Council denies North City bid

SHORELINE — The Council’s vision for North City is blurry after a 4-3 vote against a staff recommended $5.8 million contract with Wilder Construction Inc. to complete all elements of the project.

While the majority favors spending less money and retaining the current four-lane alignment, the vote leaves many unsure of what the next step will be.

“We’ve got some regrouping to do to come up with a plan,” public works director Paul Haines said after the vote. “There wasn’t any specific direction from Council, so we will need to spend some time interviewing them to find out where we go next.”

Because the vote was divided, Haines said he is unsure at this point if needed changes are minor or something more substantial.

The North City Project included changes to 15th Avenue NE such as lighting, street trees, pedestrian crossings, under-grounding utility lines and restriping to a three-lane roadway with a middle turn lane.

Attendance at the Aug. 23 meeting required a separate room for the overflow crowd, including many who either work or live in North City and anticipated the Council’s decision after months of public outcry.

Issues of debate include potentially reducing the four-lane roadway to three lanes and the escalating price of the project, which was recently estimated at $1.6 million more than originally budgeted, at $7.2 million.

City staff say another $2 million has already been spent on design work, bringing the total close to $9 million.

At the meeting, Council members John Chang, Maggie Fimia and Bob Ransom all favored two amendments that called for reducing the scope and cost of the project and retaining four lanes from 145th to 180th streets, which they acknowledged may require redesign work.

Council members Rich Gustafson, Scott Jepsen and Mayor Ron Hansen all favored awarding the contract that night, with a modification to retain four lanes from 175th to 180th streets, but keeping the cost the same.

Council member Paul Grace opposed amendments made by Ransom and Fimia, but in the end voted against the Hansen’s amendment to award the contract with a four-lane modification. Grace, who was out of town on vacation, joined the Council’s discussion via a conference telephone call.

Before the vote, city manager Steve Burkett advised the Council that although there are different points of view in the community regarding the project, he recommended the Council proceed with awarding the contract, especially since money has already been invested in design work in the past two years.

“If you were going to pull the plug, it would have been wise to do so in 2001,” Burkett said. “This is an investment that will pay back in 30-40 years.”

City staff said that if the project is rebid, Seattle City Light may no longer participate in the project after 2005, and their contribution of $1.7 million for the under-grounding of utilities could be lost.

During the debate, Fimia raised concerns that because the bid is over the budgeted amount, additional money would be taken from the neighborhood traffic safety program and from the surface water fund to fill the gap.

Ransom reminded everyone to consider the public response the council has received, which has included more than 100 letters in favor of the project and more than 1,000 in opposition. He also said the cost of the project was too high.

“This is taking a huge amount of money,” Ransom said. “It is too expensive, we need to reconsider and rebid it.”

Hansen replied that $1.5 million to $2 million has already been invested, and approximately $1.7 million of Seattle City Light funding could be put at risk.

He said there will not be enough savings for what could be lost, and writing off the project would cost $4 million.

Hansen also said that a compromise to retain the current four lanes was being made with his amendment.

“One compromise I am making is putting through the four-lane configuration,” Hansen said. “Those who oppose it are wasting $4 million dollars.”

Before voting on the mayor’s amendment, Grace asked city staff how awarding the contract with a redesign to four lanes would be different than rebidding.

Haines said modification after awarding the contract would be treated as a change order and there are limitations to how much it could be modified and stay within the contract.

“I think we still have the opportunity to do the design within the budget we had.” Grace said. “My major concern would be stepping into very uncertain grounds.”