CITY OF SHORELINE
SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL
Monday, June 1, 2020 Held Remotely via Zoom
7:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Mayor Hall, Deputy Mayor Scully, Councilmembers McConnell, McGlashan, Chang, Robertson, and Roberts
ABSENT: None.
1. CALL TO ORDER
At 7:00 p.m., the meeting was called to order by Mayor Hall who presided.
2. ROLL CALL
Upon roll call by the City Clerk, all Councilmembers were present.
(a) Pride Month Proclamation
Mayor Hall said he proclaimed June 2020, as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Pride Month.
Mayor Hall noted the outrage of City Council members over the killing of George Floyd and the systemic racial injustices.
3. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER
Debbie Tarry, City Manager, shared the City’s response to the death of George Floyd and spoke about the importance of standing against racism.
Shawn Ledford, Police Chief, read a message from the Police Department to the Shoreline community stating that the actions that caused the death of George Floyd do not reflect the values, training, and de-escalation efforts used by the Shoreline Police Department and would not be tolerated in Shoreline as an acceptable response. He added that the Response, Awareness, De-escalation, and Referral (RADAR) program implemented in 2016 helps provide strategies for officers. He said the Police Department will continue to work hard to build and maintain community trust between all people, and that there will be ongoing, prioritized training for the department.
Ms. Tarry provided reports, resources, and updates on the City’s response to the COVID-19 outbreak and shared information on upcoming events and activities.
4. COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember Roberts said at the recent Puget Sound Regional Council Executive Board meeting a recommended budget was finalized and he shared the dates of the upcoming General Assembly meeting. Mayor Hall encouraged all Councilmembers to attend.
Mayor Hall said that he proclaimed June 5, 2020, as Gun Violence Awareness Day in Shoreline.
5. PUBLIC COMMENT
Brandon Hohengarten, Shoreline resident and representative of Save Shoreline Trees, asked the Councilmembers to prioritize environmental stewardship over urban development.
Rebecca Jones, Shoreline resident and representative of Save Shoreline Trees, voiced her concerns about the impact the 148th Street Non-Motorized Bridge Project will have on significant trees. She spoke to the value of Shoreline’s urban tree forest and urged the City to find solutions to preserve trees during development.
Kathleen Russell, Shoreline resident and representative of Save Shoreline Trees, said the Transportation Improvement Plan has an impressive amount of information and asked questions regarding tree preservation as related to projects. She urged the City to preserve trees during the design of the 148th Street Non-Motorized Bridge Project and asked that people be made aware of public tree removal.
6. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
The agenda was approved by unanimous consent.
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
Upon motion by Deputy Mayor Scully and seconded by Councilmember Chang and unanimously carried, 7-0, the following Consent Calendar items were approved:
(a) Approving Minutes of Regular Meeting of March 23, 2020
(b) Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Construction Contract with Insituform Technologies, LLC in the Amount of $384,381 for the 2020 CIPP Stormwater Pipe Repair Project
(c) Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Supplement No. 1 to Contract 8463 with H. Lochner for Design and Environmental Services for the SR-523 & Interstate-5 Interchange Project in the amount of $865,191
8. ACTION ITEMS
(a) Public Hearing and Adoption of the 2021-2026 Transportation Improvement Plan
Nytasha Walters, Transportation Services Manager, delivered the staff presentation. Ms. Walters reviewed the 2021-2026 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) update process and provided a follow up to the April 6, 2020, Council discussion. She shared information on the anticipated decrease in tax revenues for new sidewalks due to the Stay Home/Stay Healthy Order and said staff anticipates delivering several projects in the next few years as planned. She said staff will continue to pursue Safe Routes to School funding and added that the Ridgecrest School project is funded, and design will begin in 2020. She said that Council and staff will continue to explore new revenue sources to compensate for the loss of vehicle license fees due to the passage of State Initiative 976. She said the Council discussion did not lead to any changes to the draft 2021-2016 TIP.
Mayor Hall opened the Public Hearing. Seeing no public testimony, he closed the Public Hearing.
Councilmember McConnell moved to adopt Resolution No. 458. The motion was seconded by Councilmember McGlashan.
Mayor Hall and Councilmember McConnell thanked the staff for their work on this Resolution.
The 2021-2026 Transportation Improvement Plan was adopted unanimously, 7-0.
(b) Adopting Resolution No. 459 - Temporarily Authorizing Meetings and Public Hearings to be Held Remotely Due to the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency
Margaret King, City Attorney, delivered the staff presentation. Ms. King said that this Resolution allows meetings and public hearings of the City Council and City Boards and Commissions to be held electronically due to the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency. Ms. King reviewed the City’s remote meetings since the ‘Stay Home, Stay Healthy’ Proclamation prohibited the holding of in-person meetings and added that the proclamation had been extended until June 17. She explained that for the Council to operate in compliance with the phased reopening guidelines, it will be impossible for in-person meetings to be held until Phase 3.
Ms. King said the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) mandates that meetings be open to the public and that the purpose of conducting a virtual meeting is to have it open to the public while staying safe. She added that the OPMA also provides for an emergency provision that the Council can enact to keep the public safe. She said the adoption of Resolution No. 459 would allow the Council to temporarily suspend the location of meetings as set forth in Resolution No. 445 and change to a virtual location. She added that this venue would allow the public to comment and for testimony to be taken by electronic means. Ms. King concluded that staff recommends the adoption of Resolution No. 459 to provide general requirements for meetings of the City Council, Boards, and Commissions, allowing the public to safely participate in the meetings.
Mayor Hall opened the Public Comment period.
Ann McFarland, Shoreline resident, spoke in favor of the Resolution and said she is impressed with the way the City Council and staff have been dealing with all the governance issues resulting from the COVID-19 crisis.
Seeing no additional public comment, Mayor Hall closed the public comment period.
Councilmember Robertson moved approval of Resolution No. 459. The motion was seconded by Councilmember McConnell.
Councilmember Robertson thanked the staff who have helped execute a remote meeting system. She said she misses having face-to-face interactions with members of the community and reinforced the importance of the community continuing to be engaged during this time.
Deputy Mayor Scully said the Resolution meets all the goals of the OPMA under difficult circumstances. He said he wants to get back to having in-person meetings as soon as safely possible and recognized that reducing unnecessary public gatherings right now is one step towards that goal. He concluded that most of his concerns regarding public comment and public access have been met.
Councilmember Roberts asked for confirmation that the Resolution does not modify the process for receipt of oral testimony on Action Items. Ms. King responded that this Resolution only amends the meeting location and provides additional remote-specific procedures. She explained that the rest of the Council’s regular Rules of Procedure remain unchanged. Mayor Hall agreed that this distinction is important. He stated that for remote meetings, the Council previously suspended the recitation of the flag salute and voting by a raise of hands and confirmed with Ms. King that this Resolution does not change those actions.
The motion passed unanimously, 7-0.
(c) Adopting Ordinance No. 889 - Shoreline Municipal Code 10.05 – Model Traffic Ordinance (MTO) Updates
Randy Witt, Director of Public Works, delivered the staff presentation. Mr. Witt said Ordinance No. 889 modifies the Shoreline Municipal Code for clarity and establishes a monetary penalty for parking. He reviewed the background of the updates, which were initiated after the Light Rail Subareas Parking Study. He stated that parking citations currently have a net cost to the City of about $10 per citation and that there has been an increase in parking violations over the last several years. He said that considering this, Council asked staff to provide information on increasing fines and adding dedicated parking enforcement, which was then presented at the May 18, 2020 Council meeting.
Mr. Witt shared information from a jurisdictional comparison of both established penalties and dedicated parking enforcement positions. He gave an overview of the City’s financial analysis of the costs to provide parking enforcement and reviewed the assumptions in the analysis. He stated the potential revenue to the City if the changes are implemented. Mr. Witt said the assumptions include that dedicated parking enforcement would begin in 2024, and he listed the startup and ongoing costs for enforcement. He shared a table depicting the parking enforcement cash flow and reviewed the observations voiced during the study session. He said staff recommends increasing the City parking violation monetary penalty to $50 with a late payment penalty of $25 starting on January 1, 2021, with revenues supporting the costs for processing and staffing. He said staff would return to Council with an updated evaluation of revenue and costs before staffing the program.
Mr. Witt reviewed the pros and cons expressed by the Councilmembers at the study session and said the staff recommendation has not changed since that time. He shared the proposed amendment language requested by Councilmember Roberts.
Deputy Mayor Scully moved approval of Ordinance No. 889. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Chang.
Deputy Mayor Scully said he understands that there is an increasing need for parking regulation and that the proposed Ordinance strikes an appropriate balance. He added that the $50 penalty is at the top end of what he thinks the City should charge, since he does not view it as a revenue generator and said he does not expect the program to be revenue-neutral.
Councilmember Roberts moved to amend Section 4(C) of Ordinance No. 889 to decrease the monetary penalty for a parking infraction set forth in SMC 10.05.035 to $40.00 effective 12:01 am Jan 1, 2021 until Dec 31, 2022, and, then to establish a new monetary penalty of $50.00 effective 12:01 am January 1, 2023. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Robertson.
Councilmember Roberts said that the monetary penalty needs to be increased so the City is not subsidizing parking enforcement but a stepping-stone approach is appropriate until the City has a dedicated parking enforcement officer.
Councilmembers Robertson and McConnell expressed support for the amendment.
Councilmember Robertson said that while she recognizes the upcoming stressors on parking, she agrees with delaying the $50 penalty cost until closer to the time that the Light Rail stations open, because right now the areas where tickets are being issued seem to be predominantly in lower-income neighborhoods.
Councilmember McConnell said she does not like the regressive nature of the penalties, yet when the Light Rail becomes operational some quality of life improvements will need to be made for the residents in the station subareas. She recognized the challenges associated with the COVID-19 pandemic and said she did not want to create additional financial burdens.
Mayor Hall and Councilmembers McGlashan and Chang spoke against the amendment.
Councilmember McGlashan said he struggles with the perception that two separate increases would give. He said he would rather support reducing the late fee.
Councilmember Chang said that in anticipation of the upcoming costs associated with a dedicated parking enforcement officer and in light of the budget issues now and in the years to come, she would prefer to subsidize the program as much as possible while staying in line with other cities in the area.
Mayor Hall said he appreciates the compromise the amendment creates but he prefers the penalty being a predictable, one-time, increase. He said while this program does not need to be self-sustaining, he is comfortable with $50.
The motion to amend passed by a vote of 4-3, with Mayor Hall and Councilmembers Chang and McGlashan dissenting.
The main motion as amended passed, 6-1, with Councilmember McGlashan dissenting.
9. STUDY ITEMS
(a) Discussing the Project Status and Progress for the N 148th Street Non-Motorized Bridge Project
Lea Bonebrake, Capital Projects Manager, delivered the staff presentation. Mr. Bonebrake said that Nytasha Walters, Transportation Services Manager; and Tricia Juhnke, City Engineer; were also present for questions.
Mr. Bonebrake gave an overview of the project, listing the project goals of linking the Light Rail to transportation hub access, improving safety and reducing travel times, and increasing walkshed and bicycle connectivity. He reviewed the design evaluation criteria and described the efforts to collect public feedback.
Mr. Bonebrake said the project consists of three distinct elements: the west trail connection, the bridge structure, and the east bridge landing.
Mr. Bonebrake described the location of the west trail connection and shared details on three options for design: Option 1, with minimum build-out; Option 2, with full build-out with south alignment; and Option 3, full build-out with north alignment. He said Option 3 had been added in response to concerns expressed in the open house/public comment process.
Mr. Bonebrake said the three preferred options for bridge structure were combination arch, tied arch, and truss, and said all options were comparable in terms of safety and constructability, with the greatest variations in aesthetics, cost, and maintenance. He shared images of each type of structure and described elements of each and said all options could accommodate a canopy. He said the tied arch option is the lowest cost and most preferred by public feedback, and the truss option is the most expensive and requires the most maintenance.
Mr. Bonebrake displayed graphics diagramming the options for the east bridge landing and shared details on each one. Option 1, an A-frame ramp; Option 2, a switchback ramp; and Option 3, a direct ramp. He said the main constraints for the landing are the clearance restrictions and concluded that Option 3 was widely preferred by the public.
Mr. Bonebrake shared a table depicting the project element costs, with a breakdown by trail element and option. He said all costs assume 2024 completion and do not account for all contingencies or City staff and resources.
Mr. Bonebrake shared a summary of the public outreach results from community briefings. He said 57% favored Option 2 of the west trail connection, but he is confident that if Option 3 had been available it would have been preferred because of the reduced impacts to parking and significant trees. He said the tied-arch bridge structure was preferred by 57% of respondents, and the east bridge direct ramp landing by 94%.
Mr. Bonebrake displayed the evaluation criteria matrices for each segment and said that staff recommends a full north side build-out for the west trail connection, a tied arch bridge structure, and a direct ramp on the east bridge landing. He shared the estimated project costs for the recommended options and said the project cost is $25.8 Million, currently with a $15 Million funding gap. He said the project costs have increased since the 2017 feasibility study due to increased costs of right-of-way assumption and construction.
Mr. Bonebrake described the funding strategy and delivery approach. He said because of the impacts of COVID-19 there is a high probability that the City will not achieve full funding by the end of design. He said staff has identified three alternatives for moving forward: Alternative 1, proceeding with full design with a goal of fully funding by 2022; Alternative 2, progressing the design to 30% then reassessing the options for proceeding; and Alternative 3, stopping now and returning the funding already secured. He said staff recommends proceeding with Alternative 2, and if full funding is not secured, pausing to pursue additional funding after the construction of the East Bridge Landing. He shared a delivery approach timeline for each Alternative and pointed out that whenever a delay is introduced there is a risk of project costs increasing. He said emphasized that once the Light Rail begins running the construction constraints become significant.
Mr. Bonebrake shared a timeline of proposed next steps and stated that staff is looking for Council input on the staff recommendations of preferred design, bridge cover, and project funding and delivery strategy.
All Councilmembers expressed support for the staff design option recommendations made by staff.
Councilmember McGlashan asked why a canopy was considered. Mr. Bonebrake said the primary reason is for user comfort, and there is some noise canceling benefit. Councilmember McGlashan confirmed that Options 2 and 3 of the east bridge landing have similar inclines. He said he likes the connectivity to the trail.
Councilmember Chang confirmed that the property for the west trail connection is all private property, zoned MUR-70. She said she appreciates the efforts to move the bridge farther north to reduce the number of significant trees to be removed and confirmed that there are not tree retention requirements in MUR-70 zones. She said that Council had discussed the importance of gaining density in the MUR-70 zones and commented that even if the City were to choose an alignment that would limit the number of significant trees to be removed, it would not protect the trees if private redevelopment were to occur on the neighboring properties.
Councilmember Chang asked what funding would have to be returned if the project was stopped now. Ms. Walters shared details on the secured funding, saying the intention is to use it as design money and said City staff are working closely with the legislators in Olympia and there is favorable response and strong support for the project.
Councilmember Robertson asked how much usage will come from the neighborhoods on the west side of the bridge. Ms. Walters offered to calculate an estimate for the increase in nonmotorized travel. She said the recognized benefits of the bridge include travel time savings and increased walkability and access.
Councilmember Robertson said she agrees with the public comment regarding prioritizing tree preservation. She observed that Option 3 on the west side seems to have hefty challenges and she hopes for community satisfaction and positive buy-in as one of the outcomes of the project. She concluded that funding-wise, the Alternative suggested by staff seems to be the only way to go to ensure completion of the east side before Light Rail begins service.
Councilmember Roberts asked if the City has previously been this concerned about securing project funding. Ms. Walters responded that this recommendation takes a strategic approach to funding and gives time to secure funds by phase. Ms. Tarry added that staff wants to make it clear to Council that there was hope of being able to complete construction by the time that Light Rail became operational, but given the current funding scenario it is unlikely, so for this reason, they have provided an option to get the most critical parts of the project done. She said that given the duration of each phase the City remains positive that they can eventually have a package put together, but wants the Council to be aware of the challenges before their decision making. Councilmember Roberts said he is optimistic about securing funding because he feels there is legislative recognition of the value of the project at the state level. He said the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) allocated money to this project, and once PSRC is committed to a project they have a vested interest in supporting it to completion.
Deputy Mayor Scully said it is worth the money to create access. He added that he was originally skeptical that the project funding would be secured, but he is delighted that he has been proven wrong and is hopeful for future funding. He said that recently Governor Inslee stated that he foresees a fairly aggressive capital projects funding program across the state. Deputy Mayor Scully added that it would be advantageous to have projects queued up to be ready to take advantage of any potential programs. He said he thinks the City should proceed as fast as possible through the design process. He concluded that from the environmental/tree retention perspective, he believes that a balance must be found between preserving local environmental benefits with creating regional benefits and increasing density in a Light Rail station subarea is overall, an environmental improvement. He recognized the local benefits of retaining trees and he said he is glad that staff is working to preserve some urban forest.
Councilmember McConnell reflected that the region has built its way out of a recession before and that it is a good way to bring the economy back. She shared some history of the Council decisions for tree preservation in the MUR-70 zones and agreed that this project is one that can support tree preservation. She said the west side will have significant population density and easy multi-modal access to the station would reduce the stress of parking at the south station. She said she likes the idea of a canopy on the bridge but is fine with that portion being delayed. She believes that if the City has received funding it should be spent, not returned.
Councilmember McGlashan asked if there was a significant change to the walkshed since the bridge location was shifted. Ms. Walters said that it improved a bit. Councilmember McGlashan commented that although the focus has been on west side access to the Light Rail station, it will also create easy access for east side residents to locations like Twin Ponds Park and the Community Garden.
Mayor Hall agreed with Councilmember McGlashan, adding that it may also create easier access to the churches on the west side of the bridge. He said it is important to keep working on getting the Station renamed to accurately reflect its location and expressed appreciation for the level of detail provided on both the technical and the outreach aspects of the project. He shared his preferences for phasing and said he remains optimistic about funding. He said he is hopeful the funding gap will be closed soon because of the environmental benefits this capital project offers.
10. ADJOURNMENT
At 9:10 p.m., Mayor Hall declared the meeting adjourned.
/s/Jessica Simulcik Smith, City Clerk