Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/17/2004 Adjourned Meeting 1 3 7 ADJOURNED MEETING FEBRUARY 17, 2004 - 7:30 A.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS - CITY HALL 1. Roll Call Present: Council: Mayor Paul George, presiding, Council Members Ron Bonlender, Dave Edler, Neil McClure, Mary Place, and Susan Whitman Staff: City Manager Zais, City Attorney Paolella and City Clerk Roberts Absent: Bernard Sims (excused) Mayor George called the meeting to order stating the purpose of the meeting is to hold a study session on the railroad grade separation project. He advised that Council would reserve the last fifteen minutes of the Study Session to receive comments from citizens on this issue. 2. Study Session on railroad grade separation project Kay Adams, City Engineer, gave historical background information about the railroad crossings in Yakima. He anticipates 24 -25 trains per day in the near future and spoke about the need to do grade separations in order to keep the east -west corridor open. There are seven railroad crossings in Yakima, of which two are grade separated; however, we are experiencing problems with fire service being blocked to the west side from Fire Station No. 91 located at Front and "D" Streets. Gary Phillips, Project Manager with Berger Abam, reviewed the two booklets provided to Council beginning with their report of the project: • Page 1 shows the locations of the seven at -grade intersections and the two separated intersections. • Page 2 defines the problem as: 1) rail traffic is delayed 20 minutes per train due to reduced speeds in the city;' and 2) the city is experiencing a traffic delay of 10 minutes per train with 4 -6 trains going through the city now. At the City's present capacity, 12 -14 trains could be accommodated; however, Burlington- Northern anticipates increasing its capacity to 22 -24 trains per day. • Page 3 of the report addresses safety and air pollution issues. There has been one recorded fatality recorded at a railroad crossing. Another safety issue is delayed emergency response due to blocked intersections at the railroad crossing. • Page 4 describes the project development process consisting of three teams: Citizen's Advisory Group, Project Guidance Team, and Interdisciplinary Team. • Page 5 addresses the continuous public outreach; what has been done and what will be done in terms of media briefings and meetings with the affected 138 FEBRUARY 17, 2004 — ADJOURNED MEETING business and citizens. A Web page has been set up for this project through a link on the City of Yakima's Web site (www.ci.vakima.wa.us). • Pages 6 -9 outlines the results of their study on the seven at -grade railroad crossings and the recommendation as to whether the crossing should have an overpass, underpass, road closure, or be left at- grade. It is proposed that four crossings would have underpasses (Yakima Avenue, "B" Street, Lincoln and "I" Street) and the crossing at "D" Street should be closed. The trains would still have to slow down going through the city until all the intersections are grade separated; however, grade separations at Lincoln Avenue and "B" Street would improve safety at those intersections. • Page 7 provides information on the Phase 1 project. • Page 8 contains a project status flow chart from 2001 -2007. • Page 9 addresses project funding. We have approximately $20 million committed to this project that has an estimated cost of $24,963,339. • Page 10 is a pre- construction aerial view of "B" Street and Lincoln Avenue, as well as an after - construction rendering. We will relocate a little bit of Front Street to maintain the vertical separation and allow 16.5 feet of clearance. We also need a way to shoe -fly the railroad tracks while under construction; the realigned Front Street does that. Chris Wolcott, Project Engineer, referenced page 12 and reviewed the activities to date, including: • Media briefing on 5/22/01 • Four study sessions with Council were held • Open houses were held October 25, 2001 and April 4, 2002 • A newsletter was mailed during the planning phase • Meetings with different groups, organizations, and individual business and property owners were held as well as several meetings with federal and state legislators' staffs to seek funding. Another open house is planned to keep people apprised of when the work could affect their businesses. Ross Widener reviewed the environmental process beginning on page 16 and the economic analysis beginning on page 17. Expanding on the economic analysis, he said that during the last year they developed an access management plan. Access changes and traffic rerouting would affect local businesses. They look at three issues: 1) what impacts businesses now, 2) what future impact could this project have on a business, and 3) how to keep the businesses viable. They will also study what could be done with traffic, both during construction, and after the project is completed. We will look for ways to reduce the impact. The third phase will be to quantify the impact. How much impact? How will it relate to business? Kay Adams advised that they estimated $3 -4 million in acquisition costs. The report only shows the net cost of $800,000 because they believe the purchased property could be redeveloped and sold. Mr. Wolcott told Council that the only property they have to purchase is a section of property from Burlington - Northern Santa Fe Railroad in order to realign Front Street. The balance of the project will be done within existing right -of -way. Some money will more than likely be spent on maintaining access to businesses or to compensate for businesses impacted 2 139 FEBRUARY 17, 2004 — ADJOURNED MEETING by the project. Mr. Widener interjected that the disruption of business has to reach a high level before it meets the Uniform Act minimum standards. We will listen to what people say in order to minimize the impact. Jay Larson, Pharos Corp, a sub - contractor for Berger -Abam, stated his firm is responsible for property acquisition and business relocation associated with this project. He reported that the Uniform Act states if any property is impacted they are entitled to just compensation determined by an appraisal. The appraiser will have to appraise the business before the project and then in the after - condition, to determine the impact to the business. Differences of opinion on the appraised value are either settled through negotiation or the property goes through the condemnation process. Discussion ensued on whether a business can be compensated for loss of business and what documentation would be needed. Brad Thomas, Relocation Manager for Pharos Corp., commented that while the loss of business is not compensable under the rules, the City could enter into an agreement to compensate the business owner. Under the state rules, the business owner is entitled to receive up to $50,000 for relocation costs (Federal has $10,000 limit). We will work with them to keep them in business. Kay Adams declared that if the expenses are not reimbursable with the Federal Highway Planning Administration, then the City could use General Funds. We want to make sure the business is made whole by relocation or acquisition. It comes down to do you really want to build this project. We are at the point ,where we will spend federal dollars and if the project does not continue, we would have to reimburse them. Mr. Thomas pointed out that the relocation expenses have a lower cap than the personal business impact, which is why they attempt to identify more impacts as a personal business impact. 3. Audience Comments (8:45 a.m. — 9:00 a.m.) Jamie Carmody, representing Helliesen Lumber, expressed his client's concerns about compensation for the impact to his business beyond the $10,000 relocation costs. You can't move a business for $10,000. He stated he has repeatedly been assured that the business impact aspect would be considered before a decision is made to proceed with this project, and yet, there has been no communication between the City and his client. He will put his concerns in writing and send it to the City Council. Fred Gomez, Jr., stated it is difficult to keep a business operating now, with the rising costs of wages, and a construction project around Mel's Diner will keep • patrons away. Mayor George asked Mr. Gomez to put his concerns in writing so they may be addressed. Clark Smith, owner of Goodyear Tire Center, expressed his concern that two grade separations will not totally solve the train /traffic problems. Council Member Place referred him to page 6 of the report that lists the plans for grade separation projects in the future. Mr. Adams also responded and indicated they will want to reanalyze it again after the "B" Street and Lincoln Avenue projects are completed. He also stated that dialogue with the businesses would take place during the environmental process, which is just now beginning. 3 140 FEBRUARY 17, 2004 — ADJOURNED MEETING • Conclusion Council Member McClure requested a copy of the questionnaire that was mailed to the • property owners and a summary of their responses and discussion with the businesses. 4. Adjournment McClure moved and Place seconded that the meeting adjourn to a special council meeting at 9:30 a.m. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote; Sims absent. READ AND CERTIFIED ACCURATE BY A i C UNC- MEMBER 11 DATE tri", 7- 7-e2P' O CIL MEMB DATE ATTEST: 2 12,E CITY CLERK PAUL GEORGE, MAYOR Minutes prepared by Karen Roberts. A video tape of this meeting is available in the City Clerk's Office. • 1 4