CITY OF SHORELINE

SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL

SUMMARY MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING

Monday, February 24, 2003

Shoreline Conference Center

6:00 p.m. 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 6:00 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 Ransom, who arrived shortly thereafter.

(a) Proclamation of Mareen S. Kruckeberg Week

Mayor Jepsen read the proclamation honoring the life and contributions of internationally known horticulturist and long-time Shoreline resident Mareen Kruckeberg.

Authur Kruckeberg thanked the City for recognizing Ms. Kruckeberg's achievements and assured Council that her work will continue.

Al Brooks, President of the Kruckeberg Botanical Garden Foundation, expressed appreciation for the proclamation, noting the Foundation's intention to help the family preserve the Kruckeberg property in perpetuity. He encouraged anyone who is interested in Ms. Kruckeberg's work to contact Susan Will at the City or go to the Kruckeberg website.

3. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT

City Manager Steve Burkett noted that the workshop of March 3 will begin as a joint meeting with the Planning Commission to review the proposed process and schedule for updating the Comprehensive Plan. He said the meeting will also include a review of the stream inventory. He reminded Council that the March 10 meeting has been cancelled due to the National League of Cities conference.

4. REPORTS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS: none

5. PUBLIC COMMENT

(a) Daniel Mann, Shoreline, suggested that the City support the King County parks levy instead of wasting money on unnecessary Aurora Corridor features such as the amenity zone. He said parks are beneficial, but the proposed amenity zone will not do anyone any good. He questioned whether Seattle City Light will assume the majority of costs for undergrounding utilities on Aurora. He expressed interest in seeing documentation that will explain the costs.

(b) Clark Elster, Shoreline, urged Council to visit the Fircrest Rehabilitation Center and advocate for preserving it in Shoreline. He said there will be economic consequences if Fircrest is closed, noting that it employs over 700 people. He said there are no other facilities that are capable of accepting its profoundly disabled residents, many of whom require 24-hour care. He said moving this high-needs population will result in considerable costs to the state.

(c) Richard Johnsen, Shoreline, expressed concern that reconfiguration of the North City section of 15^th Avenue NE could result in increased congestion since vehicles are prohibited from using the center lane to pass. He said the Ballinger neighborhood expressed concern that transit vehicles may block the flow of traffic. He requested additional discussion and clarification from KPG about relevant traffic laws and proposed transit revisions on 15^th Avenue NE.

(d) Anthony Poland, Shoreline, expressed opposition to reducing public comment opportunities. He said the best way to deal with the public is by reaching a consensus through compromise. He contended that the idea of reducing public comment can only be attributed to a staff-originated governance instead of citizen-driven government.

(e) Walt Hagen, Shoreline, said the Fircrest facility is impressive and that Council should try to preserve it. He said the "roving eyes" crosswalk on Aurora Avenue N is not effective, asserting that the driver's attention is drawn to the overhead lights and away from pedestrians. He said sting operations should not target drivers at that location because nobody recognizes it as a crosswalk.

Responding to Mr. Mann, Mayor Jepsen said he will continue to work on the issue of undergrounding utilities on Aurora Avenue. He noted that Council visited Olympia and discussed the Fircrest issue. He urged citizens to get involved and contact their state representatives, since the state legislature will make the decision on Fircrest. He said there has been discussion but no decision about public comment policy. He said he has passed along comments about the "roving eyes" to Mr. Burkett and Mr. Haines, who forward them to the Washington State Department of Transportation.

Councilmember Ransom suggested that citizens contact Senator Darlene Fairley, since she is the one who submitted the bill recommending closure of Fircrest. He said the Rainier School has been discussed as a possible substitute for Fircrest. He clarified that the King County levy Mr. Mann referred to is an annual expenditure for parks. He said since Shoreline assumed operation of 25 parks and facilities from King County, that money should remain in Shoreline rather than be used for parks outside of Shoreline.

Councilmember Gustafson expressed support for preserving Fircrest and noted his intention to express his concerns to Senator Fairley. He characterized the "roving eyes" crosswalk on Aurora as an unworkable pilot project that should be dismantled.

Councilmember Ransom said people do not understand the yellow flashing lights, but they do understand pedestrian stoplights. He felt there should be a pedestrian stoplight at NE 170^th Street and Aurora Avenue N. He said stoplights are also justified at NE 165^th Street due to the high accident rate.

Councilmember Hansen observed that the "roving eyes" pedestrian crosswalk has worked well when he has driven on Aurora Avenue. He noted that cars have always stopped for pedestrians, and that the center median serves as a safe pedestrian refuge. He said it is much safer than other sections of the street, where pedestrians frequently use the center, left-turn lane for refuge.

6. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

Councilmember Montgomery moved approval of the agenda. Councilmember Gustafson seconded the motion. Councilmember Ransom asked that Item 7(e) be pulled from the Consent Calendar and discussed as Item 8(c). A vote was taken on the motion, which carried 7-0, and the agenda was approved as amended.

7. CONSENT CALENDAR

Deputy Mayor Grossman moved approval of the consent calendar as amended. Councilmember Hansen seconded the motion, which carried 7 – 0, and the following items were approved:

Minutes of Workshop of February 3, 2003

Minutes of Dinner Meeting of February 10, 2003

Approval of expenses and payroll as of February 14, 2003 in the amount of $749,649.85

Motion to authorize the City Manager to execute the first one-year renewal term for leased space in the Shoreline Business and Professional Center at the current base rent

Motion to enter into the 2060 Low-Income Housing Fund Interlocal Cooperation Agreement substantially in the form as presented in the packet

Motion to authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with the Center for Human Services related to the Juvenile Intervention Program

8. ACTION ITEMS: OTHER ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND MOTIONS

(a) Motion to authorize the City Manager to execute an Amendment to the Professional Services Contract with KPG to complete design of the North City Business District/15^th Avenue Corridor Project

Mr. Burkett explained that the purpose of this item is to provide a recommendation based on project scope input and to have Council authorize the consultant to begin final design based on that scope.

Jan Knudson, Project Manager, provided a review of the items currently in the scope of service for the project. Her presentation included the following points:

• The budget for the NCBD project totals $5.96 million.
• The scope of planned improvements has increased since adoption of the NCBD Subarea Plan to include the following: pedestrian improvements south of the NCBD; sidewalks along 15^th Avenue NE; and pedestrian crossings in the vicinity of 152^ndStreet. Those combined components exceeded the budget of $5.96 million.
• The City also undertook analysis of a traffic signal at 15^th Avenue NE and NE 170^th Street, alleyway construction, and additional traffic calming devices.
• After listening to the community and Council, staff arrived at a list of priorities, including: NCBD improvements as described over the course of discussions; mitigation described in Ordinance No. 281; a traffic signal at NE 150^th Street and 15^th Avenue NE; a pedestrian signal at NE 147^thStreet, consolidation of three unsignalized crosswalks in the south end; a new sidewalk along the east side of 15^th Avenue NE (primarily in front of Hamlin Park to utilize grant funds); and a reserve fund to respond to any traffic mitigation needs.
• The scope does not include the following items, which can be reserved for possible programming at a later time: traffic signal at NE 170^th Street; additional sidewalks from Hamlin Park to NE 150^th Street; and business alleyways.
• Public input was received through a series of three public meetings. Many businesses located on 15^th Avenue NE attended and provided responses to the project. Most businesses do not necessarily oppose the plan, but have a "healthy skepticism" about it. Business concerns focused primarily on parking and business access. Some drivers expressed concern about the feasibility of the three-lane configuration.
• Of the 27 parcels in the NCBD, seven do not require easement acquisition due to existing sidewalk widths. 15 parcels would require new sidewalk easements, and 12 would require partial acquisition. Alternative methods of construction are available in the event easements on any particular parcel cannot be obtained. However, the City anticipates that owners will be willing to grant easements because in that case the City releases owners from liability and bears the cost for improving the street to its final standard.
• Staff understands that Council wants the NCBD to remain the scheduling priority; however, fast-tracking requires a well-defined scope. More construction activity may be perceived in the south end due to the complicated nature of NCBD improvements.

Joe Giacobazzi, KPG, responded to concerns raised previously regarding easements and dispersion of peak traffic. He noted that the 15^th Avenue NE corridor has a solid grid system in place that will adequately diffuse traffic. He explained that only about 120 vehicles will divert onto neighborhood streets during peak traffic hours, and not any one neighborhood street will realize a significant impact. He noted that KPG is conducting traffic counts now and will continue monitoring six months after the project is completed. He expressed confidence that the anticipated traffic volumes that will be diverted will not cause a problem. He noted that mitigation funds are in reserve if problems are detected.

Since Mayor Jepsen had stepped out of the room, Deputy Mayor Grossman called for public comment.

(a) Richard Johnsen, Shoreline, commented that Mr. Giacobazzi did not address his question regarding the legality of using the center lane to pass buses. He speculated whether the City could create a city-owned private development authority in order to construct business alleyways and to ensure that developments maintain a uniform look.

(b) Walt Hagen, Shoreline, questioned who would pay the cost for undergrounding utilities and for utility connections in the NCBD. He questioned whether property owners agreed about sidewalk easements. He said property owners must be informed now about the potential impact of alleyways. He asserted that the three-lane configuration will decrease capacity and create more neighborhood traffic. He urged Council to keep more traffic on 15^th Avenue NE and away from neighborhood streets.

(c) Gretchen Atkinson, North City Business Association, said she spoke with each of the 36 businesses that front 15^th Avenue NE in the last two weeks. She asserted that all support the project except one, who is against the three-lane configuration. She said there is mild opposition among a few people but on the whole they have a "let's see" attitude. She said KPG's answers to questions about parking and 10.5-foot sidewalks seem to have satisfied most business owners.

(d) Roger Chouinard, Shoreline, said he canvassed the Ridgecrest neighborhood and only about ten percent of the neighbors were aware of the project. He said many people will be upset, and that traffic will impact 5^th Avenue NE, 8^th Avenue NE, 10^th Avenue NE, and Perkins Way. He asserted the City will need $1 million to mitigate traffic impacts, noting the lack of sidewalks in school zones on 10^th Avenue NE and 25^th Avenue NE. He suggested the City focus on improving current infrastructure instead of undertaking the project. He said no good effort was made to include the public in the project planning.

(e) Daniel Mann, Shoreline, reported his contacts with many businesses located on 15^th Avenue NE and said there is a "healthy skepticism" about the project. He said hardly anyone is overtly supportive of the project, which he characterized as ill-advised and without purpose. He said it is not prudent to do this project at this time, citing a lack of grant money and the cost of undergrounding utilities.

(f) Anthony Poland, Shoreline, expressed concern about easements, noting that 10.5-foot sidewalks will involve taking private property at many locations. He said development will not be encouraged if costs are high. He said the City cannot build for 20 years by reducing arterials to three lanes.

(g) Clark Elster, Shoreline, said sidewalks are needed more in school zones than on 15^th Avenue NE at Hamlin Park. He said the City should reserve that option until it can ascertain what the actual demand will be.

Mayor Jepsen noted that sidewalk construction on 15^th Avenue NE at Hamlin Park is not included in the current scope of the project.

Councilmember Montgomery moved to authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment to the professional services contract with KPG to complete design of the North City Business District/15^th Avenue Corridor Project. Councilmember Hansen seconded the motion.

Councilmember Ransom asked why the City waited until now to address the issue of sidewalk easement acquisition.

Mr. Burkett said that Shoreline inherited the North City Business District when it incorporated, whether there were easements there or not. He explained that most of the planning up to this point has been preliminary and conceptual. He said the City has discovered several inconsistencies in recent title searches, so businesses will be asked to grant easements as part of the project.

Mr. Giacobazzi noted the many similarities between the NCBD project and a Burien reconfiguration project currently under construction. He said all 81 property owners in Burien granted easements for their project.

Councilmember Ransom expressed concern about funding for underground utilities and utility connections, noting that the City does not have additional funds. He wished to be assured the City is confident there will be no additional project costs.

Mr. Burkett said the City is budgeting up to $5,000 per business for utility connections, which is the same amount the Aurora project provides. He said the City will continue to work with Seattle City Light (SCL) to find out how it will allocate costs for undergrounding utilities.

Councilmember Ransom asked if undergrounding will proceed if SCL does not intend to pay for it. He asked if the $5,000 will cover the cost for most businesses or if they will have to pay more for additional connections.

Mr. Burkett said it is not staff's recommendation to cover all the costs for businesses, since the City is investing $6 million to dramatically improve NCBD properties. He said the Council has several options from which to choose: 1) find the money to fully fund undergrounding costs; 2) pay partial costs; or 3) decide against underground utilities. He thought $5,000 is a reasonable amount, given the amenities the project will provide.

Paul Haines, Public Works Director, said SCL is working hard to meet the City's timetable for the NCBD project, noting he has had regular discussions with SCL staff regarding North City. He explained that SCL is obligated through its franchise agreement to ensure its facilities are not obstructing the completion of a public improvement. Regarding utility connections, he said KPG has recruited someone to look at different techniques that can help minimize connection costs. He noted that costs will be different for all businesses depending on the distance between the curb and buildings.

Councilmember Gustafson thought it would be prudent to get an agreement in writing from SCL. He said the City needs to know what is going to occur and what the costs will be. Mr. Haines said the franchise agreement does provide that assurance, although he will try to get something more from them.

Responding to Councilmember Chang’s question whether the $1.1 million undergrounding costs will be paid by NCBD businesses or by Shoreline utility users, Ms. Knudson said according to the franchise agreement, the costs will be spread among SCL ratepayers, not just Shoreline residents and business owners on 15^th Avenue NE.

It was Mayor Jepsen's understanding from franchise agreement negotiations that Shoreline has helped pay for underground utilities at many locations outside the City of Shoreline. He said it is time for Shoreline to take advantage of its franchise agreement with SCL and receive the same benefits other cities have enjoyed.

Councilmember Chang expressed interest in getting a written agreement so that Shoreline residents will not have to bear the total cost.

Mr. Burkett said the City is working to get that assurance from SCL, although the franchise agreement basically provides it.

Responding to Councilmember Chang, Mr. Giacobazzi said he did not anticipate that buses will cause a congestion problem on 15^th Avenue NE, even though the design does not include bus pull-outs. He said METRO may add one additional bus during the P.M. peak hour, but the relatively few buses operating during peak hours should not cause a problem. He said pull-outs are not recommended for stops with less than 10 passengers. He explained that only 120 of the 600 diverted cars will use neighborhood streets in Shoreline, and that the remaining 480 cars divert at many other locations throughout north Seattle.

Councilmember Gustafson agreed that a traffic signal at NE 170^th Street should not be considered, but he would like to consider a pedestrian-only traffic light in that general vicinity, assuming the three-lane configuration and in-pavement lights make a safer condition. He asked about available grant funds for a pedestrian traffic signal.

Mr. Haines responded that the City received $150,000 in grant funds intended for use in the vicinity of NE 170^th Street and 15^th Avenue NE, which is enough to build a pedestrian signal. He said the City asked for a one-year extension on the grant in order to monitor the in-pavement flashers and complete a Transportation Master Plan to see if a pedestrian signal still makes sense.

Councilmember Gustafson expressed interest in keeping a pedestrian signal in mind, noting that David Townsend also preferred that solution over a full stoplight at NE 170^th Street.

Councilmember Hansen asked for clarification on various items included in the proposed North City Project budget, including construction management, unobligated grant funds, neighborhood mitigation, and installation of missing sidewalks. It was noted that funds for installing missing sidewalks come from a grant from the Transportation Improvement Board that can only be used for that purpose in that proposed area.

Councilmember Hansen expressed general support for the project, noting that it will yield many benefits and increase property values even though some costs will be passed on to others. He was impressed with the fact that the NCBD is willing to accept additional density when other areas are rejecting it. He noted that Burien business owners supported their improvement project and formed an association to contribute funds to that development.

Councilmember Ransom said it would be politically unwise not to install a pedestrian stoplight at NE 170^th Street and 15^th Avenue NE. He said the yellow flashing lights are helpful, but the community will not be satisfied without a pedestrian stoplight.

Mayor Jepsen pointed out that the project includes $357,000 in grant funds. He expressed a preference for studying the in-pavement lights to see if they are working effectively, though he would like to see curb cuts finished at that intersection. He said he generally favors the project, although he wants careful monitoring of any changes on neighborhood streets. He urged staff to be aware of potential inequities between eastside and westside streets.

Ms. Knudson clarified that the planned action in the NCBD does not include grant funds. She said grants were acquired when additional projects were included in the south end of the corridor.

Councilmember Ransom moved an amendment to include a pedestrian-activated traffic signal at 15^th Avenue NE and 170^th Street as part of the scope of work authorized by the motion. Councilmember Gustafson seconded the motion.

Responding to Mayor Jepsen, Mr. Haines explained that $150,000 would be adequate to build a pedestrian-activated traffic signal with associated curb ramps. He noted that the City has until October 2004 to use its grant for this purpose if it chooses, noting that it could use that time to learn more about pedestrian crossings. He said it would be helpful to know for planning purposes if the motion is to make a pedestrian signal a leading priority in 2003.

Councilmember Ransom said it would be politically unwise if Council chooses not to include a pedestrian stoplight in the design process.

Mr. Haines emphasized that staff will know more about the need for additional traffic signals in six to eight months. He clarified that the in-pavement lights would be removed if additional signals are installed.

Councilmember Hansen noted that the amendment does not the change the budget since the item is really considered reserve funds. He said a stoplight has not been installed at NE 170^th Street because that intersection did not meet traffic warrants for a signal. He suggested the City continue to study that area to determine the best course of action. He said it would be foolish to dictate a particular type of crossing at a given location when studies show it is probably not needed. He said his decision is not based on political considerations but on economics and safety.

Councilmember Gustafson said he will vote against the amendment because the grant money will be there until 2004, and because Council should wait to see the results of the in-pavement lights.

Councilmember Ransom said Council should proceed without further study because the community wanted a pedestrian stoplight at NE 170^th Street. He said tearing out the in-pavement lights seems to be an unreasonable waste of time and money. He said traffic statistics will be the same whether a signal is placed at NE 170^th Street or at some other mid-block location. He noted that Council could still change its mind later by adopting the amendment now.

A vote was taken on the amendment, which failed 2-5, with Councilmembers Chang and Ransom voting in the affirmative.

Deputy Mayor Grossman was pleased that NCBD neighbors are willing to accept increased density that both offsets and meets Growth Management Act targets in a way that preserves larger lot sizes in adjacent neighborhoods. He commended the neighborhoods for being willing to support higher residential levels, retailers, and increased pedestrian activity. He said the project is a solid investment that will provide added benefits to the community, despite its increased scope.

A vote was taken on the motion, which Mayor Jepsen defined as authorizing the proposed scope of improvements and authorizing the City Manager to execute an amendment to the KPG contract. It carried 6-1, with Councilmember Chang dissenting.

(b) Motion to authorize $220,000 for construction of Paramount School Park parking lots and frontage improvements in 2003

Wendy Barry, Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Services Director, explained that Council had directed the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Advisory Committee to review the remaining elements of Paramount School Park and identify priorities for completion this year. The committee and staff recommend completion of the parking lots and sidewalks to close out the present permit. She said the committee and staff questioned cost estimates for the picnic shelter and entrance, so staff is in the process of updating those costs. She explained that if Council approves the recommendation, the total amount for other projects in the General Capital Fund will be reduced to $280,000. If Council chooses to direct staff, staff would recommend that Council consider the unfunded elements in the context of the overall 2004-2009 Capital Improvement Program so those projects compete equally with other elements.

Councilmember Gustafson moved to authorize $220,000 for construction of Paramount School Park parking lots and frontage improvements in 2003. Deputy Mayor Grossman seconded the motion.

Councilmember Hansen observed that the sidewalk cost estimates seem to be somewhat high compared with other projects he has seen. Ms. Barry explained that the sidewalk estimates are for full frontage improvements, including curbs and gutters.

Councilmember Hansen asked why the cost estimates for the 8^th Avenue parking lot is so much more than the comparably sized 10^th Avenue parking lot. Ms. Barry said there is no parking lot on 8^th Avenue, whereas the 10^th Avenue lot is existing infrastructure that will be overlayed.

Councilmember Ransom felt the Council should keep its commitment to its constituents and complete the entire project now rather than do a partial job over several years. He moved a substitute motion to support Option #3 to find more funding and complete all the elements in 2003. The motion died for lack of a second.

Councilmember Montgomery said she would prefer to finish the park but the present economy does not justify the expenditure.

Mayor Jepsen asked if there was a $10,000 contingency fund built into the proposal since the three priority items only total $202,000. Ms. Barry said that Public Works recently updated the November 2002 cost estimates and came up with the present figure. She explained that there is less than a 15 percent contingency standard because the project is almost finished.

Councilmember Hansen said the lack of second for Councilmember Ransom's substitute motion should not be interpreted as a lack of support for his position. He said the issue is more a question of timing.

All Councilmembers expressed support for completing all the elements eventually. Staff said the other items will be brought back on a project by project basis during the 2004 CIP update process.

A vote was taken on the motion, which carried 7-0, and $220,000 was authorized for the completion of the parking lots and frontage improvements for Paramount School Park .

(c) Motion to authorize the City Manager to execute a Memorandum of Understanding between the Cities of Bellevue, Issaquah, Kirkland, Redmond, Bothell, Shoreline, and Woodinville for a one-year pilot program for planning, funding, and implementation of a joint human services application and funding program

Rob Beem, Assistant Director of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services, explained that the proposal consolidates human service funding efforts through one point of contact, the City of Bellevue, which would administer the Crisis Clinic program on behalf of several municipalities. He noted that Shoreline would retain full authority to set standards and funding levels for Shoreline residents under this agreement.

Councilmember Hansen moved to authorize the City Manger to execute the Memorandum of Understanding. Councilmember Montgomery seconded the motion.

Councilmember Ransom wished to be assured that joining such a consortium would not cause Shoreline to lose its independence in making funding decisions. He also wished to be assured that this agreement would not eliminate smaller, local service providers from the process. Councilmember Chang also expressed concern about losing local control.

Mayor Jepsen clarified that the proposal simply allows one municipality to enter into a master contract with the agency and administer the funding on behalf of the consortium. He said it streamlines the process for the human service agency while allowing the City to fund its desired programs. He said the City could still enter into agreements with the human service agency directly if there is no benefit for Shoreline in the future.

Councilmember Hansen asked why the cities of Kenmore and Lake Forest Park did not participate in the program. It was Mr. Beem's understanding that those cities do not currently fund the Crisis Clinic.

Mayor Jepsen expressed interest in raising this issue at the next northend Mayors meeting in March.

Mr. Beem assured Council that this is a one-year pilot program and that only agencies already selected for funding will be supported in this joint process.

A vote was taken on the motion, which carried 7-0, and the City Manager was authorized to execute the Memorandum of Understanding.

9. CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENT

(a) Richard Johnsen, Shoreline, expressed opposition to any attempt to limit public comment. He said Council has an obligation to listen to people who speak at Council meetings, no matter how long they may wish to speak. He expressed concern that Council and Mr. Giacobazzi ignored his comments related to the 15^th Avenue project. He encouraged the Council to attend an upcoming cultural event and to consider inviting Alma Plancich of the Ethnic Heritage Council to speak about her organization.

Mayor Jepsen felt that Council did address Mr. Johnsen's concern related to bus stops. He said bus stops along NE 185^th Street have not created traffic congestion problems.

10. ADJOURNMENT

At 8:28 p.m., Mayor Jepsen declared the meeting adjourned.

_________________________

Sharon Mattioli

City Clerk