Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/21/1998 Adjourned Meeting 113 CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON APRIL 21, 1998 ADJOURNED MEETING The City Council met in session on this date at 7:30 a.m., in the Second Floor Training Room, at the Police Department /Legal Center, 200 South Third Street, Yakima, Washington, Mayor John Puccinelli, presiding. Council Members Clarence Barnett, Henry Beauchamp, John Klingele, Mary Place, and Bernard Sims present on roll call. Council Member Lynn Buchanan was absent and excused. City Manager Zais, Assistant City Manager and Acting Director of Community and Economic Development Rice, Acting Public Works Director Waarvick, Supervising Traffic Engineer Willson, Assistant City Attorney Peterson, Administrative Assistant to the City Manager Oliver, and Deputy City Clerk Skovald were also present. Continuation of Review of Growth Management Issues and Draft Legislation Mayor Puccinelli welcomed the group and called the meeting to order. • Discussion began with the sidewalk issue. Mayor Puccinelli invited • the Bicycle /Pedestrian Committee Chair to address the issue with questions from the Council to follow. Neil McClure, Chair of the Bicycle Pedestrian Committee, directed Council's attention to a meeting between himself, Glenn Valenzuela, who was the Director of Community and Economic Development at that time, Dennis Kelly, and Bob Young, who were representing the construction industry. During that meeting the group reviewed, and discussed in the broadest terms, each line of the sidewalk standards including references to guide the implementation of policies. Mr. McClure apologized that his misunderstandings were not made clear during the original review process. He understood that the existing standards would be the standards that would be implemented and the specific details of the future standards would be discussed at a later time. Now that the specifics of those standards are being discussed, the Bicycle /Pedestrian Committee is fully involved in that discussion. On behalf of the Bicycle /Pedestrian Committee, Mr. McClure urged the Council to support the Committee's recommendation for sidewalks. Although their general recommendation is there should be sidewalks everywhere, retrofitting sidewalks is not part of their recommendation. However, where there is new construction, sidewalks should be mandatory. For safety reasons, the existing development standard should not continue without any abutting sidewalks. The • 5 114 APRIL 21, 1998 ADJOURNED MEETING Committee still recommends sidewalks on both sides of the street; it is their view that sidewalks are valuable to the community because they not only add value to homes, but sidewalks provide safety to the community by separating pedestrians from moving vehicles. Equally as important, sidewalks are safety features for children. Council Member Barnett asked Mr. McClure several questions about the Committee's sidewalk construction recommendations as outlined in their letter dated April 15, 1998. With budget limitations in mind, he questioned whether "costs borne by the City" verbiage in Chapter 8.60.050 YMC will be edited or deleted to correspond to the provisions in Title 12, Development Standards. He asked about the Basis of Assessment for new construction or improvements referenced in 8.60.060 YMC where extra costs shall be borne by the city. Council Member Barnett asked if the Bicycle /Pedestrian Committee recommends barrier curbs and gutters to be made mandatory, as opposed to rolled curbs and gutters being optional. Mr. McClure described the safety benefits of barrier curbs and the dangerous aspects of rolled curbs for bicyclists. He also indicated the Committee's preference for "as wide as possible" sidewalk pavement width, four to six feet, after right - of -way width is determined. Mr. McClure also entertained questions from Mayor Puccinelli and Council Member Beauchamp about the Committee's preference for variances in sidewalk requirements. In commercial districts and existing residential areas where there currently are no sidewalks, LIDs would not be required nor would installation of sidewalks be required. In developed areas without sidewalks perhaps an asphalt strip should be put in. However, he explained that sidewalks should be required on both sides of the street in subdivisions under new construction; infill residential developments should be required to have sidewalks if a sidewalk exists within 200 feet on the same side of the street or two or more potential building lots exist within 200 feet of each other on the same side of the street. Unreasonable costs for one section of sidewalk should preclude the requirement at the discretion of the City Engineer. Council Member Sims directed attention to the portion of the Yakima Municipal Code pertaining to the 50/50 cost split for sidewalk improvements that Council Member Barnett referred to earlier. Shelley Willson explained the Neighborhood Sidewalk Installation program was last done in 1984 on Summitview Avenue along school routes. Council Member Sims asked Mr. McClure to elaborate a little bit about proposed future sidewalks. Mr. McClure explained there might have been certain corridors identified for future development, but that is separate from new development. Council Member Klingele referred to the public review process and asked how that ties in with Right -of -Way Use Permits. 2 115 APRIL 21, 1998 ADJOURNED MEETING Dennis Kelly, a member of the Central Washington Homebuilders Association and a member of the Regional Planning Commission, referred to an October 1996 handout which described the concessions that had been made concerning a sidewalk requirement for both sides of the street. He summarized some of those concessions including Section 3.2 in the document, Policy 4 concerning construction of sidewalks with existing standards. Also, language was stricken for both sides of the street. He can understand the concern about the safety issue in areas of the city where sidewalks are not there, but putting sidewalks on both sides of a development does not address the safety problems in areas where there are none currently. Council Member Sims said now it • is two years later, and it is planning for the future. This was a compromise that left the door open, and under Growth Management, it is time to look at it. Council Member Klingele referred to the existing construction standards for concrete of four inches thick and four feet wide, but where does it say.to place the sidewalks. Council Member Barnett explained that he feels that when the sidewalks on both sides of the street issue was deleted, that became the basis for the policy in the April 1997 Comp Plan document. Proposed changes should be accepted at any time, but then all proposed changes would be considered at one time during the annual GMA Amendment review process. Since it is a policy issue it should go back to the RPC for review and then back to the Council. Jerry Sturgil, a member of the Central Washington Homebuilders Association, agreed with that approach. Mayor Puccinelli said when the Comp Plan is under review this year, the Bicycle /Pedestrian Committee's recommendations should be included in that process. Council Member Sims pointed out that since the initial standards were removed because it was premature in the beginning, the Bicycle /Pedestrian Committee thought they would have a chance to give input. It is time to begin the process to establish sidewalk development standards. There was a considerable amount of discussion and debate about whether to include sidewalk standards in the annual GMA review process or to include them in Title 12, Development Standards. There are areas that the policy does not provide for and the amendment process will help pull it all together. Council Member Barnett explained his perspective that the width and location of sidewalks is a policy issue that needs to go through the amendment process. Development Standards is a separate process. 3 116 APRIL 21, 1998 ADJOURNED MEETING Dennis Kelly said he felt the three previous meetings about sidewalks were a waste of time. He directed attention to the housing cost issue, which is also a problem. Housing costs are very high as it relates to income levels. There was an exchange of ideas over the costs of housing. Council Member Klingele asked what the difference is between a standard and a policy and whether the sidewalk issue is a policy or a standard. City Manager Zais explained that a standard and a policy need to be developed on this sidewalk issue. Although the Comp Plan is already adopted, it is going to change. At the same time, land use proposals are changing recommendations. The sidewalk issue is a separate issue and will have to be considered during the Comp Plan amendment process. Mayor Puccinelli said this could be done when considering the policy issue. Council Member Barnett reiterated that when a standard in the Yakima Municipal Code conflicts with a policy, it should go through the amendment process. Council Member Beauchamp urged the group to move forward to common ground to develop an affordable housing plan that will work. Mayor Puccinelli summarized the wiggle room concept, which is an exemption that would come before the City Engineer and the City Council through the appeal process. He also directed attention to dirt streets and suggested that they be asphalted without sidewalks, and then sidewalks could be installed when money is available. Council Member Klingele feels sidewalks should be done at the same time as street improvements. City Manager Zais reiterated the point • about bringing together all the various code elements for sidewalks. Council Member Barnett referred to the new Title 12, Development Standards, and pointed out that the Yakima Municipal Code already has standards. He asked which standards will remain or be included in Title 12, and which standards will be eliminated. Don Skone said he prefers to bring all the sidewalk sections together, and then all the issues should be brought to the Council for discussion. City Manager Zais pointed out that many standards would not be changed. Council Member Sims explained that (1) policies are included in the Comp Plan and (2) standards along with (3) procedures are outlined in the ordinance. All three should be included in a logical format. After continued discussion about the Growth Management Act and its contentious requirements, Mayor Puccinelli requested another meeting on sidewalks be scheduled after the Bicycle /Pedestrian Committee has met. Transportation Concurrency Management Implementation Needs Chris Waarvick summarized the implementation needs and the basic plan of action for the proposed Transportation Concurrency Management Ordinance. He directed attention to Shelley Willson to explain the details of the proposed program. 4 117 APRIL 21, 1998 ADJOURNED MEETING Ms. Willson responded to questions concerning the implementation proposal which includes upgrading the position of Transportation Associate. She described the duties associated with the position that will include tracking and analyzing the existing available traffic capacity of streets and comparing that to the amount of capacity needed by a proposed development. The signal optimization and corridor operations portion of the proposal will also be duties of the new Transportation Associates. Larry Peterson explained what level of service standards (LOS) are for transportation and described the effect and impacts of landuse on the level. of service standards. There was discussion from staff that there needs to be a program to monitor the available capacity to comply with the requirement to maintain the specified LOS. Dennis Kelly questioned the current LOS standards. Shelley Willson explained the'highway capacity levels are national standards and some cities have changed their standards. However, all driving practices are different. Driving practices automatically adjust, and the capacity levels will change. She provided examples of types of changes. There was discussion about the priority of policy issues and the impacts from those policies. Council Member Place supported the idea to look into privatization of services to review traffic signals to determine whether any adjustments would improve the traffic flow at stop lights. This request is part of the Transportation Concurrency Management implementation services. Mayor Puccinelli expressed his opinion that the request for additional personnel, and additional office equipment, computers, and software is just a "jobs program." Council Member Sims supported the concept that a constant basis to measure the traffic is needed in order to respond to demographic and changing future needs. New companies need transportation studies to determine whether a project can be put in Yakima. This is an unfunded mandate without a source of funding. There was continuous discussion and debate about the Transportation Concurrency requirements of the Growth Management Act, as well as funding options and revenue alternatives such as application fees or an increase in the real estate excise tax, and other suggestions. Council Member Barnett suggested the news media inform the people about this new requirement. Council Member Place asked why and how it was determined that the collision records should be transferred from the Police Department. There was a brief discussion about the negatives and the positives associated with the change. There was also discussion about input of information and the ability to obtain that information. There was also discussion about how collision report information is stored and retrieved. 5 118 APRIL 21, 1998 ADJOURNED MEETING After discussion about scheduling weekly meetings to discuss GMA issues, it was the consensus of the Council that the next meeting will be April 28 at 7:30 a.m. The meeting adjourned at 9:03 a.m. READ AND CERTIFIED ACCURATE BY: _ ; _ ,j ,„� _ i l— 3 —ee /C•UNCIL / DATE 0UNC L Ir! B -R , / pr DATE ATTEST: , �' CITY CLERK JOH PUCCINELLI, MAYOR Minutes prepared by Deputy City Clerk Skovald. An audiotape of this meeting is available in the City Clerk's Office. • • 6