CITY OF SHORELINE
SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL
Monday, February 23, 2004 Shoreline Conference Center
PRESENT: Mayor Hansen, Deputy Mayor Jepsen, Councilmembers Chang, Fimia, Grace, Gustafson, and Ransom
ABSENT: none
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Hansen, who presided.
2. FLAG SALUTE/ROLL CALL
Mayor Hansen led the flag salute. Upon roll call by the City Clerk, all Councilmembers were present.
(a) Proclamation of “Red Cross Month”
(b) Proclamation of “100 Years of Excellence in Education”
Mayor Hansen read the proclamation recognizing the 60th birthday of the Shoreline School District and the 40th birthday of Shoreline Community College. These two entities have provided a combined 100 years of excellence in education and have made significant contributions to the local community and to society at large.
Representatives from the School District and Shoreline Community College accepted the proclamation and thanked the City for this recognition. They included Holly Moore, Shoreline Community College President, Jim Welch, Shoreline School District Superintendent, and Paul Burton, President of the Shoreline Community College Board of Trustees.
(c) Mayor’s State of the City Address
Mayor Hansen delivered the annual State of the City address, highlighting the City's accomplishments, financial planning, future challenges, and capital projects. He pointed out that although the City is still relatively new, it faces the challenge of bringing its aging infrastructure up to modern standards. Despite these challenges, the strength of the people of the community has laid a foundation for a promising future. He said the City’s conservative budgeting has left the City in a stable financial position. Although a lagging economy and voter initiatives resulted in dramatic service cuts for other jurisdictions, Shoreline’s programs and services have remained stable. He noted that the City has been careful about expanding services by only using stable resources for ongoing expenses. Funds from less stable revenues are set aside to reinvest in the community through improvements in parks, roads, drainage systems, and other capital projects. He said Shoreline has maintained a healthy reserve balance and has kept property and other taxes at reasonable levels with no long-term General Fund obligations.
He explained that although City services have been maintained and even improved in some cases, the long-range forecast indicates this may become more challenging in the future. Shoreline faces the same increased costs people are experiencing at home and work. Inflation will likely exceed projected revenue growth in the coming years, and Shoreline will face tough choices about what services it chooses to provide and how to fund them. Despite these challenges, the City will continue to look for ways to do more with less. It will achieve considerable savings through a newly developed employee benefits policy and through a new joint agreement for jail services. Other City achievements include online registration for recreation programs; adoption of an Emergency Operations Plan; design completion for the North City improvements; and groundbreaking on the first segment of the Interurban Trail. He commented on the significance of the Interurban Trail and how it will provide a linkage between neighborhoods, business districts, parks, and adjacent jurisdictions.
Continuing, Mayor Hansen highlighted other past accomplishments and future capital projects that will enhance and improve the City, including the North City Business District and the Aurora Corridor. He said the City appreciates the efforts already undertaken by dedicated community members in transforming these two vital areas. He noted that City staff has been meeting with Aurora business and property owners to work out the final design details prior to construction of the Aurora Corridor (N 145th Street to N 165th Street) next year. He said the design represents thousands of hours of time and research that will culminate in a safer and more viable transportation corridor for everyone.
He thanked everyone who has participated in the planning process to update the Comprehensive Plan and its associated Master Plans for Transportation, Surface Water, and Parks. He said the update will provide valuable guidance regarding Shoreline’s future investment in public assets. He emphasized the importance of focusing on the goals identified during incorporation, including those ideas and suggestions that will focus on the good of the community as a whole. He concluded by saying that the City’s hard work is beginning to pay off, and that he looks forward to celebrating the completion of many projects in the coming years.
Finally, he presented Deputy Mayor Jepsen with a commemorative gavel in recognition of his many years of service as Mayor. He noted that Deputy Mayor Jepsen’s strong leadership was a driving force in helping the City accomplish its primary goals. Deputy Mayor Jepsen thanked Mayor Hansen for this recognition, noting that he looks forward to working with the Council and the community towards continued improvement.
3. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
Deputy Mayor Jepsen noted that House Bill 2442 (including access to family planning services in growth management planning) had died; therefore, the update he had requested on February 9 was no longer necessary.
4. REPORTS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS: none
5. PUBLIC COMMENT
(a) Ken Cottingham, Shoreline, felt the Council was misled about design options for the Interurbran Trail Pedestrian Bridge. He suggested that Council revisit the design options, since it appears it erroneously chose a truss design (not the type of bridge used on the original trail). He expressed concern about budget overruns and suggested that Council consider installing a standard at-grade crosswalk, since cyclists on the Burke-Gilman Trail successfully use this type of crossing. He projected that a 36% cost overrun could result in a total project cost of $4.9 million.
(b) Patty Crawford, Shoreline, felt there should be another review of Ordinance No. 324, noting that additional changes relating to code exemptions for City-approved projects were not thoroughly reviewed. She asserted that the changes benefit current projects that would not otherwise be allowed, and that the City is assuming more liability. She noted the existence of a beaver in Twin Ponds Park. She said a pending decision from Superior Court would likely void the building permit for the Aegis development. Therefore, construction should be put on hold until the judicial system resolves the problem. She said the City should follow the law rather than forcing citizens to take costly legal action.
(c) Tim Crawford, Shoreline, said that citizens are on the verge of asking the State Attorney General to intervene in the Aegis situation. He said Superior Court is siding with him and has determined that the Crawford’s are acting in the public interest. He commented that many trees on the south boundary of the site have been removed. He urged a review of the changes made to the definition for Reasonable Use.
(d) Cindy Ryu, Shoreline, expressed concern about the quality of road materials being applied on and adjacent to the Interurban Trail at approximately N 150th Avenue. She questioned the quality of road fill being used and wondered if the material is compatible with the existing paving. She asked about how long the paving of the Interurban Trail is expected to last, and requested that there be tight quality control on materials.
(e) Jean Christensen, Lynnwood, owner of a business on Ronald Place, said the City assured her that Ronald Place would not be redeveloped for several years. However, she has now been told she may be forced to move within 15 months, despite a significant financial investment on her part. She also commented that traffic light changes and signage at Top Foods have dramatically decreased the amount of traffic in front of her shop. She said the situation is preventing her business from achieving its goal of providing costumes and instruction to local drama departments.
(f) Todd Young, Lake Forest Park, noted that the parcel located at 14927 Aurora Avenue N would likely remain vacant unless the City makes revisions to the Aurora Corridor project. He explained that George Choi and Associates is very interested in developing the property for condominiums and retail if the Aurora plan can be modified to allow left-turn ingress and egress. He urged the Council to consider the potential income to the surrounding businesses and the positive economic impact such a development would have for the City. He felt the property would likely remain vacant without the revisions, and that people will continue to drive through Shoreline rather than making it a destination.
(g) George Choi, Seattle, urged the Council to make the necessary revisions to the Aurora Corridor project so that his company can develop the aforementioned property. He said lack of access is the main obstacle to developing the property.
Responding to public comments, Mr. Burkett explained that the Interurban Trail was designed to Seattle City Light specifications, so it is expected to have a longer lifespan than other trails in the metropolitan area. He said staff would investigate Ms. Ryu’s particular concern regarding paving. He added that staff would follow up with Ms. Christensen’s concern about her business on Ronald Place. He explained that the City met with Mr. Choi to discuss his proposal; however, certain design and traffic issues would not make it possible.
Responding to Councilmember Fimia regarding the Interurban Trail Bridge, Mr. Cottingham explained that he factored the budget overrun for design (36%) into the total project cost, arriving at a projected total cost of $4.9 million.
Mr. Burkett pointed out that bids for two sections of the Interurban Trail already under construction were below the engineer’s estimates.
6. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Councilmember Gustafson moved approval of the agenda. Councilmember Ransom seconded the motion. Councilmember Grace moved to add “Public Input Sessions” as Item 8(b). Councilmember Ransom seconded the amendment, which carried unanimously. A vote was taken on the motion to approve the agenda as amended, which also carried 7-0.
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
Upon motion by Councilmember Gustafson, seconded by Councilmember Ransom and unanimously carried, the following consent calendar items were approved:
Minutes of Dinner Meeting of January 26, 2004
Minutes of Workshop of February 2, 2004
Minutes of Regular Meeting of February 9, 2004
Approval of expenses and payroll as of February 6,
2004 in the amount of $1,105,878.09
Motion to authorize the City Manager to
execute the Interlocal Agreement for Jail
Administration
8. ACTION ITEMS: OTHER ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND MOTIONS
(a) Motion to authorize the City Manager to execute
a contract with CH2M Hill for design services for
the Interurban Trail Pedestrian Bridge Project
and adoption of the alignment for the Interurban
Trail’s Pedestrian Bridge and South Central Project
Mr. Burkett introduced this item and provided a brief overview of the project’s estimated costs. He then introduced Kirk McKinley, Project Manager for the Aurora Corridor/Interurban Trail Projects, to provide the staff report.
Mr. McKinley explained the recommendation to authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with CH2M Hill to perform design services for the Interurban Trail Pedestrian and Bicycle Crossing Project. He described the current status of various trail segments and assumptions of the bridge crossing. His presentation included the following points:
· It is proposed that CH2M Hill will provide services to construct two steel truss bridges with connecting ramps. Their proposal includes:
1) Structural design
2) Geotechnical review and field survey
3) Architectural and Urban Design
4) NEPA update and permitting
5) Interagency coordination with Seattle City Light and Washington State Department of Transportation
6) Incorporation of 1% for Art program
· Staff has operated under the assumption that the bridges will be viewed as a major Shoreline landmark or monument. Staff anticipates that the bridges will serve as a major conversation piece and primary point of reference for both residents and non-residents. Staff has also operated under the assumption that grade changes should be minimized in order to keep cyclists and other trail users interested and engaged.
· To design the bridge as a landmark structure, the urban design component requires an artist and architect to work through the City’s 1% for Public Art program, which has an extensive public input component. The current request for $578,000 exceeds the line item for design within the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Therefore, the requested design contract exceeds the available design funds by $100,708 and does not include staff time. For this project, the design component is 19% of the construction budget, which is greater than the standard percentage. This is due to the urban design and public art element of the project.
· The available funding for this project within the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) roads fund totals $3,634,292.00. This funding is broken down into the following grant and City sources:
1) WSDOT Target Zero $534,292
2) Federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) $334,992
3) Congestion Management-Air Quality (CMAQ) $666,060
4) Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation $1,581,773
5) City Roads Capital Fund $517,175
Councilmember Gustafson moved to authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with CH2M Hill for design services in an amount not to exceed $578,000 for the Interurban Trail Pedestrian Bridge Project and to adopt the alignment of both the Interurban Trail Pedestrian Bridge and the South Central Section of the trail. Deputy Mayor Jepsen seconded the motion.
Mayor Hansen commented that while he preferred a diagonal alignment for the trail, the Council approved the proposed alignment (loop ramp) last fall.
Councilmember Ransom recommended that the contract not be approved due to continued cost escalations. He pointed out that the cost estimate was only $5.5 million for the entire 3.2-mile length in the early 1990’s. He was concerned that the cost could escalate to nearly $4.9 million for the bridge project alone. He felt the City should cut its losses and consider a different type of connection at NE 155th Street.
Councilmember Gustafson was also concerned about escalating costs, but felt the available funding is still adequate. He felt the bridges would be a real asset to the community and help fulfill the vision of a continuous trail running from Lake Union in Seattle all the way to Everett. He pointed out that interest rates are low and that delaying the project would increase costs.
Councilmember Chang asked for clarification about the design costs for the 1% for Art component of the project.
Mr. McKinley explained that the two options for integrating art into City projects are stand-alone pieces and artistically-enhanced building components. He said staff is proposing the latter option because art can be incorporated into the building parts without significant costs beyond design. He also explained that the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) did not include bids because budgets and scope of work are negotiated after a firm is chosen.
Councilmember Chang felt that the 19% design component was somewhat high, given that CH2M Hill is also designing the Aurora Corridor Project. Mr. McKinley pointed out that the design component for other projects (Richmond Beach Overcrossing) has been as high as 24%.
Councilmember Chang also expressed concern about the slope of the ramps. Mr. McKinley assured him that all populations could use the facility, which would meet all Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. He also clarified that the $3.6 million is the total estimated cost for design through construction. Mayor Hansen commented that the estimated costs have not changed much since the project was first introduced.
Councilmember Grace asked if the savings achieved by using the same design firm/ construction company for the Aurora Corridor project could be quantified. Mr. McKinley did not have precise figures, but said that generally the savings can be achieved by cost sharing in construction administration and mobilization.
Paul Haines, Public Works Director, explained that CH2M Hill was chosen because of its familiarity with other major Shoreline projects. He emphasized the importance of keeping the bridge construction on the same schedule as the Aurora Project in order to save money and to take advantage of the favorable building economy. He explained that the budget for art in the CH2M Hill contract is comprised of a professional art component and an architectural component, which will ensure a high quality, value-added project.
Responding to Councilmember Grace, Mr. Haines clarified that the consultant would only be paid for services provided if the scope of work is changed. However, staff is committed to achieving the proposed plan within the specified budget.
Mr. Burkett commented that the City’s investment amounts to 14% of the total project, with the remainder comprised of grants. He pointed out that Council could modify the plan in the 30% design phase if projections exceed $3.6 million. He said there are realistic options to ensure the project stays within budget. Responding to Mayor Hansen, Mr. Burkett clarified that the actual Council authorization for design would be up to $578,000, so the contract could be renegotiated if a less costly design is adopted.
Councilmember Fimia noted that completing the Interurban Trail was one of her priorities on the King County Council, but this did not include finishing the bridge connections. She felt the whole trail should be finished before considering expensive bridge crossings. She expressed major concerns about project costs and asked why costs were not included in the RFQs.
Mr. Sievers explained that state law requires that jurisdictions only compare the qualifications of design professionals. After a qualified candidate is selected, then a contract and costs can be negotiated.
Responding to Councilmember Fimia, Mr. McKinley noted that the original bid had been negotiated down from $671,000.
Mr. Haines noted that although design is developed through best estimates and “rules of thumb,” it is a major element that provides guidance for the project. He explained the importance of having a published allocation in the CIP, since grant funds are based on this design allocation. He also stressed the need to have an adequate design budget, since this is the City’s first attempt to incorporate art into a highly visible public project.
Councilmember Fimia pointed out that one of the major disadvantages of the loop ramp is that steep ramps do not provide an efficient route for trail users. She felt this disadvantage to be a fatal design flaw.
Mr. Burkett and Mayor Hansen noted that while cyclists and pedestrians preferred a completely elevated option without any ramps going down to grade level, this option was beyond the City’s budget.
Councilmember Fimia expressed her continued concern with the high cost of a project that may not even be utilized by cyclists and pedestrians. She felt people might opt to use the crosswalk instead.
Mr. McKinley pointed out that each of the original alternatives identified for this project had both advantages and disadvantages. He said when all factors were compared, the loop ramp option was the most feasible and preferred in terms of style, function, and budget.
Councilmember Fimia wondered if the grants could be used to complete the unfinished segments of the trail from NE 175th to NE 192nd.
Mr. McKinley said the $1.6 million grant from the Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation (ICOR) is dedicated funding that can only be used for the bridges. He was doubtful whether other funds could be diverted to finish the trail sections. He said the loop ramp achieves the important goals of predictability and continuity for cyclists and pedestrians.
Mr. Haines affirmed that Shoreline received the ICOR funds with the understanding that they would be used for a bridge crossing. Therefore, the City would forfeit these funds if it decided against this option.
Deputy Mayor Jepsen pointed out that cyclists would be using the ramps whether they cross at the bridge or use the crosswalk. He noted that the slope of the ramps conforms to the ADA maximum ratio of 1:12.
Mr. Haines noted that there would be continued access to the crossing at NE 155th, so a bridge at NE 155th could be built at a later time if funding is insufficient.
Responding to Deputy Mayor Jepsen, Mr. Sievers explained that contracts reflect that consultants are only paid for services provided, even if the scope of work changes.
Deputy Mayor Jepsen wondered what is included in the design contract. He noted that architects generally include the concepts of schematic design, design development, construction documents, bidding, and construction management in their definition of design contract. Mr. McKinley responded that the design contract would result in production of construction plan sheets. Mr. Haines clarified that construction management is included in the total project cost but not in the cost of design.
Councilmember Ransom reiterated his concern about escalating costs and the fact that the design is not an efficient route for trail users. He estimated there would be approximately 240 feet of ramps and switchbacks (based on ADA requirements of 1:12 slope), so it is not very likely people would use them. He noted that the pedestrian bridge at NE 130th and Aurora Avenue is not frequently used. He did not support spending nearly $4 million on a bridge that would not be used.
Mayor Hansen said although the proposed design was not his first choice, it is vital to have a grade-separated crossing. He reiterated that the City’s investment consists of only 14% of the total project, and that the design has gone through an extensive public process. He felt it would be foolish to backtrack on prior Council decisions. He noted that most of Shoreline’s capital projects have come in at or below cost estimates.
Councilmember Gustafson expressed support for the design, noting that the ramps are designed more for cyclists and other wheeled vehicles than pedestrians. He said one of the reasons for having the trail on the west side of Aurora Avenue is to tie it in with the Westminster Triangle and local retailers. He felt another long-term goal is to eventually connect the trail to Shoreline Community College.
Councilmember Chang wondered about the possibility of connecting the two bridges in the future. Mr. McKinley said an elevated connection might be an option depending on how the owner of the Westminster Triangle redevelops the property.
Mayor Hansen and Councilmember Gustafson indicated that area property owners and businesses might be interested in funding portions of the trail. Mayor Hansen noted some developers have volunteered to build portions of the trail if their plans are realized.
Councilmember Fimia felt that people would rather have a completed trail they can use now. She added that she is not interested in making the bridge a “monument.” She felt it would be more prudent to build one bridge and use the remaining money to finish the trail as soon as possible.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion to authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with CH2M Hill for design services for an amount not to exceed $578,00 for the Interurban Trail Pedestrian Bridge Project and to adopt the alignment of both the Interurban Trail Pedestrian Bridge and the South Central Section of the trail. This motion carried 4-3, with Councilmembers Chang, Fimia, and Ransom dissenting.
(b) Public Input Sessions
Councilmember Grace described the process proposed by a subcommittee of the Council (himself and Councilmembers Fimia and Ransom) to solicit input from the community about the public input process into City Council decision-making.
Mr. Burkett offered to provide the Council a summary of the findings and recommendations of the citizens committee that reviewed this topic a few years ago.
Mayor Hansen felt the Council could benefit from this information. Councilmember Grace felt there is a current problem with the public input process, regardless of past experience.
Mayor
Hansen expressed concern about scheduling this item with enough time to
consider it at the April Council Retreat.
Councilmember Gustafson felt this item should be included on the agenda for the March 15 meeting. He said in addition to the forums at the neighborhood centers and the Council meeting, this item should be brought to the Council of Neighborhoods.
Deputy Mayor Jepsen asked for a clearer definition of the problem statement. He felt it focuses solely on the Council Rule of Procedures as opposed to other forms of input such as letters, e-mail, Channel 21, and Enterprise columns.
There was Council consensus to refine the problem statement and add this item to the March 15 agenda.
Councilmember Ransom asked that the issue of Goldie’s Casino and the Choi development proposal be placed on a workshop agenda. Councilmember Fimia supported this request.
9. ADJOURNMENT
At 10:00 p.m., Mayor Hansen declared the meeting adjourned.
_________________________
Sharon Mattioli, City Clerk