CITY OF SHORELINE

SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL

SUMMARY MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING

Monday, January 8, 2001

7:30 p.m.

Shoreline Conference Center

Mt. Rainier Room

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

ABSENT: None

1. CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order at 7:32 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.

3. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER

Interim City Manager Larry Bauman reported that the City now owns the property at the corner of Westminster and Dayton Avenue as the result of a sheriff’s sale. He said staff will return to Council with options for the property’s use. He also commented on the success of the Christmas Tree Drop-off and Chipping Event.

Bill Conner, Public Works Director, explained the annual sidewalk repair program currently occurring on 5^th Avenue NE and Meridian Avenue. He said these streets are heavily treed by mature trees planted over 20 years ago by King County’s Forward Thrust program. Now the roots of these trees are pushing up the sidewalks and causing damage to the rights-of-way and private property, as well as causing "puddling" on the streets. Mr. Conner used photographs to demonstrate these problems. He showed examples of sidewalk repair where roots were removed but the trees left in place. The sidewalk is sloped up and over the roots once pruning has occurred.

Mr. Conner commented that there are more than 1,000 of these Forward Thrust trees throughout Shoreline. He estimated it would cost about $1,400 per tree to remove and replant all of them. The current approach of working around the roots will require sidewalk repatching as many as three times in a 20-year period and will probably be more expensive in the long run. He said staff recommends continuing with the current program for now (removing trees only when they pose a danger or are dead) and then coming back with a comprehensive plan of action on this problem later in the year.

Mayor Jepsen concurred with continuing the present approach.

Responding to Councilmember Gustafson, Mr. Conner said this year’s program would involve about two hundred trees creating various levels of damage to property. He noted that the photographs showed sites where the homeowners would like the City to remove the trees immediately.

Mr. Bauman added that the trees planted in the Forward Thrust program were inappropriate for street trees near sidewalks. He said the City needs a plan to systematically replace these trees without defoliating whole sections of the City at a time.

Deputy Mayor Hansen said that in some of the worst cases he would just as soon see the trees removed and replaced fairly soon. He felt some of the trees in the photographs looked very mature and ready for removal.

Mr. Conner commented that tree removal always raises questions for citizens. The trees in question provide a pleasant canopy and ambience that would be missed if removed. It would take several years for this to be recreated.

Councilmember Gustafson asked about conversation with the Ridgecrest Neighborhood. Mr. Conner said the lack of community dialogue is one reason why staff does not wish to proceed with tree removal at this time.

Mr. Bauman confirmed that any new trees being planted are species appropriate for street tree use. He confirmed Council direction to go forward with the program as-is with no tree removal until a more comprehensive program is brought back later in the year.

Councilmember Gustafson concurred with Deputy Mayor Hansen that trees that need to be removed should be removed immediately. Then the plan can be developed. Mr. Bauman said this is a pervasive problem that would require the City to look at more than a few trees for removal.

Councilmember Gustafson reiterated that the City must also solicit community feedback on the program.

Concluding his report, Mr. Bauman asked that Council pull consent calendar item 7(e) (a motion to accept the lowest responsive construction bid for the 15^th Avenue NE at 165^th St. project).

Ian Sievers, City Attorney, explained that the City is seeking clarification of some ambiguous bid specifications before the bid is awarded.

4. REPORTS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS

Michael Derrick, Library Board Chair, reported on the activities of the Library Board in 2000. He said Board members attended meetings of the Shoreline Friends of the Library and the Richmond Beach Library Association. The Board provided input on the new Richmond Beach Library. He described the Schools Initiative of the King County Library System (KCLS) and the programs sponsored by the Library Board. He said the goal of the Library Board is to ensure that the two Shoreline libraries are viable and vibrant institutions. Mr. Derrick concluded by commenting on the exciting future of libraries as part of the national information infrastructure.

Mr. Derrick introduced Shoreline Librarian Lynda Locke, who said KCLS now provides a choice in library cards. She distributed new cards to the Council.

Councilmember Grossman thanked the Library Board for its hard work. He commended KCLS for its outreach to the public school systems.

Councilmember Ransom commented that the Library Board does a very professional job representing the City. He was pleased with the Board’s responsiveness to community input.

5. PUBLIC COMMENT

(a) Don Gilbertson, 16725 5^th Avenue NE, said he has been seeking a meeting with a representative of the City of Shoreline since December 14^th regarding the street tree issue. He explained why he would like his trees removed and felt that as a longtime taxpayer, he should have received a visit from someone.

(b) Deborah Moore-Marchant, 16261 12^th Avenue NE, said she and others would be speaking tonight about light pollution.

(c) Marty Johnston, 111 NE 174^th Street, described his involvement in energy conservation. He noted many residences and commercial properties are over lit. He said reducing glare will save tax dollars and lessen light pollution.

(d) Henk Kunnen, 16724 5^th Avenue NE, commented on the tree in front of his veterinary clinic on 15^th Avenue NE. Its roots are ruining the parking lot. He asserted that it is a waste of money to repair the sidewalk at his rental property on 5^th Avenue without removing the tree.

(e) Gibran Hashmi, 1609 N 50^th Street, a planner with the City of Redmond, spoke about good lighting. He said Redmond has developed new lighting standards. He emphasized the dark night sky is a resource that should be protected. He commented that Shoreline needs good lighting policies now or this resource will be lost.

(f) Patty Hale, 16528 26^th Avenue NE, urged the City to pursue the project that was pulled from tonight’s agenda because this traffic light has been urgently needed for some time. She also commented on the tree problem, recommending that staff develop a removal and replacement program. She felt it would be a shame to see the City spend money patching the same sidewalks time and time again. She said staff should work with the neighborhood associations. She noted that the Ridgecrest Neighborhood is developing a pattern of planting to make the north/south street trees deciduous fall-color trees and the east/west street trees spring flowering trees. In conclusion, she suggested that lamp black be added to the concrete used to patch the sidewalks in order to darken the color of the concrete so that it matches existing sidewalks and eliminates a checker-board pattern of sidewalks.

Mayor Jepsen commented on his understanding that a Development Code amendment has been submitted regarding the glare issue.

Regarding the street trees, Mr. Bauman said several of photographs shown this evening were of Mr. Gilbertson’s property. He said Mr. Gilbertson has talked with various staff members about his concerns.

Mayor Jepsen said the traffic light project will undoubtedly move forward as quickly as possible once the bid technicalities have been addressed.

Deputy Mayor Hansen reiterated his position that "certain aspects of this street tree program should be addressed sooner rather than later." He said the City must address those trees that are going to be a continuing problem. Some of these must be removed. Councilmember Gustafson concurred.

Mr. Bauman said staff’s quandary is that virtually all the trees will have to be removed at some time because all are damaging the sidewalk to one degree or another. Replacing a few trees now for a few individual property owners raises an equity issue for others who have not spoken to the City but have the same problem.

Deputy Mayor Hansen pointed out the same issue comes up with repaving projects.

Mayor Jepsen said that if a short-term fix can be done, the City should go ahead. If the tree has to come down, it should be taken down. This is not anything different from what has been done in the past. Then the City needs a plan on how to deal with this Citywide.

Councilmember Montgomery noted the City has an inventory of the Forward Thrust trees and they can be thinned out if they are possibly going to fall down.

Mr. Bauman confirmed that any trees in danger of coming down or found to be diseased or posing a health and safety hazard in the neighborhood will be taken out.

Councilmember Montgomery said this is as far as the City should go at this time.

Councilmember Gustafson wanted to see a cost comparison between doing a long-term fix or several short-term fixes.

6. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

Councilmember Ransom moved approval of the agenda, pulling item 7(e). Deputy Hansen seconded the motion. Councilmember Gustafson asked that the motion include adding items 8(b) and 8(c) to the consent calendar. Councilmember Lee asked that item 8(b) remain on the agenda for discussion. Councilmember Ransom moved a substitute motion to approve the agenda, pulling item 7(e) and substituting item 8(c) as 7(e). Councilmember Montgomery seconded the motion, which carried 7 – 0, and the agenda was approved as amended.

7. CONSENT CALENDAR

Councilmember Ransom moved approval of the consent calendar, pulling the minutes of the regular meeting of December 11, 2000. Councilmember Montgomery seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, and the following items were approved:

Minutes of Regular Meeting of November 27, 2000
Minutes of the Dinner Meeting of December 11, 2000

Approval of expenses and payroll as of December 21, 2000 in the amount of $1,500,094.69

Resolution No. 172 amending Resolution No. 166 Government Access Channel Use Policies

Motion to authorize the Interim City Manager to execute a contract with the North Rehabilitation Facility for landscape maintenance in 2001 in an amount not to exceed $80,000

Motion to authorize the Interim City Manager to execute the Interlocal Agreement for the Watershed Basins within Water Resource Inventory Area 8 in an amount of $16,208 for the first year

8. ACTION ITEMS: OTHER ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND MOTIONS

(a) Motion to approve the "Aurora Corridor Real Property Acquisition and Relocation Policy, Procedures and Guidelines Manual" for the Aurora Corridor Project

Anne Tonella-Howe, Aurora Corridor Project Manager, reviewed the background of the development of this manual, noting that the City is committed to negotiating for compensation with property owners rather than doing condemnations. She said no other jurisdiction has developed such a manual to be used as a tool for the negotiation process. After briefly describing the project history, Ms. Tonella-Howe, said the purpose of the manual is to combine all the federal and State regulations controlling the acquisition process, as well as to outline the negotiation process.

Ms. Tonella-Howe summarized the public process staff has undertaken over the past few months. She said staff intends to meet with every property and business owner so that they are aware of the impacts of the project. She summarized the main issues as being compensation for property loss, incentives for displaced businesses to remain in Shoreline, construction impacts and duration, property impacts such as lost parking and timing of the various parts of the process.

Ms. Tonella-Howe then reviewed some of the key provisions of the manual:

• Section 1.8, extra benefits. This section adds additional relocation assistance for businesses displaced as a result of the project and wishing to relocate in Shoreline. It goes over and above what federal and State regulations require.
• Section 4.0, acquisition. Ms. Tonella-Howe reiterated that the City will make every effort to acquire property expeditiously and by negotiation based on fair market value.
• Section 5.0, relocation. This section is a compilation of federal and State regulations.
• Section 6.0, condemnation. This section describes the process to be used in case negotiations are not successful.
• Section 7.0, redevelopment requirements. These refer to sections in the Development Code. They are not redevelopment standards specifically required of property impacted by public projects. However, the Planning Director is allowed to administer any exception to these standards. If the exception applies to the whole corridor, it will be attached as an amendment to the manual. Ms. Tonella-Howe said an exception regarding setbacks may be made to allow a zero building setback when properties are redeveloped.
• Section 9.0, Traffic control during construction. This section lays the groundwork for staging construction and outlines the tools to be used to lessen construction impacts.

Mayor Jepsen called for public comment.

(1) Terry Green, 613 N 179^th Street, stated that she attended the November open house but did not see the complete manual. Instead she saw a four-page summary. She requested that Council ask staff to deliver several copies of the manual to the Chamber of Commerce meeting on Wednesday in order to obtain business community input and support.

Mayor Jepsen commented that Council saw a very similar version of the manual in November. He asked if this version was not shared at the open house.

Ms. Tonella-Howe did not know why copies of the complete manual were not available, since she made copies to be distributed there. She said staff intended to make copies available upon demand but she has not received any requests for the manual.

Councilmember Ransom expressed concern about the fact that no one asked for the draft manual because of the great interest on the part of the Aurora businesses. He feared that "someone dropped the ball someplace" in communicating with the affected businesses.

Responding to Councilmember Lee, Ms. Tonella-Howe said postponing acceptance of the manual for a week or two would not set the project back irrevocably. Council-member Lee felt that businesses should be allowed time to provide input.

Councilmember Gustafson commented that there were only two changes from the November 20^th draft. He said the manual could be amended later. He asserted that there had been a reasonable opportunity to review the manual. Councilmember Gustafson moved to approve the "Aurora Corridor Real Property Acquisition and Relocation Policy, Procedures and Guidelines Manual" for the Aurora Corridor Project. Deputy Mayor Hansen seconded the motion.

Councilmember Ransom reiterated his concern that the Aurora Improvement Council businesses were not aware that the manual was available. He asked the Council to wait one or two weeks to gain additional credibility with businesses that their input is important.

Deputy Mayor Hansen supported Councilmember Gustafson’s position. He asserted that the manual is very fair to the businesses and that it can be amended later, if necessary.

Councilmember Grossman shared Councilmember Ransom’s concerns, feeling that although there has been outreach with individual property owners in the southern section, businesses in the middle section are concerned because the plans are not yet set. He felt Council should postpone action, since this is not a critical path item. It is better to have the businesses on board rather than irritated with the City because of a perceived lack of time for review.

Councilmember Montgomery agreed with Deputy Mayor Hansen that the manual is well-written. She said it will receive wide distribution once it is adopted.

Councilmember Grossman also liked the document. His concern was to provide an opportunity for those involved to look it over. He realized it could be amended, but said people have ownership if they can provide input prior to adoption.

Councilmember Montgomery did not want to convey a message that Council has doubts about the manual itself. Both Councilmember Lee and Mayor Jepsen agreed it is an excellent and innovative document.

Mayor Jepsen noted the Council wanted to see an incentive to stay in Shoreline, which is now in the manual. However, he said there is no monetary time requirement for how long the business must stay in Shoreline. Mr. Bauman responded that staff felt that the investment in relocating was enough evidence of a commitment to staying in Shoreline. Deputy Mayor Hansen noted that no reimbursement funding is provided unless the expenditures are documented.

Mayor Jepsen asked about the zero setback exception for businesses that meet the redevelopment criteria. He supported this and felt the design code for the entire corridor should have a zero setback provision.

Tim Stewart, Planning and Development Services Director, explained the current code requirement is for a ten-foot setback, which can be reduced if adequate street improvements are available or adequate room for such improvements is available. He said before a corridor-wide opinion is issued to allow for a zero setback, it is necessary to know where the right-of-way is.

Mayor Jepsen noted that he supports the document but is speaking before the Chamber this week and would like to provide an opportunity for business review.

Ms. Tonella-Howe explained that she had just learned that a synopsis of the manual was available at the open house. However, the draft manual has been at all the public outreach meetings held.

Councilmember Lee moved to postpone action on the motion to the next regular meeting. Councilmember Ransom seconded the motion, which carried 4 – 3, with Deputy Mayor Hansen and Councilmembers Gustafson and Montgomery dissenting.

(b) Resolution No. 171 adopting parking revisions on NE 197^th Pl. from 22^nd Ave. NE to the north end cul-de-sac, Meridian Ave. N. from N. 175^th to the north driveway entrance of Meridian Park Elementary, and 20^th Ave. NW from NW 196^th St. to NW 205^th St.

Mr. Conner displayed the three areas proposed for "no parking" signage and provided the reasons for the proposals.

Deputy Mayor Hansen moved to approve Resolution No. 171. Councilmember Ransom seconded the motion.

Responding to Mayor Jepsen, Mr. Conner said the signage will use existing poles wherever possible. He said staff plans to return with a comprehensive signing program for the City that will address the "clutter" issue.

Responding to Councilmember Ransom, Mr. Conner said the curbs will not be painted at this time. If the signage does not work, this will be re-evaluated.

A vote was taken on the motion, which carried 7 – 0, and Resolution No. 171 was approved.

9. CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENT

(a) Deb Moore-Marchant, 16261 12^th Avenue NE, spoke about the light pollution problem in Shoreline. She said she is highly sensitive to bright light, as is approximately 20 percent of the world population. She said by the time she is 70 she will not be able to go out at night because of glare. She advocated a comprehensive and educational outdoor lighting ordinance in Shoreline. She said she submitted such a proposal to Planning and Development Services. She defined good lighting and listed its benefits, including making streets and homes safer, eliminating a cluttered-looking nightscape and saving money. She said there is evidence that light-trespass can effect our health as well. Ms. Moore-Marchant concluded by demonstrating light pollution with a slide show. She asked Council to work with her on this issue.

(b) Bruce Weertman, 6749 18^th Avenue NW, said he is the Chair of the Northwest Section of the International Dark Skies Association. His organization fights light pollution. Membership is doubling every 18 months. He said light pollution creates clutter, glare and energy waste. It has an impact on nocturnal wildlife. He said lights should be fully shielded, and he demonstrated good shielding. He listed areas that have good lighting codes, including Island County, Deschutes County, and the City of Redmond. He advocated that Shoreline develop a lighting code and set a good example to other jurisdictions. He said a lighting code can make the community more beautiful and more liveable.

In closing remarks, Councilmember Gustafson mentioned that Councilmember Lee has her picture in the National League of Cities newsletter. He also mentioned the completion of the City Manager brochure and then asked whether Shoreline has any input into Seattle City Light (SCL) rate setting.

Mr. Bauman noted that Shoreline residents receive the same rate increases that any other SCL customer receives. The City has no control over the rates.

Councilmember Grossman supported looking at lighting issues.

10. ADJOURNMENT

At 9:45 p.m., Mayor Jepsen declared the meeting adjourned.

__________________________
Sharon Mattioli, CMC
City Clerk