HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Public Works/Planning - 07/15/1992 ��a • CITY CLERK
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITY Q
n
JULY 15, 1992 y A U G 1 n',
j'„ y s,P ...q 7
CITY ry.�P,i
PRESENT: Jim White Dean Falkner
Jim Bennett Paul Scott
Don Wickstrom Jim Miller
Tom Brubaker Carol Morris
Gary Gill Bill Carey
Roger Lubovich ,Ftin Welch
Bill Wolinski Ch`krlie Kiefer
Ed White Mr. & Mrs. Rust
Janet Shull Bill Doolittle
Norm Angelo Jean Parietti
Upper Garrison Creek Flood Control Project
Bill Wolinski, Water Quality Engineer for the City, made a
presentation on a study of the entire watershed, the history of
flooding problems associated with the watershed and the proposed
projects to alleviate the problems. Previously approved standards
have proved to be inadequate to address the problems that are being
experienced. Thus, we are attempting to address existing
situations such as this and develop new standards that will prevent
future problems with new development. These new standards will
have an impact on new development and could result in some
controversy when they are brought before Council. Gill added that
we are going to upgrade our standards to comply with the current
King County standards as a first step. In addition, we are working
with King County to develop an interlocal agreement to look at the
entire Garrison Creek drainage basin to declare it a critical
drainage basin that may need to be . treated in a completely
different manner. In his presentation, Wolinski stressed that in
attempting to solve Mr. Carey's problems, there has to be a
regional solution so the problems aren't just moved from one place
to another. Jim White asked who would be paying for these
improvements. Would the owners of undeveloped land be asked to pay
or will the drainage utility fund the improvements. Gill stated
the existing problems would be addressed through the drainage
utility. We would also be requiring new development to design to
more stringent standards than in the past. Responding to Mr.
Carey's previous comments that increasing the retainage at the East
Hill Fire Station and the new school site would solve the problem,
Wolinski indicated that an extensive review of the site plans and
construction drawings for both projects revealed they were both
built to our existing standards. These existing standards may not
adequately address the problems but these two projects represent a
small fraction of the entire basin. Even if there were no controls
on either project, that would not have created the flooding that is
Public Works Committee
July 15, 1992
Page 2
happening downstream. Wolinski described the proposed project as
consisting of an earthen dike creating about 15 acre feet of
storage in an existing wetland in the vicinity of 112th which would
reduce the flows coming out of the drainage basin, an upsizing of
the downstream channels and provide a larger regional detention
facility at the north end of 98th Avenue just north of the James
Street Reservoirs.
Wickstrom added that we need to maximizP_ the detention facility
north of 98th because that will help w?Uh the problems in the
valley. Because of the wetland standards and the requirement for
a Corps permit, it will be questionable if we can build the valley
detention facility as originally proposed.
Mr. Carey responded with a review of the material he previously
presented to the Committee. He stated that 70; of the drainage in
the basin would bypass the detention facility proposed and that the
area identified for the facility is not wetland. He addressed his
concerns about the adequacy of the drainage system south of 112th
and the retention system at the Fire Station. He did not agree
with the solutions proposed by the Engineering Department. He
stated he did not want anyone from the City on his property making
surveys or taking soil samples. He suggested the solutions would
be to improve the existing drainage system west of 112th and
install an adequate retention system at the Fire Station. Gill
added that the City will have to determine if indeed the property
proposed for the detention facility is wetland. If it is not, the
design and permitting process will be much easier. Also, if it is
not wetlands, the property owner makes out better as we will have
to pay more for the property. There was further discussion on the
definition and delineation of wetland.
Jim White stated he would like to look at-more options. Regarding
the wetland situation, he stated staff is administering a wetlands
policy that has never been before Council for approval. He
suggested staff look at alternate sites for the detention facility
in the 112th vicinity. Wickstrom commented that as far as value is
concerned, the Army Corps of Engineers would be the determinant on
whether property is wetland or not. Jim Bennett raised concerns
about the design standards and questioned the status of the new
construction standards. Gill responded that the draft report has
just been completed and will be brought to Council so they can see
what impact the new standards will have on new development. Jim
White asked that staff come back to Committee with whatever other
options there might be. Mr. Carey requested his letter be a part
of the record.
Public Works Committee
July 15, 1992
Page 3
Kent Springs Transmission Main
Wickstrom stated that we have all the permits necessary for the
project and we have advertised for bids. The bid opening is
scheduled for the end of July. Wickstrom continued that he would
like to take the bids directly to Council for award in order to get
construction underway sooner and take advantage of the construction
season. Wickstrom added that all the modifications that have been
made to the project have added to the cc } of the project and he
requested authorization to transfer $350,h from the unencumbered
water funds to the project.
Charlie Kiefer stated he appreciated the opportunity to comment on
the project. He made comments to the Committee regarding the
addendum to the project's checklist. He stated the public did not
have the opportunity to comment on the mitigation plan developed to
address requirements in the addendum. He did state he and others
were able to see the mitigation plan however. He stated he didn't
think the City had a grading permit from the County. Carol Morris
corrected him in that the City does have a grading permit but the
County has indicated they would not issue a notice to proceed until
they received clarification on a couple of issues. So, the City
does indeed have a valid grading permit. She addressed the SEPA
process for the addendum. The City had a completed checklist on
the project. The County requested further environmental review and
the proper process was to prepare an addendum since the threshold
determination was not being changed. Any comments on the Army
Corps of Engineer's permit should have been made to the Corps not
to the agency making application. The Corps has required the
mitigation plan as part of our permit so, again, the comments
should have been made to them. She suggested an attorney could
advise Mr. Kiefer if the appeal period has expired. Mr. Kiefer
stated the comment period was over in Map- of 1991 and the addendum
was issued in March 1992. He stated he would be at the next
Council meeting to present information as to why he thinks the
mitigation plan is no good. Wickstrom stated it is interesting to
note that if the City were to reapply for this permit today it
would not require a 404 permit because the project has been revised
such that we are disturbing less than one acre and would be issued
a nationwide permit and would not be required to provide the
additional wetlands we are providing. Jim White confirmed that
when the project was started in 1983 the City was losing about 1
million gallons per day from the old transmission main. He asked
what was being lost today. Wickstrom commented that this phase of
the project is replacing the section experiencing most of the
leaks. White stated to Mr. Kiefer that he recognized his arguments
but the City has complied with all the requirements of the project
from the permitting agencies. The City has an obligation to the
rate payers in the City of Kent to do something about the water
Public Works Committee
July 15, 1992
Page 4
loss by replacing the line and are , at the point where we have to
move ahead. Carol Morris added that the City has to keep in mind
that we are not involved as if there were a permit before us for
approval. The City is the agency that has made application for a
permit so all of Mr. Kiefer's arguments are lost on the City. If
there is a problem with the process, it is a process we as the
applicant are following and any appeal Mr. Kiefer wants to make
should be addressed to the respective permitting agency. She
suggested Mr. Kiefer prepare a list of 110'-s comments prior to the
Council meeting so that she can prepare =ayresponse to them. The
Committee unanimously recommended going directly to Council with
contract award bypassing the recommendation of the committee
because of the time frame and to transfer $350,000 from the water
funds to the project.
L.I.D. 333 - Signalization 72nd 180th
Wickstrom stated four bids were received with Breaker Construction
submitting the low bid. He stated he is recommending we award the
project to Breaker Construction. The Committee unanimously
recommended award to Breaker Construction.
Proposed Parking at City Hall
After review of the material in the packet, the Committee
unanimously recommended the parking changes be implemented.
Visual Preference Survey Implementation
Janet Shull explained the Planning Committee had asked this item be
brought before the Public Works Committee as well since the
resolution would have impact on the Public Works Department and
would involve staff in that department as-well. Responding to Jim
White's question, Wickstrom replied that he does not have staff or
paint required to carry out the tasks outlined in the resolution.
The paint budget was cut in half. Jim White suggested that we move
ahead with the resolution and when these tasks are implemented,
staff can bring costs and recommended funding before the Committee
for direction. The Committee unanimously recommended the
resolution be adopted.
Other
Bill Doolittle commented on the "Street Closed" signs on First by
the Library and suggested they be changed to "Library Access".
He also complimented that the Centennial Center garage was open for
parking for Cornucopia Days except that it was not posted anywhere.