CITY OF SHORELINE

SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL

SUMMARY MINUTES OF JOINT MEETING WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION

 

Monday, March 3, 2003

Shoreline Conference Center

6:30 p.m. Mt. Rainier Room

 

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

ABSENT: none

Planning Commission

PRESENT: Chair Doennebrink, Commissioners Doering, Gabbert, Harris, McClelland, MacCully, and Sands

ABSENT: Commissioners Kuboi and Piro

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 shortly thereafter. All Commissioners were present with the exception of Commissioners Kuboi and Piro.

(a) Proclamation of "Read Across America" Day

Mayor Jepsen declared March 3 "Read Across American Day" and presented the proclamation to Marilynn Enloe of the Shoreline Children's Center, dressed as Dr. Seuss's famous "Cat in the Hat." She presented the Mayor with a certificate of appreciation for the City's support of reading.

3. JOINT WORKSHOP ITEM

(a) Proposed Process to coordinate the State-Mandated 2004 Update of the Comprehensive Plan and Development Code with the development of the Transportation Master Plan, Stormwater Master Plan, and Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan

Bob Olander, Deputy City Manager, explained that state law requires the City to update its Comprehensive Plan and Development Code and that this update is due by 2004. He said that staff proposes to do this update as a coordinated process that includes development of a Transportation Master Plan and Stormwater Master Plan and an update of the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan.

Tim Stewart, Planning and Development Services Director, explained that the first Comprehensive Plan adopted in 1998 included several meetings of the City Council and Planning Commission and extensive public involvement. Since the City has enough capacity to accommodate growth targets for the next 20 years, it is not necessary to update the Land Use plan. He said staff will need to look at the major elements within the document and contemplate products, delivery methods, timelines, and additional work on individual elements. He noted that the Planning Commission will be required to conduct public hearings, so this will be a major work item in 2003-04. He said the finished product will be an update of the Comprehensive Plan and Development regulations which will be integrated with the Transportation Master Plan, Stormwater Master Plan, and the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan.

Paul Haines, Public Works Director, explained how the various elements of this major work product will be developed. He said the Stormwater Master Plan and the Transportation Master Plan are major capital facility plans that will identify long-term needs through extensive public outreach. They will look beyond the six-year capital facility plan to develop successful strategies for dealing with water courses and transportation infrastructure. He said the stormwater operational and maintenance needs will provide a basis for: 1) evaluating the true cost of owning/operating a stormwater system; and 2) ensuring compliance with our own standards and environmental regulations. He said a team will be put together to analyze these issues and identify funding priorities and resources, as well as develop a rate analysis. He explained that the Transportation Master Plan is a significant undertaking and one of the most expensive things a city can implement. He stressed the need to pay careful attention to the land-use driven infrastructure choices that must be made, and to identify the true costs of operations and maintenance.

Wendy Barry, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Director, said the Parks Open Space Plan (POSP) process is a unique opportunity to evaluate and determine the next round of high-priority projects for the City. She said the department will conduct a thorough recreation needs assessment by evaluating/inventorying current services and facilities to determine what future role recreation should have in the community. Because the POSP will be a useful six-year document that complies with all Growth Management Act (GMA) and State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requirements, it will make the City eligible for much-needed grant funding. She said that blending the POSP with Stormwater Management and Transportation will create unified policies that will reflect the needs and demands of the community.

Mr. Stewart discussed the various options the City can exercise in approaching this major effort. He said the proposed option is to have a coordinated effort between departments in order to produce a fully integrated and unified policy document. Staff proposes that the City establish a lead advisory team that will work with a lead consultant in charge of a majority of work elements. The City Project Manager, Rachel Markle, will act as primary staff between the staff advisory team and the lead consultant. Other City staff will also support those consultant teams in a coordinated work program for all areas.

Continuing, Mr. Stewart outlined the benefits and potential disadvantages to this approach. He said it will create a streamlined process that will allow the City to meet internal and state-mandated deadlines while also managing resources efficiently. He noted that the primary outcome of this approach will be a quality Comprehensive Plan and integrated master plans that will enhance the quality and livability of the community.

He outlined the preferred timeline for completion of the master plans, noting the difference between internal deadlines and the state mandate of completion by December 2004. He said staff would like the master plans to be completed by April 2004 so they can be included in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), a challenging timeline. He noted that successful completion will depend on a dynamic and highly capable primary consultant. He said the next steps include requests for proposals, consulting team selection, and refinement of the work scope and schedule.

Responding to Mayor Jepsen, Mr. Stewart thought the City selected all the optional items for the Comprehensive Plan, but said he would check on this. Mayor Jepsen wished to ensure that all optional items have been considered.

Mayor Jepsen said although April 2004 is a good goal, it is really an arbitrary deadline set by the City. He said the CIP could be adopted without the update. Mr. Stewart expressed a preference for putting the major pieces together early to allow time for fine-tuning the details in late 2004. Mayor Jepsen said Council may have to consider adopting the CIP on a different schedule.

Councilmember Montgomery agreed with the coordinated approach and emphasized the importance of having the right players on the team because of the aggressive schedule. She asked if there had been any discussion about a "planning academy" as a method of public outreach.

Mr. Stewart said that whatever process is adopted will provide open access and free exchange of information. He said the details of how to structure that process will be discussed in the next few months.

Responding to Councilmember Montgomery, Ms. Barry noted that the Bond Advisory Committee (BAC) process may assist the update effort by generating some information about potential projects.

Councilmember Gustafson was pleased that the City is becoming more proactive and visionary in putting together such a collaborative plan. He said the plan lends itself to partnering with other agencies and increases opportunities for securing grant funding. He felt the plan should maintain a long-range focus.

Mr. Stewart said the legal timeline for a Comprehensive Plan is 20 years, although projects such as North City go beyond that. He felt the City should not be constrained by timelines, but rather by fiscal limitations and other factors.

Councilmember Gustafson asked staff to explain more about what the recreation needs assessment will entail. He suggested that the plan will fit in with the BAC in assessing community needs over the next 20 years.

Ms. Barry said the assessment includes a number of elements, such as analysis of community activities and priorities, market segmentation and participant profiling. This information will allow the City to design programs that will fit the demographics and meet future needs. In response to Councilmember Gustafson, she assured Council that the Planning Commission, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Advisory Committee, and Council would be updated periodically on the plan's progress. Councilmember Gustafson suggested that the Council of Neighborhoods be included as well.

Councilmember Ransom expressed concern about the limited time in which to develop an integrated Comprehensive Plan. Given the present economic outlook, he expressed uncertainty about whether the BAC's efforts will result in success, and how that outcome will affect potential parks projects. He felt the Transportation Master Plan will be the most difficult to develop because the City has little control over services such as transit/bus routes. He wanted to be sure that the plan is not overly optimistic, noting that a number of stormwater projects have taken longer than originally planned. He emphasized the need to be realistic and obtain the appropriate public input.

Councilmember Hansen said he views the project as an ongoing endeavor, since the City will continue to have to update the Comprehensive Plan in the future. He was optimistic that the City will meet its deadlines and solicit appropriate public input.

Deputy Mayor Grossman was delighted that staff has chosen a coordinated approach to the update since the various plans are interrelated.

Councilmember Chang agreed with the integrated approach. He emphasized the need to be proactive rather than reactive with regard to public involvement in the process.

Commissioner McClelland expressed the importance of giving the public a chance to provide feedback at the very beginning of the process in order to evaluate what was done previously. Doing this will help shape the remainder of the public process. She mentioned the decline in student enrollment, noting that the all three plans will be affected by the number of children living in Shoreline. She suggested that the City should try to acquire parcels of land for parks or as placeholders for future use. She said the plan should be tied to Shoreline Community College's Master Plan, and that the City should be kept informed on the Fircrest issue.

Commissioner Doering was excited about the plan and agreed that the decisions about how we live, play, work, and commute are all interrelated. She expressed confidence in the Planning Commission's ability to meet the challenge.

Commissioner Gabbert concurred, noting that the City has capable staff that can achieve the goals within the given timeline. He suggested the City follow the model of public input it established when it developed its first Comprehensive Plan.

Commissioner MacCully also favored doing an integrated plan. He noted that not having to address the land use plan will somewhat simplify the process. He explained the difference between public involvement and public comment, noting that formal comments at hearings do not allow opportunities for dialogue or meaningful input. He expressed hope that the consultants will create a flexible public process so the plan reflects what the general population really wants. He also expressed a preference for developing achievable projects and realistic goals.

Mayor Jepsen summarized the two groups’ support for the proposal and thanked the Planning Commission for attending the joint meeting.

At 7:21 p.m. the Planning Commission adjourned.

RECESS

At 7:22 p.m. Mayor Jepsen declared a five minute recess. The City Council workshop reconvened at 7:32 p.m.

4. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT AND FUTURE AGENDAS

City Manager Steve Burkett thanked staff for the creativity and teamwork that went into the development of the Comprehensive Plan update process. He announced that the pool would be closed until March 25 for roof and floor repairs. He reminded the public that next week's meeting is cancelled, since all Councilmembers will be in Washington D.C. for the National League of Cities conference.

5. COUNCIL REPORTS

Councilmember Ransom reported on his attendance at the Aegis Open House. He described the generous accommodations Aegis provides, noting it is more expensive than other facilities in the area.

Councilmember Chang noted his attendance at the Aegis Open House, his tour of Fircrest, and his attendance at the Highland Terrace Neighborhood meeting. He encouraged Councilmembers and the public to attend neighborhood meetings.

Councilmember Gustafson reported on the successful turnout at the Briarcrest Spaghetti Feed. He thanked City staff for its quick response to pedestrian safety issues at 175th and Fremont Avenue. He noted his attendance at the Regional Water Quality Committee meeting and reported on the activities of the Water Resource Inventory Area 8 group.

Deputy Mayor Grossman reported on his attendance at the King County Economic Development Council meeting and the SeaShore Transportation Committee meeting. He announced that he is the new co-chair of the SeaShore Transportation Committee.

Mayor Jepsen reported on several issues discussed at the Northend Mayor's Meeting, including equalization funds, municipal court, Brightwater, and analysis of the King County budget problem.

Councilmember Ransom reported on the legislative conference in Olympia, which he described as positive and enlightening. He was impressed with the legislators' willingness to work together and compromise, even in a difficult budget year. He suggested that the City talk to Representative Marilyn Chase about proposed "edge financing," noting that such legislation could have adverse effects on city revenues.

6. WORKSHOP ITEMS

(a) METRO Hidden Lake Pump Station and Sewer Replacement Project

Jill Marilley, City Engineer, introduced Calvin Locke and Jennifer Kauffman, King County Wastewater Treatment Division, who provided Council with a description of the proposed project and public information program.

Mr. Locke gave some background on the sewage system and explained the need for replacing outdated equipment and pipelines. He said corrosion, mechanical reliability problems, and a lack of sewage capacity have resulted in approximately three overflows a year. He explained that the existing system cannot accommodate current flows, largely due to infiltration and inflow (stormwater, or non-sewage water leaking into the system).

The proposed project includes the following elements:

Mr. Locke said the project, which is scheduled for construction in 2004-2006, will result in increased capacity, storage, and I/I removal in a two-phased approach. He noted that residents will experience temporary utility shutoffs, and streets will be reduced to a single lane of traffic in construction areas. He said the project will require that utilities be moved to the opposite side of the street at many locations. He noted that the I/I Pilot Project will determine what needs to be accomplished in Phase 2.

Ms. Kauffman outlined King County's public outreach plan. She said King County will present this issue to Shoreline’s Parks Advisory Committee and continue to work with staff from the planning phase to final execution. She said a community meeting this spring will discuss the pump station and landscaping design elements, and that neighborhood councils will be fully involved. She said advanced notice will be provided prior to construction, and there will be a 24-hour contact line.

Ms. Marilley assured Council that an extensive public process will ensue because of the many permit and property issues involved.

Mayor Jepsen called for public comment.

(a) Elaine Phelps, Shoreline, asked when the City plans to notify the residents who live in the affected area. She said residents would prefer that the City contact them first before contacting neighborhood associations. She asked whether utility lines would be permanently relocated or just temporarily moved. She also expressed concern about the duration of the project and traffic impacts.

(b) Ken Cottingham, Shoreline, expressed concern that the design configuration may perpetuate the overflow problem in the vicinity of Boeing Creek Park, noting that stormwater broke the pipeline in 1996-97. He said capacity problems will continue if sewer lines are crossed with stormwater lines in that area. He also expressed concern about building an underground storage facility at Boeing Creek Park.

Mayor Jepsen emphasized the importance of notifying the residents of the area in addition to the neighborhood associations. Ms. Kauffman responded that the County will notify the community on the geotechnical work, as well as on the general project itself.

Responding to public comment, Mr. Locke explained that the project's three separate construction elements will proceed simultaneously. The project is expected to last approximately two years. He noted that there is no detailed construction schedule yet, but that the storage facility could be completed during non-storm months. He said utility relocations will vary depending on configuration of individual streets. Of course, permanent relocations would be preferable and more efficient.

Ms. Marilley assured Council that the City is making METRO acutely aware of past stormwater failures. She said the geotechnical exploration process will address those concerns to minimize the possibility of future failures.

Noting Mr. Cottingham's concern, Mayor Jepsen felt there should be more study and discussion about design options at Boeing Creek Park. He also expressed concern about possibly creating erosion and other stormwater flow problems in other areas by trying to fix the I/I problem. Ms. Marilley said the City will address that issue as part of the Surface Water Master Plan.

Mayor Jepsen suggested that current utility franchise agreements typically require undergrounding of any overhead utility lines.

Councilmember Montgomery expressed concern about the frequency of overflows and the apparent inadequacy of the present system. She asked how the City got to such a condition.

Mr. Locke explained that the present situation is due to a series of mechanical and power problems, coupled with the reduced capacity that resulted from lining corroded pipes in the early 1990's. He went on to explain that the proposed project grew out of a planning process that started in the late 1990's.

Responding to Councilmember Hansen, Mr. Locke said the majority of work would involve "open ditch" construction, although a few areas will require tunneling. He clarified that the pipe diameter would be slightly larger that what is presently used, which, along with a new pump station and storage facility, will increase capacity. He also clarified that the new pipe material would be much more resistant to corrosion.

Councilmember Chang expressed concern that taxpayer money is wasted when utility companies conduct separate projects in the same area. He asked if King County plans to notify the utility companies about the project, and whether the County will partially or fully repave streets after construction. Ms. Marilley responded that these matters will be addressed as part of the right-of-way use permit the City will require.

Deputy Mayor Grossman asked if undeveloped property was used as a factor in determining future capacity needs. Mr. Locke said the planning studies considered whatever population growth is projected for the area. He explained that the increase in future capacity is not due to population growth but to I/I.

Deputy Mayor Grossman agreed that utility companies need to be aware of the City's long-term plans to avoid multiple and frequent construction projects.

Councilmember Gustafson emphasized the need to involve the Ronald Wastewater District in the project. He also asked that the County recheck its engineering to avoid potential failures.

Mayor Jepsen summarized Council comments and thanked both City and County staff for the presentation.

(b) Briefing on the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit

Jesus Sanchez, Operations Manager for Public Works, explained that the City is ready to submit the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Phase II Permit application required by the Environmental Protection Agency for municipal stormwater operators. He explained that the NPDS is designed to improve water quality by monitoring discharge of industrial processed water and municipal wastewater. He said the Phase II program simply requires municipalities with populations under 100,000 to meet the following six minimum Control Measures:

He explained that the City is currently meeting all six elements under its Surface Water Master Plan. He said although this is not a permit to operate under NPDS Phase I, it allows the City to continue current municipal operations and provides a measure of legal protection.

Responding to Mayor Jepsen, Mr. Sanchez clarified that the City would be responsible for enforcing runoff control on both City and private construction projects. He concluded that submitting the application affords the City a greater degree of protection from third party legal action.

(c) METRO Transit Restructure Proposal Briefing

Sarah Bohlen, Transportation Planner, provided the staff report on the proposal and introduced Jack Wisner, Metro Transit Service Planner for the Shoreline area. She explained that substantial changes to bus routes in Shoreline, Lake Forest Park, and North Seattle are aimed at improving the balance of downtown Seattle peak-period service and local service within these communities. She said the County does not have funds to implement new service hours but has proposed alternatives that capitalize on other service improvements that have already been implemented. The proposal increases service frequencies and spans by creating a more streamlined system. She said METRO has conducted an impressive community involvement process and Council should consider sending a letter to the King County Executive commending County staff for their efforts and supporting their recommendations. She outlined the approval process for the restructure, noting that the changes would be implemented in September 2003 if approved.

Councilmember Gustafson noted that bus service appears to be eliminated on 8th Avenue NW. Ms. Bohlen said the original proposal eliminated Route 301's loop in the Hillwood neighborhood, but the final recommendation simply reduces the number of trips.

Responding to Councilmember Gustafson, Ms. Bohlen explained that people have already submitted input on the various options. She said the recommendation is in the final stages, so opportunities for additional input are limited.

Mayor Jepsen called for public comment.

(a) Lathen Ween, Shoreline, expressed opposition to any changes in present bus service.

Responding to Mayor Jepsen, Ms. Bohlen said the service hours will be arranged to increase the frequency of trips on the more crowded Route 301.

Mayor Jepsen and Councilmember Hansen noted the apparent increase in bus service hours along Aurora Avenue N.

Mr. Wisner, Metro Transit Service Planner, said there is no net increase in the amount of service hours because the process does not consider changes to Route 358, although that route is being improved with new service hours. He said the County is following recommendations from both Shoreline and Seattle in improving Route 358 by targeting new service hours that result from sales tax growth. He said the reductions in service hours involve the extension of Routes 317 and 377.

Responding to Mayor Jepsen, Mr. Wisner said the five local routes depicted on the map will provide 30 minute service on Saturdays in the daytime, and 60 minute service on Sundays and evenings.

Councilmember Ransom expressed concern that the restructuring will limit opportunities for east-west travel. He was concerned that the proposal does not include a route on 25th Avenue NE to service Shorecrest High School students.

Mr. Wisner noted that Metro has never provided all day service to Shorecrest High School because ridership was so low. He said Route 314 is a two-way peak-only route and very indirect, so the proposal is to provide more direct service and efficient connection to the major markets. He noted that the route was modified to shift it closer to Shorecrest. He also clarified that there are still two all-day, two-way routes serving the Shoreline Library.

Deputy Mayor Grossman commended Ms. Bohlen and Mr. Wisner for their teamwork, dedication, and outreach in trying to get the most possible out of a fixed amount of service hours, and Councilmember Montgomery added her praise for their work on the SeaShore Transportation Committee.

Councilmember Chang suggested that Metro should provide grant money to cities to fund bus pullouts, streetlights, and other bus-related infrastructure.

Mr. Wisner commented that Metro is contributing to improve route facilities in heavy-use zones. He said the Aurora Avenue corridor is a major emphasis and will be receiving improved lighting and shelters by September 2003.

(d) Stream Basin Characterization Study

Mr. Olander introduced the Stream Basin Characterization Study, which describes existing watercourse resources in the City of Shoreline. He noted that Tetra Tech/KCM, the Ronald Wastewater District, the King Conservation District, and the Washington State Department of Community Development and Trade participated in the study.

Mr. Sanchez described the methodology used in developing the study, noting it is recognized in the legal and professional field as the accepted practice. He said the identification of sensitive stream and wetland areas will be useful during permit review and will ensure that maintenance and operation practices protect these areas. He said the fundamental value of the study is that it provides essential scientific data needed for development of policies, regulations, operational standards, capital improvements, and the Stormwater Master Plan. The two-phased study describes major wetlands, assesses physical characteristics of the stream watershed system, considers fish habitat value/quality, and assigns a rating of actual watershed conditions in order to protect/restore natural resources in compliance with state and federal regulations. Because of the short and long-range legal impacts of the study, third party review was essential to the process.

Mr. Stewart said the next step in the process is to review Comprehensive Plan policies and development regulations, as well as potential Habitat Conservation Areas. He asked that Council refer the study to the Planning Commission to receive and review any new scientific information, and to report to the City Council its findings and conclusions.

Mayor Jepsen called for public comment.

(a) LaNita Wacker, Shoreline, asked if the study addressed restoration issues or considered the effect of urbanization on the current stream inventory. She questioned whether the study compared current stream basins with historical data.

Councilmember Gustafson affirmed that the study does compare current streams with historical data.

Mayor Jepsen assumed that any restorative opportunities will come as a result of making conscious decisions based on the reports.

Mr. Stewart confirmed that restorative options would be part of the policy formulation, which will come in the next phase. He noted that the GMA requires the City to preserve the stream functions and values that exist today.

Mr. Olander explained that a capital phase, which will be partially addressed in the CIP and in the Stormwater Master Plan, will follow the policy debate.

Councilmember Gustafson noted that the study discusses 16 fish barriers in Shoreline but does not mention barriers that lie outside of Thornton Creek. Reinder Denson, TetraTech/KCM, said that information can be found in a Seattle Public Utility’s 2000 Thornton Creek study.

Councilmember Gustafson asked how the study can accurately rate the reaches if barriers prevent fish from reaching those areas. Mr. Denson said if the barrier is able to be removed, the reach is still rated in terms of habitat quality potential.

Mr. Sanchez clarified that third party comments were not included the packet but are available for review.

Councilmember Gustafson expressed interest in providing the study to the WRIA-8 group leadership.

The City Council referred the study to the Planning Commission.

7. PUBLIC COMMENT

(a) LaNita Wacker, Shoreline, announced that there would be a rally at Fircrest on Saturday. She said many people have been testifying in Olympia against Senate Bill 5971, which proposes to close Fircrest.

(b) Elaine Phelps, Shoreline, asked the City to clarify how it enforces permit conditions. She asked what process is followed if staff determines that permit conditions have been violated.

(c) Walt Hagen, Shoreline, asked the City to formally support the retention of Fircrest Rehabilitation Center. He said the Council should not tell citizens to go to Olympia, but it should support the citizens' desire to keep the facility. He expressed opposition to the Planning Commission schedule for consideration of the Critical Areas Use Permit procedures and the Stream Inventory Study. He said the stream inventory should precede any changes to the Development Code. He also felt that citizens should educate planners about what they want for the City, not vice-versa. He suggested a citizens oversight committee for the Planning Department.

(d) Peter Henry, Shoreline, inquired whether the City Council had made any decision about formally opposing the war in Iraq.

(e) Charles Montagne, Shoreline, board member of the Shorewood Hills Homeowners Association, discussed a litigation issue involving damaged properties caused by a faulty stormwater detention system. He believed that the City is responsible for the damage, in whole or in part, since the runoff was caused by City-owned streets and sidewalks. He said Council should contribute a meaningful amount of money to cover the remediation costs.

Responding to Mayor Jepsen's request for clarification, Mr. Burkett said permit enforcement depends on the type of permit issued. He said that staff who approve permits are responsible for ensuring compliance. He also clarified that the Planning Commission agenda item involves amendments to the Critical Areas administrative procedures, not to the substance of Critical Areas policies.

Mayor Jepsen noted that a majority of Councilmembers do not wish to discuss the situation with Iraq. He asked staff to clarify Mr. Montagne's settlement request.

Ian Sievers, City Attorney, clarified that the City and its insurance carrier are working with the homeowners association, but no formal decision on settlement has been made.

8. ADJOURNMENT

At 9:55 p.m., Mayor Jepsen declared the meeting adjourned.

 

_____________________________

Sharon Mattioli, CMC

City Clerk