Notes from Shoreline council meeting November 29, 2021

Pam Cross, reporter

Shoreline City Council Meeting

November 29, 2021

Notes by Pam Cross

Mayor Hall called the remote meeting to order at 7:00pm.
All Councilmembers were present.

Approval of the Agenda
Agenda approved by unanimous consent.

Report of the City Manager, presented by John Norris, Assistant City Manager

COVID-19 UPDATE

Cautious good news: In King County and statewide, new case rates continue to drop week to week as we remain in the substantial (down from high) transmission category. New cases have decreased in Shoreline from 29 to 23 cases (Nov 22 - Nov 29).

Remember to wear a mask, even if you are fully vaccinated. We encourage everyone to get vaccinated and, if eligible, get a booster shot. Masks are mandated for everyone in indoor public settings and outdoor crowded settings. To find available vaccines and for additional information, visit doh.wa.gov

In accordance with the Public Health Order effective 10/25/21 in all of King County, proof of vaccination or proof of a negative COVID-19 test taken in the last 72 hours will be required for: indoor dining, bars, and recreational activities of any size including theaters, gyms (including Spartan), and performances as well as outdoor events with 500 or more people. More information: kingcounty.gov/covid

Vaccine Clinic for adults and children through December 17.

HOLIDAY EVENTS

No display is too small!

To register and get placed on the map, as well as have an opportunity to win a prize, register here

Council Reports

Mayor Hall offered his congratulations to CM Roberts for his election to the National League of Cities Board of Directors.

Public Comment

Jackie Kurle, Shoreline
I know you’ve heard me before but I just want to reiterate the importance of having maximum transparency for the operations of the advanced shelter. I think it’s a great opportunity to support the homeless folks in our area. I support the cause but want to make sure there is transparency to the public with regular updates of shelter operations, success stories or challenges.

Approval of the Consent Calendar
Consent Calendar approved unanimously

Action Item 8(a) Public Hearing and Discussion on Ordinance No. 951 - Extension of Interim Regulations to Allow for Additional Extensions of Application and Permit Deadlines Beyond Those Provided for in the Shoreline Municipal Code Due to COVID-19 Impacts

Rachael Markle, Director, Planning and Community Development did the presentation

On July 27, 2020, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 893, enacting interim regulations that provide relief for applicants by creating additional extensions of application and permit deadlines due to the economic and health impacts of COVID-19.

This ordinance was extended twice and will expire Dec 20, 2021 (nearly 1.5 years later). The State of Emergency is still in effect for Washington even though some statewide restrictions have lessened.

PUBLIC HEARING is opened
No public comments

DISCUSSION

Do you have any idea how many permits we’re talking about?

• Reply: These are permits where work has not yet started. They haven’t paid inspection fees and picked up their permit. I don’t have an exact number. There are some in their first 180 days, some in the second, and some in the third extension.

I realize that supply chain is still an issue, but the older ones fall under the older code. If we have to extend this yet again in six months, we should have a discussion of possibly requiring the older ones to meet the new code.

• Reply: there aren’t that many under their third extension.

The supply chain problem is a real thing. I have personally experienced it, having to wait months for something I could have readily picked up at Lowe’s or Home Depot. People don’t want to pay now when they don’t know when they’ll get the supplies to actually complete a project. I support this ordinance.

No other comments

This will return on Consent.

Action Item 8(b) Public Hearing and Discussion on Ordinance No. 952 – Extension of the Interim Regulations Authorizing Outdoor Seating on Private Property and Within Approved Public Rights-of-Way Due to COVID-19 Impacts

Andrew Bauer, Planning Manager, made the presentation

On July 27, 2020, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 895, enacting interim regulations for outdoor seating areas for existing restaurants and bars due to indoor seating restrictions in place at that time related to COVID-19. The interim regulations have been extended twice and will expire on December 29, 2021, if not extended. Indoor seating restrictions continue.

Five businesses have utilized the registration for seating on private property. There haven’t been any right-of-way applications.

Staffing is looking into permanent regulations for outdoor seating.

PUBLIC HEARING is opened
No public comments

DISCUSSION

I support this ordinance. Is there a plan to take this to the Planning Commission so we can put this into permanent regulations?

• Reply: Yes. The plan is to bring forward in the near future. We will probably start discussions with Planning Commission Dec 16 to scope out some potential development code amendments that we can make permanent to allow for more flexibility for outdoor seating.

Do you think you will bring this back within this 6 month extension?

• Reply: That is the goal. It will be close, depending on the scope and the depth of the amendments. It’s possible one more extension might be required.

Recognizing that most outdoor seating is in our nice summer months, it is my hope that we get regulation is place in time for the summer, or figure out some way to bridge the summer. I don’t think too many people are clamoring for outdoor seating at this time (laughter).

Are we continuing any outreach to businesses?

• Reply by Ms Tarry: Yes, through our electronic notification to businesses. We have a newsletter where we provide updates on a variety of issues including COVID-19. We continue to encourage our businesses to sign up for this ordinance.

This will return on Consent for Dec 13

Study Item 9(a) Discussion of the Light Rail Station Subareas Parking Study 2021 Update

Kendra Dedinsky, City Traffic Engineer, made the presentation

This is the third data update to the study of parking utilization in the light rail areas. Council allocated $25,000 annually from 2018 through 2021 to study parking in the station areas. The first study provided background about existing practices and policies. The other two studies provided an overview of parking supplies and baseline parking utilization information, provided on-street parking demand projections, and recommended near-term, mid-term, and long-term strategies to manage parking demand.

On-street parking utilization is highly tied to household growth. There has not been a lot of added household growth in 2020. There were 4 net new households in the 145th subarea and 31 in the 185th subarea. So there is not a large increase in utilization. We do recognize that in 2020 COVID-19 was in full swing, and there was a lot of construction and related operations reducing available on-street parking. This is only the current update to ongoing parking studies in these areas.

Less than 70% represents an underutilized asset, while over 85% can be detrimental in terms of drivers circling the block which has both traffic and environmental impact.

Because this is a highly detailed report and the maps did not show well, please go to the staff report for additional details.

These projections are updated as we receive new data. We are not at the point yet where we really need to dig into more dynamic parking management within the next five years or perhaps longer.

New walk-shed analysis around light rail stations is provided this year in preparation for future Sound Transit hide-and-ride mitigation efforts. A 15-minute walk-shed around station areas will require consideration for tools such as restricted parking zone (RPZ) permitting.

Note: walk-shred or pedestrian shed means an area, approximately circular, that is centered on a common destination. A 15-minute walk is the distance a pedestrian will walk at a leisurely place in 15 minutes (approximately one mile).

 
A Standard Pedestrian Shed is 1/4 mile radius or 1320 feet, about the distance of a five-minute walk at a leisurely pace. It has been shown that provided with a pedestrian environment, most people will walk this distance rather than drive.

Near-term recommendations for 2021-2025

Complete

• Analyze and adopt a monetary penalty schedule for parking violations specific to the City of Shoreline;
• and update restricted parking zone (RPZ) policies, procedures and fees to prepare for anticipated new RPZ’s surrounding light rail stations

Ongoing

• Utilize basic time of day and load zone parking restrictions;
• Use study data to inform the Engineering Development Manual updates; and
• Explore potential development of code revisions to encourage reduced car ownership. One item that is being discussed is “unbundling” parking fees from rents charged, which can work towards housing affordability and reduced car ownership.

New

• Fund a position dedicated to parking management and enforcement;
• Consider updated Transportation Master Plan (TMP) parking policies; and
• Group subarea parking utilization reporting into smaller analysis zones.

Mid-Term Recommendations 2026-2031

• Evaluate need for special use zones;
• Establish basic real time parking information technology; and
• Perform feasibility analysis of metered parking in business locations.

Long-Term Recommendations 2032+

• Implement metered parking in key locations;
• Expand real time parking information & tech; and
• Continue to build upon and refine existing parking management strategies and resources.

DISCUSSION

You indicated inclusion of the non-motorized bridges in some of the walk-sheds. But the 145th walk-shed map does not include the chance of there being a 148th St bridge and/or the Trail along the Rail. Otherwise that would expand further to the northwest?

• Reply: I did have them include the 148th bridge. The Trail along the Rail was not directly included but it is included in the off street routing.

Are these types of studies still going on throughout the City? In the Town Center area the large apartment buildings are impacting the parking along the storage units and the park there, and some parking is bleeding into the neighborhoods.

• Reply: This subarea study effort has supplemental funding approved by Council. As a general rule of thumb, we are always available to the community to do operational studies. So, if and when the community does initiate action to study for RPZ (restricted parking zones), we are compelled to act on it. I haven’t received any requests for the area you described. Also, occupants of the apartments are also residents so they are entitled to have residential use permits - we can’t arbitrarily exclude certain residents. We do work with target developments to create mitigation plans to manage the parking.

I like the way the timelines are laid out so that it seems to be “baby steps” to grow into such things as metering. Because if you want to upset a community, start putting parking meters all over the City.

This is the first time I’ve heard discussion of smaller areas within the subareas. Is there a policy being developed about when to create smaller areas?

• Reply: Last year I thought we needed to start honing in on smaller geographic areas in order to capture areas of higher utilization. However, I think that will be more important a couple years down the road as we see more development.

I have a few questions.

1. There are two parking issues here: the growth from development and the potential growth from people trying to access the light rail station. Residents may want to utilize street parking, but recognizing that there are other people who also will to utilize it, especially during the day, is there a way to try to figure out distinct areas that we really need to focus on because of those who want to park to access light rail stations?
2. Also we don’t have complete sidewalks. Can we really put a meter where there’s no sidewalk? I’m trying to look at the whole picture. These are just questions for future consideration in how we craft regulations.
3. Does a 15 minute walk make sense for people using the light rail station? Should it be 5 minutes? I don’t know.

• Reply: We are starting “big” with 15 minutes but we will hone in. This gives us a good baseline because it it’s a broad area. I would guess we’ll probably be starting into this in 2023.

What are the mitigation measures that we are expecting Sound Transit to do?

• Reply: There are a couple of different forms. The main one we’re talking about now is restricted parking (RPZ) permits. There is an RPZ by Shoreline Community College that has signs that you cannot park there without a zone permit.

But that would be done by the City. I thought there was mitigation that is the responsibility of Sound Transit (ST).

• Reply: ST is required to implement an RPZ at least at the time of the start of the program. They will have to study and determine where it is needed and then put in signs in order to cover the start-up of the program. Ongoing, it will be the City’s responsibility.

Have we considered charging stations for the (hopefully) increased use of electric vehicles 10 years from now? We may want to include a forecast of the types of vehicles we’re trying to serve.

• Reply: There is a shared role among on-site development, ST, and homeowners. ST has some charging stations. I haven’t seen much in terms of charging stations in public right of way parking. Probably because it requires quite a bit of maintenance and there are other issues including the cost of installation. It would be a lovely amenity, though. I think we’re going to see more micro-mobility demand (that last mile connection).

I think we should have early parking enforcement. There is a pent-up demand throughout the City, not only in these areas but some others. For example people in the south-east area of Shoreline that have spill-over parking from multi-family development in Seattle. We have seen complaints from other areas with similar problems and I expect a flood of complaints once light rail opens up. Some of these complaints include blocked mailboxes and blocked, or partially blocked, driveways. We can’t expect patrol officers to enforce parking violations. It’s not realistic.

I live in what will be an RPZ. And I note that you state permits will be available “for purchase.”

• Reply: I think that will be adjusted but we haven’t worked through a preliminary fee schedule. The RPZ by SCC is so small and simple to oversee, the fee is very small ($17.50). I think Seattle charges about $65. We’ll be looking at that in about 2023 when the stations are getting ready to open.

One of the issues has nothing to do with light rail or growth or other things we’ve discussed but it is people’s perception that you can move into this (my) neighborhood with RV’s and boats and cars and park them on the street. So I’m very interested in having RPZ studied and see what impact it would have on neighborhoods like mine.

Is there a sense of where these cars are registered? Do we know what percentage of cars parked in a particular neighborhood are registered on that block? Is there a threshold?

• Reply: We do actually look into this. We use a threshold. If 100% of the cars are from the neighborhood, then you aren’t impacting the cars from the fringe areas. So we look at 30% of the cars originating from other areas. RPZ’s are for the residential area to preserve residential on-street parking. Metering is used in a commercial area to support more turnover parking.

Appreciate the approach that is being taken by staff.

MEETING ADJOURNED