Monday, June 3, 2002, 6:30 p.m.

Shoreline Conference Center, Mt. Rainier Room

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

ABSENT: None

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 Deputy City Clerk, all Councilmembers were present, with the exception of Deputy Mayor Grossman and Councilmember Ransom, who arrived shortly thereafter, and Councilmember Montgomery, who arrived later in the meeting.

3. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT AND FUTURE AGENDAS

City Manager Steve Burkett announced that the June 17 Council meeting has been cancelled.

4. COUNCIL REPORTS

Councilmember Hansen reported on a meeting with Aurora Avenue business owners, State Representative Ruth Kagi, and Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Secretary Doug MacDonald regarding the Aurora Corridor Project. He noted that several Councilmembers attended this meeting. He also reported on his attendance at the King County Council transportation meeting, where he expressed the City of Shoreline’s support for the Regional Transportation Improvement District.

At 6:37 Deputy Mayor Grossman and Councilmember Ransom arrived.

Councilmember Ransom wondered whether Secretary MacDonald has taken a clearly defined position on this issue. He felt that Secretary MacDonald clearly encouraged further discussion and consideration of other options, encouraging the Shoreline Merchants Association. In Councilmember’s Ransom view, Secretary MacDonald also did not have adequate statistics on traffic and could not answer public requests for data, which made his staff look unprepared.

Mayor Jepsen responded that participants at the meeting came away believing that Secretary MacDonald stated that although medians are required in the Aurora Corridor project, he would look at other options.

Deputy Mayor Grossman commented on the north-end mayors' meeting, noting its focus was on the many services that King County no longer plans to provide to cities.

5. PUBLIC COMMENT: none

6. WORKSHOP ITEMS

Andrea Spencer, Associate Planner, introduced the KPG design team. She said the goal of the gateways project is to identify a theme that reflects the Council’s vision for Shoreline. She said the Gateway Master Plan will contain design guidelines, drawings and estimates of construction and maintenance costs. She noted that parks signage and gateway signage will need to be consistent. Finally, she reviewed the timelines for Council review and public workshops hosted by the Planning Commission and the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Committee.

Paul Fuesel, KPG Principal, presented a slide show on the proposed theme for the Gateway Master Plan. He noted that Shoreline is a place of established neighborhoods, natural beauty, and quality schools; in other words, a place to call "home." He asked for Council input regarding this theme.

Responding to Deputy Mayor Grossman’s question about how the "home" theme will be visually articulated, Mr. Fuesel gave some examples of how gateways exemplify themes. He said the next step will be "fleshing out" Shoreline’s theme.

Councilmember Montgomery arrived at 6:52 pm.

Mayor Jepsen expressed that the theme was "vague." He wanted to be sure the cost estimates are available to be incorporated into the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to be adopted this summer. He also wanted to see what the implementation steps will be.

Mr. Burkett said the numbers will not be refined for the CIP, but the estimates will be available by the adoption of the 2003 budget.

Mayor Jepsen felt the simple gateway design at Walgreens in North City and at 145^th and Aurora Avenue NE may be adequate. He did not believe that the gateways needed to represent a consistent symbol of the City. He stated that variety is important and he preferred to see something that gives a sense of place and a sense of pride. Continuing, he noted that quite a bit of money was spent on Shoreline park signs. He wanted to be careful and thoughtful about replacing those signs.

Councilmember Gustafson pointed out that significant thought went into Shoreline’s current logo, which reflects the theme of trees and water. He also liked the Walgreens signs and felt this idea could be expanded upon. He did not think something needs to be done at every one of the entrances on the list.

Councilmember Ransom concurred. He said he was thinking about six gateways, not 24. He wanted to see the population of the City on the signage.

Mr. Burkett responded that the idea of listing many locations was to provide a choice among them. Mr. Fuesel added that the gateways would vary in size according to the prominence of the location.

Shawna Micic, KPG Urban Designer, continued the presentation of slides of the potential gateway locations.

Responding to Councilmember Gustafson’s question about signage on pedestrian overpasses, Mr. Fuesel said staff will talk to WSDOT to see what can be done on Shoreline’s overpass.

Mayor Jepsen summarized that Council supports the process, but wants to have something funded in the CIP. He emphasized the importance of variety in symbols and scale. He also wanted detailed information on any proposal to change the park signage.

He suggested that as business districts continue to revitalize, there may be opportunities to encourage signage outside the identified locations.

(b) Capital Improvements Project Update

Paul Haines, Public Works Director, introduced Public Works staff and consultants from CH2MHill, Otak, and Gray & Osborne. He began the 2002 CIP update by discussing the Aurora Corridor Project. He presented a matrix that was distributed at the WSDOT meeting reported on earlier in the meeting. The matrix compared improvements to SR 99 made by various cities and showed the cost-per-mile in 2002 dollars. He emphasized that for any comparison, it is important to know the year the project is or will be built and what specific transportation features are included. He said the best way to compare is to delete utility undergrounding and street lighting, as well as the contingency, which in Shoreline’s case is 30 percent. This comparison then shows a range between $ 4 million to $14 million per mile among the projects, putting Shoreline in about "in the middle of the pack."

Responding to Councilmember Ransom, Mr. Burkett noted that the $28 million figure in the CIP is inflated to reflect costs in the year the project will actually be constructed. He also clarified that Shoreline’s contingency fund reflects all the uncertainties remaining with the project. It does not reflect inflation.

Continuing, Mr. Haines reported that the Value Engineering Study has been completed. It is ready to be submitted, but since the environmental process is not yet completed, the study might require some changes. Its purpose is to test whether the project assumptions are viable or whether there are other options that should be considered. It identifies ways to reduce the cost of the project. A value engineering study is a technique to allow the City to be sure the project has been well-designed at the best cost.

Turning to the environmental process, Mr. Haines said the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) reviewed and commented on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) in February. In April it received the City’s replies to FHWA’s comments. In May FHWA requested further information on about 12 items. The two staffs will meet to determine the resolution of these points on June 13, 2002. Once FHWA has signed the document, the EIS hearing can be scheduled and the public can review the DEIS. Then Council will proceed with the decision process. Of course, WSDOT also must sanction the Council’s choices. Then when the Final EIS has been issued, design can proceed on the first phase of the project.

Responding to Councilmember Chang, Mr. Haines said Council will consider the value engineering information after the environmental review and hearing process. At that point, a final design will be selected.

Councilmember Hansen said that a good part of the contingency was set aside in case the City had to rebuild the underlying roadbed.

Moving on, Mr. Haines reported that the Interurban Trail project has been broken into four segments. Negotiations with Seattle City Light (SCL) for use of the right-of-way are ongoing. He was confident that an agreement should be forthcoming. The trail design will have to allow SCL to build out its corridor. He said he is working to accelerate the construction schedule.

Mayor Jepsen wanted to be sure that as the trail is constructed, thought is given to gateway opportunities.

Responding to Mayor Jepsen, Mr. Haines said the design plans for the south and north segments are 50 percent complete. Now SCL needs to formally review and agree with them.

Councilmember Hansen said the plans Council saw several months ago were very complete. He was under the impression that the City had "zeroed in" on the south segment of the trail.

Mr. Burkett said the main issue with SCL is alignment of the trail and making sure that there is access for people who currently have access on SCL right-of-way. The design and aesthetic plans have remained the same.

Councilmember Ransom asked whether issues about the roadbed being able to handle heavy SCL equipment and the property issues regarding agreements between SCL and private property owners have been resolved. Mr. Haines said discussions have taken place with SCL about the leases to property owners and the timing for vacation of properties. SCL wants the pathway placed comfortably for longer term use by both SCL and Shoreline.

Councilmember Ransom asked about joint use of trail facilities and short term access needs by property owners and SCL. Mr. Burkett said Shoreline would prefer to limit access. They are working on how this can be done while maintaining the viability of the current businesses along the trail.

Councilmember Gustafson felt access limitations should be similar to the Burke-Gilman Trail to address safety issues.

Turning to the North City/15^th Avenue NE Corridor, Mr. Haines said the final scope of work will be completed this week and then discussed at the June 24 Council meeting. The work plan includes a major public involvement component. Traffic analysis, pedestrian safety, neighborhood traffic mitigation, and an active neighborhood process are the deliverables for the project. It now is a combination of three prior CIP projects (North City improvements, pedestrian/crosswalk improvements on 15^th Avenue NE and pedestrian safety and mobility project).

Mr. Haines reviewed meetings he has had with various stakeholder groups in the area. He said he has explained the process the City must follow to improve an arterial. To put in a signal at 170^th and 15^th Avenue NE will have the potential of changing traffic movements east of 15^th Avenue NE because of the lack of signals there between 145^th Street and 175^th Street. He concluded that work will begin in 2002 to look at the entire corridor. The design solutions will be considered during 2003 for frontage improvements in North City.

Mayor Jepsen said the City has already conducted a healthy public involvement process for the North City business improvements. He wanted to see what the alignment of 15^th Avenue NE will be. He wondered if there is a way to expedite this part of the process by completing the traffic engineering and technical review first and then having public review.

Mr. Haines said the goal is keep the stakeholders aware of what is going on and what the technical analysis is finding.

Councilmember Ransom emphasized the importance of analyzing the traffic flow on 15^th Avenue NE, which is about half of that on Aurora Avenue (perhaps 18,000 cars per day). He wanted to be sure the three-lane idea will adequately handle this volume of traffic. He also commented that the "alley concept" is not well understood by all the businesses in North City.

There was discussion of how "The Door Store" will have access for pick-up. Mr. Burkett said there will be parking in front of that business. The first phase of the project will focus on traffic analysis and the alley concept in the business district. Mr. Haines added that the improvements are not intended to displace or eliminate any businesses.

Mr. Burkett said the design will consider issues such as whether the City actually builds alleys, whether the City pays for the alleys, whether there is private redevelopment activities, etc. The details of the project will be reviewed at the June 24 meeting.

Turning to the Ronald Bog Drainage Project, Mr. Haines said the project is designed to address flooding problems. Because the planned improvements were so extensive and would have required a great deal of environmental review, another look has been taken at the project. The value engineering review showed that immediate needs could be addressed now. Longer term fixes will be coordinated with an area-wide basin planning effort. The value engineering review will be completed in June. Stakeholders will be contacted and told what will be proposed in the CIP. The aim is to reduce the initial cost of the project.

Mr. Burkett added that the expensive and time-consuming part is the daylighting of the outlet from Ronald Bog. So staff is looking at other solutions.

With regard to the 3^rd Avenue NW drainage project, the value engineering review validates the approach identified in May of last year. Later in the summer, staff will move forward on the final design contract for the conveyance systems and the treatment detention facilities needed for this improvement.

Responding to Councilmember Ransom, Mr. Haines said the designs for both projects will be finished this year and next. Going into 2003, there should be good estimates on costs of the projects. The construction itself is addressed in the CIP process.

Mr. Burkett said both of these projects cost several million dollars. The City must look at a cost benefit analysis. The plan had been to borrow money to do the Ronald Bog improvement. Now the concern is whether there will be money from Storm and Surface Water revenue fees to pay back such loans. Right now the idea is to lower costs and to do the strategic planning so that all issues are considered.

Mr. Haines added that the concept is to segment projects so that the City can show some results.

Concluding, Mr. Haines said Shoreview Park is very close to completion and should be ready for the July 20th opening ceremonies. Construction of the skatepark will begin in a week or so. He said the skatepark will be open while other elements of Phase 1 and 2 are being completed.

Responding to Councilmember Hansen’s questions about why additional parking is not available along 8^th Avenue NE, Wendy Barry, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Director, said there will be some parallel parking. However, there were some limitations on what could be put in the Seattle Public Utilities and Seattle City Light easements.

7. CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENT

(a) Anthony Poland, Shoreline, addressed the fact that most of the Richmond Beach coastline is closed to the public and that $1,000 fines are being issued to trespassers trying to reach the beach. He also opposed the Interurban Trail project and the amount of money allotted to the gateways project. He suggested the City should test for toxins going into Puget Sound from the railroad. He said people are unhappy with the situation of limited access to the beaches. He announced that a new community council is being formed because the Richmond Beach Community Council is really a club with dues required for participation.

(b) Don Scoby, Shoreline, asked about state laws regarding driver responsibilities toward pedestrians. He also wanted to know how many failure-to-yield-to-pedestrian tickets have been given out in the City of Shoreline in 2000, 2001 and 2002.

Mayor Jepsen confirmed that the Richmond Beach Community Council is one of the recognized neighborhood groups in the City of Shoreline.

8. EXECUTIVE SESSION

At 8:50 p.m., the Mayor announced that the Council would recess into executive session for 30 minutes to discuss potential litigation on two matters. At 9:59 p.m., the executive session concluded, and the workshop reconvened.

9. ADJOURNMENT

At 10:00 p.m., Mayor Jepsen declared the meeting adjourned.

_____________________________

Carol Shenk

Deputy City Clerk