilitation on James Street between Central
Avenue North and Jason Street.
Work on the James Street Pump Station is ongoing and will not likely be completed in
2016.
Pavement replacement at the intersection of South 212th Street and 72nd Avenue South.
Due to high truck count and the high water table staff is recommending this be repaved
with concrete.
Proposed 2017 improvements include a new sidewalk on the east side of 6th Avenue
North between West Meeker and West Smith Streets. It was noted that similar to the
2016 proposal, the list includes a 4 person crew funded out of the B&O account for the
sidewalk program.
$850,000 for further sidewalk, walking path, and ADA improvements. Included in this
work is completion of the missing link on the north side of West James Street between
Russell Road and Lakeside Boulevard.
$200,000 for continuing the flashing yellow left turn arrow program
$375,000 for street tree replacement/maintenance
$300,000 for the first phase of improvements required for the railroad Quiet Zone
Recommended Residential Street Repair List:
Residential streets planned for pavement overlay work were discussed, a list and map
were provided with the packet.
Asphalt overlays are proposed in the Misty Meadows, Star Lake Highlands, and Seven
Oaks neighborhoods.
Attached is the Proposed Utilization of 2017 Business and Occupation Funds list.
Discussion Only/No Motion Required at this time.
Item 7 – 2016 Guardrail Repairs – Added Scope:
Joe Araucto, Pavement Engineering Manager, noted that since awarding the guardrail repair
contract to Peterson Brothers, Inc. on April 19, 2016 three additional guardrails have been
damaged by errant vehicles. It is imperative to have repairs made as soon as possible.
Peterson Brothers is able to perform the additional work at the unit bid prices.
The additional locations are:
72nd Ave @ S 262nd St (outside curve)
SE 240th St about 500 ft. east of 144th Ave SE
Frager Rd S @ Meeker St (southeast corner)
Araucto noted that restitution at two of these locations is currently being pursued.
The original contract amount with Peterson Brothers was $80,689.22 with the additional
work it will increase the contract amount to $117,787.95.
Committee member Fincher MOVED to recommend Council authorize the Mayor to
sign a Construction Change order with Peterson Brothers, Inc. in the amount of
$37,098.73 to repair recently damaged guardrail, subject to the final terms and
4
Public Works Committee Minutes
June 6, 2016
3
conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. The motion
was SECONDED by Committee member Ralph and PASSED 3-0.
Item 8 – Amendment to the Consultant Agreement with AECOM for the Upper Mill
Creek Dam Improvements:
Stephen Lincoln, Environmental Engineer explained that the Upper Mill Creek Dam
Improvements project is located on 104th street just south of Target. The dam
improvements will provide flood risk reduction to the Kent Valley, significantly reducing
flood risk to the Downtown Business District, including Kent Station, James Street, Smith
Street, and Central Avenue areas. The improvements to the dam’s diversion structure will
also open Upper Mill Creek to re-habitation by salmon.
Lincoln noted the contract amendment with AECOM will complete the design.
Committee member Ralph MOVED to recommend Council authorize the Mayor to
sign an Amendment to the Consultant Services Agreement with AECOM in the
amount not to exceed $159,966.98 to provide additional design services related to
the Upper Mill Creek Dam Project, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable
to the City Attorney and Public Works Director. The motion was SECONDED by
Committee member Fincher and PASSED 3-0.
Item 9 – King County Flood Control District Sub-Regional Opportunity Fund for the
Upper Mill Creek Dam Improvements Project:
Stephen Lincoln, P.E., Environmental Engineer noted the King County Flood Control District
(District) collects an annual levy from properties within King County. Through the District’s
Sub-Regional Opportunity Fund, ten percent of the levy collected within each jurisdiction is
granted back to the jurisdiction to be used for stormwater or habitat projects.
The City has requested its portion of the Opportunity Fund be directed to the Upper Mill
Creek Dam Project in the amount of $191,079. Approval is needed by our City Council to
accept these funds for the project and establish a budget. The Upper Mill Creek Dam Project
is scheduled for construction in 2017 and as noted above will greatly reduce the flooding
risk in the Downtown Business District.
Committee member Fincher MOVED to recommend Council authorize the Mayor to
direct staff to accept the King County Flood Control District Sub-Regional
Opportunity Fund in the amount of $191,079 for the Upper Mill Creek Dam Project
and to establish a budget for the funds to be spent within this project, subject to
final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works
Director. The motion was SECONDED by Committee member Ralph and PASSED
3-0.
Item 10 – South 228th Street UPRR Grade Separation – Connecting WA Grant:
Mark Madfai, P.E., Design Engineering Supervisor noted that this is a housekeeping item
that requires funding be obligated for the South 228th Street Union Pacific Railroad Grade
Separation project in order to move ahead on design and appraisals for the project.
5
Public Works Committee Minutes
June 6, 2016
4
Relocation of utilities are planned to take place in September of 2016, staff is working with
the state to get final authorization.
Madfai went on to note that in October 2015 the City received notice that this project
received funding through the Connect Washington Program and has been authorized
by the legislature, in the amount of $15 million. $13 million is available in the 2015–
2017 biennium the additional $2 million will be available in the 2017– 2019 biennium
pending enacting legislation. The funds will be administered through Washington State
Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Local Programs, which also administers the
federal funding. Acceptance and obligation of state funds will be authorized using
Supplements to a Local Agency Agreement currently in place with WSDOT.
Committee member Ralph MOVED to recommend Council authorize the Mayor
and/or designees to sign agreements with the Washington State Department of
Transportation to obligate $15 million of Connecting Washington funds for
expenditure on the South 228th Street Union Pacific Grade Separation Project,
subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public
Works Director. The motion was SECONDED by Committee member Fincher and
PASSED 3 - 0.
Item 11 – Interlocal Agreement for Milwaukee II:
Mark Madfai, P.E., Design Engineering Supervisor noted the Milwaukee II levee is part of
the Horseshoe Bend/Foster Park Levee that spans between 3rd Avenue South and the Union
Pacific railroad embankment. In order to be accredited the adjacent levee and the levees
downstream needs additional freeboard along the right bank of the Green River.
The Flood Control District has allocated funding to Kent to make offers to purchase property
and construct levee improvements for this project. This Interlocal Agreement (ILA) allows
the City to proceed with an Alternatives Analysis and acquire property for the levee project.
Madfai noted that a future ILA will be required in order to move forward to design and
construct the levee improvements.
The ILA presented to the committee has been modified from the version presented to the
Public Works Committee on March 21, 2016 and was approved in the modified form by the
King County Flood Control District Board of Supervisors on May 23, 2016.
Jeff Watling, Park and Recreation Director and Brian Levenhagen noted that a key link is
missing to the Green River Trail. Confirmation was requested from Watling who stated that
King County Parks supports and advocates for this project. It was confirmed that the
committee was directing Parks and Engineering staff to include the missing trail link in any
alternatives analysis.
Committee member Fincher MOVED to recommend Council authorize the Mayor to
sign an Interlocal Agreement with the King County Flood Control District for the
Milwaukee II Levee project, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to
the City Attorney and Public Works Director. The motion was SECONDED by
Committee member Ralph and PASSED 3 - 0.
6
Public Works Committee Minutes
June 6, 2016
5
Item 12 – Information Only/Complete Streets:
Charlene Anderson, Long Range Planning Manager joined Lacey Jane Wolfe, Senior
Transportation Planner at the table. Wolfe noted that Complete Streets is a policy and
design approach that requires streets to be planned, designed, operated and maintained to
enable safe, convenient and comfortable access for all users, regardless of age or ability.
Complete Streets concepts are becoming more crucial every day for planning and
transportation projects in the region, as traffic congestion worsens, transportation costs rise
and public health initiatives strive to increase people’s activity levels. Wolfe stated that to
date, more than 700 agencies at local, regional and state levels have adopted Complete
Streets Ordinances; adopting such an ordinance in Kent would enable the City to be more
competitive for regional funding and steer future updates to plans and standards, which
would have real impacts on implemented projects.
Wolfe went on to note that Kent’s existing pedestrian and bicycle network consists of
sidewalks, pathways, trails, bike lanes, shared off-street paths and striped shoulders. In the
past, many sidewalks and bicycle lanes have been constructed as part of individual
development projects resulting in gaps, missing connections and inconsistencies in the
connections of facilities.
It was noted that Kent has a number of strong Complete Streets-supportive policies and
plans in place, including the Transportation Master Plan (which recognizes the need to
improve connectivity and identifies a network of streets to receive bicycle and pedestrian
facilities) and the Comprehensive Plan (which has policies in land use and transportation
chapters related to improving non-motorized access and encouraging walking and
bicycling). Complete Streets policies improve safety, lower transportation costs, provide
mobility alternatives, encourage healthy activity, stimulate local economies, contribute to
economic development goals through creating a sense of place, improve social interaction
and generally improve adjacent property values.
INFORMATION ONLY/NO MOTION REQUIRED
ITEM 13 – Information Only/Vegetation Update:
Ryan Carroll, Maintenance Worker 4, and Joe Codiga, Field Storm Vegetation Lead gave an
informative presentation on what the vegetation crews are working on throughout the year.
They showed slides of typical sites and the amount of maintenance they require. Ground
crews work on vision obstructions that the mowers aren’t able to. Codiga noted that the
spray trucks are used to help keep the grass down. Mowers were down a total of 37 days
during 2 months of mowing. If the crews had two more mowers they could keep 3 on the
road at all times. Vegetation staff receives 5-10 calls per day for mowing requests. Citizens
are urged to call (253)856-5500 if they see a vision obstruction due to tall weeds or grass
Monday – Friday 7:00 am – 4:00 pm. Both Codiga and Carroll noted that safety is their
number one priority.
INFORMATION ONLY/NO MOTION REQUIRED
7
Public Works Committee Minutes
June 6, 2016
6
Item 14 - Information Only/Quiet Zone Update:
Chad Bieren, City Engineer noted that staff is pulling together a bid package for
maintenance items which include 50 signs, center line barriers and extending crossing
paddles. Work could start later this fall.
INFORMATION ONLY/NO MOTION REQUIRED
The meeting was adjourned at 5:32 p.m.
Cheryl Viseth,
Council Committee Recorder
8
Proposed
100,000
1,000,000
200,000
100,000
East Valley Highway - between S 196th St and S 180th St (overlay, PE match only)
S 212th St & 72nd Ave Intersection (concrete)
S 208th St - vic 92nd Ave S to 92th Ave S - snake hill (guardrail)
S 212th St - 91st Pl S (Winco) to 500 ft east - Winco Hill (guardrail)
James St - Central Ave N to Jason Ave N (concrete street)1,400,000
Contracted Projects Totals 2,800,000
Proposed
60,000
300,000
225,000
150,000
110,000
850,000
80,000
250,000
375,000
Bridge Structural Rating (Required by FHWA) (Consultant)
Lane Line Markings aka Pavement Markings (Paint and RPM's)
Thermoplastic Pavement Markings (crosswalks, stop lines, arrows, etc.)
Crack Sealing
Guardrail Repairs
Sidewalk,Walking Path and ADA Improvements
ADA Transition Plan
Crosswalk Safety Improvements (Includes Removal)
Street Tree Replacement/Maintenance
Quiet Zone Improvements 300,000
Contracted Street Services Totals 2,700,000
Proposed
Concrete Sidewalk Replacement Program 700,000
Traffic Sign Replacement 250,000
In House Street Services Totals 950,000
Proposed Street & Sidewalk: Grand Total 6,450,000
Proposed
Street light Pole Damage Replacement 100,000
Additional Street Light 200,000
Street Light Services Totals 300,000
Proposed
Traffic Loop Replacement 50,000
Traffic Signal Controller Cabinets and Signal Parts 300,000
Flashing Yellow Left Turn Arrows Phase 3 (Valley Area)200,000
-228th St Corridor - 76th Ave to Lakeside Blvd E
Signal Services Totals 550,000
Proposed Street Lights & Signals: Grand Total 850,000
Proposed
98th Ave SE - SE 240th St to 248th St 60,000
Residential Traffic Calming Measures (e.g. speed radar signs)140,000
Residential Traffic Calming Totals 200,000
Residential Traffic Calming: Grand Total 200,000
7,500,000
Residential Traffic Calming
Proposed Utilization of 2017 Business and Occupation Funds
Streets & Sidewalks
Street Lights & Signals
Total Proposed Utilization of B&O Funds in 2017
Contracted Projects
Contracted Street Services
In House Street Services
Street Light Services (for Principal Arterials and Minor Arterials Only)
Signal Services
Residential Traffic Calming
\\Pwupfpp1v\pwpublic\Public\Operations\Streets\2017 BO and Garbage Utility Fund Utilization.xlsx Revised 6/2/2016
9
Proposed
Misty Meadows 800,000
Star Lake Highlands 800,000
Seven Oaks (SE 259 Pl, 117th Pl SE, SE 256 Pl) 300,000
Contracted Overlay Projects Totals 1,900,000
Proposed
SE 280th St - 121th Ave SE west to CDS @ Kent Ridge Estates 30,000
122nd Pl SE - SE 280th SE north and south to CDS @ Kent Ridge Estates 75,000
123rd Pl SE - SE 280th St north to CDS @ Kent Ridge Estates 40,000
Highridge - S 265th Pl and 99 Pl S 50,000
SE 255th Pl - 118 Ave SE to west CDS @ Teresa Terrace 20,000
SE 255th St - 118 Ave SE to east CDS @ Teresa Terrace 15,000
SE 254th St - 118 Ave SE to east CDS @ Teresa Terrace 25,000
SE 253th St - 118 Ave SE to east CDS @ Teresa Terrace 25,000
117th Pl SE - SE 254th Pl to north and south CDS T.P. @ Teresa Terrace 40,000
S 252nd Pl - SR 99 to west City Limits vic 23rd Pl S 85,000
105th Ave SE - SE 224th St to SE 222nd St 35,000
SE 217th St - 108th Ave SE to 350 ft east of 108th Ave SE 55,000
103 Pl SE - SE 222nd St to SE 220th St 35,000
118th Ave SE - SE 277th Pl to south City Limits 70,000
In-House Overlay Projects Totals 600,000
Proposed Residential Streets: Grand Total 2,500,000
. Proposed
ADA Curb Ramps and Sidewalk 200,000
ADA Upgrade Totals 200,000
Proposed Residential Sidewalks: Grand Total 200,000
2,700,000 Total Proposed Utilization of Residential Street Maintenance & Repair Funds
Contracted Overlay Projects
In-House Overlay Projects
ADA Compliance - Contracted Work
Residential Streets
Residential Sidewalks
Proposed Utilization of 2017 Residential Street Maintenance and Repair Funds
\\Pwupfpp1v\pwpublic\Public\Operations\Streets\2017 BO and Garbage Utility Fund Utilization.xlsx Revised 6/2/2016
10
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Timothy J. LaPorte, P.E. Public Works Director
Phone: 253-856-5500
Fax: 253-856-6500
Address: 400 West Gowe Street
Kent, WA 98032-5895
Date: June 14, 2016
To: Chair Dennis Higgins and Public Works Committee Members
PW Committee Meeting Date: June 20, 2016
From: Jens Vincent, Storm Drainage Supervisor
Through: Dave Brock, P.E. Public Works Operations Manager
Item 5: Spoils Disposal Agreement with Republic Services, Inc.
Summary: Through normal business operations of catch basin pumping and
drainage ditch cleaning, a considerable volume of soil (material) is generated
annually. This material is temporarily stored and processed at the utilities vactor
decant facility located along 64th Ave South. The level of contaminants
(hydrocarbons and metals) within the material is tested prior to disposal to
determine an appropriate disposal location.
Currently there are approximately 1,200 cubic yards of material that contains high
levels of contaminants requiring disposal. Agencies accepting materials with the
levels of contaminants are limited:
PRC $95 / ton
King County $129.37 / ton
Republic Services Inc. $45 / ton
Staff is recommending disposal of the material through Republic Services Inc.
Exhibit: Republic Service Special Waste Service Agreement
Budget Impact: Fees for material disposal is an unbudgeted Drainage operating
expense.
Motion: Move to recommend Council authorize the disposal of material
containing high levels of hydrocarbons to Republic Services Inc. at a rate of
$45/ton, not to exceed a total amount of $90,000, subject to the final terms
and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director.
11
This page intentionally left blank
12
13
14
15
This page intentionally left blank
16
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Timothy J. LaPorte P.E., Public Works Director
Phone: 253-856-5500
Fax: 253-856-6500
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent, WA 98032-5895
Date: June 14, 2016
To: Chair Dennis Higgins and Public Works Committee Members
PW Committee Meeting Date: June 20, 2016
From: Lacey Jane Wolfe, Senior Transportation Planner and
Hayley Bonsteel, Long Range Planner & GIS Coordinator
Through: Chad Bieren P.E., City Engineer
Item 6:Complete Streets Ordinance
Summary: Complete Streets is a policy and design approach that requires streets to be
planned, designed, operated and maintained to enable safe, convenient and comfortable access
for all users, regardless of age or ability. Complete Streets concepts are becoming more crucial
every day for planning and transportation projects in the region, as traffic congestion worsens,
transportation costs rise and public health initiatives strive to increase people’s activity levels. To
date, more than 700 agencies at the local, regional and state levels have adopted Complete
Streets Ordinances; adopting such an ordinance in Kent would enable the City to be more
competitive for regional funding and steer future updates to plans and standards, which would
have real impacts on implemented projects.
Since the June 6, 2016 presentation to Public Works Committee, staff has presented to Economic
and Community Development Committee and the Land Use and Planning Board conducted a
Public Hearing. Edits to the draft since June 6 include:
- Amended recitals to reflect potential action by the Public Works Committee
- Clarified the applicability section
- Refined the decision-making process for exceptions
- Defined “disconnected sections” and “historic structures and sites”
Background: The City of Kent’s existing pedestrian and bicycle network consists of sidewalks,
pathways, trails, bike lanes, shared off-street paths and striped shoulders. In the past, many
sidewalks and bicycle lanes have been constructed as part of individual development projects.
This has resulted in gaps, missing connections and inconsistencies in the design and quality of
facilities.
The City has a number of strong Complete Streets-supportive policies and plans in place,
including the Transportation Master Plan (which recognizes the need to improve connectivity and
identifies a network of streets to receive bicycle and pedestrian facilities) and the
Comprehensive Plan (which has policies in land use and transportation chapters related to
improving non-motorized access and encouraging walking and bicycling). Complete Streets
policies improve safety, lower transportation costs, provide mobility alternatives, encourage
healthy activity, stimulate local economies, contribute to economic development goals through
creating a sense of place, improve social interaction and generally improve adjacent property
values.
Exhibit: Draft Complete Streets Ordinance
Budget Impact: To be determined on a
project by project basis.
Motion: Move to recommend Council approve amendments to the Kent City Code,
related to Complete Streets, as presented by staff and recommended by the Land
Use and Planning Board, subject to final terms and conditions acceptable to the
City Attorney and Public Works Director.
17
This page intentionally left blank
18
1 Amend KCC Title 6
Re: KCC 6.14 - Complete streets
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, amending Title 6 of the
Kent City Code by adopting a new chapter 6.14
pertaining to “complete streets.”
RECITALS
A. The complete streets concept promotes streets that are safe
and convenient for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit
riders, freight haulers and motor vehicle drivers of all ages and abilities.
B. Streets constitute a large portion of public space generally,
and should be corridors for all modes of transportation.
C. Streets that support and invite multiple uses are more
conducive to the public life and efficient movement of people than streets
designed primarily to move automobiles and freight.
D. Trends in energy and transportation costs, air quality, public
health and economic development necessitate a more comprehensive
approach to mobility.
E. The City of Kent engaged residents during the Let’s Go Kent
project in 2010, which focused on improving the walking and biking
network. Residents repeatedly expressed the desire for better walking and
biking options.
19
2 Amend KCC Title 6
Re: KCC 6.14 - Complete streets
F. There are practical limits to the expansion of roadways in
response to traffic congestion. Promoting pedestrian, bicycle and transit
travel as an alternative to automobile usage can reduce congestion, reduce
the negative environmental impacts of automobiles, and also reduce
transportation costs for residents and commuters.
G. A 2007 Washington State Department of Transportation
survey found that a lack of pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, such as
sidewalks and bicycle lanes, is a primary reason why Washington residents
do not walk or bicycle more frequently.
H. The United States Congress and the National Association of
Local Boards of Health specifically recommend complete streets policies as
a strategy to increase pedestrian and bicycle travel modes. Complete
streets legislation has been adopted by the United States Department of
Transportation and numerous state transportation agencies, as well as
cities such as Seattle, Kirkland, Redmond, Portland, San Francisco, San
Diego, Boulder and Chicago. The complete streets concept is also
supported by the Institute of Traffic Engineers, American Planning
Association, United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
American Public Health Association, and many other transportation,
planning and public health professionals. Washington State’s complete
streets grant program is described in RCW 47.04.320 and 47.04.325.
I. The Strategic Plan adopted by the City Council includes a
vision of a safe, connected and beautiful city, culturally vibrant with richly
diverse urban centers. Safety and connectivity can only be achieved if all
users’ needs are taken into account during planning and implementation of
roadway projects.
20
3 Amend KCC Title 6
Re: KCC 6.14 - Complete streets
J. The Comprehensive Plan and Transportation Master Plan for
the City of Kent both contain policies and goals supportive of complete
streets concepts, including: policies to promote walking and bicycling;
policies regarding level of service for pedestrians, bicycles and transit;
policies to provide non-motorized facilities; and many more.
K. Planning staff introduced a description of and the need for
complete streets at a regularly-scheduled Land Use and Planning Board
(“LUPB”) workshop on May 23, 2016, and received authorization from the
LUPB to draft a policy and ordinance to implement the complete streets
concept for new development within the City of Kent.
L. The City determined that due to the procedural nature of this
amendment (which includes no development regulations), neither
notification to the State nor State Environmental Policy Act review is
required.
M. Planning staff presented the draft ordinance and policy at a
public hearing held by the LUPB on June 13, 2016. The LUPB moved to
recommend to the City Council adoption of the ordinance and policy as
presented by staff.
N. The Public Works Committee, at its regularly-scheduled
meeting on June 20, 2016, moved to accept the recommendation of the
LUPB, and forward the matter for consideration by the full City Council.
O. The City Council, at its regularly scheduled meeting on July
19, 2016, adopted the ordinance and policy as presented by staff.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT,
WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
21
4 Amend KCC Title 6
Re: KCC 6.14 - Complete streets
ORDINANCE
SECTION 1. – Amendment. Title 6 of the Kent City Code is
amended by adding a new chapter 6.14, entitled “Complete Streets,” to
read as follows:
Sec. 6.14.010 Vision. The city endorses the concept of complete
streets, which promotes roadways that are safe, convenient and attractive
for all users regardless of age and ability, including pedestrians, bicyclists,
transit riders, freight haulers and motor vehicle drivers. The vision of
complete streets is a community in which all residents and visitors can
safely and efficiently use the public right-of-way to meet their
transportation needs regardless of their preferred mode of travel.
Sec. 6.14.020 Policy.
A. The city will plan for, design, construct, operate and maintain
an appropriate and integrated transportation system that will meet the
needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, wheelchair users, transit riders, freight
haulers, motorists, emergency responders and residents of all ages and
abilities.
B. Transportation system facilities that support the concept of
complete streets shall include, but are not limited to: pavement markings
and signs; street and sidewalk lighting; sidewalk and pedestrian safety
improvements; Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and Title VI
compliance; transit accommodations; bicycle accommodations, including
signage and markings; and, as appropriate, streetscapes that appeal to
and promote all modes of travel. The system’s design will be consistent
with and supportive of local neighborhoods, recognizing that transportation
needs vary and must be balanced in a flexible, safe and cost-effective
manner.
22
5 Amend KCC Title 6
Re: KCC 6.14 - Complete streets
Sec. 6.14.030 Applicability. The city will plan for, design and
construct all new city transportation improvement projects to provide
appropriate and safe accommodation for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit
riders, freight haulers, motor vehicles and persons of all abilities. Those
involved in the planning and design of projects within the public right-of-
way will give consideration to all users and modes of travel from the start
of planning and design work consistent with approved plans.
Transportation system improvements shall be viewed as opportunities to
create safer, more accessible streets for all users. This shall apply to new
construction, reconstruction and rehabilitation. The city may create a
checklist that will assist in considering modes of travel in the planning and
design of transportation system improvements. ADA-specific projects, such
as the installation of ramps or other improvements required for improved
accessibility, are exempt from complete streets consideration, as are
ordinary maintenance activities such as mowing, sweeping, spot repair,
joint sealing, pothole filling, and installation of raised pavement markers.
Sec. 6.14.050 Plans and standards. As city plans, guidelines and
standards are updated, consideration shall be given to complete streets
concepts to ensure that new regulations and practices comply with this
chapter and the latest in applicable complete streets research and best
practices. Examples of plans and standards include, but are not limited to
the Design and Construction Standards and the Transportation Master
Plan. Resources to be referenced in developing these standards and plans
shall include, but not be limited to the latest editions of National
Association of City Transportation Officials’ Urban Street Design Guide and
the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
Sec. 6.14.100 Exemptions.
A. The mayor, after consultation with the public works director,
the economic and community development director, and the parks and
23
6 Amend KCC Title 6
Re: KCC 6.14 - Complete streets
human services director, may determine that a project is exempt from the
requirements of this chapter, based on the following circumstances:
1.The project would require the accommodation of street
uses that are prohibited by law;
2.The accommodation of a specific use is expected to
have adverse impacts on environmental resources such as streams,
wetlands or floodplains, or on historic structures or sites (eligible for listing
in national, state or local preservation registers), above and beyond the
impacts of currently existing infrastructure;
3.Topographic challenges make accommodation of a
specific use infeasible;
4.The establishment of complete streets facilities would
be contrary to public safety;
5.The cost would be excessively disproportionate to the
need or probable future use; or
6.The inclusion of complete streets facilities would create
a disconnected section (less than 300 feet) of improvements where
additional improvements at either end are unlikely to occur within ten
years.
B. Where the above exemptions allow complete streets facilities
to be omitted from a roadway project, the city shall consider whether
bicyclists, pedestrians, transit users and persons of all abilities can be
accommodated by nearby facilities, and shall strive to provide complete
streets connections to those facilities.
Sec. 6.14.120 Intergovernmental cooperation. The city will
cooperate with other transportation agencies, including the Washington
State Department of Transportation, King County Metro and Sound Transit,
to ensure the principles and practices of complete streets are embedded
within their planning, design, construction and maintenance activities. The
24
7 Amend KCC Title 6
Re: KCC 6.14 - Complete streets
city will specifically cooperate to ensure the transportation network flows
seamlessly between jurisdictions in accordance with local and regional
road, transit, bicycle and pedestrian plans.
SECTION 2. – Severability. If any one or more section, subsection,
or sentence of this ordinance is 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 3. – Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon
approval of the city attorney, the city clerk and the code reviser are
authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the
correction of clerical errors; ordinance, section, or subsection numbering;
or references to other local, state, or federal laws, codes, rules, or
regulations.
SECTION 4. – Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and
be in force 30 days from and after its passage, as provided by law.
SUZETTE COOKE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
SUE HANSON, INTERIM CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY
25
8 Amend KCC Title 6
Re: KCC 6.14 - Complete streets
PASSED: day of , 2016.
APPROVED: day of , 2016.
PUBLISHED: day of , 2016.
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)
SUE HANSON, INTERIM CITY CLERK
P:\Civil\Ordinance\6.14 - Complete Streets Ordinance.docx
26
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Timothy J. LaPorte P.E., Public Works Director
Phone: 253-856-5500
Fax: 253-856-6500
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent, WA 98032-5895
Date: June 13, 2016
To: Chair Dennis Higgins and Public Works Committee Members
PW Committee Meeting Date: June 20, 2016
From: Lacey Jane Wolfe, Senior Transportation Planner
Through: Chad Bieren P.E., City Engineer
Item 7:Crosswalk Recommendations
Summary: Staff will present a draft resolution that provides guidelines for installing
and maintaining marked crosswalks within the City. The guidelines are consistent
with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), which is the national
standard approved by the Federal Highway Administration and adopted by the
Washington State Department of Transportation. Staff solicited public input through
a series of focus groups and individual outreach to residents and businesses most
impacted by the recommended changes.
Staff has compared the City’s approximately 700 existing marked crosswalks against
the proposed recommendations. While the majority of existing marked crosswalks
were found to be consistent with the guidelines, 47 marked crosswalks were
identified as candidates for removal. Two marked crosswalks require pedestrian
volume studies before a recommendation can be made. Staff has also identified 61
locations that could be improved by adding crosswalk markings.
Exhibit: Draft Crosswalks Resolution
Budget Impact: Completing the removal of 47 crosswalks and the installation of 61
crosswalks would cost an estimated $200,000 to $300,000.
Motion: Move to recommend the Public Works Committee forward
the Draft Crosswalks Resolution to Council and recommend that
Council set a date for a Public Hearing.
27
This page intentionally left blank
28
1 Crosswalks
RESOLUTION NO. ___________
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, adopting a policy for
addressing installation and maintenance of
crosswalk markings throughout the City of Kent.
RECITALS
A. The purpose of this Resolution is to establish a methodology
for determining where crosswalk markings are installed and how they are
to be maintained within the City of Kent.
B. Crosswalks are features of a multimodal transportation
network that provide locations for pedestrians to cross roadways.
Crosswalks exist at all intersections, whether marked or unmarked, unless
signs are posted to prohibit crossing. At non-intersection locations,
pavement markings are necessary to establish the crosswalk. Marked
crosswalks are considered traffic control devices and are subject to the
guidance in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). The
MUTCD is approved by the Federal Highway Administration as the National
Standard for such devices. The MUTCD is adopted as the statewide
standard for traffic control devices, through Chapter 468-95 of the
Washington Administrative Code, as mandated by RCW 47.36.030.
C. Crosswalks can be marked or unmarked. RCW 46.04.160
defines a crosswalk as “the portion of the roadway between the
intersection area and a prolongation or connection of the farthest sidewalk
29
2 Crosswalks
line or in the event there are no sidewalks then between the intersection
area and a line ten feet therefrom, except as modified by a marked
crosswalk.”
D. RCW 47.04.010(16) defines a marked crosswalk as “any
portion of a roadway distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by lines or
other markings on the surface thereof.”
E. Pursuant to RCW 46.61.235(1), drivers must stop for
pedestrians in a crosswalk regardless of whether it is marked or unmarked.
F. According to the Federal Highway Administration, despite
numerous studies, there has been no conclusive evidence to show that
either marked or unmarked crosswalks are safer in locations that are not
controlled by a signal or stop sign.1 Marked crosswalks are appropriate at
some locations but other treatments (such as post-mounted pedestrian
warning signs, flashing lights, supplemental pavement markings) are also
necessary when used at other locations.
G. According to the Federal Highway Administration, “crosswalks
should not be installed at locations that could present an increased safety
risk to pedestrians, such as where there is poor sight distance, complex or
confusing designs, a substantial volume of heavy trucks, or other dangers,
without first providing adequate design features and/or traffic control
devices.”
H. Based on the guidelines established herein, staff will compile a
prioritized list of candidate locations for enhanced crossing treatments.
I. The Downtown Subarea Action Plan emphasizes the value of
the Downtown Area as a comfortable, friendly place for people to meet and
enjoy themselves. To encourage a pedestrian-friendly environment,
crosswalks at intersections in the Downtown Area are considered
separately from crosswalks at intersections outside the Downtown Area.
1 Safety Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations, Final Report and
Recommended Guidelines. FHWA Publication Number: HRT-04-100. September 2005.
30
3 Crosswalks
J. This Resolution provides standard guidelines consistent with
state law to be considered and applied as requests for crosswalk
modification are received by city staff.2
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT,
WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
RESOLUTION
SECTION 1. –Signal-Controlled Locations.
Crosswalks should be marked at signal-controlled intersections unless the
Traffic Engineer determines a crosswalk is not appropriate for traffic flow.
In that case, a “no pedestrian crossing” sign will be installed.
SECTION 2. –Stop-Sign Controlled Locations.
At locations controlled by stop or yield signs, crosswalk markings should
not be installed unless at least one of the following is true:
a.The Traffic Engineer determines a marked crosswalk is needed to
direct pedestrians to the proper crossing path due to traffic flow or
safety concerns.
b.The stop-sign controlled location is within the Downtown Area. Kent
has designated the Downtown Area as key to economic vitality of the
City. Pedestrian access to this area is especially important to
encourage commerce. Stop-sign controlled locations in the
Downtown Area, as defined by Council, should be marked, with the
exception of intersections that currently have single-family
residential character, unless those locations qualify under other
sections of this policy. The stop-sign controlled location is on a
2 For information regarding proposed locations impacted by this Resolution, see Attachment 1.
31
4 Crosswalks
school walking route pursuant to WAC 392-141-340. In such case,
refer to section 5.
SECTION 3. – Uncontrolled Locations.
Uncontrolled locations are pedestrian crossings not controlled by a traffic
signal, stop sign or yield sign. This includes uncontrolled intersection
locations as well as midblock locations. The following table will be consulted
for uncontrolled locations.
Recommendations for installing marked crosswalks and other needed
pedestrian improvements at uncontrolled locations.*
Roadway Type
(Number of
Travel Lanes
and Median
Type)
Vehicle ADT
9,000
Vehicle ADT
>9,000 to 12,000
Vehicle ADT
>12,000-15,000
Vehicle ADT
> 15,000
Speed Limit**
30
mi/h
35
mi/h
40
mi/h
30
mi/h
35
mi/h
40
mi/h
30
mi/h
35
mi/h
40
mi/h
30
mi/h
35
mi/h
40
mi/h
Two lanes C C P C C P C C N C P N
Three lanes C C P C P P P P N P N N
Multilane (four
or more lanes)
with raised
median
C C P C P N P P N N N N
Multilane (four
or more lanes)
without raised
median
C P N P P N N N N N N N
*These are general recommendations; good engineering judgment should be used in individual cases for
deciding where to install marked crosswalks.
** Where the speed limit exceeds 40 mi/h, marked crosswalks alone should not be used at uncontrolled
locations.
C = Candidate sites for marked crosswalks.
P = Possible increase in pedestrian crash risk may occur if crosswalks are added without other
pedestrian facility enhancements such as post-mounted pedestrian warning signs, flashing lights,
supplemental pavement markings.
N = Marked crosswalks alone are insufficient, since pedestrian crash risk may be increased by providing
marked crosswalks without other pedestrian facility enhancements such as post-mounted pedestrian
warning signs, flashing lights, supplemental pavement markings.
Source: This table was adapted from table 11 in the Federal Highway Administration’s publication Safety
Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations, Final Report and
Recommended Guidelines. FHWA Publication Number: HRT-04-100. September 2005.
32
5 Crosswalks
In uncontrolled locations categorized as “C,” the Traffic Engineer will
determine whether the location is appropriate for a marked crosswalk.
The Traffic Engineer will also determine whether the peak hourly pedestrian
volume is at least 20 pedestrians per hour (or 15 or more elderly or
children pedestrians). The pedestrian volume requirement shall be waived if
the uncontrolled location is at an intersection within the Downtown Area
with the exception of intersections that currently have single-family
residential character, unless those locations qualify under other sections of
this policy.
In uncontrolled locations categorized as “P”, an engineering study will be
performed. The study, in accordance with the Manual on Urban Traffic
Control Devices (MUTCD), should consider:
a.Number of lanes,
b.The presence of a median,
c.The distance from adjacent signalized intersections,
d.The pedestrian volumes and delays,
e.The average daily traffic,
f.The posted or statutory speed limit or 85th-percentile speed,
g.Geometry of location,
h.Possible consolidation of multiple crossing points,
i.The availability of street lighting, and
j.Other appropriate factors.
Additional factors that may be considered include land use, pedestrian
facilities nearby, and potential traffic-calming items such as post-mounted
pedestrian warning signs, flashing lights, or supplemental pavement
markings. Upon conclusion of the study, the Traffic Engineer shall
33
6 Crosswalks
determine the need for a marked crosswalk in the uncontrolled location and
document the decision and the reasoning.
Locations categorized as “N” shall not be marked without the appropriate
traffic-calming items, to be determined by the Traffic Engineer. These items
may include post-mounted pedestrian warning signs, flashing lights,
supplemental pavement markings, or other devices.
SECTION 4. – Designated School Crossing Locations.
Pursuant to RCW 46.61.440, designated school crossing locations have a
maximum speed limit of twenty miles per hour.
Designated school crossings may be established in locations where the
school district commits to providing a school crossing guard. When
requested by the school district’s transportation director, the Traffic
Engineer will evaluate potential new designated school crossing locations
with the Kent Police Department.
In accordance with the MUTCD, designated school crossing locations shall
include:
a. Advance Crossing Assembly and School Speed Limit Assembly,
posted in advance of the marked crosswalk,
b. Marked crosswalk with School Crossing Assembly, and
c. Signs to mark the end of the school speed zone, posted at least 300
feet after the marked crosswalk.
The Traffic Engineer will work with the school district’s transportation
director in cases where designated school crossing locations are no longer
staffed by a school crossing guard. When necessary, school crossing signs
and associated markings will be removed.
34
7 Crosswalks
SECTION 5 – Locations on Walking Routes to School.
The Traffic Engineer shall follow the MUTCD’s guidance on crosswalk
markings, such that crosswalks should be marked at all intersections on
established routes to school where there is a substantial conflict between
motorists, bicyclists, and student movements; where students are
encouraged to cross between intersections; where students would not
otherwise recognize the proper place to cross; or where motorists or
bicyclists might not expect students to cross.
For purposes of this Resolution, established routes to school will be
determined by school walk routes, pursuant to WAC 392-141-340. Areas of
substantial conflict will be determined by the Traffic Engineer. Factors that
may contribute to substantial conflict include vehicle volume, pedestrian
volume, sight distance, vehicle speed limit, and presence of sidewalks.
The Traffic Engineer will work with the school district’s transportation
director when school walking routes change. The crosswalk marking will be
removed if it is not justified under Section 5 of this policy.
PASSED at a regular open public meeting by the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, this day of , 2016.
CONCURRED in by the Mayor of the City of Kent this _____ day of
__________, 2016.
SUZETTE COOKE, MAYOR
35
8 Crosswalks
ATTEST:
RONALD MOORE, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of Resolution No.
______ passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington,
, 2016.
RONALD MOORE, CITY CLERK
P:\Civil\Files\Open Files\2160-Crosswalks Policy\Crosswalks Resolution Draft 2_vlredits.docx
36
9 Crosswalks
Attachment 1
37
1
PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT
Tim LaPorte, P.E., Public Works Director
Phone: 253-856-5500
Fax: 253-856-6500
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent, WA 98032-5895
Date: June 12, 2016
To: Tim LaPorte, Director of Public Works
From: Lacey Jane Wolfe, Senior Transportation Planner
Through: Kelly Peterson, Special Projects and Transportation Manager
Copy: Chad Bieren, City Engineer
Regarding: Crosswalks Marking Recommendations
Background
On June 20, 2016, the Public Works Committee will consider adopting a resolution
that provides guidelines for installing and maintaining marked crosswalks within the
City. The guidelines are consistent with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices (MUTCD), which is the national standard approved by the Federal Highway
Administration and adopted by the Washington State Department of Transportation.
Staff solicited public input through a series of focus groups and individual outreach
to residents and businesses most impacted by the recommended changes.
Staff has compared the City’s approximately 700 existing marked crosswalks
against the proposed recommendations. While the majority of existing marked
crosswalks were found to be consistent with the guidelines, 47 marked crosswalks
were identified as candidates for removal. Two marked crosswalks require
pedestrian volume studies before a recommendation can be made. Staff has also
identified 61 locations that could be improved by adding crosswalk markings.
In areas where crosswalk markings are removed, the location may benefit from
future investments, subject to available funding, such as such as post-mounted
pedestrian warning signs, flashing lights, supplemental pavement markings. Factors
to consider may include nearby land use such as parks or multifamily housing,
pedestrian volume, history of pedestrian-vehicle collisions, and other factors.
The following table summarizes the recommended changes across the City of Kent.
38
2
Table 1. Summary of Recommended Changes to Crosswalk Markings Citywide
Location
Type
Add
Crosswalk
Markings
Remove
Crosswalk
Markings
Signal-
Controlled 1 0
Stop-Sign
Controlled 32 27
Uncontrolled 28 19
Established
Routes to
Schools
0 1
Total 61 47
Recommended Changes
Signal-Controlled Locations
There is one signal-controlled location that is recommended for marking, subject to
available funding. The following table lists this location.
Table 2. Signal-Controlled Locations Proposed for Marking
Major Street Minor Street Leg
East Pioneer
Street Central Avenue North S
Stop- or Yield-Sign Controlled Locations
Public Works staff reviewed all of the existing stop- and yield-sign controlled
locations within the City, (marked crosswalks within walking routes to school were
evaluated separately). Twenty-seven marked crosswalks are candidates for
removal. The following table lists these locations.
Table 3. Marked Crosswalks at Stop- and Yield-Sign Controlled Locations Proposed
for Removal
Major Street Minor Street Leg
80th Pl S (S 192nd Street) 84th Ave S E
80th Pl S (S 192nd Street) 84th Ave S W
39
3
S 182nd St 72nd Ave S W
S 184th St East Valley Hwy (84th Ave
S) E
S 187th St East Valley Hwy (84th Ave
S) E
S 196th St 66th Ave S N
S 196th St 81st Ave S S
S 216th St 64th Ave S W
S 216th St 64th Ave S E
S 216th St 68th Ave S (West Valley
Highway) E
S 216th St 68th Ave S (West Valley
Highway) W
S 216th St 72nd Ave S W
S 220th St 68th Ave S (West Valley
Highway) E
S 224th St 68th Ave S (West Valley
Highway) E
SE 260th St 101st Ave SE S
SE 260th St Driveway West of 104th
Ave SE S
SE 260th St Top Foods Driveway S
Southeast 248th St 116th Ave SE N
Southeast 248th St 116th Ave SE E
Southeast 248th St 116th Ave SE S
Veterans Dr (S 228th St) 54th Ave SW N
Veterans Dr (S 228th St) Riverview Blvd S Enter/Exit
Ramp S
Veterans Dr (S 228th St) Riverview Blvd S Exit Ramp N
Veterans Dr (S 228th St)
Private Rd (Driveway
between Russell Rd and
54th Ave SW)
N
Veterans Dr (S 228th St) Riverview Blvd S E
Veterans Dr (S 228th St) Riverview Blvd S W
Veterans Dr (S 228th St) Russell Rd N
40
4
With input from Economic and Community Development staff, Public Works staff
recommends that all stop-controlled and yield-controlled locations in the Downtown
Area, as designated by City Council, be marked as funding becomes available. This
would require adding 32 crosswalk markings. The following table lists these
locations.
Table 4. Stop-Sign and Yield-Sign Controlled Locations within the Downtown Area
Proposed for Marking
Major Street Minor Street Leg
E George St Central Ave N E
E George St State Ave N E
E George St State Ave N W
E George St Woodford Ave N W
E Saar St Central Ave S W
E Willis St Bridges Ave S S
E Willis St Railroad Ave S N
E Willis St Railroad Ave S S
N Lincoln Ave W Harrison St E
W Temperance St 1st Ave N W
Titus St Kennebeck Ave S W
Titus St State Ave S N
W Harrison Washington Ave N (68th Ave
S) E
W Harrison St 6th Ave N E
W James St 1st Ave N N
W Meeker St S 6th Ave N
W Meeker St S 6th Ave S
W Meeker St Madison Ave N
W Meeker St Thompson Ave N N
W Saar St 2nd Ave S E
W Saar St 2nd Ave S W
W Smith St 64th Ave S E
41
5
W Smith St 6th Ave N S
W Smith St Madison Ave S
W Smith St Washington Ave N (68th Ave
S) E
W Smith St Washington Ave N (68th Ave
S) W
W Willis St 1st Ave S N
W Willis St 1st Ave S S
Ward St N Kennebeck Ave W
Washington Ave N (68th Ave
S) W Sam St E
W Harrison St Madison Ave E
W Harrison St Madison Ave W
Uncontrolled Locations
Public Works staff reviewed all marked crosswalks at uncontrolled locations within
the City (crosswalks within walking routes to school were evaluated separately). In
all, 19 marked crosswalks are candidates for removal. These locations may be
considered for enhanced treatment in the future, such as post-mounted pedestrian
warning signs, flashing lights, supplemental pavement markings. The following
table lists these locations.
Table 5. Marked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations Proposed for Removal
Major Street Minor Street Leg
39th Pl S Riverview Blvd S N
S 216th St 64th Ave S S
S 216th St 64th Ave S N
S 217th St Riverview Blvd S N
S 219th Pl/S 218th Pl Riverview Blvd S S
SE 260th St 101st Ave SE W
Veterans Dr (S 228th St) 54th Ave SW W
Veterans Dr (S 228th St) Riverview Blvd S Entrance
Ramp N
Veterans Dr (S 228th St) Riverview Blvd S W
42
6
S 244th St Military Rd S N
S 248th St Military Rd S N
S 221st Pl Riverview Blvd S S
Lincoln Ave* 2nd from North Midblock
Lincoln Ave* 3rd from North Midblock
Lincoln Ave* 4th from North Midblock
E Titus St* Central Ave S N
Willis St* 2nd Ave W
Willis St* 2nd Ave E
Willis St* 3rd Ave E
* Indicates location within the Downtown Area.
Staff also reviewed all uncontrolled intersection locations within the Downtown Area
with input from Economic and Community Development staff. There are currently
28 uncontrolled locations within the Downtown Area that are recommended for
marking. The following table lists these locations.
Table 6. Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations within the Downtown Area Proposed
for Marking
Major Street Minor Street Leg
1st Ave N Cole Street W
W Cloudy St 1st Ave N W
W Cloudy St 5th Ave N E
W Cloudy St 5th Ave N S
E George St State Ave N N
E George St State Ave N S
E George St Woodford Ave N N
E George St Woodford Ave N S
W Gowe St 5th Ave S E
W Meeker St 6th Ave N E
E Meeker St N Kennebeck Ave S
43
7
W Meeker St Madison Ave E
W Meeker St Madison Ave W
W Saar St 1st Ave S W
W Saar St 1st Ave S N
W Saar St 1st Ave S S
W Saar St 2nd Ave S N
W Saar St 2nd Ave S S
W Saar St 5th Ave S E
W Saar St 5th Ave S N
E Saar St Railroad Ave S E
E Saar St Railroad Ave S N
E Saar St Railroad Ave S S
W Temperance St 1st Ave N S
W Harrison St Madison Ave N
W Harrison St Madison Ave S
Ward St N Kennebeck Ave N
Ward St N Kennebeck Ave S
Designated School Crossing Locations
Staff reviewed existing designated school crossing locations and identified three
that no longer have a school-provided crossing guard, and one where staff
recommends adding a guard. Staff will work with the school district to determine
next steps for these locations, which are listed in the following table.
44
8
Table 7. Crosswalks Recommended for Further Discussion with School Districts
Major Street Minor Street Leg
South James Street 64th Avenue South S
South James Street 64th Avenue South W
South 236th Street Lakeside Boulevard East N
Southeast 192nd Street 120th Avenue Southeast W
Established Routes to School
Public Works staff reviewed all of the marked crosswalks within established walking
routes to schools. Twelve marked crosswalks would be candidates for removal
under the proposed guidelines, but staff recommends that nine of these locations
be maintained under a grandfather clause because they are stop-controlled and
therefore within safety guidelines. The following table lists the nine locations
proposed to be maintained.
Table 8. Crosswalks within Established Walking Routes to Schools Proposed to be
Maintained under Grandfather Clause
Major Street Minor Street Leg
SE 232nd St 110th Pl SE W
SE 232nd St 112th Ave SE S
SE 232nd St 114th Ave SE N
S 236th Pl 64th Ave S E
S 238th Pl 64th Ave S E
SE 260th St 140th Ave SE W
S 261st St 42nd Ave S W
S 262nd St 42nd Ave S W
S 262nd St 42nd Ave S S
The following marked crosswalk in an uncontrolled location within an established
walking route to school is a candidate for removal. In making this recommendation,
staff consulted with the Federal Way School District and the District concurred.
45
9
Table 9. Marked Crosswalk within Established Walking Routes to Schools Proposed
for Removal
Major Street Minor Street Leg School
South 248th
Street 42nd Avenue South S
Sunnycrest
Elementary
The following uncontrolled locations within established walking routes to school
would not be marked under the proposed guidelines; however, they may have
sufficient pedestrian volume to warrant marking. Accordingly, staff recommends
pedestrian studies be conducted for these locations.
Table 10. Crosswalks within Walking Routes to Schools Proposed for Pedestrian
Study
Major Street Minor Street Leg School
South 232nd
Place Lakeside Blvd East S Neeley-
O’Brien
S 240th
Street/James
Street
Lakeside Blvd East W Neely-
O’Brien
Prioritized List for Enhanced Treatments
The City will develop and maintain a prioritized list of potential locations for
enhanced pedestrian treatments, such as flashing lights, raised crosswalks, or
advanced paving markings. These features and crosswalks will be installed as
funding becomes available. Input from residents and businesses will be considered
in prioritizing those locations. Factors to consider may include nearby land use such
as parks or multifamily housing, pedestrian volume, history of pedestrian-vehicle
collisions, and other factors. The Traffic Engineer will make a final determination
pursuant to the proposed guidelines.
46
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Timothy J. LaPorte, P.E. Public Works Director
Phone: 253-856-5500
Fax: 253-856-6500
Address: 400 West Gowe Street
Kent, WA 98032-5895
Date: June 14, 2016
To: Chair Dennis Higgins and Public Works Committee Members
PW Committee Meeting Date: June 20, 2016
From: Eric Connor, Construction Manager
Through: Chad Bieren, P.E., City Engineer
Item 8: Mill Creek (Auburn) Bridge Repair Change Order
Summary: Scarsella Brothers Construction from Kent began work on the Upper
Mill Creek (Auburn) 14 West Valley bridge to install sheet piles to secure the
compromised guardrail and roadway subgrade and an existing water main that
crosses the bridge. Scarsella Brothers mobilized work on Friday, June 10, 2016.
Repairs will conclude the week of June 20. Work is expected to cost in the range of
$60,000 to $90,000.
Exhibit: None
Budget Impact: Staff recommends that costs for repairs be divided equally between Water
and Street funds.
Motion: Move to recommend Council authorize the Mayor to sign a change
order for emergency bridge repair of the Mill Creek (Auburn) 14 Bridge on
West Valley Highway, subject to the final terms and conditions acceptable
to the City Attorney and Public Works Director.
47
This page intentionally left blank
48
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Timothy J. LaPorte P.E., Public Works Director
Phone: 253-856-5500
Fax: 253-856-6500
Address: 400 West Gowe Street
Kent, WA 98032-5895
Date: June 12, 2016
To: Chair Dennis Higgins and Public Works Committee Members
Meeting Date: June 20, 2016
From: Kelly Peterson, AICP, Special Projects/Transportation Manager
Item 9:Information Only/Grant Award
Summary: Staff will provide a grant update.
Exhibit: None
Budget Impact: None
INFORMATION ITEM/NO MOTION REQUIRED
49
This page intentionally left blank
50
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Timothy J. LaPorte, P.E. Public Works Director
Phone: 253-856-5500
Fax: 253-856-6500
Address: 400 West Gowe Street
Kent, WA 98032-5895
Date: July 15, 2016
To: Chair Dennis Higgins and Public Works Committee Members
PW Committee Meeting Date: June 20, 2016
From: Mike Mactutis, P.E., Environmental Engineering Manager
Through: Chad Bieren, P.E., City Engineer
Item 10: FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map Update
Summary: The Federal Emergency Management Agency began a Flood Insurance
Rate Map (FIRM) update in 2005 which was put on hold in 2011 when new Levee
Mapping Policies were introduced. Since then, FEMA has been working on pilot
projects across the country as they interpret the new policies.
FEMA is now starting to update the FIRMs in King County for flood hazard areas not
affected by levees. They recently provided a webinar and report on areas that will be
updated and others that will be secluded from this update until the levee policies are
interpreted.
Staff will provide a status of the levee mapping project.
Exhibit: None
Budget Impact: None
INFORMATION ONLY/NO MOTION REQUIRED
51
This page intentionally left blank
52
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Timothy J. LaPorte P.E., Public Works Director
Phone: 253-856-5500
Fax: 253-856-6500
Address: 400 West Gowe Street
Kent, WA 98032-5895
Date: June 12, 2016
To: Chair Dennis Higgins and Public Works Committee Members
Meeting Date: June 20, 2016
From: Paul Scott, Accounting Manager
Item 11: Sewer Rate Discussion
Summary: Staff will provide an update regarding questions that were asked at the
May 16, 2016 Public Works Committee meeting.
Exhibit: None
Budget Impact: None
MOTION:
53
This page intentionally left blank
54
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Timothy J. LaPorte P.E., Public Works Director
Phone: 253-856-5500
Fax: 253-856-6500
Address: 400 West Gowe Street
Kent, WA 98032-5895
Date: June 12, 2016
To: Chair Dennis Higgins and Public Works Committee Members
Meeting Date: June 20, 2016
From: Chad Bieren, P.E., City Engineer
Item 12: Information Only/Quiet Zone Update
Summary: Staff will provide an update on progress to date.
Exhibit: None
Budget Impact: None
INFORMATION ITEM/NO MOTION REQUIRED
55