Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSpecial Committee of the Whole October 27 2015WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Special Committee of the Whole October 27, 2015 CALL TO ORDER Council Chair Carl Weimer called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. ROLL CALL Present: Barbara Brenner, Ken Mann, Satpal Sidhu, Carl Weimer, Pete Kremen, Rud Browne and Barry Buchanan. Absent: None. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION 1. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION APPROVING THE WHATCOM COUNTY 2016 ANNUAL CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM (ACP) (AB2015 -305) Jon Hutchings, Public Works Department Director, gave a staff report and stated this document is the precursor to the budget document. If the Council agrees on this document, the Council will introduce it tonight and schedule a public hearing on November 10. Mann stated this was discussed in committee, and the committee voted to add the Lakeway Drive corridor preliminary engineering study. He wanted to remove project R31, the $400,000 Lakeway crosswalk project, but the committee deadlocked on that vote. That's why this discussion is in the Committee of the Whole today. He moved to remove item 23, project R31, from the annual construction program. The motion was seconded. Mann stated they have talked a lot about the crosswalk. It's not a comprehensive solution. It's a solution driven by members of the public. The objective criteria they use to evaluate these types of requests do not merit granting this request at this time. He foresees having to turn down any similar future requests that are based on popularity and are arbitrary. He sympathizes with the residents. It should be done as part of the corridor study. He wants a project the County Engineer can recommend. Do the corridor study first and come up with a comprehensive study. Browne stated he wants to see that any project is in accordance with safety standards, so the County's engineering staff can approve it. There is conjecture about whether the concerns of the engineering staff are valid. He suggests getting an independent assessment of the safety of the project and whether any design would improve safety in the area. He does not want to put in a crosswalk that would reduce safety, according to nationally- accepted standards. Weimer asked the scope of the corridor study and if the study would include a recommendation for the best location for a crosswalk between Birch Street and cable Street. Hutchings stated a corridor study would address that question and all multimodal questions. Special Committee of the Whole, 10/27/2015, Page 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 That road was built to rural standards many years ago. Over time, the community built up around that existing level of service. That fact demands improvements to the roadway. The question is whether or not those improvements are done one at a time, without consideration of the overall integrity and service level of the urban level of service. The plan for a crosswalk in this location does not meet national standards, and puts certain liability on the County that would not otherwise exist. For those reasons, it's better to look at the corridor as a whole. Weimer asked if the Whatcom Transit Authority (WTA) recommendations on better locations for bus stops would impact a decision on where crosswalks would go. Hutchings stated that's correct. WTA has standards it must adhere to, based on need and use. The County Engineer has talked with WTA recently to ask that question. If the appropriate facilities are developed along the corridor, it changes the warrant calculation, whether or not they are successful in petitioning WTA to develop that transportation corridor in such a way those facilities are built. He can't be certain that will happen. If the Council wants to consider the broader use of the corridor and make design parameters around improved multimodal facilities, the conversation becomes bigger and involves more people. It's a more responsible way for approaching the problems. Weimer stated the location can't meet warrants because not enough people cross the streets, and WTA doesn't want to put in a bus stop because people aren't riding the bus. However, people won't cross the street and ride the bus because it's dangerous. People don't ride the bus because there's no bus stop now. He asked how that's accounted for. Joe Rutan, Public Works Department, stated the location meets 10 to 20 percent of the required warrants, so a few more people won't make a difference. Brenner stated she watched the intersection for two hours. No way is anyone going to try and cross the road in that area because of all the traffic. The Council has gone against warrants in the past. Don't hire someone else to study it, because the Public Works Department will hire that contractor anyway. The cost for the crosswalk would be less than they're told. It's a horrible area to try and cross the road. There are many houses in the area. The traffic will only get worse. It's time to make sure this gets done. Kremen stated the Council has been dealing with this issue for some time. He's frustrated. They have gone against warrants before. Now it seems to be a threshold that the staff refuses to cross. It makes sense to do the project, it won't be prohibitively expensive, and residents in the area will be able to traverse from one side of the street to the other. It may not guarantee safety forever, but it will address the majority of the problem. It could be incorporated into a larger plan in the future. He doesn't understand the strong push -back on this issue. This crosswalk does not preclude a corridor study. The community created this urban environment out there. It's only fair and reasonable to implement this reasonable, modest crosswalk project at a reasonable, modest price. Move on and conduct the study. Sidhu stated he agrees with Councilmember Kremen. They install crosswalks now, and still things happen at them. At every stoplight, there is a crosswalk. There will always be accidents. A $400,000 budget for a crosswalk is too high. They can also do the corridor study. Browne stated he doesn't have a problem installing safer measures to go to a higher level of safety. He's concerned about installing anything that lowers the overall safety standard. A third -party evaluation will be useful because this issue has become so Special Committee of the Whole, 10/27/2015, Page 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 contentious. They could even invite the citizens to be involved in the selection process for an independent engineer. Kremen stated he disagrees with Councilmember Browne. The City of Bellingham put in a more questionable crosswalk on Barkley Boulevard at the top of the hill in an area with impaired sight distance and a fast speed limit. A crosswalk on Lakeway Drive would be much safer. They won't create a more dangerous situation. Brenner stated they are not thinking about the growing population of seniors who will want to cross the street, but who won't want to ride bicycles. There should be more crosswalks along Lakeway Drive as long as there is sight distance. They can make it work and make it safe. Browne stated that if the City of Bellingham has built a crosswalk that is unsafe, it's not justification for the County to also build one. If a crosswalk is built according to national standards, and a car hits a pedestrian at the crosswalk, the liability falls on the driver. If they build a crosswalk that is below national standards and a car hits a pedestrian, the liability can fall on the County. That's his concern. Brenner stated the County pledged to do things to help people get out of cars. If they design a crosswalk correctly, drivers will stop. Weimer asked if the staff can do the corridor study in the first half of 2016 and the crosswalk study in the second half of 2016. Hutchings stated they can construct a crosswalk in 2016 or they can conduct a corridor study. It's not reasonable to think they will complete a corridor study and build a crosswalk in the same year. Weimer asked if they performed the corridor study in 2015. Hutchings stated the staff provided an initial response to the Council regarding whether or not a crosswalk was warranted and the safest location for a crosswalk, regardless of whether or not it met warrants. The staff has been consistent in its response that it does not meet warrants. However, if they are going to build a crosswalk on that section of Lakeway Drive, the safest location would be at the intersection with Oriental Avenue. Staff has been consistent in its response, but ultimately the decision is the Council's. The Department will construct the safest crosswalk it can at the location the Council chooses. All their research has been done openly and with full disclosure. They asked the City of Bellingham to review their warrant analysis for accuracy. Weimer asked if the cost of $400,000 can be reduced. Hutchings stated the cost includes the signal, crosswalk, drainage, sidewalk work, and to properly make the crosswalk Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant. Brenner stated they can install the crosswalk now and install sidewalks later. Mann stated that if the Council votes to include the crosswalk project, he would be content to remove the corridor study. It is one or the other, not both. Hutchings stated that if the Council desires to have the crosswalk installed, he prefers to not do the corridor study until a future year. Sidhu stated there are many ways to create a crosswalk, not just one way. Hutchings stated ADA mandates certain construction standards when these kinds of facilities are built. The County and City of Bellingham have a list of compliance retrofits. All new facilities must be built according to those construction standards. Special Committee of the Whole, 10/27/2015, Page 3 Brenner stated they don't have to do all that stuff in addition to the crosswalk. Rutan stated the $400,000 cost includes modifications of the sidewalk for a curb ramp that is deep enough to accept a wheelchair, right -of -way purchase, adding impervious surfaces, and possible stormwater treatment. They expect the cost will come in less than that. The draft estimate is less than $400,000 'for a quality crosswalk that includes advanced notification and ADA features. Hutchings stated that in the construction program for 2016, there is a project that includes a crosswalk at Parkstone Lane at a level of safety consistent around the county and around the city. They know it doesn't meet warrants. The level of safety is for those people standing on the curb looking across the road, not the other users. The money is budgeted. They have to do a certain amount of ADA work and stormwater treatment work. If the Council wants staff to move forward regardless of the risk management question, it must give staff that direction. Sidhu stated he supports the proposal to delay the corridor study until they are ready to do the construction. The factors of the study may change in five years. Weimer asked where staff will build the crosswalk if the Council approves the project, and if the safest location is Oriental Avenue. Hutchings stated that is the safest location, but they will built it wherever the Council directs them to build it. Weimer asked if Mr. Hutchings wants the Council to tell the staff where to build the crosswalk. Hutchings stated he does want that direction from the Council. Browne stated he supports improving pedestrian facilities in the area. However, the Council just had to approve $91,000 that a previous engineer did that didn't solve a problem. If they are going to vote, he will abstain. He doesn't support a crosswalk that doesn't meet safety warrants. The motion to amend failed by the following vote: Ayes: Mann and Weimer (2) Nays: Buchanan, Sidhu, Brenner, and Kremen (4) Abstains: Browne (1) Sidhu moved to remove the engineering study, item 24, project R32. They may not use the study for a while, so there isn't a reason to spend money on it. The motion was seconded. The motion to amend carried by the following vote: Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Sidhu, Browne, Buchanan, Weimer and Kremen (7) Nays: None (0) Weimer stated he would like the crosswalk located at the safest location in that general area. He understands many people may potentially want a crosswalk at Oriental Avenue. When moving forward, locate the crosswalk in the safest place from Lowell Avenue to Oriental Avenue. Brenner stated there is more sight distance at Parkstone Lane. Special Committee of the Whole, 10/27/2015, Page 4 Mann stated the councilmembers should not choose a location based on their anecdotal experiences. They need a different process for that. Browne stated he agrees with Councilmember Mann about the councilmembers not choosing the location. Sidhu stated he also agrees. Weimer stated provide staff a range of areas where the crosswalk could be. Kremen asked if staff does not feel comfortable recommending a crosswalk at any location. Hutchings stated that's correct. Kremen asked why they would do a study for something they will never feel comfortable doing. Hutchings stated the study is not specifically about where to place a crosswalk. The study is about how to improve the entire corridor to urban standards, that include pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and vehicular uses. Kremen asked if staff doesn't want to provide any consultation or opinion on where the safest location for a crosswalk would be. Hutchings stated that work has been done, and is in the Council packet. There is a study that has recommendations that answer the question Council asked some time ago about where the safest place for a crosswalk is, regardless of whether the crosswalk would meet warrants. Kremen stated those results were created in a vacuum, because they don't consider where the use would be. He would like to know where the demand is. Rutan stated the study they did considered several locations and crosswalk options. Council asked what the staff would recommend, so staff recommended a full signal at Oriental Avenue, because it would be the safest. Staff provided the Council different options to choose from. The staff's recommendations have been consistent. Staff tried to find a warrant for this location to meet. Staff is not against what the community wants, and they did a lot of work trying to come up with evidence on which they could make a recommendation that would make everyone happy and be successful. However, they couldn't do that. They were not able to find a warrant on which to base such a recommendation. The staff just make recommendations. They've made a recommendation that has been consistent and clear. They've also provided options to the Council on how to proceed. Kremen stated the Council approved a stop sign not long ago that did not meet warrants. Staff's statements have been consistent. Hutchings stated staff did not recommend it. Brenner moved to locate the crosswalk at the safest place in the area as determined by the Public Works Department. Weimer stated they already determined the safest location at Oriental Avenue. Brenner stated she won't say Oriental Avenue. It will be up to them. The motion was seconded. Special Committee of the Whole, 10/27/2015, Page 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 The motion to amend carried by the following vote: Ayes: Buchanan, Sidhu, Brenner, and Kremen (4) Nays: Mann and Weimer (2) Abstains: Browne (1) Browne stated he read the materials, and staff's statements have been consistent all along. When doing a final vote, he would like to vote separately on projects R5 and R8. Weimer stated they will consult with legal staff about their ability to vote on those projects separately. Rutan stated legal counsel recommended keeping one ordinance, and just taking two separate votes. Brenner moved to introduce as amended. The motion was seconded. The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Browne, Buchanan, Sidhu, Brenner, and Kremen (5) Nays: Mann and Weimer (2) OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 2:45 p.m. The Council approved these minutes on February 9, 2016. q I, ATTEST,: WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk T •%'�; 1 111 4 ►111.0��`� Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Carl Weimer, Council Chair Special Committee of the Whole, 10/27/2015, Page 6