CITY OF SHORELINE

SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL

SUMMARY MINUTES OF WORKSHOP MEETING

Monday, January 16, 2001

6:30 p.m.

Shoreline Conference Center

Mt. Rainier Room

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

ABSENT: Councilmember Grossman

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 by the City Clerk, all Councilmembers were present, with the exceptions of Councilmembers Lee and Ransom, who arrived later in the meeting, and Councilmember Grossman.

Councilmember Gustafson moved to excuse Councilmember Grossman. Deputy Mayor Hansen seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.

3. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT AND FUTURE AGENDAS

Interim City Manager Larry Bauman reported that King County Metro plans to restore Richmond Beach and Ridgecrest bus service cut in response to Initiative 695. He said the Council of Neighborhoods will be asked for feedback on specific route changes, and then Council will discuss this item at its March 12 meeting.

4. COUNCIL REPORTS

Councilmember Gustafson mentioned the Youth Summit on February 3 and hoped there would be Council representation there. He also mentioned a meeting regarding the future of human services in the north end on Wednesday, January 31. He said he would attend and invited other Councilmembers to do so.

Councilmember Montgomery said she attended KOMO’s "Town Hall" on Sunday night, along with Shoreline residents Walt Hagen and Ken Howe. She said Mr. Howe mentioned the possibility of a monorail on the Interurban Trail right-of-way.

Mayor Jepsen noted speaking about the state of the City at the Shoreline Chamber of Commerce.

5. PUBLIC COMMENT

(a) Ken Howe, 745 N 184^th Street, addressed three topics: 1) his advice to the Sound Transit Board that there is room for a monorail in the 100-foot Seattle City Light right-of-way; 2) the Aurora Village Transit Center, which is owned by Metro and which he feels should be studied before the 192^nd Street Park and Ride for a Transit Oriented Development (TOD); and 3) factual errors in the Comprehensive Plan—he noted the statement in the Housing Element that half of the housing units built before 1939 are in the Richmond Beach area, and he said this figure is actually less than 20 percent. He asked that such errors be corrected.

(b) Don Gilbertson, 16727 5^th Avenue NE, asked if Councilmembers had received his petition regarding street trees. He reiterated his testimony last week that no one from the City has met with him face-to-face on his property regarding the problems created by the street trees on 5^th Avenue between 167^th and 170^th Streets. He said he also represents his neighbor on this problem, and he protested the lack of City response.

(c) Clark Elster, 1720 NE 177^th Street, informed Council that a depression is forming under 192^nd Street just west of Meridian Avenue.

Mayor Jepsen commented that Council is committed to locating the TOD at the 192^nd Street Park and Ride site.

Mr. Bauman pointed out that several staff members have spoken with Mr. Gilbertson about his concerns and considerable time has been spent analyzing this situation. Mr. Bauman confirmed that the City needs a comprehensive tree replacement program in order to fairly and appropriately begin replacing the street trees that are causing problems.

Mayor Jepsen commented that Deputy Mayor Hansen had noticed another depression on 200^th Street Mr. Bauman said both problems have been rectified.

Councilmember Lee arrived at 6:55 p.m.

6. WORKSHOP ITEMS

(a) North City Sub-Area Plan Update

Tim Stewart, Director of Planning and Development Services, explained that four major issues crystallized at the Planning Commission’s discussion of the North City Sub-area Plan: 1) residential densities; 2) traffic and reducing the four travel lanes on 15^th Avenue NE to three; 3) mitigation of cut-through traffic and development of a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Planned Action Ordinance; and 4) integrating this effort into the economic development program.

Anna Kolousek, Assistant Director of Planning and Development Services, reviewed the two documents before Council tonight: a Comprehensive Plan amendment called the "North City Sub-Area Plan;" and a Development Code amendment creating a special district for North City. She described the goal of the plan to create a "Main Street" along 15^th Avenue NE between 172^nd Street and 180^th Street by moving the buildings closer to the street and permitting retail and residential uses to be denser than currently allowed under the Development Code. Parking will be located behind the buildings, possibly with additional residential units above the parking lots.

Continuing, Ms. Kolousek described the two overlay zones to be created within the Main Street district. Zone #1 would require retail to be located on the first floor. Zone #2 would allow either residential units or retail on the first floor. She said the Planning Commission reviewed this concept and recommended the elimination of the density limitations in both zones. The reasoning was that it is actually the bulk of the buildings, rather than the number of units, that affects the character of the area. The bulk of the buildings would not change in the proposed Main Street zones. Building height would remain capped at 60 feet. Additional standards are proposed to make development more compatible with the surrounding area, but it would be left to the market to determine the number of units in the building. Ms. Kolousek then described the supplemental design standards in the amendment to the Development Code.

Turning to traffic considerations, Ms. Kolousek said there are two issues to be considered. No change is recommended to the physical dimension of the rights-of-way on 15^th Avenue NE. However, there will be reduction of the distance between future buildings due to the elimination of the front yard setback. It is also recommended that 15^th Avenue NE be tapered down to three lanes, with two travel lanes (one in each direction), center left-turning lane, and parallel parking on both sides of the street.

Noting that this design could create more potential for cut-through traffic, Ms. Kolousek said that as part of the SEPA Planned Action Ordinance, a mitigation plan for the entire North City area will be developed. The State allows such an approach in growth areas. It will be carefully designed to enhance opportunities for pedestrians and bicycles and to reduce the number of necessary car trips within the neighborhood. She pointed out that the Council has already acted to allocate over $5 million for improvements to 15^th Avenue NE.

Ms. Kolousek said development is slowed by the amount of time required by the plan review process. The Planned Action SEPA review will be based on providing detailed environmental analysis for a build-out in 2015 of the demonstration projects that are in the sub-area plan. The analysis will consider traffic, land use, and all the other items that are reviewed in a draft environmental impact statement (EIS). She said that once this Planned Action SEPA review is completed, any developer who complies with the plan would be able to apply for a building permit without the Type B permit review process. This would reduce review time and therefore save money for the developer. She emphasized that the mitigation measures will be prepared in advance and approved by Council as part of the Planned Action Ordinance and the Final EIS.

Ms. Kolousek reviewed the next steps in the process, noting that staff is working on the EIS, which will be completed in March. After public review, some changes to the sub-area plan may be necessary. The EIS and the Planned Action Ordinance will be prepared simultaneously and brought to Council in June 2001.

Mayor Jepsen called for public comment.

(a) Gretchen Atkinson, President of the North City Business Association, said the Business Association is very pleased with the proposal and is looking forward to further development of North City.

(b) Rob Mateko, 17127 15^th Avenue NE, representing Anderson Community, was concerned that the Anderson driveway is at the edge of the development area. He pointed out the number of emergency vehicles that use this driveway and hoped this would be taken into account.

(c) Dennis Lee, 14547 26^th NE, said this is a fine plan; however, he was concerned that it is business-driven. He wanted to be sure residents are not left out of the planning.

(d) Walt Hagen, 711 N 193^rd Street, was concerned about narrowing 15^th Avenue NE. He was glad to hear that cut-through traffic will be mitigated. He emphasized that traffic congestion is a major problem for Shoreline. He didn’t want to see a plan that generates more traffic congestion.

(e) Charlotte Haines, Chair of the North City Neighborhood Association, responded to the comment about informing North City residents. She described neighborhood mailings. She said people are very excited about this plan because it will upgrade the entire area. It will allow more businesses that residents won’t have to drive to, which is particularly important as the population ages.

Councilmember Ransom arrived at 7:29 p.m.

Mayor Jepsen spoke in support of the Planned Action SEPA. He said this approach helps the region balance growth goals and concerns from the community. This process allows planning for the worst-case scenario so that as development occurs, the City has already addressed what will happen. The challenge is to make sure as many people as possible get involved as early in the process as possible. He said an effort has been made by the Business Association and the Neighborhood Association to do that and will undoubtedly continue.

Ms. Kolousek confirmed for Mayor Jepsen that the mixed use requirement in Zone #1 will not be eliminated by the proposal. He wished to ensure that the recommendation does not dilute the intent to get mixed use development.

Responding to Mayor Jepsen, Ms. Kolousek said construction on 15^th Avenue NE should begin in 2002.

Noting the Planning Commission did a very good job of asking the right questions, Councilmember Montgomery supported their recommended changes. She also commented that although her initial response to narrowing 15^th NE to three lanes was negative, she has been surprised at how well the three lanes have worked on 185^th Street.

Councilmember Lee commented on the amount of cut-through traffic already occurring through neighborhoods. She wished to ensure that the mitigation is adequate and advised researching what other communities, such as Everett, have done.

Mayor Jepsen raised the issue of traffic enforcement in neighborhoods, noting that early on, the Council decided that Shoreline should not become a "speed trap" like Lake Forest Park or Woodway. This policy has not been revisited, while the City has grown in its radar-enforcement capacity. He asked that a discussion on traffic enforcement be scheduled to determine whether Council wishes to see policy changes.

Noting he did not wish to minimize the problem of cut-through traffic, Deputy Mayor Hansen asserted there are no "good" north-south cut-through routes in North City.

Ms. Kolousek confirmed for Councilmember Gustafson that the recommendation from the Planning Commission was unanimous. He said he had concerns about density and traffic, but he would await the EIS to "fill in the holes." He asked where the City is in its growth management goal of adding 1,600 to 2,400 housing units and how the elimination of the density limitations in North City will impact this.

Mr. Stewart said staff is working on evaluating how many units have been produced since incorporation and the potential for growth in the future. He said one of the elements of the analysis is how development opportunities in North City and elsewhere may provide for much higher densities than anticipated in the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan provided for the addition of 66 units per year in the next 20 years. Under the proposal, ten times as many units might be added without impacting the adjoining neighborhood. This raises questions about whether all the conversions to higher densities in some neighborhoods are really needed. One area that staff is looking at is the one-lot deep high-density residential zoning that goes down 15^th Avenue NE. Mr. Stewart said the Planning Commission will wrestle with this issue in the spring. He concluded that currently the City is just about on target, producing between 80 and 100 new units per year. However, new targets will be coming out shortly based on the 2000 Census. These will be a challenge not only for Shoreline, but for the entire region.

Councilmember Gustafson said he was excited about the North City plan because it may allow the City to protect the integrity of the neighborhoods and still accommodate growth management goals.

Mr. Stewart said "firmer" numbers will become available through the environmental analysis.

Councilmember Ransom said everyone he has talked with has been supportive of the proposal. He was also impressed by the unanimity on the Planning Commission. Therefore, he had no concerns about the proposal.

Mayor Jepsen summarized that everyone supports the plan and is looking forward to seeing the results of the environmental review and the Planned Action Ordinance.

(b) Water Service Report

Kristoff Bauer, Interim Assistant City Manager, and David Parkinson of CH2MHill, recalled that the five options Council originally heard for water service in Shoreline have been narrowed down to three: 1) supporting the Shoreline Water District’s (District’s) efforts to annex the west side of the City, served by Seattle Public Utilities (SPU), to its system; 2) assumption of the District’s system; or 3) acquiring both service systems and serving all of Shoreline through a City utility. Tonight staff is recommending some policy positions that will serve as the basis for completion of the analysis of these options.

Continuing, Mr. Bauer said the key policy decisions are in three areas: 1) cooperation with Lake Forest Park (25 percent of the District’s customers live in Lake Forest Park); 2) long-term water supply; and 3) rates and financial management decisions.

With regard to Lake Forest Park customers, Mr. Bauer said the recommendations are based on how Shoreline would have liked to be treated by SPU. They would give the Lake Forest Park City Council some authority over policy decisions about how services are provided and how rates are set in its area.

Discussing the other two issues, Mr. Parkinson said staff recommends following the current District policy of attempting to negotiate a long-term water supply contract when the current contract with the City of Seattle expires in 2012. In terms of rates and financial management, he focused on capital improvement issues. He said the analysis is based on the District’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Water Plan rate model. He described the key assumptions of the analysis. Then he reviewed four alternative comparisons for projected capital project costs. The District’s CIP contains extensive budget allocations for water supply projects and water system replacement/expansion projects. By scaling back the water supply projects and modifying the pipe replacement program, the District’s CIP can be reduced by 22 percent. He noted that the reduced pipe replacement option is based on the concept that some of the pipe scheduled for replacement by the District has not reached the end of its useful life and replacement can be delayed without impacting the quality and reliability of service.

Mr. Parkinson reviewed other recommendations, including: 1) centralize administrative services and apply the City’s allocation model; 2) share equipment between utilities to decrease overall costs to the ratepayer; 3) repay debt according to the existing District schedule; 4) apply the six percent utility tax for Shoreline customers; 5) keep current District assets; and 6) maintain a minimum capital reserve balance of $1,000,000.

In conclusion, Mr. Parkinson said the estimated cumulative quantifiable impacts of all the recommendations would result in a nine percent reduction in 2010 water service rates, an additional $190,000 in General Fund revenue per year and a $275,000 reduction per year in administrative expenses allocated to existing City services.

Mr. Bauer said a number of ideas, such as sharing equipment, may have impacts, but they are not of sufficient magnitude to be visible in this analysis. He also noted that any sharing of equipment or use of property between a City "water utility" and another department would have to be compensated to the water utility fund to keep ratepayers whole.

Mr. Bauer said staff will complete the impact analysis based on tonight’s discussion. Then Council can provide direction about which alternative it prefers.

Mayor Jepsen asked for public comment.

(a) Bill Bear, 2541 NE 165^th Street, commended the District for planning ahead and thinking about water reutilization. He said tonight’s report seems to eliminate reutilization, which he felt is essential in any future plan.

(b) Dennis Lee, 14547 26^th NE, was bothered that the only option on the table is assumption of the District and the only information about options is coming from staff and consultants. He advocated another workshop at which the District could respond to the analysis. Noting the District has been serving Shoreline for a long time and has not had any problems, he advised a better choice might be to let the District continue to provide water service and let it help the City take over the Seattle side.

(c) Don Gilbertson, 16727 5^th Avenue N, commented that he has been served by the District since the early 1950s, that he has always been happy with the District and that he has not had any problems.

On another topic, he commented that the trees on 5^th Avenue are very unstable. He said he wished to be on record that if any of the trees fall and cause damage, he will "be after" the City.

(d) Rick Harbert, Water District Engineer, represented the District, saying he could not address all of the issues on the table in the short time available. He asked the Council to give the District the opportunity to make a presentation addressing each of the relevant points. He commented that the District has been working on a renegotiated agreement for long term water supply. It has received its water from the City of Seattle since 1935 and feels it has paid for its share of the supply. It is not in the citizens’ best interests to continue to pay for this forever. This is one of the reasons that an alternative was put on the table. This alternative has water reuse at its core. He also contested the statement that the District goes out and repairs pipelines whenever a new standard is adopted. However, sometimes requirements change, mandating improvements to the system.

(e) Walt Hagen, 711 N 193^rd Street, noted that Deputy Mayor Hansen attended the January 5, 2001 Water Commissioners meeting, where there was a lively exchange. Mr. Hagen said the maintenance the District provides is superior to that of SPU. He did not support only replacing equipment when "we have to." He feared Shoreline might follow the Seattle model, with the resultant lowering of service levels.

Councilmember Montgomery said if the City annexes the District, it should protect Lake Forest Park’s jurisdictional authority. Mr. Bauer said the analysis is based on this recommendation. He said there are many variables over time, including what Lake Forest Park might do. Some decisions will increase rates; some will decrease rates. The analysis is based on what the District is doing and plans to do. However, this could be changed tomorrow.

Responding to Councilmember Lee, Mr. Bauer explained that under the District’s current CIP, the accumulated CIP reserve will be spent down in five years. Of course, the District could decide to change this policy. The staff recommendation is to establish a minimum CIP reserve amount of $1 million. Doing this would create a two percent increase in the rates.

Mayor Jepsen commented that assumption is not the only option on the table. He said he would like to have SPU and the District consolidated to serve the City of Shoreline. He wanted to focus on how to move the process forward so that both the City and the District are working together to accomplish the goal. He was encouraged by the District’s new direction in looking at long-term water supply.

Councilmember Ransom stated that municipalities are attempting to consolidate all utilities under the umbrella of city government. In his view both water and sewer service should be provided by the City in order to provide comprehensive service. He wished to assure that there will be no harm to any of the District users and that they will continue to have service equal to what they have now. If anything, they might have a slight betterment. He said the District can be absorbed by the City and then a system can be built to integrate the SPU area into the City as well. The end result will be a better system for everyone. He said that even if there is a final vote for assumption, it will take at least two years for the integration to finally happen. Then it will take another two years for things to "settle down." He recommended starting now to accomplish this integration.

Deputy Mayor Hansen commented on his meeting with the District Commissioners. He said his interest is in acquiring the SPU service area and consolidating service in one provider. Whether this is a separate district or a department of the City is not terribly important to him. He believed that in the long run the City will acquire the District, but right now he would like to enter into a cooperative venture with it to acquire the SPU service area. He said he would welcome a joint meeting and workshop with the District Commissioners. He said there will be multiple joint meetings before action is taken.

Councilmember Gustafson concurred with Deputy Mayor Hansen. He welcomed a joint workshop to hear the District’s point of view and have an open discussion.

Mayor Jepsen added that Councilmembers have participated in a number of meetings with the District. Numerous reports have been shared with both Lake Forest Park and the District as the process has moved forward. He wanted to see the report completed so that Council can make a decision.

Mr. Bauer asked if Council supports the specific recommendations listed in the Council packet as a starting point for the remainder of the staff analysis. Mayor Jepsen commented that in general they make sense.

Councilmember Ransom also generally liked the recommendations but said he might take exception to one or two. He noted that Lake Forest Park has not responded with any specific requests regarding its role.

Councilmember Montgomery asked if the analysis is completely objective. Mr. Bauer assured her that it attempts to be neutral in evaluating how the District is run and the impact of different decisions. He said staff has tried to provide all the options, not drive the result.

Deputy Mayor Hansen said the final report should contain an explanation of exactly what legal processes are established by State law for assumption of the District. He mentioned questions asked by the District and said they could best be discussed in a joint workshop. He questioned items related to reducing costs, noting he did not believe that Commissioners’ expenses could have much of an impact. He also wondered whether the figure of $125,00 per year is realistic for reduced staffing costs and costs of engineering and legal expenses. He reiterated his long term goal that the District will eventually be assumed by the City. However, the primary goal is to have all of the citizens of Shoreline served by a single water district at the same service level. He asserted that the District could help the City achieve this goal.

Councilmember Ransom asked about the map of the boundaries of the District. Mr. Bauer said the map is inaccurate in identifying annexation areas, although it does show the accurate boundaries of the District.

Councilmember Gustafson asserted that a nine percent decrease in rates would appeal to citizens as long as quality of service is maintained. He generally agreed with the recommendations. He expressed concern about reductions in the CIP, noting the District is doing a good job with maintenance and water supply equipment. He wished to revisit this recommendation when the report is completed. He reiterated the need for open discussion.

Mr. Bauer clarified the issue of reserves. The District maintains reserves for different purposes. The only one that is projected to decrease to zero is the capital reserve. The other reserves will be maintained. The recommendation is to maintain the capital reserve fund at $1 million.

Mayor Jepsen expressed consensus to move forward to complete the analysis based on the recommended assumptions and to clarify the legal process established by State law. A joint meeting with the District will take place after the report is completed.

7. CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENT

(a) Andrew Maron, Water District Attorney, did not wish the Council to believe that following the recommendations will result in a 22 percent reduction in costs compared to the District. He said most of the savings are based on items the District itself is considering as well.

Mayor Jepsen assured Mr. Maron that the Council understands that these figures are simply projections at this point. No decisions will be based on them.

8. ADJOURNMENT

At 8:42 p.m., Mayor Jepsen declared the meeting adjourned.

__________________________
Sharon Mattioli, CMC
City Clerk