CITY OF SHORELINE

SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL

SUMMARY MINUTES OF WORKSHOP MEETING

Tuesday, September 5, 2000

6:30 p.m.

Shoreline Conference Center

Mt. Rainier Room

PRESENT: Mayor Jepsen, Deputy Mayor Hansen, Councilmembers Grossman, Lee, Montgomery and Ransom

ABSENT: Councilmember Gustafson

1. CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Mayor Jepsen, who presided.

2. FLAG SALUTE/ROLL CALL

Mayor Jepsen led the flag salute. Upon roll call by the City Clerk, all Councilmembers were present with the exception of Councilmember Gustafson.

Councilmember Lee moved to excuse Councilmember Gustafson. Councilmember Montgomery seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.

3. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT AND FUTURE AGENDAS

City Manager Robert Deis distributed a memorandum from Tim Stewart, Director, Planning and Development Services, in response to public comments at the August 28th Council meeting regarding a proposal to mount antennae on the water tower at N 145th Street and Dayton Avenue N. He noted that the federal government preempts the City from denying an application to install antennae because of alleged health effects.

Mr. Deis reviewed agenda items scheduled for upcoming Council meetings.

4. COUNCIL REPORTS

Councilmember Ransom said he attended an Association of Washington Cities workshop in Leavenworth, Washington on budget and fiscal analysis. He discussed software that the City of Everett uses to provide and revise financial projections during policy discussions.

Councilmember Ransom reported that King County staff presented more proposals at the recent meeting of the King County Jail Advisory Committee. He noted that County staff continue to project a six to eight percent increase in jail costs.

Councilmember Ransom said Public Works Director Bill Conner met with representatives of the Aurora Improvement Council (AIC), an association of 80 Aurora Avenue businesses, at his request. He explained that AIC businesses oppose the 12-foot sidewalks and median barriers of the Aurora Corridor Project. He said Mr. Conner advised the AIC representatives that these project elements "are by Council direction." He mentioned that the AIC is considering three methods of opposition: 1) legal action; 2) media publicity; or 3) an initiative or petition. He said business owners believe that median barriers will impede delivery truck access to their buildings. He asserted that "time is running out" for Council to indicate flexibility on these issues.

Mayor Jepsen disagreed. He said the City is just beginning the design process for the Aurora Corridor Project. He noted that Council adopted policies to provide flexibility regarding the width of sidewalks. He suggested that the City continue the design process to identify where problems exist.

Mr. Deis said the City adjusted the pre-design policy statements to reflect business concerns and to provide greater flexibility. He asserted that the City will measure the appropriateness of proposed designs against the policies that Council adopted.

Deputy Mayor Hansen agreed that Council intended the implementation of the Aurora Corridor Project to be flexible.

Councilmember Montgomery mentioned an article in Open Spaces magazine regarding transportation in greater Seattle. She said Sound Transit Chair Dave Earling will issue a response to the article. She expressed concern about whether public investment in Link Light Rail will yield appropriate benefits. She stressed the difficulty of deciphering competing facts and figures regarding mass transit.

Councilmember Lee said she will host a meeting of the National League of Cities (NLC) Information, Technology and Communication Steering Committee, which will begin September 7 and continue through September 9.

Mayor Jepsen noted the need to appoint a voting delegate and an alternate delegate to the NLC Conference on December 9. He mentioned that King County Siting Manager Michael Popiwny phoned to advise that County staff has revised six of the Draft Siting Criteria for Wastewater Facilities to read "shall select" instead of "shall seek." Finally, he said King County is seeking a Shoreline citizen to participate on its Solid Waste Advisory Committee. Mr. Deis said staff will advertise the opportunity on the City web site and in the Shoreline Enterprise. In addition, he mentioned that the Office of Neighborhoods will notify the Meridian Park Neighborhood Association.

5. PUBLIC COMMENT: None

6. WORKSHOP ITEMS

(a) Shoreline Park and Ride Transit Oriented Development Master Plan Process Briefing

Kirk McKinley, Planning Manager, introduced Jan Briggs, Senior Planner, King County Metro, and Rich Thorsten, Urban Policy Director, 1,000 Friends of Washington.

Mr. Thorsten provided a presentation on transit-oriented development (TOD). He discussed three principles of TOD:

Mr. Thorsten asserted the following short- and long-term benefits of TOD: easy and safe walking and bicycling access; a mix of land uses to provide more convenience for residents; reducing traffic and air pollution; enhancing public amenities; providing a range of housing; increasing local economic activity and welfare; stopping urban sprawl and, thereby, protecting open spaces and natural resources; and creating a sense of place in the community.

Ms. Briggs discussed the Overlake TOD in Redmond, Washington on which she worked as project manager.

Mr. McKinley discussed the proposed master plan development and environmental review process for the Shoreline Park and Ride at 192nd Street and Aurora Avenue.

Mayor Jepsen invited public comment.

(1) Ken Howe, 745 N 184th Street, asserted that the Shoreline Park and Ride does not make sense as a TOD site. He noted the proximity of another park and ride facility. He suggested the area of Richmond Beach Road and 15th Avenue NW as a more logical vicinity for a TOD site.

(2) Walt Hagen, 711 N 193rd Street, asked if the proposed project is "a done deal." He questioned the proposal to develop one of the well-landscaped properties on Aurora Avenue. He questioned whether the project will decrease or increase vehicle trips in the area. He asked if neighborhood input will be weighted in comparison to that of the developer.

In response to Councilmember Montgomery, Ms. Briggs said the six-month timeline for the master plan development and environmental review process is realistic.

Councilmember Lee noted that the preliminary market analysis identified the importance of an anchor tenant to office development at the Shoreline Park and Ride. She questioned the role of an anchor tenant in the development process. Ms. Briggs acknowledged the difficulty of defining the anchor tenant's role. She said the marketing analyst who participates in the second workshop will provide advice on this issue. Mr. McKinley asserted the importance of involving all stakeholders, including potential anchor tenants, in the master planning process.

In response to Councilmember Lee, Mr. McKinley said staff plans to include representatives of Hillwood and Echo Lake neighborhoods in each of the three proposed workshops. Councilmember Lee noted that the design charrette for the North City Sub-area Plan was open to everyone in the neighborhood. She advocated that the design charrette for the Shoreline Park and Ride be open to all Hillwood and Echo Lake residents.

Councilmember Grossman agreed. He asserted that open forums provide opportunities for a broader range of public input to staff and consultants and for broader public education.

Councilmember Grossman questioned the likely ratio of public and private involvement in TOD at the Shoreline Park and Ride. Ms. Briggs said market analysis will provide more information about the amount of necessary public financial involvement. She mentioned, for example, that the City has legal authority under the Growth Management Act to sponsor the preliminary environmental review and that this would help reduce the cost of construction.

Councilmember Grossman noted that the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) owns the Shoreline Park and Ride site. He acknowledged Ms. Briggs's suggestion of a "land swap" between King County Metro and WSDOT as a means of minimizing the complexity of the project by reducing the number of governmental entities involved. He went on to question the cooperation among governmental entities. He expressed discomfort that "communication is not as broad reaching as it ought to be."

Councilmember Grossman supported the general layout of the master plan development and environmental review process.

Councilmember Ransom questioned the height of the proposed project and the amount of parking it is likely to include. He suggested it is likely to be three levels of parking, for 1,200 spots, and four other levels, one for retail, one for the anchor tenant and two for the 200 housing units proposed. Ms. Briggs said the project must include the same number of park and ride spaces as the site currently provides (approximately 400), and the Puget Sound Learning Center (PSLC) would require an additional 200 parking spaces. She noted that the Overlake TOD included one parking space for each housing unit. At this rate, the project would need 200 parking spaces for the proposed housing. She said she could not otherwise say at this point how the proposed project might look.

In response to Councilmember Ransom, Ms. Briggs said the "buffer zone" between the Shoreline Park and Ride and the homes to the west is in private ownership.

Councilmember Ransom concurred with previous comments in support of open forums.

Councilmember Ransom expressed concern about identifying an anchor tenant. He asserted that the PSLC, as the anchor tenant, seems "less and less likely to happen." He did not want the City to be required to serve as the anchor tenant. Ms. Briggs noted the challenge of determining the appropriate amount of planning and investment necessary to prepare the site for economic development. Mr. McKinley said staff will be better able to address questions about the site as the master plan development process progresses.

Councilmember Montgomery supported the master plan development and environmental review process. She expressed enthusiasm about the charrette process. She stressed the need for affordable housing in Shoreline. She asserted that the master planning for the Shoreline Park and Ride site fits well with the Aurora Corridor Project.

Mayor Jepsen supported the proposed community participation process. He noted previous comments of Councilmembers in favor of opening the design charrette to the public. He stressed the value of market and financing analysis before the design charrette to clarify the feasibility of the program. He asserted that Council favors some form of mixed-use at the site.

(b) Review of Provider Responses and Recommendation for City Solid Waste Collection Services

Kristoff Bauer, Assistant to the City Manager, presented an overview of the responses to the Request for Proposal (RFP), the recommended solid waste collection services, the preferred service provider and next steps.

Referring to the "Summary Rate Proposal Comparison" (pages 21-24 of the Council packet), Mr. Bauer noted that Waste Management bid lowest on most collection rates. While these rates represent a reduction from most similar current rates, Mr. Bauer pointed out that the savings include changes in service (e.g., Waste Management would collect recycling and yard waste on an alternating, biweekly schedule instead of every week).

Mr. Bauer mentioned the motion for summary judgment that the City filed in King County Superior Court to clarify its authority to replace existing continuation franchises with a service contract awarded to one provider after a competitive selection process. He said the hearing will take place in early October. Staff plans to return to Council October 23 to summarize information on solid waste collection services for Council action.

Mayor Jepsen invited public comment.

(1) Bob Schille, 13225 NE 126th Place, Kirkland, Washington represented Waste Management.

In response to Mayor Jepsen, Mr. Bauer confirmed that Waste Management has proposed a rate of $15.38 to collect one 96-gallon container of yard waste every other week and that Waste Management currently charges $19.27 to collect the same amount of yard waste every week.

Deputy Mayor Hansen and Councilmember Montgomery expressed support for the Waste Management proposal.

In response to Councilmember Lee, Mr. Bauer said the provision of a bulky item collection service does not preclude residents' option to dispose of such items themselves.

In response to Councilmember Lee, Mr. Bauer said the biggest benefit of alternating, biweekly collection of recycling and yard waste is the reduction of the number of collection trucks—and the related impacts to the community—by one third. He said the City has received few complaints about alternating, biweekly collection on the east side of Shoreline since it began a couple of years ago. Mr. Deis explained that decreasing the collection of recycling and yard waste to an alternating, biweekly schedule on the west side of Shoreline seemed preferable to increasing the collection to a weekly schedule, with consequently higher rates, on the east side of Shoreline.

In response to Councilmember Lee, Mr. Bauer said the selection of a single provider for solid waste collection services throughout Shoreline will not prevent residents from self-hauling solid waste.

In response to Councilmember Ransom, Mr. Bauer confirmed that the Waste Management proposal allows customers to use a smaller yard waste container at a lower rate.

In response to Councilmember Lee, Mr. Bauer said the contract provides for potential annual rate increases related to increases in the Consumer Price Index, taxes and fees.

Councilmember Ransom expressed concern about the viability of the $5.12 rate that Waste Management bid for biweekly collection of a 32-gallon can of yard waste given that the company currently charges $19.27 for weekly collection of the same amount. Mr. Bauer explained that Waste Management recalculated its cost for yard waste collection to exclude the costs it incurs collecting yard waste in less densely populated areas outside of Shoreline. He noted that Waste Management has completed a certification regarding its proposed rates as part of the RFP process.

In response to Deputy Mayor Hansen, Mr. Bauer confirmed that Waste Management rates are currently subject to Washington Transportation and Utilities Commission (WUTC) regulation and that its proposed rates derive strictly from contract negotiation with the City.

Mayor Jepsen asserted that the $5.12 rate that Waste Management bid for biweekly collection of yard waste reflects the reduction to 32 gallons from the current collection amount of 96 gallons and that the lower rate it bid for "Garbage/Recycling" collection reflects the reduction from weekly to biweekly recycling collection.

Mayor Jepsen confirmed Council consensus in support of the recommended preferred solid waste collection services provider.

7. CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENT: None

8. ADJOURNMENT

At 8:46 p.m., Mayor Jepsen declared the meeting adjourned.

 

___________________________
Sharon Mattioli, CMC
City Clerk