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