CITY OF SHORELINE
SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL
SUMMARY MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING
Monday, June 16, 2008 - 6:30 p.m.
Shoreline Conference Center
Mt. Rainier Room
PRESENT: Mayor Ryu, Deputy Mayor Scott, Councilmember Eggen, Councilmember Hansen, Councilmember McConnell, Councilmember McGlashan, and Councilmember Way
ABSENT: none
|
1. |
At 6:31 p.m., the meeting was called to order by Mayor Ryu, who presided.
|
2. |
Mayor Ryu led the flag salute. Upon roll call by the City Clerk, all Councilmembers were present, with the exception of Councilmember Hansen, who arrived shortly thereafter.
|
3. |
Bob Olander, City Manager, provided updates, announcements, and reports on various City events, meetings, and projects. He then introduced students and teachers from Echo Lake Elementary to present their environmental mini-grant project at Camp Orkila.
The group stated that they did volunteer work involving picking up trash on the Interurban Trail, and becoming more aware of waste. They learned about outdoor education and preserving the wildlife and habitat. One of the representatives commented that the kids waste less food now and thank the City for the grant funding.
Councilmember Way thanked the students for their presentation and confirmed that they worked on it themselves.
Councilmember McConnell thanked them for their report. She commended the school and parents for supporting the transition to Echo Lake Elementary.
|
4. |
Councilmember Eggen stated that he attended three meetings. The first was the Eastside Human Services Forum meeting and there was discussion about three new human services funding sources. He attended the Public Issues Committee meeting of the Suburban Cities Association. At that meeting, they addressed the new funding cycle for transportation and money from the Federal government. He said he also attended the Municipal Solid Waste Management Committee meeting and they discussed the upcoming Comprehensive Plan for recycling and their various goals coming out in the next 4-6 years. He highlighted that a main issue in the future is mandatory recycling.
Mayor Ryu commented that she and Councilmember Eggen attended the SeaShore Transportation Forum meeting. She said she would share a final version of the letter to be sent to the Sound Transit Board when it becomes available.
|
5. |
a) Bob Phelps, Shoreline, on behalf of Shoreline Auxiliary Communications, stated there will be an exercise at the Shoreline Arts Festival using emergency power to communicate with as many others as possible. He said they love having the community and Councilmembers visit.
b) Bill Meyers, Shoreline, said that the City of Shoreline’s website states that the City imposes utility taxes and franchise fees at a rate of 6%, based on gross revenues. He stated that when he calculated it he came up with 6.2 and 6.7%. He added that he was shocked to find utility tax was being imposed on itself. He wondered if there is a 6% tax on the 12% tax that Seattle charges. He said this is an issue about truth in government, or deception by government. He pointed out that there is a statement on the website about Seattle City Light charging every resident an additional surcharge of $2.67 per month. He questioned if that increase is before the 6% fee is calculated. He said he hasn’t received an answer. He asked the City Council to change the utility tax so it is a true 6%.
c) Bill Bear, Shoreline, discussed the Southeast Subarea Plan and the sixteen people proposed by the Planning Department to staff the committee. He said his main concern is that as Shoreline grows, people have a real sense that they belong here and that the City belongs to them. One way to accomplish that, he explained, is getting residents involved in planning. He felt that every person who applied to be on the committee should have been accepted because it brings a better outcome in the end.
Mr. Olander stated that the City staff will respond to Mr. Meyers' comments in writing.
|
6. |
Deputy Mayor Scott moved approval of the agenda. Councilmember McGlashan seconded the motion, which carried 7-0 and the agenda was approved.
|
7. |
Councilmember Way requested removal of item 7(b) from the Consent Calendar and added as Action Item 8(a). Deputy Mayor Scott moved approval of the Consent Calendar as amended. Councilmember McGlashan seconded the motion, which carried 7-0 and the following items were approved:
|
|
(a) Adoption of Southeast Neighborhoods Subarea Planning Citizen Advisory Committee |
|
8. |
Councilmember Way asked for an explanation of the fish passable box culverts and which pipes are involved.
Mark Relph, Public Works Director, replied that there are two parts to this. He noted that the three culverts are different construction and the contract for the three culverts was awarded. The first part has already been designed and that is the 18" piece and will be located two blocks immediately south of Ronald Bog on Corliss Place.
Councilmember Way questioned if both would be increasing capacity and infiltration for storm water. Mr. Relph explained that during the low flow situations the ability for water to pass through the culverts will be increased.
Councilmember Way wanted to know if the section that the Council is approving tonight would improve the habitat in riparian area. Mr. Relph replied that it would and the area is fish-passable. He added that the City is moving towards improving the habitat of the entire area, with the assistance of the property owners, in the first phase.
Mayor Ryu said she was delighted that there were ten bids submitted. Mr. Relph commented that the City is doing well with bidding because the City staff tries to package projects so they are predictable and similar to other projects. He said the staff is doing a good job at estimating costs.
Mr. Olander noted that several projects are funded through Washington State Public Works Trust Fund Loans at a rate of .5% interest.
Deputy Mayor Scott moved to authorize the City Manager to award the construction contract to Construction, Inc. in the amount of $949,628.70 plus a 10% contingency for the Ronald Bog South Improvements. Councilmember Eggen seconded the motion, which carried 7-0. |
(b) Discussion of the 2009 - 2014 Capital Improvement Plan
Debbie Tarry, Finance Director, reviewed the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) document with the Council on a fund-by-fund basis. She highlighted that the CIP has to be balanced within each fund, each with its own resources. However, future anticipated grants can be used as funding sources. She provided a summary of the General Capital Fund and stated that under the Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) a municipality just needs to list the projects to be grant-eligible.
Councilmember Way inquired how that applies to the different areas that might be interconnected, such as transportation, parks, and surface water. Mr. Relph responded that it is done with lots of coordination between Parks and Public Works to ensure both entities are in grant sequence. Councilmember Way felt there would be lots of crossover between grants.
Mr. Olander explained that larger projects may include multiple grant sources. For example, the Aurora Corridor Project has lots of different grant sources. Ms. Tarry added that the City staff looks at the primary purpose of a certain project to determine which fund it should be applied to.
Mr. Relph submitted that it also depends on who is offering the grant.
Mr. Olander stated that the CIP can be amended if a new property or proposal is submitted that wasn’t originally included.
Ms. Tarry resumed her presentation and discussed the General Capital Fund, revenue sources, the Real Estate Excise Tax (REET), and the City Hall Project.
Mayor Ryu asked why the financial impact of the new City Hall isn’t included in the budget. Ms. Tarry responded that there are some funds that have already been committed, therefore they aren’t listed.
Councilmember Eggen inquired if the $750,000 from REET will be the total yearly payment on the construction loan. Ms. Tarry replied that it wouldn’t. She added that they would be taking payments on the leased offices in the new City Hall and the Annex and applying them to the debt service amount, which she estimated to be between $1 million and $1.2 million.
Councilmember Eggen confirmed with Ms. Tarry that the construction loan amount will be more than $750,000 per year. She added that this also will include the cost of operational maintenance.
Councilmember Way inquired if there was a chart for the expenditures. She wanted to know what percentage of the General Fund was the $750,000 plus the additional revenue. Ms. Tarry estimated that the majority of the costs over the next six years will be for City Hall. She stated that 75% of the project costs will be attributed to City Hall and 25% is for parks projects and land acquisition. She noted that this represented about 3% of the General Fund.
Ms. Tarry said the public facilities study is focused on the municipal pool. Councilmember Way commented that there is an immediate concern about what will happen to the senior center and the school district facility. Mayor Ryu said she heard the school district was considering putting a new high school there.
Dick Deal, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Director, said the superintendent says they are considering how to develop a high school and adding it to next year's CIP. He said they are in the process of evaluating the entire site because there is a lot of space.
Councilmember Way inquired if some kind of agreement is needed to preserve the pool. Mr. Deal replied that the school district is in the process of evaluating their needs and he anticipates the district having discussions with the senior center as they analyze the information they shared in March. He added that the pool was funded in the 1968 Forward Thrust Bond and it is nearing its 40th year, which is old for a swimming facility. He said the life of the pool needs to be looked at and anything more would probably require more resources.
Mr. Relph suggested keeping the pool study separate from the senior center study. Mr. Olander added that the pool clientele should be determined, which would go beyond this analysis. Councilmember Way suggested that Fircrest is another site that seniors can utilize.
Councilmember McGlashan commented that there is only $50,000 for maintenance in 2010 and none in 2011. He said he remembered adding something in the CIP about a study for the pool so it could be replaced. Ms. Tarry said it was put on hold until the study is completed, although the air handlers are scheduled to be replaced in 2013.
Continuing, Ms. Tarry discussed Parks projects which are primarily bond funded. She added that most of it will be spent by the end of 2009.
Councilmember Way highlighted the letter in the packet concerning the off leash dog park. Mr. Deal commented that over 100 people attended the meeting in which the dog park study group report was released. He noted that there are six sites listed as possible locations, but the group is continuing to gather information throughout the summer. He confirmed that there is $150,000 identified in the bond issue money and there may be a strategy to discuss two or three sites; however, the current funding will only cover one.
Councilmember Way inquired if there are any Interurban Trail projects with businesses involved.
Mr. Deal replied that there is a citizen study group on trail corridors and the Council has approved the routing studies. The group, he announced, reconvenes next month to move forward on the soft surface trail design and to look at other routes. He added that they will also be looking at connectors between the Interurban Trail and the Burke-Gilman Trail. He said anything that ties to the Interurban Trail needs to be discussed with Seattle City Light. He noted that the surface design recommendations should be done by the end of this year or by early next year. He noted that the public and the Council can submit suggestions to the committee on the hard surface trails.
Councilmember McGlashan said he is confused about the total funding for the trails and parks.
Ms. Tarry replied that the numbers reflect what is anticipated to be spent from 2009-2014. She explained that between now and 2014 there will only be $137,000 left because most of the bond will be spent in 2008. She then discussed the remaining parks projects. She noted that the Interurban Park project is heavily dependent on obtaining grant funding in the future and is scheduled to be planned in 2010, with construction occurring from 2011-2013.
Mayor Ryu asked if it was easier to obtain a grant by adding in a skate park. Mr. Deal responded that it is not likely. He clarified that this project is now scheduled to run up to 185th Avenue NE.
Ms. Tarry then discussed Parks Repair/Replacement funding. Councilmember Way asked if this fund includes equipment for recreation programs. Mr. Deal commented that they are looking to purchase small equipment for the pool, but the majority is for parks equipment and facilities, not operational supplies.
Ms. Tarry then discussed the Pym acquisition. Mr. Deal highlighted that this acquisition is funded with grant money through the Conservation Futures Trust Fund. He felt this site would have the highest grant score because it is next to a regional recreation facility.
Councilmember Way asked if there are plans for trails in the natural areas of that park. Mr. Deal said he would like to come back to the Council with options for trails at Strandberg Reserve. He then described the Strandberg Reserve property.
Ms. Tarry discussed the improvements at the Richmond Beach Pump Station, the Twin Ponds Master Plan, the Paramount Open Space purchase, and other non project-specific allocations.
Councilmember Way discussed the Boeing Creek project and bank stabilization. She commented that it is not funded until 2014, but it seems urgent. Mr. Relph replied that both the Boeing Creek and Thornton Creek basin plans had to be delayed in order to balance the budget. Mr. Olander commented that they will be funded from the storm water revenue stream.
Councilmember Way asked if the City staff can look for grant funding for bank stabilization because of the erosion of the trails. Mr. Deal commented that there has been some success on trail grants; the City staff met with the on-site contractor today and trail work will start soon. He commented that City staff is aware of the fact that Boeing Creek is dynamic. He added that work will be done to stabilize the man-made erosion. Mr. Olander highlighted that the trail work will keep some of the erosion from progressing.
Councilmember Way encouraged the City staff to look for ways to utilize volunteer labor like Earth Corps or the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts.
Councilmember McGlashan said he didn't see anything in the CIP about the upper Shoreview Park parking area by the college. Mr. Deal said there are some preliminary discussions taking place about a land swap between Shoreline Community College (SCC) and the City.
Mayor Ryu asked if it would make sense to co-locate the Parks Maintenance storage facility with the school district. Mr. Deal replied that that can be explored in the future.
RECESS
At 8:09 p.m. Mayor Ryu called for a five minute break. Mayor Ryu reconvened the meeting at 8:17 p.m.
Ms. Tarry commented on the Major Maintenance Fund for City facilities which is funded by General Fund revenues. The fund, she explained, is for maintaining the police station, the pool, and the Richmond Highlands Community Center.
Councilmember Eggen said he recalls there were discussions about replacing the police station.
Mr. Olander replied that there is no timeframe for the police station. He said there was discussion on the benefits of having the police department located at the City Hall site.
Ms. Tarry then discussed the long-term maintenance of the pool and the upgrades to the Richmond Highlands Community Center.
Ms. Tarry said that there are 14 projects in the Roads Capital Fund and that the major project is the NE 165th-205th portion of the Aurora Corridor Improvement. She reviewed the revenue sources and stated most of the revenue sources are related to the Aurora Corridor.
Mayor Ryu asked if there was some possibility of doing a low impact development (LID) program. Mr. Relph replied that if someone paid “in-lieu-of” fees and met their obligation, the City could do something like an LID if the funds are spent by the City. Mr. Olander added that the next requirement will be if the cost of the LID improvement “benefits” the property.
Continuing, Ms. Tarry stated that 25% of REET is put into the Roads Capital Fund. Additionally, there is a General Fund contribution that goes to Roads Capital Fund, and a part of it comes from cardroom taxes. She highlighted the Pedestrian and Non-Motorized Projects.
Councilmember Eggen said that a constituent reported a dangerous walking condition to him near Ballinger Way. He wanted to know what could be done about it. Mr. Relph said the Neighborhood Traffic Safety Program (NTSP) can address those types of problems. He also noted that there are hazard elimination grants.
Councilmember Way discussed priority sidewalk routes. She said the Council identified priority routes around schools and the funding ends in 2010. Mr. Olander pointed out that the Transportation Master Plan (TMP) provides guidance on this.
Mayor Ryu noted that Ms. Tarry is always cautious on the in-lieu-of funds. She added that if the City can keep the level up at $200,000 and if there aren’t any other programs identified, the City can be more ambitious in building sidewalks. Mr. Relph agreed and stated that the City is attempting to establish a program to utilize the in-lieu-of funds.
Councilmember Way asked if more sidewalk funds could be provided through the concept of impact fees. Ms. Tarry said the Planning and Development Services Director commented that impact fees have to be used for capital expenditures related to the reduction of road impacts, car trips, etc. She added that it doesn't appear there will be a significant amount of revenue generated from an impact fee. She said there are other cities that collect impact fees as mitigation as it relates to roads, not sidewalks.
Councilmember Way asked why a sidewalk isn’t considered transportation mitigation. Mr. Olander replied that developments have to build sidewalks as a part of their mitigation. He said that under SEPA something might apply, but developments could be required to pay a miniscule part, but it would only be their portion of the impact. He expressed the opinion that it is not worth the cost of developing and tracking impact fees. He stated that the City can get the equivalent amount needed through SEPA impacts.
Councilmember Hansen noted that when the City first incorporated the shortage was $3.8 million.
Councilmember Way asked if SEPA mitigation could be used as a funding source for sidewalks.
Ian Sievers, City Attorney, commented that the frontage improvements in the code are derived from SEPA, and residents are getting it, including sidewalks and fee in-lieu-of. He didn’t feel any other funding would come from SEPA unless it is an unusual circumstance.
Mr. Olander highlighted that TOP Foods is an example of a business that directly affects traffic impacts, so they were required to fund most of the traffic signal and a portion of the trail.
Ms. Tarry then discussed sidewalk curb ramps. Mayor Ryu asked that the annual sidewalk improvement program be renamed to "repairs" program.
Ms. Tarry said that the sidewalk priority route program would be completed in 2010 and that year the City will be relying on grant funding to provide $600,000 per year.
Mr. Relph commented that one factor in not executing the sidewalk program is that the school district closed some schools, so the City re-prioritized the list.
Ms. Tarry reviewed the Traffic Small Works program and said annual funding improves safety and pedestrian needs.
Councilmember Way highlighted that there is a problem with kids safely crossing at Paramount School Park at NE 155th Street and 8th Avenue NE.
Mr. Relph responded that the City staff has estimated the cost to install additional curb bulb-outs is between $50,000 and $75,000. However, the accident history will need to be carefully reviewed if the City considers installing more pedestrian-activated signals. He stated that there is a need to have a strategic view of analyzing accidents by location so they can be prioritized. This, he added, will allow the City to identify and remedy the most problematic locations first.
Mr. Olander commented that the City needs to be cautious about crosswalks and uncontrolled intersections because they can be more dangerous.
Councilmember McGlashan felt that pedestrian-activated signals can give a false sense of security.
Mr. Relph said he is cautious about how these are approached and expressed his concern about this issue.
Councilmember Way said she would like the City to do the testing at NE 155th Street and 8th Avenue NE and measure the traffic there. She added that the Washington Cities Insurance Authority (WCIA) would want us to ensure we’re doing everything we could to provide safety measures close to schools and City parks.
Mayor Ryu asked if the flags are effective in increasing visibility. Jesus Sanchez, Public Works Operations Manager, stated that some people say it works, but it takes a long time because flags disappear. He said he was advised to buy an abundance of them so they aren’t taken. Now, he said there aren’t many missing flags and they are being used. He felt it isn’t a serious deterrent but it does work.
Councilmember Eggen added that he has also witnessed near accidents at the NE 155th Street and 8th Avenue intersection and neighbors have flagged that as a major concern. He agreed that the City should conduct a citywide analysis.
Ms. Tarry continued with the Transportation Master Plan (TMP) Update. She discussed the City’s System Preservation Projects which include the annual Roads Surface Maintenance, the Richmond Beach Overcrossing Replacement Project, and the Traffic Signal Rehabilitation Program.
Councilmember McGlashan asked if the signals and the controllers need to be replaced. Mr. Relph replied that this program is intended to replace or upgrade the heads, controllers, and anything involved with the traffic signals.
Ms. Tarry reviewed the NE 145th Street dual-left turn on Aurora Avenue, which is dependent on grants and coordination with the City of Seattle. She noted that the next project is the closeout of the Aurora Corridor Project from NE 145th Street to NE 165th Street.
Councilmember Way commented that there are weeds growing in the medians and ivy growing next to NE 155th Street and the Aurora bridge. Kirk McKinley, Aurora Corridor and Interurban Trail Project Manager, replied that the ivy at that location is a non-invasive species.
Mr. Sanchez noted that there has been some damage to the sprinkler heads in the medians by vehicles. He said staff will continue to work on the area.
Mayor Ryu asked if there is a need to water the plants beyond their mature stage. Mr. McKinley said there is currently a debate regarding this issue; however, the theory is that once everything is established the City won’t have to water them. Councilmember Way urged the City staff to find an alternative to ivy in the City.
Ms. Tarry then discussed the Neighborhood Traffic Safety Program (NTSP).
Councilmember McGlashan communicated that there have been some intense neighbors speaking out about problems on NE 155th Street and Ashworth Avenue and they are very frustrated. He stated that he thinks they are relieved that the Senior Housing Assistance Group (SHAG) has pulled out of the development. However, he said there are still trucks delivering things to the property. He inquired where this issue was on the priority list. Mr. Relph said he will provide a response to the Council on this. He stated that the first phase is education and compliance, but most people become frustrated with how long it takes.
Mr. Sanchez said they have discussed this specific issue with the NTSP and have expedited their program from Phase 1 to Phase 2. He added that there are 54 current NTSP street segments that the City staff is working on, and 22 of them are in Phase 2. He noted that it is a matter of obtaining the funding. Mr. Olander added that another consideration will be prioritization, following program approval by the City Council.
Mr. Relph agreed with Councilmembers that the street has some strange geometry. However, the data suggests that the impacts in the neighborhood are minimal. He explained that the data would provide the proper perspective of the problem.
Ms. Tarry stated that the traffic signal at 15th Avenue NE & NE 170th would be funded mostly from grants. She said that there are some non-project specific items such as Roads Capital Engineering and a Transportation Planning Program which will establish a program to plan and pull together some of the transportation functions. This may include looking at the role of transit and the City’s role in the region.
Mayor Ryu confirmed that the Transportation Planning Program isn’t a lobbying effort, it’s purely technical.
Councilmember Way discussed the NTSP and highlighted that the funding has been reduced from $260,000 to $192,000. She said maybe the City should consider increasing the funding level for it. Ms. Tarry explained that the 2008 amount is unusually high because of carryovers.
Mr. Sanchez noted that there are a number of projects throughout the City, and one of them is on NE 155th Street and Ashworth Avenue. He said there is a sidewalk that would connect from 155th through Ashworth to the existing sidewalk on the west side of Ashworth. He noted that 85% of the vehicles that are traveling on that street are driving at a speed of 22 mph, and that is good.
Mr. Olander highlighted that there are broader issues being considered by the Long Term Finance Committee.
Ms. Tarry highlighted the Aurora Avenue Corridor 165th – 205th Avenue Improvements, noting that there is a need for additional grants to complete the project. She then discussed long-term funding options and the affect the fuel tax is having on the funding. She also discussed the Transportation Benefit District funding option passed by Legislature that would assist cities by implementing a $20.00 vehicle license fee with Council approval. It could also levy up to an additional $80.00 in licensing fees, and/or implement an additional 1% sales tax, both with voter approval.
Mayor Ryu asked if the fuel tax can be based on the total price of the fuel and not the price per gallon. Mr. Olander replied that this concept has not been accepted politically.
Mayor Ryu called for public comment.
a) Bill Bear, Shoreline, said that as a homeowner he is faced with tough choices and competing priorities. He said the Council needs to be very careful not to spend capital before the operating budget is adequate. He said this Council has continually moved money from the operating budget into the capital budget and he would like to see that stopped. He said the indicators show that the economy is in for a major bump, and these projections don't account for that.
Ms. Tarry stated that this item will continue next week with a public hearing and a presentation on the Storm Water Capital Fund. She responded to the public comment and stated that the CIP includes inflation factors. She highlighted that she felt the City is being conservative and expects a higher level of inflation. She also stated that the Council policy is to transfer money from operating to capital.
Mr. Olander clarified that the total amount that is transferred each year is $1 million, or 3% of the total budget of $30 million. He commented that it is safe to be conservative in forecasts. He felt the City is careful, cautious, and professional in finances and budgeting.
|
9. |
At 9:32 p.m. Mayor Ryu declared the meeting adjourned.
________________________________
Scott Passey, City Clerk