CITY OF SHORELINE
SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL
SUMMARY MINUTES OF STUDY SESSION
Monday, July 21, 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 6:33 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.
|
3. |
Bob Olander, City Manager, provided reports and updates on various City projects, meetings, and events. Mr. Olander highlighted the success of the Solarfest event and stated that the King County Conservation Futures Trust Citizen Oversight Committee has recommended that the City receive an additional $157,000 grant in 2009 for assistance in purchasing the Kruckeberg Gardens.
|
4. |
|
|
Councilmember Way introduced this item and turned the time over to Steve Dubiel, Executive Director of Earth Corps. Mr. Dubiel provided a brief presentation outlining Earth Corps' mission and services in the area of environmental stewardship. He highlighted that Earth Corps is made up of young leaders and strong communities. He described their work related to bridge and trail construction, invasive plant removal, replanting native plants, shoreline and stream restoration, stewardship, and monitoring.
Councilmember Way asked if the organization has done any ivy removal work on steep slopes. Mr. Dubiel responded that they can help with problem sites.
Responding to Mayor Ryu, Mr. Dubiel confirmed that there is no age limit restriction for the Earth Corps volunteers and that they can coordinate all of the volunteers.
Councilmember Way noted that Earth Corps can partner with other groups and leverage volunteer time as a grant package.
|
5. |
a) Dennis Lee, Shoreline, said some attendees are concerned about testifying during the general public comment on Hamlin Park.
b) Maria Walsh, Mountlake Terrace, on behalf of her son who resides at Fircrest, discussed the Council goal of "developing a Fircrest Master Plan in partnership with the State." She stated there is another goal and workplan concerning the hybrid plan and stated it wasn’t presented to the public. She said she is upset that Department of Social and Health Services stated that their hybrid option is the only one. She noted that she also heard that the CRISTA Master Plan was accepted and passed and would like some clarification.
Mr. Olander responded that Shoreline Community College, CRISTA, and Fircrest are called out in the Comprehensive Plan, but no master plan has been submitted. He stated that he will ensure Ms. Walsh is on the mailing list.
|
6. |
|
|
(a) Community Conversations - Visioning Process for Shoreline 2028 |
Joe Tovar, Planning and Development Services Director, provided a briefing about Community Vision 2028. He explained that the Council has adopted Council Goal A for 2008-2009 which revisits the vision so it integrates with the Economic Development Strategy, the Comprehensive Housing Strategy, and the Environmental Sustainability Strategy. He noted that the residents will need to think about what they want the City to look like 20 years from now and through discussions of values, the stage will be set for the rest of the Comprehensive Plan update. He continued and discussed possible formats for the Community Conversations meetings and stated that all comments will be captured. He said he is looking forward to an open, disciplined and timely process with draft language prepared for public hearings next year and maybe having a joint hearing with the Planning Commission (PC). This, he said, should lead to the Council adopting an amendment to the Plan prior to the Council retreat next year. He felt this process will be helpful to other ongoing efforts.
Mr. Olander stated that the highly decentralized nature of this is attractive to him. He said the benefit of informal meetings is that neighbors talk to each other and inform each other of their ideas. This, he noted, ultimately results in a better product. He said that the key is to frame the questions consistently. He stated that there will be a DVD produced and the Council can help develop the script and the questions that the City asks the community. He advised the Council that this will not be an exercise in developing specific policies, but it will be a framework.
Mr. Tovar commented that the Municipal Research Services Center (MRSC) was helpful in showing which cities were successful in formulating their vision. He stated that all of the successful cities described their vision in a narrative form and didn’t include too much description because it limits capacity. He reiterated that neither the vision, nor the framework goals are regulations.
Mr. Olander summarized that the City staff is asking the Council to discuss the two-phase road map, general process, concept, and timing that the PC has recommended.
Mayor Ryu suggested discussing the proposed schedule, clarifying questions, and having public comment. She noted that the visioning is more conceptual but it will drive the CP process. Mayor Ryu commented that the Council has been so focused on details and the City doesn’t want people to think they aren’t important in this process.
Councilmember Hansen highlighted that visioning is what the first Council did when it was formed. He noted that most of their goals were accomplished by the end of the 10 year period, such as the Aurora Corridor, the Interurban Trail, and green pathways.
Mayor Ryu called for public comment.
a) Dennis Lee, Shoreline, thanked the City for starting with framework goals. He noted that it is important for them to be designed in a user-friendly way so they can reach the normal person. He noted that the churches and businesses in Shoreline feel left out and it is important that this takes the time to cover everyone.
Councilmember Eggen felt that the goals need a certain element of specificity. He felt they need to be able to engage the community in problems of development and be centered on the near and long-term goals.
Mr. Olander added that the vision has to be specific enough to determine Shoreline's future and needs to focus on Shoreline’s unique qualities. Mr. Tovar stated that looking at framework goals and visions from other places will be very helpful in the process.
Deputy Mayor Scott said the challenge is that this has to engage the community in a broad fashion. He said the first council went through 300 activities, and now a true representation of the community's values needs to be determined. Mr. Olander said the City staff will make a strong effort to get this out where the people are.
Councilmember McGlashan questioned when this went from land use issues, namely RB transition problems, to re-visioning the entire City. Mr. Tovar responded that the City staff heard from the Council that this was something they wanted to do. He said if this isn’t done now it would have to be done soon, because this isn’t just about zoning. He reminded the Council that the CP provides direction not just to the development regulations, but to the capital budget, too.
Councilmember McGlashan read Council Goal A and stated that he thought the three documents would need to be rewritten to determine how they would fit into the CP now to support the current framework goals, but he said he is hearing that the framework goals are being rewritten.
Mr. Tovar explained that there are some gaps and ambiguities, but the purpose is to determine how the City looks 20 years from now. Mr. Olander added that much of the integration in that goal will occur as the policies of the CP are developed. This signifies a place to start on those processes, which is at the higher level, he explained.
Councilmember McConnell questioned why the entire vision statements are being revised if they are broad. She also stated that creating DVDs is a problem if the meetings aren’t attended. Mr. Tovar commented that Councilmember McConnell’s observation touches on the dilemma most cities face, which is how to engage the public. He said the best that they can do is make it as easy as possible with a process like this. He noted that if it is made unthreatening and the City should go where they already are, for example, at the Chamber meetings, at PTA meetings, at the Neighborhood Association meetings, there will be more of an audience.
Councilmember McConnell expressed concerns that this will take up lots of staff time. Mr. Tovar concurred and noted some staff priorities will need to be moved to November or December because this happens in October. However, the community may accept this and pieces of it might be affirmed.
Mayor Ryu highlighted that it has been 10-12 years since the City has gone through this process and said it is very timely for the Council to revisit it.
Councilmember Way agreed and stated it is a good proposal. She said a DVD is an interesting way to engage people. She discussed how to engage as many people as possible. She said this could be brought to the Council of Neighborhoods, but she isn’t sure that they are well attended. She suggested engaging the school board, the Long Range Financial Committee, and the Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC). She wondered if the Council could go to some of the neighborhoods and hold public meetings. She noted that she looked at the City of Kirkland Comprehensive Plan and it has some good elements.
Mayor Ryu commented that neighborhoods should be allowed to define themselves.
Councilmember Way discussed the 2028 concept and inquired if the Council wanted to work with a 20-year frame or if it should be adjusted. She noted that there are four areas that should be defined: 1) What does the City need? 2) What is on the horizon? 3) What are the standards of environmental protection? 4) What to keep or change. She felt that the Council should be involved with the development and approval of the DVD.
Mr. Tovar felt that the target timeframe is important but the Council might want to consider making the timeframe longer than 20 years. He felt they should consider the near and long term. He added that the meetings should be candid and that the Council probably shouldn’t attend all of the meetings so they won’t skew the input.
Mr. Olander said there are different methods to get a variety of input and ways to include the Council. He pointed out that it is the responsibility of the City staff to administer the meetings and check in with the Council at key points.
Mayor Ryu commented that a joint City Council and PC meeting might be better if the meeting is held in December. Mr. Olander replied that later in the fall there are several study sessions between the two bodies and they can jointly craft the draft language with the public.
Councilmember Eggen commented that subcommittees might be practical.
Councilmember Way commented that she would like to see the Council involved early on in this process.
Mr. Tovar stated that the joint session with the PC on September 8 could be the kickoff. He added that it would be great if some citizens attend and others could watch the meeting on DVD and give their input.
Councilmember Eggen inquired if the Council would have an opportunity to participate in the DVD. Mr. Tovar responded that they would but warned that they need to be careful to ensure the result is the desired outcome.
|
|
Dick Deal, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services (PRCS) Director introduced Maureen Colaizzi, PRCS Project Coordinator, and Peggy Gaynor and Chuck Warsinske, who are consultants with Susan Black and Associates. He discussed the bond literature and outlined the proposed projects in Hamlin Open space and lower Hamlin. He reviewed the field availability and stated that there is a need for better and smaller fields.
Ms. Colaizzi explained the public involvement process and the goals for the project. She said this project renovates the parks main recreation area which represents 13 acres of the 80-acre park. She discussed the public notice process and said she has been utilizing prescribed methods of participation through community mailings, the Enterprise, the “What’s Happening in Shoreline” flyer, Currents, Channel 21, all four of the City’s notice posting sites, the website, the PRCS Board agenda, and in the City Manager’s weekly Council meeting reports. She said it has been over eight months of public process which included four public open house presentations, a PRCS Board special meeting, four PRCS Board regular meetings, and this Council meeting. She highlighted that the PRCS Board unanimously approved the plan and in 2006 Susan Black and Associates and Gaynor, Inc. were selected from among many proposals to be the design team. She introduced Peggy Gaynor and Chuck Warsinske and outlined their background and experience.
Ms. Gaynor discussed the habitat and site analysis, deficiencies in park, design principles, and the plan itself. Mr. Warsinske continued and described the drainage issues, ADA accessibility, understory problems, steep slopes, worn asphalt, and design principles. He discussed balancing activities and the goal to reduce the overall human footprint in the sensitive areas of the park. Ms. Gaynor noted that there is pedestrian circulation and re-contouring planned. She noted that the goal is to make and maintain Hamlin as a multi-use, flexible park for all.
Bill Clements, on behalf of the PRCS Board, stated that most of the master site plan has never been in question among the Board members. He explained how the PRCS Board viewed the active area and stated they were looking for a configuration that works best for all users. He said the park will address the needs of baseball, t-ball, football, ultimate frisbee, informal soccer, and picnics. He said this plan improves aesthetics, parking, and organizes the field space. He said the Board hasn’t decided on details like backstops, fencing, and spectator seating. He commented that he is impressed with consultants and their work on erosion control, surface water management, parking, field safety, and the efforts to have better user circulation. He said the Board unanimously approved this item.
Mayor Ryu called for public comment.
a) Sarah Kaye, Shoreline, commented that she didn’t like the sports field reconfiguration because it puts permanent structures in the open field. Additionally, she said moving the main play area close to the ball field is not friendly to families.
b) Jerri Geer, Shoreline, said she opposes the preferred plan for Hamlin Park open space multiple use areas and any plan that deviates from the plan that was in the 2006 voter mailer. She also said Ordinance No. 409 was approved by Council but the language in it is vague. She added that the voters rely on mailers and voter pamphlets to make their decisions. She said Ordinance No. 409 has given the Council and City staff a license to create their own agendas on how Hamlin Park should be improved. She felt the voters have been denied their voice and this creates a privatization of organized sports. She also felt that passive recreation is viewed as not as important in this City.
c) Susan Colton, Lake Forest Park, felt the City should listen to the public to create a plan. She felt there is a preconceived idea on the table and the present design doesn't adequately address the rights and needs of the public. She also felt this is moving towards privatization and a preference for organized sports. She said this current design sacrifices public open space and said the City’s interaction with the little league concerning this park is a questionable use of public land. She urged the Council to keep Hamlin Park as open space and multi-use.
d) Lois Harrison, Shoreline, supported the plan with a couple exceptions. She is in favor of the drainage enhancement and the restoring of the creek and vegetation, but is concerned with the location of the ball fields. She noted that the backstops intersect the field which leaves a tiny play area on the upper plateau. She felt the process is skewed to favor the little league, but she didn’t think it was done intentionally. Additionally, she felt as if proper noticing hasn’t been followed for this proposal and if she would have known about this she would have expressed her concerns earlier.
e) Paul Jensen, Shoreline, member of the North King County little league board, felt this as an improved park and commended the design team and PRCS for trying to address the needs of the entire community. He stated that the placement of the ball fields actually helps other groups because it keeps the games contained. Currently, he said it is difficult to know where boundaries on the field are for pedestrians and people with dogs. He said he is impressed with the thought and the work that has gone into this plan.
f) Dennis Lee, Shoreline, stated that most of the concern comments came from the Briarcrest Neighborhood Association. He noted that the concerns about the plan relate to having a large open field with baseball diamonds in the middle. He said this is a baseball field but this makes the field smaller. He said it is great that two of the backstops are being removed, but there has to be a way to change the field so the open space works. He warned that this shouldn’t encroach on sensitive areas either. He urged the City staff and the PRCS Board to look at the plan once again.
g) Bettelinn Brown, Shoreline, read Charles Brown's comments which favored the PRCS Board proposal, but with reservations. She communicated that he objected to the placement of the ball fields on the corners of the open areas and stated that Hamlin Creek requires maximum protection because it is an ecologically sensitive area. She concluded the letter which highlighted his possible revisions to the plan.
h) Melissa Banker, Shoreline, spoke as Vice President of the Challenger Division on behalf of the North King County Little League. She noted that the Challenger Division is made up of children with physical and mental disabilities. She said they will most likely have 2-3 teams this year. She said she is in favor of the park plan and asked if the walking areas are paved. She commented that if it is paved it will be much easier for the majority of the children to get around. She noted that Hamlin is the most ADA-unfriendly park in Shoreline. She added that the North King County Little League pays the City for using the park.
i) John Desrosier, Shoreline, thanked the PRCS Board and PRCS Director, Mr. Dick Deal. He said Hamlin Park has been used for over 50 years for baseball and football and he has never heard it called a “meadow.” He said this plan is a compromise. He noted that there were four ball fields planned, but now there are two. The paved trail, he said, is great and with the play area added, line-of-sight is very important. He commented that sharing the multi-purpose fields is difficult and fences are important for the game. He noted that losing the 90-foot field would be difficult.
j) Heidi Tally, Shoreline, commented that she is sad the feel of Hamlin Park will be lost. She said it has always been a sports complex for her. She announced that eventually the North King County Little League will be asking the City for a miracle league field, which is a coined term for a disabled league field. A miracle league field, she explained, is a poured, flat surface that is user-friendly for disabled children and is 150-feet long with a fence.
k) Tiffany Hamilton, Shoreline, commented that the design of the park is very important to her and the community. She said it will hurt to give up a 90-foot field. She stated that fences are important for safety and that the little league has made enormous compromises. She pointed out that there will be eight to nine t-ball teams this year and felt the t-ball field will be flooded because of its location. However, she noted that the North King County Little League has paid over $15,000 for use of Shoreline fields this year and there aren’t many people using the park when baseball isn’t going on.
l) Cathy Hall, Shoreline, commented that Hamlin Park is her neighborhood park and she would like to see it retained as mixed use. She said there must be a balance between neighborhood users and the little league. She read a letter from Suzanne Gillette which stated that Ms. Gillette liked the drainage and hiking area improvements, but objected to the ball fields being located in the middle of the park.
m) LaNita Wacker, Shoreline, said she is disappointed by the loss of two fields with this plan. She is concerned that soccer and football cannot be played at the park. She said she recalled there could be four t-ball games going in the past. She agreed that line-of sight issues are important. However, they can be fixed if the play areas are put behind the bleachers. She stated that this park historically has had an open space, and the two fields interrupt that.
n) Jeff Cleppy, Shoreline, communicated that this is about an 80-acre park and what is planned affects a very small portion of it. He noted that there are about 69 other acres of natural environment, trails, and open spaces. Fences, he explained, are needed for boundaries. He reiterated that there will still be lots of open places in the park to walk. He said this is a very large park with many places to walk and enjoy open spaces.
Mr. Olander commented that the Hamlin upper area was purchased with the bond and was formerly owned by SPU. He said the fact that the park is shared between so many different types of users required difficult compromises.
Mr. Warsinske explained that players can only play on two fields at a time because the fields overlap.
Councilmember McConnell asked if a 90-foot field is in the plan. Mr. Deal explained that there are two 90-foot fields in the City and they are utilized at the high school level. He stated that the school district wants to improve the one field behind Meridian Park. He stated that the plan is in the conceptual stage, so items like benches and picnic tables are not included yet.
Mayor Ryu wanted to know how the public could have access to the timeline. Mr. Deal replied that there will be public meetings, public notices, Park Board discussions, and other discussions with the Council for the community to participate in.
Deputy Mayor Scott asked if other sports, such as football, are a casualty of the new design. Mr. Deal stated there will be seven field turf football and soccer facilities in Shoreline and the community's need hasn't changed, but access to higher quality fields has improved. Ms. Colaizzi added that the free-play area with this new design can accommodate football, ultimate Frisbee, and soccer.
Councilmember Way focused on the playgrounds and said they have evolved into something more definite. She suggested the lower playground have a fence. She asked if netting for foul balls is planned. Mr. Deal replied he would look at those issues as this moves forward. He noted that the safety of the children is paramount and they will work with the design team on addressing these issues.
Councilmember Way discussed the “solar direction” of the eastern field. She had heard that there is a concern with playing baseball or softball on the field. She asked if there is a possibility to shift the orientation a bit. Mr. Warsinske replied that there have been solar and shadow studies and they are aware of where the sun and shadows are during the day. He said there will be some small adjustments.
MEETING EXTENSION
At 10:00 p.m., Councilmember Hansen moved to extend the meeting to 11:00 p.m. Councilmember Way seconded the motion, which carried 7-0.
Mr. Olander suggested postponing the jail planning update and moving the work release item to another day. He said he would like to leave at least 30-45 minutes for the Executive Session.
There was Council consensus to postpone Study Items 6(c) and 6(d).
Councilmember Way asked the City staff to explore the availability of temporary fencing. Mr. Deal responded that the City already utilizes temporary fencing on the west side of the City and will explore options for this location.
Councilmember Hansen expressed his disappointment in possibly losing the 90-foot diamond and would like to see bleachers for spectators. He added that the layout of the fields is lot safer than other configurations. He suggested having an artificial covering for the t-ball field. He supported the proposal.
Councilmember Eggen wondered if the new design results in insufficient parking.
Councilmember McGlashan commented on the play area and potential drainage issues on the t-ball field. Mr. Warsinske responded that there will be a French drain along the base of the north edge of the fields to pick up the water coming off of the slope. Additionally, the fields themselves will include drainage enhancements. He added that the pavement will be better. He felt all of these improvements together would resolve any flooding problems.
Councilmember Way communicated that drainage and the creek is important. She said the configuration looks like it will protect the creek.
Ms. Gaynor commented that the drainage will be improved in the two places on this site. She noted that a wide channel with weirs will be installed, along with revegetation.
Mr. Warsinske stated that there will also be some metering of the stormwater done to ensure the problems are eradicated.
Councilmember Way commented that there needs to be more benches and picnic tables.
Mayor Ryu questioned if there is going to be an increased surface water capacity.
Ms. Gaynor replied that by making a channel broader the capacity for surface water will be increased.
Mayor Ryu asked what the impact is on environmental sustainability by not doing anything.
Ms. Gaynor replied that this plan calls for the revegetation of 2 ½ to 3 ½ acres native forest which is a significant improvement.
Mr. Deal highlighted that there will be more shrub areas put in and more grass will be put in on the turf areas. He responded to Mayor Ryu that particular products and cost savings will be looked at as this moves into the design phase. He summarized that the City staff will move forward and come back to the Council with a 30% design in the next several months.
|
7. |
At 10:17 p.m., Mayor Ryu stated that the Council would recess into Executive Session until 11:00 p.m. to discuss two items of business: real estate acquisition and potential litigation.
RECESS
At 10:18 p.m., Mayor Ryu called for a seven minute break. Mayor Ryu reconvened the meeting at 10:25 p.m. At 10:25 p.m., the Council retired to the Spartan Room and conducted the Executive Session.
MEETING EXTENSION
At 10:58 p.m. Mayor Ryu emerged and announced that the Executive Session would be extended until 11:20 p.m. At 11:20 p.m., Mayor Ryu emerged and announced the Executive Session would continue until 11:25 p.m. At 11:25 p.m., the Executive Session concluded and Mayor Ryu reconvened the Study Session.
|
8. |
At 11:25 p.m. Mayor Ryu declared the meeting adjourned.
__________________________________
Scott Passey, City Clerk