CITY OF SHORELINE
SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL
Monday, August 28, 2006 Shoreline Conference Center
7:30 p.m. Mt. Rainier Room
PRESENT: Mayor Ransom, Deputy Mayor Fimia and Councilmembers Hansen, Ryu, and Way
ABSENT: NONE
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Mayor Ransom, who presided.
2. FLAG SALUTE/ROLL CALL
Mayor Ransom led the flag salute. Upon roll call by the City Clerk, all Councilmembers were present except for Councilmember McGlashan and Councilmember Gustafson.
Upon motion by Councilmember Hansen, seconded by Councilmember Ryu and carried 5-0, Councilmember McGlashan and Councilmember Gustafson were excused.
(a) Proclamation of “Traffic Safety Month”
Mayor Ransom read the proclamation and proclaimed the month of September as “Traffic Safety Month.” He presented the proclamation to Police Chief Tony Burtt.
(b) Proclamation of “Seattle Shores Chorus Day”
Mayor Ransom read the proclamation and declared the August 28, 2006 as “Seattle Shores Chorus Day” in the City of Shoreline. He presented the proclamation to Chorus Director Bonnie Willis and other members of the group.
The Seattle Shores Chorus performed two songs for the City Council and those in attendance.
3. REPORT OF THE CITY MANAGER
Bob Olander, City Manager, provided updates and status reports on the following items:
4. REPORTS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS: none
5. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
(a) Martin Kral, Shoreline, discussed the rezone of a parcel on Stone Avenue. He said he did not get proper notification and was surprised that Council only spent 15 minutes deliberating the rezone before it was approved. He explained that because the Planning Commission unanimously approved the rezone the City Council didn’t feel it was necessary to discuss it at length, and only Mayor Ransom raised an issue because he had some historical insights. He felt the opportunities for residents to speak are very limited. He said he faces the prospect of the third cottage housing development a block from his home. He added that this rezone on Stone Avenue allows developers to get their “foot in the door” on his street. He said the Council needs to take their responsibility seriously because the Planning Commission failed to listen to the public input.
(b) LaNita Wacker, Shoreline, said there needs to be citizen input into the design of City Hall and a process whereby individuals can submit ideas. She noted that the Council has been operating for eight months and has never ended one meeting on time. She added that Councilmembers appear to not be prepared to vote on legislation when they come to their meetings. She said that speaks to the public and relays that they are not ready or not taking their job seriously. She said it is abusive to the staff, the video crew, the public, the editor of the newspaper, and the public to hold lengthy meetings. She said it is improper for Councilmembers to “blindside” other Councilmembers with amendments and new items at the meetings. She added that staff should not be blindsided with questions at workshops that can easily be sent to them ahead of time so the staff can come prepared and bring answers. She said the Council needs to be more efficient. She also said she is saddened by the same 4-3 voting and it needs to stop.
Mr. Olander responded to Mr. Kral and stated that the development is not cottage housing. It is another type of development allowed under the current code. He also said that there was one open public hearing which is legal under current Washington land use law and Council procedures. He also said that when an item comes to the Council that the Planning Commission has had an open public hearing on it cannot be reopened. The Council only acts as an appeal body when this occurs and can only review the record of the Planning Commission. In response to Ms. Wacker, he said there will be opportunities for public input on the City Hall design. The City is still in the due diligence stage and has not closed on the property, he said. Within the next 30 to 45 days the City staff will outline the next steps before the City Council, which will include a public process. He pointed out that the general parameters for the building are that it will be up to 60,000 square feet, but no designs are set. He added that Councilmembers often do e-mail City staff with questions in advance of Council meetings.
Councilmember Way asked for clarification on the public notice issue.
Ian Sievers, City Attorney, responded that residents get notice of the public hearing at the Planning Commission level. Thus, the hearing for any site specific rezone, which is a quasi-judicial action, is where comments get submitted, either written or oral testimony.
Mr. Olander noted that the Council agendas are also posted in City Hall and libraries in town. He also added that the Council future agendas are posted on the website.
Mayor Ransom said there will be much participation from the public on the new City Hall. He added that the Council does coordinate with the staff prior to meetings for clarification on issues and to get questions answered. He said there are meetings that have finished on time and the 4-3 voting splits are not common.
6. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Councilmember Way proposed pulling item 7(c) to add a word to the scope of work.
Mr. Olander noted that her previously stated revision has already been communicated to the City staff, so the addition of the word “prevention” to the contract is an editorial revision.
Deputy Mayor moved for a point of personal privilege for Councilmember Way.
Councilmember Way introduced her parents, Dave and Dotti Way from New Jersey. She added that her father was the inspiration for her being on the City Council.
Deputy Mayor Fimia moved approval of the agenda. Councilmember Ryu seconded the motion, which carried 5-0.
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
Deputy Mayor Fimia moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Ryu seconded the motion, which carried 5-0, and the following items were approved:
Minutes of Workshop Dinner Meeting of July 10, 2006
Minutes of Business Meeting of July 10, 2006
Minutes of Special Meeting of July 17, 2006
Minutes of Special Meeting of July 18, 2006
Minutes of Workshop Dinner Meeting of July 24, 2006
Minutes of Business Meeting of July 24, 2006
Approval of expenses and payroll as of August 17, 2006
in the amount of $5,234,670.34
Approval of amendment to contract for School Resource
Officer between the City of Shoreline and the Shoreline
School District
Approval of Memorandum of Agreement between the City
of Shoreline and King County to transfer project funding for
the Aurora Corridor Project (N 165th – N 205th)
Motion to authorize the City Manager to contract with the
Washington State Military Department in the amount of
$54,531 for Emergency Management Preparedness Assistance
Grant Funds (EMPAG)
8. ACTION ITEM: PUBLIC HEARINGS
(a) Public hearing to receive citizens’ comment on
Resolution No. 249, supporting the Automated Fingerprint
Identification System (AFIS) Levy at the September 19, 2006
State Primary Election; and
Council Action on Resolution No. 249, supporting the AFIS Levy
At 8:07 p.m. Mayor Ransom opened the public hearing. There was no one signed up and no one in the audience wishing to provide public comment.
Upon motion by Deputy Mayor Fimia, seconded by Councilmember Ryu and carried 5-0, the public hearing was closed.
Councilmember Hansen moved to adopt Resolution No. 249, supporting the Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS) Levy at the September 19, 2006 State Primary Election. Deputy Mayor Fimia seconded the motion.
Mr. Olander explained that the purpose of AFIS is to rapidly identify suspects and warrants, and the funding depends upon a renewable levy every six years. The passage of this levy will include some enhancements being installed and he urged for positive consideration from the Council.
A vote was taken on the motion, which carried 5-0, and Resolution No. 249 was passed.
9. ACTION ITEMS: OTHER ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND MOTIONS
(a) Ordinance No. 438 amending the City’s Official Zoning
Map Tile Number 443 changing the Zoning from Residential
12 DU-AC (R-12) to Residential 18 DU-AC (RU-18) of one
parcel located at 19201 15th Avenue NW (Parcel #0226039205)
Joe Tovar, Planning and Development Services Director, summarized that this ordinance is the culmination of a long, complicated code enforcement issue. He said he inherited this issue and there were lots of concerns. The property, he said, is in an area that the Planning Commission determined can be up-zoned. There was a neighborhood meeting held in the spring that was well-attended, and the main concern was to ensure there would be no vehicular access to this parcel from the west. This was echoed by the staff who said the main concern was to protect the property from access by multi-family vehicles.
Steve Szafran, Planner, noted that the structure is currently a fourplex, which allows for residential zoning between R-12 and R-48. He reviewed the densities of the areas adjacent to the parcel, the conditions of the rezone, and any future impacts the rezone would have on the area. He closed by recommending approval of the rezone with conditions.
Councilmember Hansen moved to approve Ordinance No. 438 amending the City’s Official Zoning Map Tile Number 443 changing the Zoning from Residential 12 DU-AC (R-12) to Residential 18 DU-AC (RU-18) of one parcel located at 19201 15th Avenue NW (Parcel #0226039205). Deputy Mayor Fimia seconded the motion.
Councilmember Hansen pointed out that this has been a problem in this neighborhood for a long time. He said the Planning Commission and the staff have worked out a good compromise, noting that the Burt’s bought this property in 2002. He added that the properties adjacent to the parcel are already zoned for R-18. He expressed support for the proposed ordinance.
Councilmember Way agreed with respect to the work done by the Planning Commission and the staff and concurred that the solution seemed amicable for all parties. She inquired if the current owner understood that this issue wasn’t resolved when he purchased the property.
Mr. Tovar said this question was not addressed in the record, so therefore he cannot provide an answer.
Councilmember Way said that the process needs to be consistent for rezones, and the Council needs to ensure it is not setting a precedent. She wanted fairness for all citizens in Shoreline regarding rezones.
Mr. Tovar felt this was the best conclusion that could be reached based on the various and very different interests of the parties. He said when a rezone is granted for a specific parcel, people often question whether it is a “spot zone” to benefit one property owner. There is a generic problem on how the City deals with zoning changes to implement the Comprehensive Plan Land Use map. He hoped that there will be discussion on it in the future with the Council and the Planning Commission. He said that maybe the Comprehensive Housing Strategy can be used to outline a clear, more predictable, consistent process to communicate what the appropriate densities or uses ought to be for a given area.
Mr. Olander added that the City’s current code enforcement personnel help resolve these types of issues.
Councilmember Ryu highlighted that the entire record needed to be available to the Planning Commission, because only seven neighbors spoke at the hearing and there were 45 letters written to them that they didn’t see. She urged City staff to be aware of the traffic impacts on rezones and inquired if there was a way to control the traffic. She asked how much this rezone would have cost the property owner if he had initiated this action. She also asked if it was possible to pass those fees onto the property owner as a condition of the rezone. She wondered how the City goes about enforcing the conditions of the rezone.
Mr. Tovar noted that the conditions have to be satisfied by the applicant. For instance, the landscape plan has to be completed by October 1. If they don’t comply, he said, then they don’t get an approved permit. At that time, code enforcement would become involved and fines and other actions would be implemented by the City. He noted that at the Planning Commission meeting the property owner, Mr. Burt, was agreeable to the conditions that were discussed.
Mr. Szafran estimated the cost of the rezone for this application at around $10,000.
Councilmember Ryu asked if reimbursement of this fee to the City could be a condition of the rezone.
Mr. Olander noted that it was a conscientious decision to make this a City-initiated rezone to ensure the applicant did not have to pay the cost. He said the staff felt this was a reasonable City contribution in order to solve the problem.
Mr. Sievers responded that since this has been initiated by the City, it would be an unfair condition to ask the property owner to reimburse the City.
Mr. Tovar pointed out that the property owner will, however, have to pay some permit fees related to this rezone.
Councilmember Ryu clarified that some higher density lots are even more valuable than commercial lots and she felt the rezone makes his parcel more valuable.
Mr. Sievers added that the City tried to find a process that worked for the entire neighborhood and the City.
Councilmember Ryu asked if the fee could be split 50-50.
Mr. Olander said that in such a late stage of negotiations that would be in bad faith. He said this represents a compromise to balance the interests and advised against charging the property owner.
Deputy Mayor Fimia supported the motion and commended the neighborhood, the staff, and the property owner for working through the issues and crafting a solution. She said the property was purchased after the owner thought it was compliant and change is needed. She said the City has to be reasonable and flexible when there is a need.
Mayor Ransom supported the motion and agreed it was a reasonable compromise to a difficult and complex issue.
Councilmember Hansen stated this is a “win-win-win situation.” He added that the City avoids any potential lawsuit, and the Burt’s have their property and the neighborhood traffic problem is mitigated. He commended the staff and supported the motion.
Councilmember Way congratulated the members of the public who commented repeatedly and were consistent about their concerns. She stated that the solution seems to be good compromise.
A vote was taken on the motion, which carried 4 – 1, with Councilmember Ryu dissenting, and Ordinance No. 438 was adopted.
RECESS
At 8:55 p.m., Mayor Ransom called for a five-minute recess.
At 9:06 p.m., Mayor Ransom reconvened the meeting.
10. NEW BUSINESS
(a) 2005 Police Service Efforts and Accomplishments (SEA) Report
Tony Burtt, Shoreline Police Chief, presented the 2005 SEA Report. He outlined that the department focused on Council goals to include safe and friendly streets, speed enforcement in school zones, and responding to community concerns. Additionally, the overall goal of reducing crime was analyzed by identifying where crime occurred in Shoreline. He said 2005 was a successful year for policing in Shoreline. However, there is room for improvement in the areas of auto thefts and burglaries because there was a slight 1.8% increase in Part I crimes in 2005. However, there was a 17% drop in Part I crimes in terms of violent crimes towards against persons, he reported. In 2005, he stated there were 20% more arrests made. He noted that they increased their enforcement in traffic safety and auto thefts in 2005. He also reported that collisions are down 20% this year because traffic citations are up 45%. He pointed out that there is an obvious correlation because their primary mission in traffic enforcement is reducing accidents and reducing injuries. He commended Sergeant Kevin Fagerstrom for working successfully on obtaining a large number of grants. The police storefronts have also been very successful in crime prevention, he said. He noted that the police department averages 400 hours of volunteer hours per month; volunteers are doing tasks such as making 607 follow-up calls to crime victims per month, and logging 3,300 reminder telephone calls a month to people that are scheduled for court. He highlighted that Part I crime is down 11% so far this year and is attributed to a reduction in auto theft (down 3.7%) and burglary. He commented that the wireless computer system in patrol cars is excellent and it allows officers to run checks on vehicles inside their patrol cars without having to call dispatch.
Councilmember Ryu inquired if there are any statistics on the reduction of traffic since the construction began on Aurora Avenue, and if this is correlated to fewer accidents in Shoreline.
Mr. Olander said the experience is that drivers are utilizing other routes in Shoreline to avoid Aurora Avenue. He explained that the volumes are there, but along other streets. He added that he would get that information to the Council.
Councilmember Way asked if there were any pedestrian accident statistics in 2005 and 2006.
Chief Burtt said the greatest emphasis in preventing accidents has been in school zones, but he will investigate and report back to the Council how many pedestrian traffic accidents took place and their severity over the past two years.
Councilmember Way pointed out that David Townsend’s “TIA” Foundation has raised awareness in the neighborhoods, organizations, and on the Council.
Chief Burtt said traffic safety is the top priority and they are constantly looking at the statistics. He added that the Public Works department has developed reports that show speed counts throughout the City. These reports demonstrate where the speeding vehicles are so they can be targeted by the police department. He highlighted that there was an increase in burglaries in 2005, however, during the first six months in 2006 there is a significant decline in the number of commercial and residential burglaries. He added that the education of the public by the storefront volunteers and officers had a big impact on the reduction of burglaries in Shoreline. Additionally, the Detective Unit has been fully staffed for most of 2005 and all of 2006, and they have been able to focus on some of the chronic burglars with some significant arrests occurring.
Mayor Ransom pointed out that the 32 percent decline in burglaries Chief Burtt discussed in his presentation is incorrect and should be a 24 to 25 percent reduction.
Deputy Mayor Fimia inquired if there was a more prominent time of day that these burglaries occur in Shoreline.
Chief Burtt responded that most of them occur during the day when residents are at work.
Mayor Ransom inquired if most of the burglaries are committed by teenagers.
Chief Burtt replied that it is difficult to answer because most of these burglaries do not end in arrests.
Deputy Mayor Fimia asked if most of the criminals that are apprehended reside in Shoreline.
Chief Burtt replied that an overwhelming majority of auto thefts are done by thieves that do not reside in Shoreline. He added that the number of burglars apprehended who reside in Shoreline is about equal to those who reside outside the City.
Deputy Mayor Fimia asked the age range of those that are arrested.
Chief Burtt responded that almost all of them are adults over the age of 18. However, those that are between 18 -25 years of age represent the greatest percentage. He also said they are starting to see more females involved in burglary.
Deputy Mayor Fimia inquired if most of the burglary cases involve drug users.
Chief Burtt replied that it is hard to determine because most of the time they do not tell the officers why they are stealing.
Deputy Mayor Fimia added that the information gained from these crimes is important in order to reduce burglaries and auto theft. She said it is important to know who they are, why they are stealing, whether they are on drugs, and where they come from.
Chief Burtt said the police normally get their address but it is not routinely collected. He added that the officers normally make assumptions about that type of information, but he admitted that those assumptions may not be accurate. He added that shoplifting declined in 2005 also.
Deputy Mayor Fimia said it is encouraging to see the numbers going down for 2006. She asked if the number of domestic violence cases has decreased as well.
Chief Burtt said he would have to look into those statistics. He noted that the department has been encouraging victims to report for a long time now, but he said he would actually like to see that number stabilize because that means more people are reporting the abuse.
Deputy Mayor Fimia asked him to bring some specific points in the future for a more detailed discussion to identify more solutions and focus areas. She said domestic violence and other areas need to have more resources applied in order to continue to reduce the numbers.
Mayor Ransom pointed out that the presentation says there is a 50 percent increase in domestic violence from 2004 to 2005. He said the highest number is 4th degree assault and asked if family juvenile disturbances were included in that number.
Chief Burtt said these represent cases where officers are called to residences for family disturbances that don’t require an arrest.
Councilmember Way inquired what the process was for responding to calls. She asked if there was a protocol that the dispatcher goes through when routing calls. She highlighted that Chief Burtt said the response time is 3.98 minutes, however, she said that she hasn’t had that experience when she has called.
Mr. Olander said there is a protocol which outlines the classification of calls. Some of the calls are more serious than others and require a more immediate response. He added that most of the officers are busy with routine calls and some calls take a while to respond to, so it all depends on how the call is classified.
Chief Burtt referred to page 183 of the SEA Report which explained how each call is classified. He outlined that the classifications are utilized by the person who takes the call and places it in one of the classifications. The dispatcher will examine how many officers are available that moment and what they are working on to ascertain if they can leave to respond to an emergency call, he explained. Higher priorities will be responded to first. Non-priority calls will be taken in order depending on how long the call has been waiting.
Councilmember Way inquired where a burglary call would be classified.
Chief Burtt replied that it depends upon if there is someone in the house or not. The presence of a burglar would have a very high priority. If the burglary took place while the resident was at work and the residence is safe it would not have such a high priority. In between those two would be a burglary that occurred a short time ago, he stated.
Councilmember Way asked how Shoreline compared with other cities on the drug issues.
Chief Burtt said there are very few juvenile arrests for drugs. He said there are some misdemeanor arrests for marijuana, but it is not rampant in schools.
Mr. Olander said there is a need for another officer in the street crimes unit because one was taken from the unit last year for traffic enforcement.
Deputy Mayor Fimia called for public comment. There was no one wishing to provide public comment.
Mayor Ransom commented that he is pleased that auto theft and burglaries have not exceeded the 2004 numbers.
MEETING EXTENSION
At 9:57 p.m., Deputy Mayor Fimia moved to extend the meeting until 10:30 p.m. Councilmember Ryu seconded the motion, which carried 4-0-1, with Councilmember Hansen remaining silent.
(b) Surface Water & Environmental Services
Mr. Olander introduced Jesus Sanchez, Public Works Operations Manager, and Jerry Schuster, Public Works Surface Water Manager.
Mr. Sanchez noted that the City inherited a failing “wire and duct tape” drainage system with an equally inadequate maintenance program from King County. There has been substantial progress made, he said, to reduce flooding, water quality, and habitat enhancement. The accomplishments include major capital improvements and the increase of routine maintenance. He introduced the Operations Division personnel and highlighted their professional backgrounds. He said they are an accomplished group with diverse skill sets.
Mr. Schuster discussed the surface water portion of the department. He noted that they work closely with the planning department’s design review engineer and the capital projects manager. He explained that the surface water department does everything from maintaining 7,400 catch basins to working with King County and City right-of-way inspectors. He noted that his team maintains and inspects 240 commercial stormwater facilities to ensure they meet City standards for water flow control and water quality treatment. The department also inspects 94 regional sites (large ponds) and 64 residential sites. They also respond to any flood or drainage issues that occur in Shoreline. The department also designs and implements stream restorations, monitors water quality in Hidden Lake, Echo Lake and City streams on a monthly basis, and are the point of contact for King County Public Health on any West Nile virus related issues.
Councilmember Ryu inquired how many catch basins will be added on Aurora Avenue as a result of the project.
Mr. Schuster responded that there will be about the same number of upgraded catch basins, but there will be three new treatment stations added.
Deputy Mayor Fimia inquired if the catch basin cleaning was contracted out and if there was anything else that was contracted to another organization.
Mr. Sanchez responded that they have existing contracts for catch basin cleaning and street sweeping.
Councilmember Way wondered if a performance measure could be implemented for how many square feet of stream habitat has been improved.
Mr. Sanchez responded that he tried to have the same measures as other cities to eventually reach the environmentally sustainable measures. He added that in 2007 they are starting a database to keep track of micro invertebrate counts.
Mr. Olander added that the City has been measuring water quality and it will be a federal requirement under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. He added that our goal shouldn’t be to meet the federal and state requirements, but to exceed them.
Councilmember Way added that Seattle Pubic Utilities does fish counts and measures the sediment load. She suggested that Shoreline begin doing the same.
Mr. Schuster continued his presentation and outlined the major flood protection projects in the City.
Councilmember Ryu inquired about the recommended way to dispose of deciduous tree leaves.
Mr. Sanchez said the preferred way is to pick them up instead of blowing them into the street, which clogs the drainage system. However, there is a program where they are sometimes blown onto the road surface 30 or 45 minutes prior to the street sweeper coming through. He also noted that there is a regenerative air system that the City has contracted for in 2006 which is the highest rated vacuum system on the market.
Councilmember Way asked if the City encourages homeowners to compost.
Mr. Sanchez said the City does encourage composting and there is a compost facility behind Shorecrest High School. This facility saves the City over $10,000 in transfer station fees per year. The resulting compost is taken by residents and used on their properties.
Mr. Schuster continued the presentation and discussed the NEST (Neighborhood Environmental Stewardship Team) program which was modeled after the neighborhood traffic safety program. The program, he explained, involves City staff conducting and holding meetings to discover what projects communities want to do concerning the environment.
10. ADJOURNMENT
At 10:34 p.m., Mayor Ransom declared the meeting adjourned.
Scott Passey, CMC
City Clerk