Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout26-053 - Contract - Anchor QEA - Design Services: Nelsen Side ChannelCity of Tukwila Contract Number: 26-053 Council Approval 2/9/26 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila WA 98188 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (Includes consultants, architects, engineers, accountants, and other professional services) THIS AGREEMENT is entered into between the City of Tukwila, Washington, hereinafter referred to as "the City", and Anchor QEA, hereinafter referred to as "the Consultant", in consideration of the mutual benefits, terms, and conditions hereinafter specified. 1. Project Designation. The Consultant is retained by the City to perform preliminary design services in connection with the project titled Nelsen Side Channel Salmon Habitat Project. 2. Scope of Services. The Consultant agrees to perform the services, identified on Exhibit "A" attached hereto, including the provision of all labor, materials, equipment and supplies. 3. Duration of Agreement; Time for Performance. This Agreement shall be in full force and effect for a period commencing upon execution and ending December 31, 2026, unless sooner terminated under the provisions hereinafter specified. Work under this Agreement shall commence upon written notice by the City to the Consultant to proceed. The Consultant shall perform all services and provide all work product required pursuant to this Agreement no later than December 31, 2026 unless an extension of such time is granted in writing by the City. 4. Payment. The Consultant shall be paid by the City for completed work and for services rendered under this Agreement as follows: A. Payment for the work provided by the Consultant shall be made as provided on Exhibit "B" attached hereto, provided that the total amount of payment to the Consultant shall not exceed $629,894.00 without express written modification of the Agreement signed by the City. B. The Consultant may submit vouchers to the City once per month during the progress of the work for partial payment for that portion of the project completed to date. Such vouchers will be checked by the City and, upon approval thereof, payment shall be made to the Consultant in the amount approved. C. Final payment of any balance due the Consultant of the total contract price earned will be made promptly upon its ascertainment and verification by the City after the completion of the work under this Agreement and its acceptance by the City. D. Payment as provided in this section shall be full compensation for work performed, services rendered, and for all materials, supplies, equipment and incidentals necessary to complete the work. E. The Consultant's records and accounts pertaining to this Agreement are to be kept available for inspection by representatives of the City and the state of Washington for a period of three (3) years after final payments. Copies shall be made available upon request. CA revised May 2020 Page 1 5. Ownership and Use of Documents. All documents, drawings, specifications and other materials produced by the Consultant in connection with the services rendered under this Agreement shall be the property of the City whether the project for which they are made is executed or not. The Consultant shall be permitted to retain copies, including reproducible copies, of drawings and specifications for information, reference and use in connection with the Consultant's endeavors. The Consultant shall not be responsible for any use of the said documents, drawings, specifications or other materials by the City on any project other than the project specified in this Agreement. 6. Compliance with Laws. The Consultant shall, in performing the services contemplated by this Agreement, faithfully observe and comply with all federal, state, and local laws, ordinances and regulations, applicable to the services rendered under this Agreement. 7. Indemnification. The Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits including attorney fees, arising out of or resulting from the acts, errors or omissions of the Consultant in performance of this Agreement, except for injuries and damages caused by the sole negligence of the City. Should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that this Agreement is subject to RCW 4.24.115, then, in the event of liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or damages to property caused by or resulting from the concurrent negligence of the Consultant and the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers, the Consultant's liability hereunder shall be only to the extent of the Consultant's negligence. It is further specifically and expressly understood that the indemnification provided herein constitutes the Consultant's waiver of immunity under Industrial Insurance, Title 51 RCW, solely for the purposes of this indemnification. This waiver has been mutually negotiated by the parties. The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. 8. Insurance. The Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees. Consultant's maintenance of insurance as required by the agreement shall not be construed to limit the liability of the Consultant to the coverage provided by such insurance, or otherwise limit the City's recourse to any remedy available at law or in equity. A. Minimum Amounts and Scope of Insurance. Consultant shall obtain insurance of the types and with the limits described below: 1. Automobile Liability, insurance with a minimum combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage of $1,000,000 per accident. Automobile Liability insurance shall cover all owned, non -owned, hired and leased vehicles. Coverage shall be written on Insurance Services Office (ISO) form CA 00 01 or a substitute form providing equivalent liability coverage. If necessary, the policy shall be endorsed to provide contractual liability coverage. 2. Commercial General Liability insurance with limits no less than $2,000,000 each occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate. Commercial General Liability insurance shall be at least as broad as ISO occurrence form CG 00 01 and shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, stop -gap independent contractors and personal injury and advertising injury. The City shall be named as an additional insured under the Consultant's Commercial General Liability insurance policy with respect to the work performed for the City using an additional insured endorsement at least as broad as ISO endorsement form CG 20 26. 3. Workers' Compensation coverage as required by the Industrial Insurance laws of the State of Washington. CA revised May 2020 Page 2 4. Professional Liability with limits no less than $2,000,000 per claim and $2,000,000 policy aggregate limit. Professional Liability insurance shall be appropriate to the Consultant's profession. B. Public Entity Full Availability of Contractor Limits. If the Contractor maintains higher insurance limits than the minimums shown above, the Public Entity shall be insured for the full available limits of Commercial General and Excess or Umbrella liability maintained by the Contractor, irrespective of whether such limits maintained by the Contractor are greater than those required by this Contract or whether any certificate of insurance furnished to the Public Entity evidences limits of liability lower than those maintained by the Contractor. C. Other Insurance Provision. The Consultant's Automobile Liability and Commercial General Liability insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain that they shall be primary insurance with respect to the City. Any Insurance, self-insurance, or insurance pool coverage maintained by the City shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not be contributed or combined with it. D. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than A:VII. E. Verification of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish the City with original certificates and a copy of the amendatory endorsements, including but not necessarily limited to the additional insured endorsement, evidencing the insurance requirements of the Contractor before commencement of the work. Upon request by the City, the Consultant shall furnish certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements, required in this Agreement and evidence of all subcontractors' coverage. F. Notice of Cancellation. The Consultant shall provide the City with written notice of any policy cancellation, within two business days of their receipt of such notice. G. Failure to Maintain Insurance. Failure on the part of the Consultant to maintain the insurance as required shall constitute a material breach of contract, upon which the City may, after giving five business days notice to the Consultant to correct the breach, immediately terminate the contract or, at its discretion, procure or renew such insurance and pay any and all premiums in connection therewith, with any sums so expended to be repaid to the City on demand, or at the sole discretion of the City, offset against funds due the Consultant from the City. 9. Independent Contractor. The Consultant and the City agree that the Consultant is an independent contractor with respect to the services provided pursuant to this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be considered to create the relationship of employer and employee between the parties hereto. Neither the Consultant nor any employee of the Consultant shall be entitled to any benefits accorded City employees by virtue of the services provided under this Agreement. The City shall not be responsible for withholding or otherwise deducting federal income tax or social security or for contributing to the state industrial insurance program, otherwise assuming the duties of an employer with respect to the Consultant, or any employee of the Consultant. 10. Covenant Against Contingent Fees. The Consultant warrants that he has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bonafide employee working solely for the Consultant, to solicit or secure this contract, and that he has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bonafide employee working solely for the Consultant, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gifts, or any other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this contract. For breach or violation of this warrant, the City shall have the right to annul this contract without liability, or in its discretion to deduct from the contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or contingent fee. CA revised May 2020 Page 3 11. Discrimination Prohibited. Contractor, with regard to the work performed by it under this Agreement, will not discriminate on the grounds of race, religion, creed, color, national origin, age, veteran status, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, political affiliation, the presence of any disability, or any other protected class status under state or federal law, in the selection and retention of employees or procurement of materials or supplies. 12. Assignment. The Consultant shall not sublet or assign any of the services covered by this Agreement without the express written consent of the City. 13. Non -Waiver. Waiver by the City of any provision of this Agreement or any time limitation provided for in this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other provision. 14. Termination. A. The City reserves the right to terminate this Agreement at anytime by giving ten (10) days written notice to the Consultant. B. In the event of the death of a member, partner or officer of the Consultant, or any of its supervisory personnel assigned to the project, the surviving members of the Consultant hereby agree to complete the work under the terms of this Agreement, if requested to do so by the City. This section shall not be a bar to renegotiations of this Agreement between surviving members of the Consultant and the City, if the City so chooses. 15. Applicable Law; Venue; Attorney's Fees. This Agreement shall be subject to, and the Consultant shall at all times comply with, all applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations, and rules, including the provisions of the City of Tukwila Municipal Code and ordinances of the City of Tukwila. In the event any suit, arbitration, or other proceeding is instituted to enforce any term of this Agreement, the parties specifically understand and agree that venue shall be properly laid in King County, Washington. The prevailing party in any such action shall be entitled to its attorney's fees and costs of suit. Venue for any action arising from or related to this Agreement shall be exclusively in King County Superior Court. 16. Severability and Survival. If any term, condition or provision of this Agreement is declared void or unenforceable or limited in its application or effect, such event shall not affect any other provisions hereof and all other provisions shall remain fully enforceable. The provisions of this Agreement, which by their sense and context are reasonably intended to survive the completion, expiration or cancellation of this Agreement, shall survive termination of this Agreement. 17. Notices. Notices to the City of Tukwila shall be sent to the following address: City Clerk City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 Notices to Consultant shall be sent to the following address: Anchor QEA 1201 3rd Ave Suite 2600 Seattle, WA 98101 18. Entire Agreement; Modification. This Agreement, together with attachments or addenda, represents the entire and integrated Agreement between the City and the Consultant and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements written or oral. No amendment or modification of this Agreement shall be of any force or effect unless it is in writing and signed by the parties. CA revised May 2020 Page 4 Federal Clauses These provisions apply to federally funded work under the NOAA Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund (ALN 11.438), administered by the Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO) for Project 22-1047P. Only clauses relevant to architectural and engineering professional services are included and will be incorporated into the consultant agreement to ensure compliance with 2 CFR Part 200 Appendix II. They impose no additional technical deliverables or cost changes. Other Appendix iI items—such as Procurement of Recovered Materials (§ 200.323) and Domestic Preferences for Products (§ 200.322)—do not apply to this design -only contract and are intentionally excluded. Clause Reference Action Required Timing / Documentation Responsibility Compliance 2 CFR Include compliance clause Contract Executed with Federal 200.300; requiring adherence to execution - City contract clause. Law; Contract 200.327 & applicable federal laws and Consultant Provisions Appendix II and executive orders. Suspension & 2 CFR Verify Pre -award - City; SAM.gov Debarment 200.214; 2 consultant/sub consultants ongoing - screenshot; CFR Part are not debarred in Consultant for signed 180; App. II SAM.gov; include subs certification. H certification statement. Byrd Anti- 31 U.S.C. Obtain signed Pre -award (if Signed Lobbying 1352; App. II certification; if non-federal >$100,000 certification; Amendment (I) funds were used for federal funds) - SF -LLL (if lobbying, collect SF -LLL Consultant applicable). disclosure. Clean Air Act 42 U.S.C. Include environmental- Contract Contract & Federal 7401- compliance clause; execution - City; clause; Water 7671q; 33 consultant reports ongoing - compliance Pollution U.S.C. 1251- violations and avoids Consultant documentation Control Act 1387; App. II debarred firms. (if any). G Access to 2 CFR Provide audit access to During & Contract Records and 200.337 City, RCO, NOAA, and post -performance clause; Audit Rights federal agencies; keep - City and retention records >_3 years post -final Consultant policy; audit payment or until audits access record. are resolved. Page 5 DATED this 12th day of February , 2026 CITY OF TUKIMLA Signed by: mea Thomas McLeod, Mayor ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Signed by: Andy Youn-Barnett, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Signed by: 0-4• Sa0t1_4 €zk'P;4'1'8's Office of the City Attorney CONSULTANT: Printed Name: Anna Spooner Title: Shareholder CA revised May 2020 Page 6 Scope of Work January 29, 2026 Nelsen Side City of Tukwila 1. Project Understanding The City of Tukwila (City) proposes the Nelsen Side Channel Salmon Habitat Project (Project) to accomplish three distinct goals: 1. Restore off -channel and high -flow -refuge habitat for juvenile Chinook salmon, consistent with WRIA 9 salmon recovery objectives 2. Maintain or reduce local flood risk, consistent with applicable floodplain management standards and adopted surface water design criteria 3. Improve public access consistent with City objectives The Project will reconnect the Lower Green River to its historical floodplain and re-establish riparian forest within a highly urbanized corridor, directly addressing limiting factors identified in the WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plan (2021 Update). Community benefits will be provided by developing safe, formally acquired public access routes that connect the shoreline with existing non -vehicular infrastructure in the area, while also accommodating necessary vehicular access for maintenance, operations, and emergency response. The project area (Figure 1) currently includes City -owned parcels and land recently acquired by the City from the Nelsen Family Trust. It is bordered by busy highways and private properties that include large hotels and is currently underutilized and prone to encampments. The site also contains a valuable stretch of Green River shoreline, a remnant of the historical river alignment and is immediately adjacent to key segments of existing pedestrian and cycling infrastructure that can be expanded upon to bring public access to the site and the Green River shoreline. The site also includes stormwater outfalls, utilities, and environmentally critical areas. The Project will include in -water, shoreline and upland restoration and improvements. The Project includes potential design of the westernmost parking bay at the Ramada Hotel and the potential footbridge connection pathway south of Ramada. The Project presents one of the most meaningful remaining opportunities in the Lower Green River to restore scarce juvenile Chinook rearing habitat, expand floodwater storage to reduce flood risk, and provide access to the river and greenspace in a highly urbanized environment. January 29, 2026 Nelsen Side Channel Restoration Project —Phase I Page 2 Figure 1 - Project Area Potmitial Stiordim Resitoutiryn Prq)eifty Une Proposed Work Approach Anchor QEA will lead Phase 1 engineering, design, and outreach. We have included two subicoinsultants to support the effort: Psomas for upland survey and Holocene for geotechnical drilling. Anchor QEA has developed the following Scope of Work (SO," to approach this complex project and identify feasible, constructable design, solutions while concurrently achieving the three goals. The SOW is focused on Phase 1, which includes background information review, existing condition investigations,, alternatives analysis, outreach and will develop, the preliminary design (30%) package to be used in subsequent final design, permitting, and construction. The SOW includes the following tasks: • Task 1: Project Management • Task 2: Survey and Base Map • Task 3: Technical Investigations and Background Review • Task 4: Alternatives Analysis, • Task 5: Outreach • Task 6: 30% Design Citi" of Ttj hNi 1 n NOwin Faffiifly Trust Property 10 Exl,(�iYYidied Stayikrneriica Suites 0 WOOdFpr ing Suib�s 0 Nelsen Fain flyReAeme, flisuxrIBP .a ifii �:�� Proposed Work Approach Anchor QEA will lead Phase 1 engineering, design, and outreach. We have included two subicoinsultants to support the effort: Psomas for upland survey and Holocene for geotechnical drilling. Anchor QEA has developed the following Scope of Work (SO," to approach this complex project and identify feasible, constructable design, solutions while concurrently achieving the three goals. The SOW is focused on Phase 1, which includes background information review, existing condition investigations,, alternatives analysis, outreach and will develop, the preliminary design (30%) package to be used in subsequent final design, permitting, and construction. The SOW includes the following tasks: • Task 1: Project Management • Task 2: Survey and Base Map • Task 3: Technical Investigations and Background Review • Task 4: Alternatives Analysis, • Task 5: Outreach • Task 6: 30% Design January 29, 2026 Nelsen Side Channel Restoration Project — Phase 1 Page 3 The SOW detailed fee proposal is included as Exhibit A. Subconsultant proposals are included as Exhibit B. 2. Scope of Services and Deliverables Task 1: Project Management This task includes management of the consultant's team and control of approved scope, schedule, and budget. Anchor QEA will develop, maintain and provide to the City a task -level schedule for the duration of the project. For the purposes of scoping, the negotiated fee assumes that project management will extend over an 11 -month period, ending in December 2026. This task includes regular biweekly coordination meetings with the City. These coordination meetings will be virtual, 1 -hour meetings between the City project manager (Joshua Hopkins), other City representatives as needed, and consultant team project manager (Arielle Farina -Williams). In addition to biweekly coordination meetings, this task includes City meetings at key project milestones. Meetings will take place at the following steps in the project: • Project kickoff meeting (1.5 hours, virtual, with three core consultant team staff) • Project milestone meetings (1 hour, virtual, with three core consultant team staff) — One meeting during Task 4 Alternatives Analysis — Two meetings during Task 6 (30% Design) Meeting agendas and notes will be prepared for the project kickoff and City milestone meetings. Meeting notes will be provided in a summary format that focuses on documenting key decisions and City comments. Deliverables • Meeting notes for project kickoff and City milestone meetings provided as summary emails • Budget status provided in monthly invoices by task (PDF file) • Project schedule developed in Microsoft Project (PDF file) Task 2: Survey and Base Mapping This task includes compiling a base map, including survey, existing bathymetry, and property data including boundary lines and easements. Anchor QEA's subconsultant, Psomas, will complete a topographic survey for upland project areas as shown in Figure 1 (see Exhibit A for subconsultant proposal). The survey will include ground features, such as extent of pavement, curbs, fences, trees, ditch features, and aboveground utilities. The survey will include utility locates to mark and survey underground utility locations. January 29, 2026 Nelsen Side Channel Restoration Project — Phase 1 Page 4 The survey will include identifying property boundaries within the Project area. City property will be mapped using GIS data. Title reports and full boundary survey is not included for the City property boundary. A boundary survey and title reports will locate boundary lines for the private properties within the Project Area. Easement(s) through the private properties will be mapped. See Exhibit B for a full description of the survey scope. The City conducted a bathymetry survey of the in -water areas adjacent to the Project site in April 2025. In this task, the existing bathymetry survey will be compiled with the topographical survey to develop a comprehensive base map. Anchor QEA has not included effort to conduct additional bathymetry survey. Deliverables • Draft and Final Base Map (pdf and CAD files) Task 3: Technical Investigations and Background Review In this task, Anchor QEA will conduct technical investigations to inform alternatives analysis, design, and permitting. Anchor QEA will develop a memorandum summarizing the investigations as well as a review of background information. Subtask 3.1: Geotechnical Desktop Study Anchor QEA geotechnical engineers will review available subsurface data including data provided by the City, publicly available subsurface borings in the vicinity of the project area, and geologic maps. On the basis of this review, we will prepare a summary of anticipated subsurface conditions at the project site, highlight key geotechnical considerations for design development, describe seismic risks and mitigation strategies, and prepare a list of geotechnical data gaps as well as a recommended subsurface investigation strategy to be implemented under a future task. This task also includes a review and description of geologic critical areas that may be mapped within the project area. The work under this task will be documented in the Subtask 3.4 Background Review Summary Memorandum. Subtask 3.2: Habitat Investigation Our habitat restoration field team will complete a detailed assessment documenting landscape and habitat conditions to complement the other technical investigations. We will collect data on anthropogenic floodplain manipulation and armoring, riparian conditions and tree mapping, presence of large wood and instream habitat conditions, riverine floodplain engagement and sediment deposition, and off -channel restoration opportunities. Anchor QEA will also delineate existing wetlands and the ordinary high-water mark (OHWM) to assist with future permitting. The effort will require 2 days of field work for two staff and will include the following: January 29, 2026 Nelsen Side Channel Restoration Project —Phase I Page 5 • Wetlands: Delineate wetlands within the Project area. Mark boundaries in the field using flagging and record using DGPS. Document findings, including wetland rating data sheets. • Wetland buffers. Characterize buffer conditions. Identify appropriate buffer extents for delineated wetlands and locate on site mapping. Characterize site conditions, including extent of native and invasive vegetation. Following the field work, Anchor QEA will document field conditions in a Wetland and OHWM Delineation Report that will support alternatives evaluation. The Wetland and OHWM Delineation Report will include assigning wetland functional ratings, wetland buffer width, and shoreline setback distances. The report will meet current state and federal wetland and OHWM delineation guidance and requirements. The report wHI incorporate City code for wetland shoreline buffer widths, river rating and 100 -year FEMA flood mapping data. Subtask 33: Preliminary Hydraulic Analysis To inform a preliminary hydraulic assessment and support a site-specific sediment transport analysis, we will use the bathymetric and topographic data on the Green River compiled in Task 2. These data will be incorporated into the existing scale model developed by others to help with site evaluation. We will update the existing model geometry with the current topographic and bathymetric data to accurately represent the existing Site conditions. We will use HEC -RAS 2D to model the site under a range of desired habitat flows, up to 500 -year flood conditions, where appropriate for alternatives screening to identify- existing hydraulic and geomorphic thresholds to inform alternatives development geared toward restoring natural processes. Coordinate local river gauge stages for habitat access and habitat type, and tidal fluctuations for sediment transport in and out of site. We will also conduct a drainage analysis and review of drainage requirements to characterize existing project site runoff and outfall TOTATTEO "I The primary use of the hydraulic model will be for alternatives evaluation and the development of the preferred alternative. The model will also provide key design information on grades, elevations, and widths for channel and other site features as well as help inform permit related data and information. Reporting documentation will include a summary narrative including: review of the river reach geomorphic assessment, tidal signal and implications for sediment transport, potential for design flood storage, scour and habitat access, and habitat type, Reporting will include at least one figure showing the river stage graph for a representative year with elevation markings to communicate how river states impact and relate to the site. Subtask 3A Background Review Summary Memorandum Anchor CEA will review background information provided by the City (on a City SharePoint library) and information that is publicly available. Known information includes: January 29, 2026 Nelsen Side Channel Restoration Project — Phase 1 Page 6 • WSDOT as-builts and record documents for 405 • As-builts and record documents for adjacent hotels and properties • King County documents relevant to Green River and flood control including FEMA maps • WSDOT geotechnical data • Cultural Resources Review • City GIS data for critical areas, utilities, environmental data, etc • City Comprehensive Plan • Southcenter Subarea plan • Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan • Shoreline Master Program • WRIA 9 Habitat Plan • Lower Green River Corridor Flood Hazard Management Plan PEIS This subtask will include developing a site analysis graphic annotating the Base Map developed in task 2 with available information including: existing access routes, existing habitat areas, existing road prism locations and site features, existing stormwater features and drainage patterns, historical features, and any potential relevant cultural resources (where/when applicable). This graphic will include relevant site observations and client and stakeholder input. The site analysis graphic will highlight key opportunities and constraints (such as needed easement need to formalize access routes) and inform the alternatives analysis in Task 4 and the outreach described in Task 5. Deliverables • Draft and final background review summary memorandum with sections summarizing geotechnical, habitat and hydraulic analyses (word and pdf files) • Draft and final site analysis graphic (pdf file) • Draft and final Wetland and OHWM Delineation Report Task 4: Alternatives Analysis Subtask 4.1: Project Goals and Design Evaluation Criteria In this subtask, Anchor QEA will also draft Project goals. Anchor QEA will then document design evaluation criteria based on the identified Project goals and the work completed in Task 3. The design evaluation criteria will be used to evaluate the alternatives and guide the development of the preferred alternative. Project goals, evaluation criteria, and relative weighting shall be subject to City review, revision, and final approval prior to application. January 29, 2026 Nelsen Side Channel Restoration Project — Phase 1 Page 7 Subtask 4.2: Alternatives Development Anchor QEA will develop three conceptual design alternatives which may include variations of key elements, that consider the existing conditions, sustainability, Project goals, and work completed in Task 3. The design alternatives will propose different approaches to restoring the habitat, reducing local flood risk, and improving public access in a manner subordinate to and compatible with habitat restoration and flood -risk -reduction objectives. The conceptual alternatives will be shown in simple, basic scaled plan and section drawings over the basemap. The plan and section drawings will be color rendered in a basic, consistent way to provide clarity of communication. A conceptual rough order -of -magnitude (ROM) opinion of probable construction cost (OPCC) will be developed for each of the alternatives to assist in the alternatives analysis and is intended for planning and comparative purposes only. Subtask 4.3: Alternatives Analysis Anchor QEA will conduct initial simulations in HEC -RAS 2D, modifying the existing conditions preliminary model developed in Task 3.3 to best represent each alternative. Hydraulics and sediment transport patterns will be analyzed for project sustainability and habitat benefits as a component of the evaluation criteria. We will then analyze the alternatives based on the design evaluation criteria generated in subtask 4.1. Anchor QEA will develop a summary of the alternatives evaluation and analysis in the form of a summary matrix showing the design evaluation criteria and rankings with the intention of choosing one of the conceptual design alternatives as the preferred alternative. Example design evaluation criteria will include: • Flood Risk Criteria — Flood storage effects — Water surface elevation changes — Implications for levees, infrastructure, and adjacent properties — Consistency with applicable floodplain management policies and system -wide flood - risk frameworks (e.g., KC SWIF) • Public Access Feasibility & Site Maintenance Criteria If one conceptual design alternative is not determined to be the preferred alternative, the desired elements that scored well in the alternatives analysis will be summarized to inform the next step of project design (task 6). Reporting will document reasoning for preferred alternatives selection and why other alternatives were not selected. Subtask 4.4: Alternatives Analysis Report Anchor QEA will develop the Alternatives Analysis Report. This report will serve as the foundation for design and permitting work and will include: January 29, 2026 Nelsen Side Channel Restoration Project — Phase 1 Page 8 • Project Goals • Design Evaluation Criteria • Narrative review of Alternatives Considered with ROM Costs • Evaluation Summary Matrix • Narrative review of City Decisions and Preferred Alternative with ROM Costs • Preliminary permit pathway for preferred alternative • Data gaps City Review and Authorization to Proceed Completion of Task 4 shall constitute a formal decision point. Following City review and acceptance of the Alternatives Analysis deliverables, the City will determine whether to: a. authorize advancement of the Preferred Alternative into Task 6 (30% Design), b. direct refinement of alternatives, or C. pause or modify the scope. Deliverables • Draft Project Goals and Design Evaluation Criteria (word file) • Draft and Final Concept Design Alternatives (pdf files) • Draft and Final ROM Costs for Each Alternative (pdf files) • Draft Alternatives Analysis Summary Matrix (pdf file) • Draft and Final Alternatives Analysis Report (word and pdf files) Task 5: Outreach Subtask 5.1: Technical Stakeholder The Project will engage with a Technical Stakeholder team including: King County Rivers and Floodplain Staff (KC Flood Control District Service Provider), WRIA 9 and King County Technical Science Staff (fisheries ecologist and habitat and landscape/aquatic processes), Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT), Duwamish Tribe (DT), and WDFW. Anchor QEA will participate in up to five Technical Stakeholder meetings. One may be on site (2 hours in length with 1 hour of travel time), and three Anchor QEA staff will attend. Four will be virtual (1.S hour in length) and three Anchor QEA staff will attend to cover sediment and habitat technical discussions. The City will lead meeting logistics and coordination, including providing relevant documents to the Technical Stakeholder team prior to meeting. The meetings will take place at key milestones: • Kickoff (prior to alternative design) January 29, 2026 Nelsen Side Channel Restoration Project — Phase 1 Page 9 • Background data review (prior to alternative design) • Flood protection meeting (KC Rivers and Floodplain Staff, WSDOT) • During Alternatives Analysis to review alternative designs • Prior to finalizing the preferred alternative design Subtask 5.2: Real Estate Coordination The Project will engage with the City's selected real estate consultant (Commonstreet Consulting) and the adjacent property owner Q hotels and the Nelsen Family Trust). Anchor QEA will participate in up to four virtual meetings. Each will be 1 hour in length and two Anchor QEA staff will attend. The City will lead meeting logistics and coordination. The meetings will occur prior to starting Task 4 (Alternatives Analysis). Coordination with the City's real estate consultant will be integrated into this work to confirm that all easement options for access routes proposed are viable. The real estate consultant will be asked to join regularly scheduled PM check in meetings as determined by the City in partnership with Anchor QEA. Subtask 5.3: Permit Agency Anchor QEA will attend one virtual meeting with applicable City permit review team members to review City permit requirements. The meeting will last 1.5 hours and two Anchor QEA staff will attend. This will occur after a preliminary preferred alternative is identified but before it is finalized. Anchor QEA will engage USACE staff to determine if Section 408 is required for any project alternatives. This will be conducted with emails and phone calls and up to one meeting attended by two Anchor QEA staff. Subtask 5.4: WSDOT Outreach Anchor QEA will attend one virtual meeting with WSDOT early in the project. Two Anchor QEA staff will attend. Subtask 5.5: Public Meeting Anchor QEA will attend one public meeting with the community. In advance of the meeting, Anchor QEA will work with City staff to develop a multi-lingual online survey tool. The City will lead the development of the tool and Anchor QEA will provide project -specific technical information. The City will advertise the survey in the e -Hazelnut and other City -led media efforts. Anchor QEA will develop and lead a short presentation. Anchor QEA will bring up to three rendered boards showing the existing site, site analysis and preliminary preferred alternative. The meeting will be in person and last 2 hours. Two Anchor QEA staff will attend. Anchor QEA will compile notes and input from the meeting participants. January 29, 2026 Nelsen Side Channel Restoration Project — Phase 1 Page 10 Deliverables • Agendas and meeting notes for outreach meetings (emails) • Draft and final presentation for public meeting (Powerpoint file) • Plotted boards for public meeting • Notes from public meeting (word file) • Compile all documentation into the Alternatives Analysis Report Public engagement is intended to inform City decision-making and does not obligate incorporation of public preferences where inconsistent with project goals, technical feasibility, regulatory requirements, or funding constraints. Task 6: 30% Design Task 6 shall commence only upon written authorization from the City following acceptance of Task 4 deliverables and confirmation of the Preferred Alternative. Subtask 6.1: Engineering Analysis 6.7.7 Hydraulic analysis At the 30% design stage, the model will be re -run to optimize the design with respect to meeting project objectives. We will also evaluate the stability of any proposed large wood or other design features. In addition, we will optimize key design parameters, such as grades, elevations, and widths for channel and other site features. Finally, the model findings will be used to extract key permit related data and information. 6.7.2 Geotechnical Investigation Anchor QEA will conduct a subsurface geotechnical investigation to address data gaps and inform the geotechnical design of the selected alternative from Task 4. Our scope assumes we would advance up to 4 borings using a track -mounted mud rotary drill rig. One boring would be advanced to 100 feet below ground surface to support seismic risk evaluations. The remaining 3 borings are assumed to be advanced to 50 feet below ground surface. A field geologist will create a log of subsurface conditions and collect samples from discrete depth intervals. Representative field samples will be submitted to a geotechnical test laboratory for further engineering classification. Our scope assumes the following laboratory testing program: • Moisture content per ASTM D2216 — up to 66 samples • Grain size distribution (with hydrometer) per ASTM D6913/D7928 — up to 8 samples • Atterberg limits per ASTM D4318 — up to 8 samples • One-dimensional Consolidation testing per ASTM D2435 — up to 4 samples January 29, 2026 Nelsen Side Channel Restoration Project — Phase 1 Page 11 Note our geotechnical engineers may recommend to modify this investigation scope after the Data Gaps review and based on the project elements included in the selected alternative. Anchor QEA will coordinate with the City if scope modifications are recommended. We have assumed no environmental sampling for our subsurface geotechnical investigation. If the City suspects contaminants may be present, Anchor QEA can provide a scope amendment to add subsurface chemical testing in coordination with the geotechnical sampling program. Following the geotechnical field investigation, Anchor QEA geotechnical engineers will prepare recommendations to support the 30% Design. These recommendations will be documented in the Subtask 6.4 30% Basis of Design Report. We assume the following geotechnical engineering analysis would be needed to support the 30% Design: • Summary of subsurface conditions • Recommendations for Earthwork • Recommendations for Levee Design and Construction • Seismic design input including liquefaction assessment, seismic slope stability, and recommendations for post -earthquake contingency actions. Our scope does not include a site-specific seismic hazard analysis. If such an analysis is recommended, this will be documented as a data gap to be addressed during a subsequent design stage. Our scope does not include foundation design recommendations for structures. If structures are included in the selected alternative, we will revisit our assumptions to evaluate whether a scope amendment is recommended or if these recommendations can be completed under our existing authorized budget. Finally, based on subsurface variability encountered during the subsurface investigation, Anchor QEA geotechnical engineers may recommend supplemental geotechnical data be collected in a future phase of design to reduce uncertainty and address related data gaps. Subtask 6.2: 30% Design Drawings Based on the preferred alternative, identified Task 4, Anchor QEA will prepare 30% Design drawings. The 30% Design drawings will be prepared using AutoCAD Civil3D software. The list below, while subject to change, provides a basis for estimating the level of effort that will be required to complete the drawings. Each set of plan drawings will be provided on two sheets at 20 -foot scale, unless otherwise indicated. The following is a general sheet list for 30% Design development: • Existing condition plans with river gauges • Composite site plan noting the proposed Project key design features i.e. off -channel creation areas, habitat areas, public access routes, with the base survey map underlay (one sheet at 40 - foot scale) 0 Access and staging plan (one sheet at 40 -foot scale) January 29, 2026 Nelsen Side Channel Restoration Project — Phase 1 Page 12 • Demolition plans • Grading and drainage plans • Construction materials plans with river stages • Grading and material sections (two sheets at 10 -foot scale; no exaggeration) with river stages • Planting plans • Plant schedule (one sheet) Subtask 6.3: 30% Design Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Anchor QEA will develop an Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (OPCC) for the design shown on the 30% Design drawings. Anchor QEA will prepare an OPCC, based on estimated quantities and unit costs, to document the expected implementation cost. The design development OPCC will be assembled in a format consistent with the CSI MasterFormat. Subtask 6A 30% Design Basis of Design Report Anchor QEA will draft a Basis of Design (BOD) report. The BOD will be a living document during design and permitting efforts. At 30% Design, it will include: • Specification Outline (following CSI MasterFormat) • Geotechnical Investigation results • Hydraulic Analysis results • Update Design Criteria • Identified Data Gaps Deliverables • 30% drawings (pdf file) • 30% OPCC (pdf file) • 30% Design Basis of Design Report (word file) 3. Assumptions • Meetings in addition to those described in this SOW are not included and will be considered additional work. • Outreach and engagement meetings will rely on materials in other tasks to produce outreach materials. • The City will determine who is invited to community meetings, provide all meeting invitations, and coordinate meeting logistics, including securing meeting rooms and ensuring that audio- visual equipment is available and in working order. • Community meetings will occur in the evening and will be a conventional format with a presentation followed by a question -and -answer session. January 29, 2026 Nelsen Side Channel Restoration Project — Phase 1 Page 13 • The City will determine if a project website is desired and, if so, will provide project updates on a City -led online platform (such as the City's website). This will include posting community meeting presentations and community survey results. • The City will lead outreach with all Tribes. • Travel time will be billed to the City. Travel time from Seattle to the City is estimated at 1 hour round trip. • Alternatives will be developed within the project areas identified in Figures 1 and 2. If the project boundaries expand, Anchor QEA will discuss with the City which level of evaluation and/or design work can be conducted within those additional areas within the scope and fee negotiated for this work. • Environmental and construction permit packages development and submittal is not included in Phase 1 • Anchor QEA will engage with King County and USACE to determine whether Section 408 is required for any alternative. If this is determined to be required, this will be scoped as part of permitting in Phase 2. • The survey will include title reports and boundary survey for the private parcels in the Project area. The survey will only include mapping GIS boundaries for the City owned parcels. • Bathymetry survey is not included. The base map will compile the City -provided April 2025 bathymetric survey data. • Anchor QEA will utilize the City -provided existing hydraulic model. • The City's 2025-2030 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) currently identifies a planning -level construction budget of approximately $4.2 million for the Project, assuming construction in 2027. This figure represents an early -phase, non -escalated estimate developed for programming purposes and does not reflect detailed site-specific constraints, market escalation, or outcomes of alternatives analysis. Phase I design and alternatives evaluation are intended to inform refined cost understanding, funding strategy, and future budget alignment consistent with project goals and precedent outcomes from comparable projects. • An OPCC will be developed to reflect the level of design (conceptual and 30% Design) and will include a contingency markup appropriate to this stage of design. • The SOW does not include time for developing grant applications. • A management reserve estimate is noted in the fee estimate in case additional work is identified and agreed upon. Anchor QEA will not utilize the management reserve unless directed in writing by the City. 4. Budget See Exhibit A for the detailed fee proposal. January 29, 2026 Nelsen Side Channel Restoration Project — Phase 1 Page 14 5. Schedule Work will begin immediately following Notice to Proceed (NTP). Assuming NTP is provided by February 15, Anchor QEA will bill a minimum of $100,000 by March 31, 2026. Phase 1 is anticipated to extend to the end of 2026. 'I'Toposed Fee 27 Exhibit A Proposed Fee Table ANCHORMA, 2026 LABOR BUDGET ES'"MATING FORM I: LABOR RecommeodedMam",ementResee (S%) $ 20.956 Page 1 of 1 January 2126 Exhibit B Subconsultant Proposals EXHIBIT A ANCHOR QEA Surveying for Nelsen Side Channel Project Tukwila, WA Psomas Scope of Work A. INTRODUCTION The Nelsen Side Channel Salmon Habitat Project will restore off -channel and high -flow -refuge habitat for juvenile Chinook salmon, maintain or reduce local flood risk, and improve public access consistent with City and WRIA 9 salmon -recovery objectives. Anchor QEA has asked Psomas to assist with Phase I — Preliminary Design, which will establish an existing conditions base map. B. SCOPE OF WORK Work Element 1: Existing Conditions Base Map 1.1 Desktop review of available records — review assessor's plats, boundary survey records, title reports, bathymetry files by others, topographic survey files by others, etc. 1.2 Compile Desktop Data into an existing conditions base map - merge assessors data, Lidar, bathymetry and topographic survey files. 1.3 Right of Entry (assigned to Tukwila) 1.4 Boundary and Topographic Survey Control — conduct field survey to establish project control points and tie sufficient survey monuments to calculate property boundaries for Extended Stay Hotels Parcel 0005800015, Ramada Inn Parcel 0005800030, and Woodspring Suites Parcel 0005800002, and incorporate into the base map. GIS parcel lines will be utilized for City -owned boundaries. See Exhibit C for a breakdown of private and public parcels. 1.5 Topographic Survey — conduct topographic survey over the areas outlined in Exhibit C. It will include ground features, such as extent of pavement, curbs, fences, trees, ditch features, and above -ground utilities. An underground conductible utility locate along the western boundaries of the hotel properties noted in Task 1.4 to be performed by a private utility locating firm. The estimated length is 1,700 Lf. Psomas will survey the location of the locate paint marks. While every reasonable effort will be made by Psomas to depict the location of underground utilities based on utility locates, Psomas is not liable for errors or Scope of Work January 2026 Surveying for Nelson Side Channel Page 1 of 2 City of Tukwila omissions by utility locators or erroneous or insufficient information shown on utility record drawings. 1.6 Compile existing conditions base map with topographic survey data. Assumptions: • Bathymetric survey of area 5 is not included. Elevations will be determined where physically accessible on foot, using conventional survey methods. • Title reports for Extended Stay Hotels Parcel 0005800015, Ramada Inn Parcel 0005800030, and Woodspring Suites Parcel 0005800002 are included as a reimbursable expense. They will be used to calculate easements within those parcels. • Topographic and bathymetric survey files provided by others will be incorporated 'as -is' for layering, DTMs, and symbology. • Survey work provided by Psomas will be to Psomas CAD standards. Scope of Work January 2026 Surveying for Nelson Side Channel Page 2 of 2 City of Tukwila EXHIBIT B PRIME CONSULTANT COST COMPUTATIONS Client: Anchor QEA Project Name: Surveying for Nelson Side Channel Project Psom,as Project Number: SANCO10200 Date: Januarv. 2026 LaWw'Hour F-stimato, Total Hqqrs avd,Labor P 10 Task TaskDescriptlon KL cost cofflowo"s by Task Ulm $2;tft $207.00 $19 ;;;T$163* 09 HaVrO TOW Task I 1.1 Desktop review of available records 2 a 2 12 $ 2,358.00 1.2 Com le preliminag base map 16 16 $ 2,608.00 1.3 Mght of En" asci reed to Tukwila) 1 2 3 $ 074.00 1.4 Bounds !y and Topagra2hic Survey Control 1 — 16 24 41 $ 9,65G.00 Topographic Survey 1 -8-0 144 8 90 323 $ 77,984.00 —1.5 1.6 Com le Final Site Plan with Topographic Survey Data 4 32 36 $ 5,984.00 — Task Total 5 so , iso , 46 1 138 1 2 1� 431 , $ 99,258.00 Total Labor Hoo rs and Filial 5 1 00 1 1 " I " I im, 1 2 1 411 1 S ".258-00 Reimbursable Direct Non -Salary Costs Three (3) Commercial Title Reports $ 2,500.00 Conductible Unlit y Locates $ 4,0430.00 Total Reimbursable Expense $ 6,600.00, TOW FsOmoted Pludget $ M'750AO' 6r1l, Lf) 0 4* 4- a) 0 T— w od 4- zi to 0 00 (A 3: �c cu �= 0 m CC co 4-1 o 4- 0 0 E Cfl CCS -0 0 >, W = fnC[FIm a) E 4-0 -0 U') 0 0 (D E 'o *6 o E 0 W a) o m _0 cu C1a 0 > cc caCil C: A — = -;;:: -0 CC 0- Q 0- t M a)ti -Se 0 44-- 6 0 > a) a) cr- en Lo o "0 ii, +, L 'M �> C: in 4- fn L- 0 u a) co a) > Q Co CL 0 Q), E 0 W, to co rZ CCS > CO E 0 4- Zo- 0 Z 0 C to L 0 A a 0 OL C: co rrs - - T co a) 0 0 0 L - Cil 0 0 4- CO 0 CL CL a) U U) 0 0 - to 0 Z 0 0 -0 cn -, 0 — +, Co :3 c to �c: R CN21 4- 'D CL co co, 4-1 CJ5 0 co bol C/) 0 (D 4- 4- z 0 75 CL c :Ll — - -0 70 'a) (D cn .2 (D > CO 0) C 0 =3 U) (13 (D 0 CL C: 0 co .2 TE 4-j 03 q) c - CL 0 > 0 0 rAs to 0 co (n 0 CL CO 44 0 0 -a 0 = 0 0 0 0- 0 m M o CL CL 0 a) Z 0 4- 4-i C.) wryCL Q) icy! (D "m 0 (D (n OL W W Wi co (D Co 2 CO 0 zl co co L 2 -i co CL L3 -j CIL >1 (n E co C—/) am E UM -0 OL Z 0� 4�- "r01r, (n CD -;�- 0 0 E u z ui 3: z 0 cc CL >- C11 c) T irn 6 c,.-) cn rn c) cq rN 0 CO ry') W (4) cr) rwo 0 IV) ce) CY) 110 11"5 LO 0 LO If) M N c") c "D C-) 0 10 'r4t CL z It')' z ir-A I cl� C a c� a C)� lr".')i CA C 6r1l, Lf) 0 4* 4- a) 0 T— w od 4- zi to 0 00 (A 3: �c cu �= 0 m CC co 4-1 o 4- 0 0 E Cfl CCS -0 0 >, W = fnC[FIm a) E 4-0 -0 U') 0 0 (D E 'o *6 o E 0 W a) o m _0 cu C1a 0 > cc caCil C: A — = -;;:: -0 CC 0- Q 0- t M a)ti -Se 0 44-- 6 0 > a) a) cr- en Lo o "0 ii, +, L 'M �> C: in 4- fn L- 0 u a) co a) > Q Co CL 0 Q), E 0 W, to co rZ CCS > CO E 0 4- Zo- 0 Z 0 C to L 0 A a 0 OL C: co rrs - - T co a) 0 0 0 L - Cil 0 0 4- CO 0 CL CL a) U U) 0 0 - to 0 Z 0 0 -0 cn -, 0 — +, Co :3 c to �c: R CN21 4- 'D CL co co, 4-1 CJ5 m 0 co bol 0 (D 4- 4- z 0 75 CL c :Ll — - -0 70 'a) (D .2 (D > CO 0) C 0 =3 U) (13 (D 0 CL C: 0 co .2 TE 4-j 03 q) c - CL > 0 0 rAs to 0 co (n 0 CL CL 0 4- 4- a) 0 0 0 m M o a) 0 4- 4-i C.) Q) C14 (D "m 0 (D (n OL W W Wi co (D Co 2 CO 0 zl co co L 2 -i co CL L3 -j CIL m q k I W U) uj 0 CFi LN 0 c uj 0 cc 6 z 11 z Iii *W* cc, 0 ,2 z CL LS CL 4� LLI cx 4- 0 z 4- 11 -a let ��p ry, as 0 U �Wy AGA CL 2- CL 0 IZ- c yT 0 O OL 0 0 V) co co cu S o 2:� E 0 to 0 CL o 0 0 a) o "a (D 0 0 to c 0 0 LU 3: .0 oCi 4-1 JZ - c w 4- 0 "D 4- 4�4s 0 :Lap cc (n (5 cm C6 0 4- z 0 U) (D to LO 0 Uo uo L.0 uj w %)0 LU uj uj uj to uj 4� 4- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cr x cr 0 cr cr- cr- cr cc -0a a 2:2,000i 4) 0 c m (D Co r - z cn z U) w rn .0 'm ->00000 D U) w w w c z C/) w t 0 Co tf UO ca tf CL Z m C 0 C 7--, m c o 0 co 4- w cn 4wNMa CL U) Q) :3 W 'to c 0 r- 0 Q m to C: 0 0 +� o c CO 'to Iryl U)ZZZZZZZZZZZZ ECL C co CL 0 0rri 53 za LLJI -0 en 0 0 a to LO o = Im w to — W z cc$ 0 = m -0 -0 c Z; U) c 4- U) cc CN.CL M CL 0 -a CO V) 4- W co .Lo E m 4- M LU LU cc uo 0 0 >* U) 2� E U4) W ,E F U- cr F U- cr- w 0 Z ol -u W W 10 z -16n < 2� 4*4 X 0 0 -0� 0, E D 010 5 Z 1 6 11 Lu 1 3: z cc i5 LO rx, 0 LO 04 14, 0 101) CC' 04 0 CWJ C) 0 CP M 10 0 C.') (D 0 0 C11) 0 CD 10 C C".1 :j-, V, 04 Ir 10 00 TX) a: CO ck) rx) p 0 0 < 10 r:5 er) 6- C14 ,1, 0 c, ("D e " 0 c, 0 o 0 o 10 (.5 (14 4 m z C>l Z C-41 10411 CDI I CD1 I CA I ol I cz)l I c -A I ('A q k I W U) uj 0 CFi LN 0 c uj 0 cc 6 z 11 z Iii *W* cc, 0 ,2 z CL LS CL 4� LLI cx 4- 0 z 4- 11 -a let ��p ry, as 0 U �Wy AGA CL 2- CL 0 IZ- c yT 0 O OL 0 0 V) co co cu S o 2:� E 0 to 0 CL o 0 0 a) o "a (D 0 0 to c 0 0 LU 3: .0 oCi 4-1 JZ - c w 4- 0 "D 4- 4�4s 0 :Lap cc (n (5 cm C6 0 4- z 0 U) (D to LO 0 0 -0 a) 0 wr 4� 4- to C 0 • CL 0 -0a a 4) 0 m (D Co r_ rn .0 'm CC 0 (D �= 06 CO 0 Co UO ca CL 4- 0 C 0 C 7--, L. Q +-, c o 0 0 4wNMa CL Q) :3 'to c 0 r- 0 Q m to C: 0 0 +� o c CO 'to Iryl — ECL C co CL 0 0rri 53 za co 4- a -0 en 0 0 a to LO o = Im w to — W z cc$ = = m -0 -0 c Z; U) c 4- U) cc CN.CL M CL 0 -a CO 4- W co E m LU LU cc uo 0 R 0 6 E 0— Co 41 M 0 0 r— :3 0 0 0 0 ;- C > �> -C 0 > a) a) -Z o E 0 (D OL m E 42) to cl) (D 4c-0 "—a J= 4- 4— (D 4 - co 0 x (D +0' U) 4- 4- a) CO A 0 CL m &- to to 0 0 a•cr (D 0 0 = 4- F - LW (D 0 (D L) 0 Gt 4- u cu — 0 .0 C14 17 a) > C14 — (D C M 0) 0 U) Ui < 0 +- co CL Q) — V Q) 0, 0, (D z -0 — 0 0 w u CL Ojr as o — ca 0 dsu CU CL X, 0 to r oi (1) c . — as cu 4- co LO o M C 0) 0 0 2 F MI CU (D a) > :"3 LO 0 5 o r,� CD .0 > ca C ) r:�Jl Ca M 'a 4- 0) 4— CN 0 o 0 X CP r_li - 0 E 0 0 0 0 -Z 0) C) F- C-) ca M CL cu OL u C 0 M :3 0 a) m IF- F- L " m co OL r -L E E: Co as ca 0 Gld 0 C D 0 0 0 bD = .7 n LU LO o 4� CL ca :-z 0 E co E 0 0 - =3 m ?: 41 0 Co cp .0 0 > 4� CD LO cu CD :3 0 t > 0 co 0 -0 ca CL a) 0 > — (D CD -C 4- 0 W 0c 'a cu ca 4- >, -T- 0 0 CL o .2 (D .0 -C co " 0= 0 4- 0 '4-4- > p > :3 4- w ca > 0 t'- :3 0 U) 4- ID OL 4- m m (D E E 00 0 & , 4- -- 0 CU 4-1 0 0 a) 4- o 0 Cl Ca W 4a 0 4- 4� Bei E o u m cn CL 0 0 co a) (D 4" CD 0 414 0 0 0 m " 0 0 m m c Lo r > CL 0 4Z CL > a) aw CL (D cn th 0 CC _0 CO CL cl), a) 0 t- S- >1 Cc o C: m 03 U) U) ?-, 0 13) 0 (D 0ara co -0 > � rra 0 w. 0 > 4- 0 cn 70 (0, CIO a (D, 4w bb 0 r 0 CO 0 (n 0, lis C D 0 M w cc a_ E 0 ca 0) 0 M 4�J (n W lLF-r 0 a) 72 CL CL OL .2 Z, 4— to "C' CL Co CD w 0 im m 0 "a cc t -- 0 c lri0 w 3: 4., 2 0 0 2 0) +� E OM C: -0 CD 0 +� Fn +-1 cn 0 .5 — 10) CL > (D q) -a co 70 - Co� 0 r– C co 0m 'D u 0' 0 > 4--o 0 0 io u ca a5 1aA 0 115 0 x LU W,-0 = cts to cn E 2-1 w 4) = -r- D ( 0 :3 =1 0 4" +1 0 lC5 UJ >, OL q5 0 Co 0 0 co > CD (1) 0 0 (1) C 0 ca - 4- CL0 CL co- L+ 0 = — " M 0 r_ 5 (D CO L -P 0 m a) CO 0 0 OL 0 0 CL 0 0, co a) (5 -0 10L co 0 4.0 0m 0 -0 +.0 c: E *cJ " to U) cn CL D 0 CU 115 C: a) -0 :3 0 cr Cc 0 U) tf t 0 OM 0 m LU 0a)or- 0 3: 0 =Ocoo 0.0c Z a 4� M= C m o m co -C +j *� (D 10 -0 0 0 0 " M Co +- �% 3: a 4- ra jo 70 a 4- cu �c Q u S 41 0 a/i CCS 4.; 41 0 = 0 tY5U) " 0 -C >LAG cu CO0 0 20 1— Z; CL 0 0) u CL ca 0 -Ne w Iq :3 a) CD 0 " V) ca :3 Lo i>> -0 = m m a) c 4� CLC3CC m 2 "a < 0 0 - 0 0' a) = — E E CL +� -0 J_- 4, to 0 C: +, 0 u co 0 r- m x —1 0 0 Ca 0 co w 0 0 6 LO a) 0 (n 3: —; -;2 6 >, = C 4- 70 . r- (D (D (D - :3 to CD 0 — 4� ca W 0 u L- (D zs = 0 r- 0) 4- 0 - Co L < < 0 m h- _:� I- c -1 ca 11 0 -C 4- (D '- W le (D 4� 0)z JZ C 0 CD — (o 0 3: 4- L? 4- OL a Co CL 0 0- < >1 4- < 4- 0 co OL o Q) 0 > LO LO 0 cr- 'MO m 0 C: 4- as = CD0 -0, 5 CP Co a) 4-1 E (D co -=; r- C a) -C 0 , 0 C — cl 0 CU 2 Co 0 4� 4- >, 0 Q m o o > CL (D u = to 4� c o (D u c5 c 0 m 2 UD Ga 0 0 C CL m - >� w Z 0 E co 0 0, 0 en CL > 'zi 0 0 m " — E 5 (D 4- i>- (D 0 4- 0 a (D (D M +, U 0 0 0 2 co D 0 -a o :3 0 CD — 0 CL 0 0 F- 4-1 a- CD �; w 0 m 0 (D a CO > o 0 M 0 0 0 to 0 U) 0 M CL M 0 0 0 C: E CL 4- -C LL w•m to 0 2 -6 +1 C) 0 "0 CD (n 0 E cO C: -a 0 C: U 3: 2 COL m:3 E -0 0 CC 0 49 cr = 4) m Iq (D LO 0 Co C; rN w C(":') L- D < L6 12) W ME ,. r wr ��