Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Public Works/Planning - 11/18/1992 CITY OF KENT PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 18, 1992 PRESENT: JIM WHITE TIM HEYDON JIM BENNETT NORM ANGELO PAUL MANN KEN CHATWIN DON WICKSTROM KEVIN LINDELL TOM BRUBAKER TIM LA PORTE GARY GILL TONY MC CARTHY ED WHITE CYNTHIA STEWART MR & MRS RUST Pedestrian Crossing Farrington Court Jim White stated that he and Paul Mann, along with the Traffic Engineers, met on-site to review the situation 'and came to the conclusion that a 4-way stop would be necessary at Kennebeck and a 3-way stop at the bottom of Reiten Rd. Wickstrom explained that staff would be very uncomfortable with that recommendation; this is not a residential street with 2,000-3, 000 vehicles per day; this is a street with 21,000 vehicles per day. The 4 way stop location has a site distance problem on the westbound direction. Installing stops there would allow pedestrians to feel "protected" and a serious injury to a pedestrian could occur. Wickstrom stated his concern with the volume of traffic and the education of vehicle drivers to learn of the stop signs. Serious injuries could occur either to pedestrian or vehicle/driver. Wickstrom said that a pedestrian signal would be the best operation for the safety aspect; both for the drivers and pedestrians. Wickstrom responded to White that there is an unencumbered balance left in the capital street fund. This pedestrian signal would cost approximately $56,000 and would be located at Reiten and Jason Streets. Wickstrom stated this would be a pedestrian activated signal similar to the one at Reith Rd and West Fenwick Park. Wickstrom stated that addressing the signal at Reiten would solve the needs of the residents at Farrington Court going to the Senior Center. Further discussion followed regarding the number of pedestrians crossing Jason. Wickstrom stated that if a signal is provided at Reiten, than essentially we have provided access and some re-routing would have to be made by the pedestrians. 1 a White asked if the pedestrian signal could be converted to an auto activated signal, if this was warranted in the future. Ed White responded that it could be constructed in such a way that the same poles and mast arms could be used. Ed White again expressed concerns regarding the safety element of this situation. However, he stated that the pedestrian signal would be expensive but from the liability standpoint with the City, it would be much cheaper. Wickstrom concurred with this point. Ed then explained the synchronization of the signal. Ed responded to Jim White that the installation would take a minimum of six months. Wickstrom stated that this would need to be moved to the top of the priority list and other things would have to shift. Ed clarified that the signal would not benefit the vehicular traffic coming down Reiten Rd. Mann stated that he found it difficult to accept the argument for not installing the 4-way stop signs. Mann feels that the City has a responsibility to the citizens and if an intersection demands action in the form of a traffic sign or light it is the City's responsibility to install same, whatever the consequences may be. Wickstrom stated that staff is expressing professional opinion of what has happened in other similar situations and staff is trying to watch out for the liability of the City. If there is a serious accident, the City will definitely be involved in a lawsuit. Wickstrom explained that this is a high volume street and if something needs to be done, the pedestrian signal is what should be installed, in order to protect the City's liability. This is a professional opinion and would protect the pedestrian, the motorist and the City. Committee unanimously agreed to authorize the installation of a pedestrian activated signal at Reiten & Jason Streets. King County Solid Waste Management Cynthia Stewart, Assistant Manager of the King County Solid Waste Division made a presentation on the 1992 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. The Comp Plan will be adopted by all the jurisdictions within King County with the exception of Seattle. Stewart summarized the briefing packet handed out to the Committee starting with the waste volumes generated in King County, indicating that only includes the planning area which does not include Seattle. In order to develop strategies, the County looked at what is in the waste stream; the last major waste analysis was done in 1987. Referring to the packet, Stewart indicated the comparisons between 187 and 191, explaining that the wood and yard , waste, glass and paper have declined proportionately. Plastics, textiles and 'other' have increased. Six categories picked to be the target of this next phase are paper, wood and yard waste, plastics, textiles, glass and 'other' . While Seattle was in the 2 a system, a ratio of about 60% of the waste was generated by the commercial sector and about 40% by the residentiAl sector. With Seattle leaving the system, the reverse of that is now happening. At this time, Stewart explained how the Comp Plan is organized beginning with background information; relationships between ' jurisdictions; and finally, to the operating environment. The subsequent chapters are broken down into specific categories of the waste handling system. Referring to the packet, Stewart further explained the major recommendations of the Comp Plan, requesting that staff review the Draft Plan and recommend comments to King County. Stewart stated that the Solid Waste Division's recommendation is to coordinate with all jurisdictions to put out a stronger, more effective message for the need to reduce waste and consumption. Stewart went on to discuss the adoption process. Right now they are in the Public Comment Period noting that the Public Comments are accepted until November 30th. During December and January the plan will be edited based on the comments receiv6d.' ' In addition, the Suburban Cities Association has appointed a Staff Policy Group to help resolve any issues between Cities and the County. Susan! Property - 94th & James Kevin Lindell stated that staff has found a barricade systep which would be an appropriate solution for this problem. " In concept, it is identical to the Navy's barricades on aircraft carriers. Cost is approximately $9000; it can be installed by City personnel. Literature is forthcoming. Wickstrom stated that the money would come from the $300, 000 in the Safety Improvements for James Street. White requested this item be brought back to Committee for review, after receipt of the literature. White requested that the SusanjIs are made aware of the proposal to make sure they are in concurrence with this barricade system. 1993 Engineering Work Program Referring to the Work Program table, White asked about the 104th & 256th intersection project and inquired if anything is being done about eastward movement. Wickstrom noted that the design does address the eastward movement. Wickstrom indicated the high priority items need to be addressed; those being'-approximately 50 projects for a total of $54,000, 000. These have been' reduced down from 60+ projects for a total of $88,000,000. Mann stated that the Watershed Fencing project should be a higher priority since it deals with the safety of our drinking water. Wickstrom explained that essentially to do all the requested top priority projects, 30 FTEs are needed. We have a total of 20 available FTEs to do this work. Technically there is a need for 3 S � 10; however by getting 4 additional FTE's and making the existing part-time clerical full-time, we can address a significant amount of this work. When we get into the construction phase, we would use these same technical people to assist therein. These people would all be funded from the Street Utility fund. The cost of this is approximately $199, 000 but since the Street Utility funds go solely toward financing the corridor projects, the respective project budgets already included these engineering costs. Wickstrom explained that we either pay these in-house people to do the work or hire consultants to do same, which would then double the cost and could create- budget problems. The money is shown as project costs such as the $20, 000, 000 for the 272nd Corridor project and that project cost includes all the engineering costs. As such, all the money for these people is there within the project funds which are already budgeted. It is just a matter of pitting these people on the project and charging those projects. White noted that he would like the "downtown" removed from downtown in-city transit project. Also, "downtown" removed from downtown sidewalks. White stated that in the category of downtown parking, a recommendation will probably be forthcoming from the Budget Committee; - that money be put into sidewalks. Committee unanimously agreed to adopt the Engineering Project Priority List. Comment added from Wickstrom was that to get these people, we have to go thru an advertising and we have some candidates within house which, if they were the successful candidate, would mean no net gain. As such, if we get vacancies in house with the existing people who may qualify for these positions, we would like to be able to fill those too. The Committee voted that McCarthy and Wickstrom would work on this issue. Wickstrom added that this proposal does result in a net reduction in the general fund by $12, 000. We would transfer one of our existing engineers into our Drainage Section and fund him out- of the Drainage Utility. Property Acauisition - Johnson Wickstrom explained that this i-s the property below the Ramstead property. An offer has been made to Mrs. Johnson; we haven't got a response as yet. The property was appraised at $181, 000. Wickstrom noted that the reason we are looking at it is that it gives us much better access all along the road; it enhances the property (Ramstead) we just purchased. Also, the biggest cost of the corridor project is the fill material. This purchase would allow us to get an early start on the filling and cutting operation. The offer was made at'the appraisal price of $181, 000. If Johnson does accept we can't close and bring back to Council until after January. If we get an acceptance within 10%, than we can go right to Council at the next formal Council meeting. 4 Mann said he made a mistake by voting for acquiring the Ramstead property. Mann stated that if the motion were amonded to insure that general funds would never be used for this project, than he would vote for it. Mann strongly expressed his feeling that he did not want his city taxes going into this project. Committee unanimously agreed to direct staff to proceed with the purchase of the Johnson property and allow them to bring it directly to Council if the acquisition is within 10% of the appraisal. North Park Sewer Rebuild: West Hill Storm Drainage; LID 338; and LID 339 Committee unanimously agreed to accept all of these contracts as complete. Garrison Heights; Canterbury Place; Pine Tree Elem nq_tary Bills of Sale Committee unanimously agreed to approve all of the above Bills of Sale. Adopt a Street Program Wickstrom explained that REI wanted to take over the cleaning up of 228th Street next to their complex. They want to take care of the landscaping along 228th and are willing to do so having their own staff work on company time. They have about $400 to spend on vests and safety equipment. Wickstrom said they need formal action before the end of the year. Ken Chatwin stated that we would follow the State's adopted program and amend it somewhat, using the City Attorney. REI is willing to do this at their cost and time. Chatwin proposed at the same time we get into this same type of program with other organizations. Committee unanimously agreed to approve the Adopt a Street Program. Everson Annexation Wickstrom stated that the City received a lot petition for annexation of 60 acres in the vicinity of 93rd Ave So and So 222nd St. , depicting the area on a map. Committee unanimously agreed to set the public meeting at the January 5th regularly scheduled Council meeting with the petitioners. 5 Equipment Rental Discussion followed with Chief Angelo regarding the vehicle equipment issue. Angelo stated that if the issue is money, than with outside funds which have become available, the costs can be covered for 5 of the 20 vehicles originally requested. White stated he is in more interested in the dollar figures rather than the number of vehicles. Angelo noted that 4 of the 5 vehicles in question are Public Works vehicles that support Fire. McCarthy stated he would work out the vehicle issue and reconfirmed that 15 vehicles would be cut, not 20. Committee unanimously concurred that they were more interested in the money saving rather than the number of vehicles to be reduced. 6