HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic Works August 7 20071 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
2 Public Works and Safety Committee
3
4 August 7, 2007
5
6 Committee Chair Barbara Brenner called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. in the
7 Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
8
9 Present: Absent:
10 L. Ward Nelson None
11 Laurie Caskey - Schreiber
12
13 Also Present:
14 Carl Weimer
15 Dan McShane
16
17
18 COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
19
20 1. REQUEST REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE 2007/2008 INTEGRATED
21 ROADSIDE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN (AB2007 -335)
22
23 Nelson moved to recommend approval of the plan to the full Council.
24
25 Paul Kelley, Public Works Department, stated he is available for questions.
26
27 Brenner asked about an extraordinarily hardy grass seed. Kelley stated he is not
28 aware of it.
29
30 Brenner stated that if such a thing exists, it doesn't take much care and it will still
31 grow. However, she doesn't know if it will become an invasive weed. She asked if they
32 plant fireweed. Kelley stated there is no fireweed seed in the plants they buy.
33
34 Brenner stated it's native, and is not invasive. Native plants are often the hardiest.
35 She likes what they do with the wildflowers, but they have to keep replanting it every year.
36 Kelley stated they get a lot of return. The poppies come back every year. They spray every
37 year with wildflower seed.
38
39 Caskey- Schreiber stated she appreciates the wildflowers along the roadsides. Kelley
40 stated they increased the number of wildflower plots from 12 to 19.
41
42 Brenner stated they should try to plant native plants, also. She moved to amend
43 the mission statement, "1. ...vegetation in the most environmentally - friendly manner,
44 wherever possible." That's what the staff does, but it's not mentioned.
45
46 The committee concurred.
47
48 Brenner stated the entire Lummi reservation is a no spray zone, and it has the most
49 noxious weeds. Kelley stated the Lummi Tribe won't let the County staff cut it. Laurel
50 Baldwin is trying to work with them on doing something. The County staff is aware of the
51 problem.
52
Public Works and Safety Committee, 8/7/2007, Page i
I Brenner asked why the plan says knotweed is a class B noxious weed. Kelley stated
2 it is not considered the most noxious. However, it may be promoted if it gets worse and
3 worse.
4
5 Caskey- Schreiber asked how they know its imported.
6
7 Brenner stated it was originally brought into the area as a pretty, decorative plant.
8 She asked if the Executive can grant approval to treat the area by spraying. Kelley stated
9 he can't, on the reservation.
10
11 Weimer stated check with Councilmember Crawford and find out if the State
12 Department of Transportation (DOT) is matching the County's program. The committee
13 agreed last year to write a letter to the State about the State's system, which isn't as good
14 as the County's system, about using alternative methods. The letter is to encourage the
15 State to use better methods.
16
17 Caskey- Schreiber stated someone can draft a letter and put it in the next Council
18 packet.
19
20 Nelson stated the State may have different problems than the County does locally.
21 Large scale State expenditures are probably different from the County's expenditures, which
22 may be why the programs are different. It may not be cost - effective for the State to match
23 each county's program.
24
25 Weimer stated the folks from the Toxics Coalition said there is a movement in the
26 Department of Transportation administration to start pushing more integrated pest
27 management. Whatcom County's encouragement to the State may help the State do that
28 statewide.
29
30 Motion carried unanimously.
31
32
33 COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
34
35 1. DISCUSSION AND PRESENTATION OF THE SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATION
36 IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 2008 -2013 AND RESOLUTION FOR ADOPTION
37 (THE RESOLUTION IS SCHEDULED FOR INTRODUCTION THIS EVENING)
38 (AB2007 -334)
39
40 Joe Rutan, Public Works Department, submitted an amended Exhibit A and an
41 attachment A to the memo (on file). There is an additional project added for the repair of
42 Lummi View / Lummi Shore slope, which is number eight. The staff changed some of the
43 financing mechanisms to work out better financing. To get the road fund to balance, they
44 had to do some things with the Haxton Way reconstruction, which is project 17. They
45 intend to include the project on the list and seek construction funding sources. He made
46 adjustments to programmatic projects, such as unanticipated site improvements and
47 subdivision overlay. The financing also reflects the Council's decision to accept $8.1 million
48 for a new ferry.
49
50 Caskey- Schreiber stated the Hannegan Road -Pole Road project was slated for 2006,
51 not 2008. Rutan stated the design is done. They are obtaining right -of -way. There are 19
52 parcels to buy, with 11 different owners. The right -of -way acquisition has become access
53 negotiations. They intend to obtain the right -of -way within the next month, put the project
Public Works and Safety Committee, 817/2007, Page 2
1 out to bid in September or October, and construct as much as they can through the winter.
2 They show about $1 million in construction in 2007, with the remainder in 2008. It's been
3 one of the more difficult and frustrating projects.
4
5 He's started meeting with the State Department of Transportation (DOT) about their
6 detours on their Guide Meridian project. Some of their detours will go through the County's
7 project at this intersection. The State's contract documents will not allow any detour
8 through this intersection until August 1, 2008 or by special permission of the County
9 engineer.
10
11 He read through the project list. The staff will present to the Council the Lincoln
12 Road update at the next meeting. They are at 30 percent design on that project. He
13 described the design options for the Lincoln Road project.
14
15 Brenner asked if they've heard from any State or federal agencies about a concern
16 for the upgrade the County has planned for Drayton Harbor Road. She asked if they have
17 any environmental concerns about the County's plan.
18
19 Chris Brueske, Public Works Department, stated they do not. The project itself has
20 been through extensive review by numerous agencies, including the State departments of
21 Ecology and Fish and Wildlife, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
22 Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, State Archaeology Office, and the County
23 shorelines and critical areas ordinances. There were concerns about the project, which is
24 why he took two and a half years to get the permits. They've developed a very extensive
25 list of mitigation measures. The bald eagle habitat appeal is not a concern. The County has
26 letters from all the agencies that concur with the County's plans. The bald eagle specialist
27 in Olympia reviewed the plan specifically. The appeal, which the Council will see soon,
28 doesn't reference any environmental concerns. All the concerns in the appeal documents
29 are procedural.
30
31 Brenner asked about Lincoln Road. People in Birch Bay Village raised a concern
32 about a nearby pond. She asked if there will be a barrier. Rutan stated he doesn't have the
33 exact design details, but the design will meet all requirements of slope and recovery areas.
34 He will check into that concern and report back to the committee. If it doesn't have a
35 barrier, he will find out why it wouldn't. At times, giving a vehicle a fixed object to hit isn't
36 the best option. It may be best to give a vehicle a slope on which it can slow down and
37 recover. The pond is a separate issue. It's a dry pond design.
38
39 Caskey - Schreiber asked if Mr. Bovenkamp was going to contribute mitigation to
40 Lincoln Road. She asked if Mr. Rutan plans to recover other costs in the future through
41 concurrency. Rutan stated Mr. Bovenkamp is required to construct the connector across his
42 property. He indicated the locations on a map. He will also construct a roundabout. He's
43 not sure yet of the configuration of the roundabout.
44
45 Caskey- Schreiber asked they considered not going all the way to the Blaine Road, to
46 save costs. Rutan stated they intend that road to go through to Blaine Road, so the entire
47 point can have access to Blaine Road and then the freeway instead of having to go along
48 Drayton Harbor Road or Birch Bay Drive.
49
50 Caskey- Schreiber stated she didn't realize the cost would be $8 million. When the
51 Council first learned about this, it would be gratis of Mr. Bovenkamp. She didn't realize the
52 County was taking it so far. Rutan indicated the location of Mr. Bovenkamp's portion of the
53 development. They expect to spend $3 million of the project cost from other sources,
Public Works and Safety Committee, 8/7/ 2007, Page 3
including transportation impact fees or voluntary mitigation fees from development in the
area.
There is a lot of activity around the outlet mall. The County is working on a project
for a potential signal, using the developer's designer. When the County gets $1 million in
construction funding from developer impact fees and voluntary mitigation, the County will
build it. Many players are coming together on the project. That's how the County will
complete many of its projects. Construction is getting very expensive. Their ability to
complete projects solely with local funds is lessening. They have to get creative about
getting funding.
Brenner asked if the County can get any money from the State DOT for the
roundabout. Rutan stated the County continually works with the State. He's always asking
the State to help finance these projects.
Brenner asked the percentage of the road fund collected from the property tax that
goes to the State. Rutan stated he would find out.
He continued to describe the projects on the list.
Brenner stated it's unethical and immoral for the County to do projects for the City
that are right next to the city limits, such as the area of Birchwood that is not in the city.
McShane stated that once the road goes in using Economic Development Investment
(EDI) money and other matching funds, there will be underused industrial land. Then the
City will want to take the area into its city limits.
Nelson asked about project 21, the North Shore Road. He asked what is proposed to
enhance bike use along the road. Rutan stated they haven't designed the project yet. They
know they want to improve non- motorized access out there. They don't know yet if that will
be an off -site trail, shoulder, bike lane, or something else. It will be a community decision.
Different people want different things for that road. They will have to compromise. They
would like to straighten out the road and provide traffic calming methods.
Nelson asked the funding, and what the County will receive from the funding. Rutan
stated they need to get a good base map. They will survey the area, identify utility
locations, and property ownership. Then they will begin to discuss what they have and what
they must do.
Nelson asked where this concern comes from. Rutan stated this project has been on
the list since before he started with the County. The project should stay on the list. The
project is high on the priority list. There is a fairly high accident rate, including fatalities.
It's an environmentally sensitive area.
Nelson stated the deer cross the road from the woodlands to the lake for water. A
lot of the accidents can be attributed to deer. Also, there will be extreme costs from the
solid rock on which the road is constructed. He's concerned about getting too far along this
project. Clearly understand the full scope of what this project will be. Rutan stated they
will analyze how much rock they will have to cut when they start analyzing the area. They
will develop alternative analysis to give the community the information to help staff make a
decision. They can also apply for grants for the project if it is on the list. Grantors like to
see projects on the Capital Improvement Program. It will be a difficult project politically.
Public Works and Safety Committee, 8/7/2007, Page 4
1 Brenner asked if the new electrical scooters can go on the bike paths. Rutan stated
2 that is a policy question. Certain trails don't allow any motorized vehicles.
3
4 Brenner stated that if they can't be licensed for the road, they should be able to fit
5 an the bike paths. Otherwise, they won't fit anywhere.
6
7 Caskey - Schreiber asked Mr. Rutan about the state of the County's bridges.
8
9 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
10
11 Rutan stated bridges are inspected biannually. The County was audited by the State
12 and federal governments. The County came through well.
13
14 Brenner asked if there is a national rank for bridges. Rutan stated the rank called
15 'adequate' is the highest rating for the bridge program. Bridges are reviewed and rated
16 through a very standardized process nationwide. They are given a sufficiency rating,
17 compiled of different factors.
18
19 Brueske stated there isn't any official national ranking. The number of deficient
20 bridges ranges from state to state.
21
22 Rutan stated there are 155 bridges in this county. Eight are classified as structurally
23 deficient, which is five percent of the bridges countywide. That is the state average, and
24 better than the national average of 12 percent. Of those eight bridges, the County has
25 projects lined up for five of them. Some of those bridges don't have load restrictions.
26 Other bridges with load restrictions aren't structurally deficient. Other bridges are
27 functionally obsolete. He indicated the project for bridge #1 on a map and described the
28 project. Load rating has to do with a bridge design, which is different from structural
29 deficiency issues. They can't submit for federal funding unless a sufficiency rating is down
30 to about 50. They've only been successful in getting federal funds when the sufficiency
31 rating gets to about 30.
32
33 Brenner asked if people disregard load limits on bridges. She asked how they are
34 enforced. Rutan stated the deputies carry a portable scale. If necessary, they send
35 deputies to bridges to write tickets.
36
37 Caskey- Schreiber asked if they keep open bridges that they know are structurally
38 deficient. Rutan stated they make sure all bridges are safe to be open. Some structurally
39 deficient bridges concern him less than other bridges with weight restrictions or other stress
40 issues. A structurally deficient bridge may have a sufficiency rating in the 80's.
41
42 This is a complex issue that the media is trying to make simple. They miss the
43 nuances. This week, he made sure staff took a fresh look at this issue. The bridge rating
44 program tells him which bridges they must work on and what they will do.
45
46 Nelson stated Mosquito Lake Road got federal funds. Rutan stated it is a structurally
47 deficient bridge. It has to have a sufficiency rating of less than 50 to be eligible for federal
48 funds, and around 30 to receive those funds.
49
50 Nelson stated the Baker Lake Road /Sulfer Creek project 422 is not funded. Rutan
51 stated that's correct. Baker Lake Road has a scour issue.
52
Public Works and Safety Committee, 8/7/2007, Page 5
Nelson asked how they define rehabilitation. Rutan stated they may replace certain
parts of the bridge.
Nelson asked why they would do rehabilitation rather than wait to get federal
funding. Rutan stated they are terribly concerned about the scour issue. They could
actually lose that bridge due to scouring.
Nelson stated that doesn't have anything to do with the physical capacity or the
bridge's capability. Rutan stated scouring is one if the biggest issues with bridges.
Brueske stated scour is a major driver behind the national bridge inspection
program. Some of the famous failures in the Midwest and on the East Coast were due to
scour. The Sulfer Creek bridge is a structural issue. One of the footings is undermined by
the scour. The weight of that footing hanging on the rest of the bridge becomes a
detriment. It may become eligible for federal funding. To get the sufficiency rating, the
bridge must have its biannual inspection, which it hasn't had since the scour event of last
November. There is a scour plan of action. They monitor the bridge during and after every
storm. The bridge could become eligible for federal funds, but the federal program has
been closed for a few years. The staff is pursuing other federal funds. He explained the
federal bridge replacement program. It hasn't accepted any new applications in three
years.
McShane asked the location of the County road. Brueske stated it is about one mile
north of where the County road starts. It is about one mile north of the Skagit Whatcom
county line. He indicated the location of where the road becomes a Forest Service road.
He's working directly with the Forest Service on a pot of money used routinely after
disasters for culvert and road washouts. It's not bridge - specific, and it won't provide for a
bridge upgrade. The repair will cost about $120,000, which will fix the scour. With
approval, they can apply that money to a betterment, such as a new bridge. Staff planned
to fix the scour this summer. However, a nearby road with culverts also washed out. Once
the culverts are pulled out and a new bridge is built as a replacement, the river will find its
new equilibrium. It will get steeper and further undermine this bridge. Therefore, the
County shelved its scour repair until they know what happens with the other bridge.
Therefore, they will probably look at a replacement that is on piles and not susceptible to
scour.
McShane stated funds may be available through the Resource Advisory Committee.
He described the funding mechanism.
Brenner asked how they come out of a deficit and back into a surplus. She asked
who decides how they adjust the project funds to get the right fund balance. They know
they are getting deeper into the fund, and there will be a deficit at some point. Rutan
stated there won't be a fund deficit. He indicated the ending balance on the paperwork.
Brenner asked how the fund balance begins to rise again. Rutan stated the first
three years of the program includes higher spending amounts for construction. Later in the
plan, there aren't a lot of construction funds associated with the projects.
Brenner stated the projected ending fund balance in 2013 is $12 million. Rutan
stated years 11, 12, and 13 in the six -year plan include very few construction funds for the
projects. The balance will build back up. However, they expect to apply construction
funding to those projects as they come closer into focus.
Public Works and Safety Committee, 8/7/2007, Page 6
1 Brenner stated she would like to see a list of what the acronyms mean that are used
2 in the program. Rutan stated he will provide that information.
3
4 Brenner stated they aren't sure yet about the ferry design. There are still questions
5 to be answered. She asked the problems that are occurring with the Guemes Island ferry,
6 and if she can get a report from them. She asked if they can look into the option of buying
7 a decent, used Washington State ferry that can hold at least 35 people.
8
9 Frank Abart, Public Works Department Director, stated he's looked at the Guemes
10 Island ferry design, which is similar to the County's proposed design. The propulsion
11 systems are completely different. He spent time on the Guemes Island ferry and discussed
12 it with the Ferry Master. The only problems they have with that ferry is with the propulsion
13 system. They are extremely happy with the design that has the side wheelhouse, because
14 they can see the entire deck and loading /unloading process. That ferry has been in
15 operation since the early- or mid- 1980's. He meets with a group of the crew in a week to
16 talk to the Skagit County Ferry Master.
17
18 Brenner stated that before final decision, she would like Mr. Abart's opinion on the
19 seaworthiness.
20
21 Abart stated the issue with used ferries is that they have to choose very carefully,
22 because ferries are designed for where they will specifically be used. They are designed for
23 specific winds, tides, and currents of an area. It may be possible to find an appropriate
24 used ferry, but they'd have to be very careful about what they acquire.
25
26 Brenner asked Mr. Abart to talk to Dave and Jim Dickinson about these questions.
27 They've done a lot of research on this issue.
28
29 Brenner asked about ferry terminal maintenance. It's almost 2008, and the lease
30 expires in 2010. Don't wait until the last minute to deal with it. Abart stated he has been
31 talking to folks on the reservation.
32
33 Weimer stated he thought the new ferry will require additional operating expenses of
34 about $200,000 per year. This plan says it will be an additional $500,000 per year. Abart
35 stated he estimates $800,000 per year in additional cost.
36
37 Weimer stated they are planning to spend almost $2 million in dock improvements at
38 Gooseberry Point in the next two years. He'd hate to spend that money to find out that
39 they can't have the dock there anymore. Abart stated he understands the concerns.
40 However, they do need to make investments in those docks. They're already load
41 restricted. They are essentially bridges with weight limits.
42
43 Fred Bovenkamp, 2425 E. Bakerview Road, Bellingham, asked if the County can
44 phase the Lincoln Road project and make the section from Shintaffer Road to Harborview
45 Road a higher priority. That's the section with the serious safety concerns. More traffic will
46 be dumped onto that road due to his connector road. The section from Blaine Road to
47 Harborview Road is a lower priority, if done at all. Harborview Road is a much better road
48 than Blaine Road. The section from Blaine Road to Harborview Road will cost more for
49 right -of -way acquisition. It has significant wetlands, which creates doubt about whether or
50 not residential housing will develop. Make the existing section of Lincoln Road a higher
51 priority to get it done.
52
Public Works and Safety Committee, $/7/2007, Page 7
Rutan stated the policy direction he's been given is to put this road through to Blaine
Road to create this corridor. That is in the Comprehensive Plan and subarea plan. Doing
the project in phases is a reasonable alternative. The idea is to get people to Blaine Road
and not up to Harborview Road. Get the people to the State Route. If that policy changes,
he will design differently.
Brenner stated it seems there is more traffic from Birch Bay Lynden Road, up
Harborview Road, to Lincoln Road than the traffic that goes to the north. Rutan indicated
on a map the order in which they would do the construction. Construction sequencing has
to do with the cross - section design, also. He will present cross - section design options soon.
They may not be able to afford the median.
Caskey- Schreiber stated the biggest hazard to those roads is the ingress and egress
of all the driveways. It would create a high -speed road with many stops, which is very
dangerous. She totally supports the median. Rutan stated he really likes the median idea.
However, he also wants to get the road built. The median would require an extra 33 feet
width of right -of -way for that two -mile length. All of that is wetlands. They've made initial
contacts with permitting agencies, which are questioning this section because of the wetland
impacts.
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business.
ADJOURN
The meeting
�
adjourned at 3:00 p.m.
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
6_�_ /SL---
Barbara Brenner, Committee Chair
Public Works and Safety Committee, 8/7/2007, Page 8