CITY OF SHORELINE

SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL

SUMMARY MINUTES OF WORKSHOP MEETING

Monday, July 15, 2002, 6:30 p.m.

Shoreline Conference Center, Mt. Rainier Room

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

ABSENT: Councilmember Montgomery

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 Deputy Mayor Grossman, who arrived later in the evening, and Councilmember Montgomery.

Upon motion by Councilmember Hansen, seconded by Councilmember Chang, and unanimously carried, Councilmember Montgomery was excused.

3. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT AND FUTURE AGENDAS

City Manager Steve Burkett reminded the Council of the Reopening of Shoreview Park on Saturday, July 20th, and the Gateway Open House on July 25th.

4. COUNCIL REPORTS

Councilmember Hansen reported his attendance at the Suburban Cities Association management meeting.

5. PUBLIC COMMENT

(a) Daniel Mann, Shoreline, reiterated his point from the July 8 meeting about the need for the City to communicate with the citizens before legal action is taken. He read a July 2001 e-mail correspondence to Deputy Mayor Grossman relating to the Aegis Assisted Living project and expressed his displeasure that Shoreline citizens have no say in City government.

(b) Janet Way, Shoreline, said she learned from the Shoreline Enterprise that the City has limited funds to spend on creek protection. She said the City has a duty to protect all critical areas, and that it does not have the option to choose which areas to protect.

(c) Dave Townsend, Shoreline, said he disagrees with all the traffic studies the City plans because they are unnecessary when the Council can rely on existing traffic information. He also disagreed with the City's handling of the Aegis and Aurora Projects.

(d) Pat Crawford, Shoreline, questioned the meaning of statements made in the Aegis e-mail, specifically the section referring to a "negotiated agreement" between Aegis and the City. She wanted clarification about what kind of agreement was made, noting that Councilmembers should not be negotiating when they will be the final judges on the Aegis permit.

(e) Tim Crawford, Shoreline, said a law was broken in the Aegis e-mail matter and that Mayor Jepsen and Deputy Mayor Grossman will have to recuse themselves because they discussed Mr. Crawford in Executive Session. He said the City has been embarrassed and the matter will eventually find itself in Superior Court.

Mayor Jepsen said the Mayor alone does not establish the rules and that the matter will come before the entire Council.

Councilmember Ransom clarified that the Council has not discussed the Aegis Project as a group, as it has been warned by legal counsel not to do so.

Mr. Burkett said that to his knowledge no meeting ever took place on the Aegis project. He said he never attended any meetings nor did he meet any of the principals for Aegis.

6. PUBLIC HEARING

(a) Public hearing to consider citizen's comments regarding the 2003-2008 Capital Investment Program and the 2003-2008 Transportation Improvement Program.

Mr. Burkett distributed revisions to certain pages of the Capital Investment Program(CIP). He briefly reviewed the contents of the CIP and noted a few changes in cost and/or timeline for the following projects: Interurban Trail project; Interurban Pedestrian Bridge; 3rd Avenue drainage pipeline; and Ronald Bog long-term improvements. He said that 19% of resources for the CIP is coming from the fund balance, 33% is projected to come from grants, and 12% from General Fund contributions. He explained the following three funds comprising the CIP:

He summarized by emphasizing that the CIP is effective, purposeful, and balanced through 2008.

Mayor Jepsen noted that Council rules require that public hearings begin at 8:00 p.m. Councilmember Hansen moved to suspend the rules to start the public hearing at the noticed time of 6:30 p.m. Councilmember Gustafson seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.

Mayor Jepsen opened the public hearing and noted that the purpose of the hearing was to allow the public to specifically comment on the CIP.

(a) Janet Way, Shoreline, asked for clarification of the Paramount Park open space line item in the CIP. She also inquired about the appeal fee, and was told by the Council that it was an operating budget issue not included in the CIP.

(b) Roger Chenard, Shoreline, reaffirmed his comments from three weeks prior regarding the 15th Avenue corridor project. He noted the tremendous amount of traffic on that street, and the fact that traffic flows fluctuate throughout the day. He felt that the North City project will create more traffic problems than solutions.

(c) Fred Clingan, Shoreline, urged the Council to finish the project to eliminate flooding at N. 183rd St. and Dayton Place N. He explained where the drainage is coming from and why flooding has occurred. He said storm water flow has increased significantly in the last five years due to construction projects in surrounding areas. He urged the Council to include this project in the CIP.

(d) Daniel Mann, Shoreline, said the Shoreline Merchants Association has developed alternatives for the Aurora Corridor Project that would cost only $5-6 million per mile. He said the merchants oppose the idea of medians as well as the reductions to lanes on 15th Avenue. He felt the City’s plans will waste a lot of money and put neighborhoods in jeopardy.

(e) Russ McCurdy, Arlington, owner of two businesses on Aurora Avenue, said that the CIP programs may be good ideas but the timing is bad, since these are difficult economic times. He said the project costs are too high and asked Council to consider the financial burden on taxpayers.

Upon motion by Councilmember Hansen, seconded by Councilmember Gustafson and unanimously carried, the public hearing was closed.

Wendy Barry, Director of the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department, reviewed the parks projects in the CIP. She addressed the question of Paramount Park open space and said grants for property acquisition did not come through last year. It is included it in the CIP for a future year.

Continuing, Ms. Barry introduced the Neighborhood Parks Repair & Replacement Plan. Councilmember Hansen asked whether it might be more appropriate to include maintenance in the operating budget. Ms. Barry said that items totaling more than $10,000 are considered major maintenance items that should be included under capital improvements.

Councilmember Ransom inquired about park modifications the City can make to meet the criteria for the Americans with Disabilities Act. Ms. Barry said the City could replace non-compliant drinking fountains, provide handicap accessibility for new playgrounds, and install accessible paths and picnic tables. She noted that Paramount Park will include handicap accessible features.

Parks Master Plan

Ms. Barry reviewed the Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan (PROSP) Update from page 44 of the CIP. She added that the Master Plans are priorities in the current POSP but may be modified with the update.

Ronald Bog Park Master Plan

Councilmember Gustafson asked if a separate Master Plan was needed for other parks. Ms. Barry responded that the PROSP is a long-term, overview document. She said there is an expanded public process for master planning on individual parks. Councilmember Gustafson expressed a desire to tie the Cromwell Park and Ronald Bog Studies together.

Mr. Barry said the City would have a better idea on planning after surface water issues are addressed in Ronald Bog.

Mayor Jepsen said that the Master Plan needs to be completed by 2005 in order to work on the drainage solution. Paul Haines, Public Works Director, felt the circumstances in Ronald Bog Park may differ from Cromwell Park because of flooding issues. He asked whether park master planning drives the solution for storm water or vice versa. Mayor Jepsen said that neither should drive the other, but both should be done with the whole in mind. Councilmember Gustafson concurred with Mayor Jepsen, and Mr. Burkett added that the project could be included for 2005.

Councilmember Hansen said that the solving the bog problem is the more important consideration, but after further discussion, the Council agreed that both are important considerations.

Twin Ponds Park Master Plan

Ms. Barry described the Twin Ponds Master plan as a high priority project with a number of recommended improvements scheduled for 2006-2007.

Cromwell Park

Ms. Barry identified Cromwell Park as a high priority and expressed her intention to collaborate with Public Works in coordinating the Master Plan and Surface Water Plan.

Swimming Pool

Ms. Barry identified the auditorium ceiling and the roof as the two major maintenance projects included in the capital budget.

Shoreline Community College Sports Field Feasibility Study

Ms. Barry gave 2004 as a corrected date for the study, which will follow the SCC Master Plan Project. She said the City has been working with the college to resolve an encroachment issue, and the college has recently come forward with a proposed partnership. She said the study may not be needed after 2004, depending on how much progress is made, and described this project as one that presents a good test of the PROSP Update.

Councilmember Gustafson raised the question of whether this project should be submitted to the voters as part of a bond issue. He added that the preliminary feasibility study should be moved up to this year if the intent is to include this project in the bond issue.

Richmond Beach Saltwater Park Master Plan

Ms. Barry described this plan as a high priority project included in the original PROSP that makes enhancements and manages underutilized assets.

Richmond Beach Saltwater Park Erosion

Ms. Barry described the Erosion Plan as repair work to reinforce the concrete sidewalks surrounding the park. Responding to Councilmember Ransom’s question about what the City is doing to prevent the continued erosion at Richmond Beach, Ms. Barry said that staff is working to remove unwanted vegetation and re-vegetate the landscape.

Deputy Mayor Grossman arrived at 7:45 p.m.

Parks Equipment

Ms. Barry said staff is evaluating equipment and will be undertaking a full analysis of athletic field maintenance in 2004.

Roads Capital Fund

Mr. Burkett provided a new detail sheet for the Interurban Trail and responded to the suggestion that the City delay some road projects due to economic factors. He said the City will lose grants if the projects are delayed, resulting in tax money being spent on other cities.

Councilmember Hansen emphasized the fact that all of these projects are fully funded.

Mr. Haines added that grants help in scoping projects and noted that the current year and possibly 2003 are the only budget years tied to the CIP. Councilmember Ransom added that the CIP is a living document and subject to change mid-budget year.

Regarding the Interurban Trail, Mr. Haines explained that the CIP looks at three segments in the six-year plan. He anticipated first phase construction of the project beginning in 2003 with possibly two additional phases.

Councilmember Ransom asked for clarification about the timeline for starting the project, and Mr. Haines said that the project is scheduled to begin in 2003. Mr. Haines said Seattle City Light (SCL) feels that the City's schedule may be too aggressive.

Councilmember Ransom followed up by asking how the bridges crossing 155th and Aurora Avenue will be designed and constructed. Ms. Tarry replied that the City did not know yet but that some preliminary technical engineering had identified a solution.

Councilmember Hansen asked whether the bridge would be designed for vehicle use. Mr. Haines replied that SCL is more concerned about access to overhead power lines than vehicle use.

Curb Ramps Program

Mr. Haines described this as a continuing program that complies with ADA requirements.

Pedestrian Program

Mr. Haines said the Pedestrian Program is a new project beginning in 2003 that will evaluate pedestrian infrastructure and construct sidewalks and crosswalks in arterials and collectors. He said part of the funds will be spent to construct the right-of-ways and part will go to maintenance.

Annual Road Service Maintenance Program

Mr. Haines said that by the end of 2002 the City will be able to determine whether the $700,000 annual investment is a valid figure, and will update the surface rating report if necessary.

Councilmember Ransom asked about the problems associated with maintaining roads and performing overlays. Mr. Haines said the City would like to get 20 years on an overlay, but 10 to 15 is more realistic. He said slurry seals are not frequently used in this area, and that the City applied no slurry seals this year.

Annual Sidewalk Repair Program

Mr. Haines said the Sidewalk Repair Program is designed to evaluate existing sidewalks and maintain them as necessary at an annual cost of $100,000.

Richmond Beach Overcrossing

Mr. Haines said the City owns the bridge and that 14% of the maintenance costs come from City revenue, with the remainder coming from grants and Burlington Northern. He said the City needs to either replace the bridge at a $1.8 million estimated cost or assume ongoing maintenance costs.

Transportation Improvements CIP Project Formulation

Mr. Haines said the money for CIP Project Formulation is set aside to do some preliminary scoping and assist with grant preparation. Deputy Mayor Grossman asked if the process included working with organizations that are doing institutional master plans, and Mr. Haines said it did.

Neighborhood Traffic Safety Program

Mr. Haines explained that funds for this program are divided among three areas: enforcement, improvements, and education. He said 54 areas throughout the City have applied for program assistance. He also stressed the importance of Council input on how to use these funds.

Councilmember Ransom wanted to make sure that the solutions are effective. He suggested that the program could be used to address the problems with the 15th Avenue Project.

Mayor Jepsen, referring to prior public comment, said the Aurora budget has a fair amount of contingency in it and suggested it could be tightened up as the design goes forward.

Mr. Burkett reminded everyone that staff will keep coming back with updates on projects so that Council can understand all the costs and make informed decisions.

Mr. Haines briefly discussed the environmental process on the Aurora project and said the best case scenario is construction in 2004. He said the CIP is based on assumptions due to the lack of a preferred alternative.

Councilmember Chang said the Council needs to listen to the merchants and employees who will be impacted by the project. He said the merchants wanted to meet with the City but the Aurora Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) ignored their concerns. He said the information that staff provides Council must be detailed, unbiased, and thorough so Council can make good decisions. Noting most Asian merchants and property owners disapproved of the process, he asked whether any public opinion had been collected.

Mayor Jepsen said the Aurora Corridor project itself can be discussed in September when the Council considers the DEIS.

Aurora Avenue North 165th-205th Design

Mr. Haines explained that much more information is needed before the City can fully scope the project south of 165th. Councilmember Chang asked about the estimated costs and whether the City has the funds. Mr. Haines said an additional $70 million will be needed for the remaining phases. He warned that there is an inflation factor attached to it, and said the City only has the first phase funds. He said the Transportation Improvement Program will be used to compete for grant money.

15th Avenue NE

Mr. Haines said the design effort is currently underway. It spans from 145th to 196th, with the major construction effort scheduled for 2004 and 2005. Mayor Jepsen asked about 2002 construction costs, and Mr. Haines said a traffic signal may be purchased this year.

Councilmember Ransom was concerned about the effects that three years of road construction may have on traffic and the business community. Mr. Haines replied that some of the construction will not occur on 15th, and he did not anticipate a full three years of construction on the corridor. Councilmember Ransom was also concerned about narrowing 15th Avenue to three lanes, noting that the street is experiencing increased traffic and carries half the traffic of Aurora Avenue (Highway 99), about 20,000 cars per day. Mr. Haines assured the Council that there would be many more opportunities to discuss all the project details.

North 160th Street @ Greenwood Avenue North Pre-Design Study

Mr. Haines said having this project in the CIP helps the City pursue grant funding by identifying projects the City wants to pursue to correct pedestrian safety problems at N. 160th and Greenwood.

Dayton Avenue N. @ N. 175th Street Retaining Wall

Mr. Haines identified this as a new project involving a single investment of $30,000 to determine the scope of repairs to a retaining wall showing signs of distress.

5th Avenue NE Street & Drainage Improvements

Mr. Haines outlined the timeline for improvements to this arterial connected to the Ronald Bog drainage improvements project.

Transportation Master Plan

Mr. Haines said the Transportation Master Plan needs to be updated and available as part of the land use update. He said its purpose is to develop modeling in order to test different redevelopment proposals and to define a funding strategy.

Mayor Jepsen asked whether any of the resources in the CIP were loans. Ms. Tarry replied that none of the resources in the Roads Capital Fund were loans.

SWM CIP Project Formulation

Mr. Haines commented that the project mentioned during the public hearing on Dayton Place at 183rd remains unfunded. Councilmember Hansen asked why and supported pursing the matter. Mr. Burkett concurred with Councilmember Chang that the CIP process is about prioritizing, and added that the seven SWM projects totaling $10.5 million is the maximum the City can afford.

Mayor Jepsen referred to page 111 and asked if the SWM fee represents an increase or the total collection amount. Mr. Tarry said it represents an increase in SWM fees, and that page 111 does not show the total amount. She added that 3rd Avenue and Ronald Bog are being partially funded up front with a Public Works Trust Fund (PWTF) loan and repayment will come out of the operational account. Mayor Jepsen inquired about old PWTF debt, and Ms. Tarry said it would be paid off in 2003.

Mr. Haines explained that $40,000 per year for SWM CIP allows Public Works to do pre-design scoping for surface water projects.

Surface Water Small Projects

Mr. Haines said the SW small projects sets aside a dollar amount each year to fix pipe and catch basin problems. He provided a new handout for Ronald Bog and said the City will do a value engineering study to compare alternatives, adding that more time is needed to determine the best approach. He said the CIP continues to acknowledge the need to choose a preferred alternative, and that the City has a PWTF loan to finance these improvements.

3rd Avenue NW Drainage Improvements

Mr. Haines said the City has a preferred alternative for this project, which came through the value engineering study. He added that funds were moved around to reflect how expenses will most likely occur.

Stream Rehab/Habitat Enhancement Program

Mr. Haines said the project scope description has been adjusted, and Councilmember Gustafson said grant funding for stream and habitat restoration is available through WRIA.

Surface Water Comprehensive Plan

Mr. Haines expressed the need to articulate priorities and said the SWCP will identify costs, timing scenarios, and scheduling of improvements. He said the project description contains unfunded projects and emphasized the need for public participation and continued dialogue with both the Planning Commission and the Council.

Mayor Jepsen then summarized the following five items about which the Council had comments:

7. WORKSHOP ITEMS

(a) Draft Work Plan for Council Goal #7(establish a Shoreline Citizens Bond Advisory Committee)

There was a Council discussion on whether to postpone consideration of this item until August. Due to certain timing issues, Council began discussion tonight.

Mr. Burkett noted that during 2004, when a bond election is proposed under the timeline in the Council packet, several major CIP projects will be underway. He also said it might be preferable to have the master planning programmed in the CIP completed before addressing a bond issue.

Bob Olander, Deputy City Manager, briefly reviewed the staff report. He noted that staff had prepared an alternate schedule with a longer timeframe. He also expressed a concern about the ability to staff to manage all the CIP projects that might be approved.

Councilmember Gustafson supported the current timeline but said he was willing to discuss it at a future meeting.

Councilmember Ransom suggested the School District does not want additional items on the ballot and recommended that a bond issue be tied with master planning. He also favored further discussion sooner rather than later.

Mayor Jepsen suggested continuing the item to the August 19 workshop. At that time, staff can provide information regarding which CIP projects would be under construction in an overlapping timeframe and what the School District and any other entities' plans may be for bond measures.

Councilmember Chang suggested that the City form a citizens advisory committee for economic development to generate ideas on how to better market Shoreline. He also suggested that the City become more proactive in dealing with King County on the district court issue.

Councilmember Hansen said the Suburban Cities Association is working with King County and staff are always looking for more effective ways to do business.

8. CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENT

(a) Janet Way, Shoreline, expressed agreement with a holistic approach to drainage projects and said that many citizens are concerned about the stream basin characterization inventory. She expressed her opposition to raising the appeal fee, noting that a high fee discourages citizens from participating in the public process.

(b) Richard Johnsen, Shoreline, was upset about the manner in which Mayor Jepsen treated his comments regarding safety concerns on 175th. He said 175th has grown into a major traffic corridor, and that Mayor Jepsen does not understand the history of that road or the safety issues involved. He recommended a signal at Ashworth and 175th to slow traffic, and requested a traffic solution to a crosswalk at 175th and Wallingford.

(c) Anthony Poland, Shoreline, addressed Deputy Mayor Grossman's e-mail memorandum and asked for his response to allegations about his relationship to Aegis.

Responding to public comment, Mayor Jepsen said it was not unusual that stream basin inventory drafts were not available. They will be available to the public after stream inventories are finalized and sent to Council for public review. He also With regard to appeal fees, he expressed his preference for making appeal fees proportional to the cost or size of the project. In response to Mr. Johnsen's comments, Mayor Jepsen said he did not intend to dismiss him and apologized for the misunderstanding.

Councilmember Gustafson noted that 175th Street was an unfunded project in the CIP at an estimated cost of $6.6 million.

In response to Mr. Poland's comments, Deputy Mayor Grossman said he was an Economic Development Council Board Member and was asked by the EDC President to meet with Aegis representatives, although such a meeting never took place.

Councilmember Chang asked about the status of the Street Light Equalization Plan and the Sister City Committee. Mr. Burkett said not much has changed on the street light issue due to staff vacancies and a pending court case with the City of Seattle. He said a previous memo explained the status of the Sister City proposal and that the Sister City Association is still working on its bylaws. Mayor Jepsen suggested calling former Councilmember Cheryl Lee for more information on the Sister City idea.

9. ADJOURNMENT

At 10:03 p.m., Mayor Jepsen declared the meeting adjourned.

 

_____________________________

Sharon Mattioli, CMC

City Clerk