Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2006-08-28 Item 3D - Agreement - Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Update with Adolfson and Associates COUNCIL AGENDA S�'NOPSIS o 4 j :riled, ITEM NO. C z I -t I 1 .1f ThIR Date 1 Prepared ay I I Ia r't rcre;✓ Cot l r 0% v i=` I 08/28/06 I SL 1 et I �A2 I 2 I I I I I .J lam{ r9 790s I I I I I I I 1 1 1 ITEM INFORMATION CAS NUMBER: 06-096 IORIGLNAL AGENDA DATE: AUGUST 28, 2006 AGENDA ITEMTU1E Consultant Contract for Shoreline Master Program Update CATEGORY N Disauston N Motion p ke oketian Ordinaare Bid Award Public Hearing Otkr ABg Dat. 8-2S-06 MUg Dots 09/05/06 Meg Date leg Dat. 3fig Dale Mrs Date lUg Dats I SPONSOR p Coll nnl Ma Alin) Svcs N DCD Finance Fire Legal Po-R p Police PTP/ SPONSOR'S The City has been awarded a grant of $65,000 from the Department of Ecology for the Su\ ?.IARY update of the Tukwila Shoreline Master Program. The consulting firm of Adolfson and Associates has been selected to assist the Department of Community Development in the preparation of the Update. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. N CA &P Cmte FR•S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm" Planning Comm. DATE: August 15, 2006 RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADM. Approve consultant contract; forward to 9 -5 -06 Consent Agenda 11 CO,MMrrrEE Unanimous Approval; Forward to COW I COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $48,000 $65,000 $0.00 I Fund Source: DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY GRANT (GRANT No. G0600234) Comments: MTG. DATE I RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION I I I I I I I 1 1 I I MTG. DATE I ATTACHMENTS I 8 -28 -06 1 August 22, 2006 Memo from Steve Lancaster to Committee of the Whole I Community Affairs and Parks Minutes (8- 15 -06) I Contract with Adolfson Associates with attached Scope of Work and Budget I I I I I 1 <1+ I I 1 I j r s City of Tukvvida i Steven M'Wallet, Mayor A Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director 1908 INFORMATION MEMO To: Council President Dennis Robertson, Members of the City Council, Mayor Mullet From: Steve Lancaster, Director, Depaitinent of Community Development Date: August 22, 2006 gait-J Subject: Consultant for Shoreline Master Program Update ISSUE Approve the hiring of Adolfson Associates consulting firm to assist the Department of Community Development with the update of the Tukwila Shoreline Master Program (SMP). BACKGROUND The City began updating its SMP in 1999 and prepared a baseline inventory, draft SMP including revised and expanded shoreline goals and policies and draft design guidelines. A Citizen Advisory Committee was appointed, met to review SMP policies and recommended a draft SMP for Planning Commission consideration in March, 2000. As new Ecology SMP guidelines were in flux at the time, the City's SMP update was put on hold in late 2001 before the Planning Commission completed its review The Department of Ecology adopted new shoreline regulations in 2003 Under the regulations, the City of Tukwila is required to have an updated SMP by December, 2009 The City applied for and received a 2005 -2007 Grant of S65,000 from the Washington State Department of Ecology to assist in the update of the City's Shoreline Master Program. Of the grant award, S48,000 would be used for consultant services, with the remainder being used to support in- house staff. No City matching funds are required. The Community Affairs and Parks Committee reviewed this contract at their meeting on August 15, 2006, and recommended approval and placement on the agenda for the Committee of the Whole. DISCUSSION A Request for Proposals was issued on June 16, 2006 with proposals due on July 21, 2006. Five proposals were received and four consulting firms were interviewed. The selected consultant firm, Adolfson Associates, has extensive experience in working with Puget Sound communities in preparing updated Master Programs. The City worked with this consulting firm on the update of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance, which the Council adopted in 2004 CL Pane I oft 08'222006 1 1:50 A\t Q92003 Shoreline Grant \COP." Memo-Consultnnt Conoact.doc 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206 431 -3670 Fax: 206 431 -3665 Committee of the Whole August 28, 2006 Consultant for Shoreline Master Program 'Update The consultant will build upon the work prepared from 1999 -2001, particularly using the inventory work that was developed. The general scope of the consultant services will be to describe the larger geographic context of our shoreline (basin -wide level) and our shoreline functions, identify restoration sites and prepare a restoration plan, review development and redevelopment potential along the river so that the cumulative impacts of this development can be estimated, and assist with developing new shoreline environment designations. There are several reports that the Shoreline Regulations require that will be prepared by the consultant. New shoreline maps will be prepared jointly by the consultant's GIS staff and the City's. RECOMMENDATION Place the request for consultant contract approval on the Consent Agenda for the regular City Council meeting on September 5, 2006. Attachments: August 15, 2006 Community Affairs and Parks Committee Mtg. Minutes Contract with Adolfson Associates, with Attachments (Attachment A. Scope of Work, Attachment B Budget and Fee S chedule) CL Page 2 of 2 08 212006 11:50:00 AM Q: 2005 Shoreline Grant.CO W \femo-Consnitant Coatractdoc Community Affairs and Parks Committee August 15, 2006 5:00 p.m. Present: Joan Hernandez, Chair; Joe Duffie, and Pam Linder, council members. Rhonda Berry, City Administrator; Steve Lancaster, Director of Department of Community Development (LCD); Jack Pace, Deputy Director DCD; Derek Speck, Economic Development Administrator; Kathy Stetson, and Joyce Trantina, Code Enforcement Officers; Diane Jenkins, Administrative Assistant to the Council; and Chuck Parrish, community member Business Agenda: A. Proactive Code Enforcement Update Mr Lancaster reported that beginning in January of this year, two full -time code enforcement officers began proactive efforts to address certain violations across the City instead of a complaint -driven model. Data was gathered to assess which neighborhoods had the most violations. Ms. Trantina explained how the city was divided into nine zones and assigned to each officer However, by using a computerized program, it will allow either officer to address issues or answer questions outside their designated area. Normally, the officers handled 200 -300 cases per year they have now tripled their case load. It is anticipated that there will be 700 -800 cases in 2006. As of today, approximately 35% of the City has been examined for such items as junk vehicles, garbage and debris, graffiti, unsafe /derelict structures, and illegal parking of more than three vehicles. The response from property owners has been positive. Also, the code enforcement officers have been working on the backlog. In 2003, there were 60 cases that dated back five years or more; this list has been reduced to 10 and by the end of the year, it should be reduced to four Some of the difficulties arise in trying to locate a property owner Ms. Trantina noted that last year the City established an abatement fund which has been utilized to clear two residential properties; tax liens will be placed on the property to recover these monies. In three years, the lien becomes due and payable. Forward presentation to future Committee of the Whole. Information only. B. Discussion of Vacant Structures Ordinance /Proposal Ms. Trantina pointed out that there are approximately 40 -50 identifiable vacant structures in residential neighborhoods. They are not attractive; can be targets for vandalism, arson, crime, and trespass; and undermine the aesthetic character of a neighborhood. Some cities have developed or are developing ordinances regarding vacant structures. Many of the ordinances require that the property not look vacant and/or limit the amount of time it can be left vacant. Ms. Trantina reviewed efforts by neighboring cities to improve the overall appearance of vacant structures (no boarded -up structures). City of SeaTac has adopted an ordinance; the cities of Des Moines and Federal Way are in the process. The committee members agreed that a more aggressive approach is needed and that a proposed ordinance should be drafted to address this situation Ms. Hemandez noted that the City must lead by example and referred to an abandoned house owned by the city; Mr Speck indicated that the house was scheduled for demolition later in the week. Mr Lancaster indicated that an ordinance would be drafted for review Return to future CAP with a DRAFT Ordinance. C. Discussion of Rental Housing Licensing Ordinance1Proposal Ms. Stetson referred to a report, "Housing Needs Assessment and Condition Survey,' conducted in June 2004. Should the City require a Rental Housing License and inspection for all rental dwelling units? There are more multi family rentals than single family units, more renters than homeowners, over 40% of the renter occupied housing units are rated as needing maintenance, and a large number of housing units are overcrowded. Currently, City of Tukwila requires a license for five or more units. Ms. Stetson researched this issue and provided case studies from cities across the United States on programs that have been implemented, She reviewed the program implemented in the City of Hopkins, Minnesota which is similar to the demographics of the City of Tukwila. The implementation of this program assisted the city in ensuring minimum housing standards and helped bring structures into compliance. A 20 -page educational packet was developed to present the information in a clear and concise manner It addresses all items address numbering, debris, landscape maintenance, junk vehicles, fire protection standards and outlines the inspection program and penalties. Since its inception in Hopkins, Minnesota, all buildings have come into compliance and they have not had to revoke one license. Tenants no longer have to be fearful of landlord reporting code violations because of the routine inspections. It has improved the substandard living conditions of many units. Tenants are more aware of their rights. Ms. Stetson indicated that many tenants living in Tukwila do not exercise their rights and are afraid to complain. This is even more difficult if there is a language barrier Ms. Hemandez commented that if everyone is expected to j comply with the same standards, it is easier to understand and enforce. Mr Duffie noted that this Community Affairs Parks Committee 2 August 15, 2006 would assist landlords in documenting their unit during the inspection process in cases where the tenant causes substantial damage. King County Housing Authority routinely inspects their units every six months. Ms. Stetson conveyed that the inspection process would not be a structural inspection. Once it has been inspected. it could then be done when a unit is vacant or every three years. Ms. Hernandez asked if this program could be implemented with current staff. Ms. Stetson conveyed that a license could either be issued through City Clerk' office or Code Enforcement, Department of Community Development. The inspections would be a challenge as the program is initially implemented. Ms. Stetson indicated that the number of occupants per unit could also be addressed to ensure there is not overcrowding. Ms. Berry referred to the Hillsborough County inspection program, 2 paragraph, of the rental housing inspection program. It states, .establish a proactive approach to enforcing Minimum Housing Standards rather than relying on a complaint driven system. .because no one ever complains due to fear of possible eviction. Lower income tenants are the most vulnerable to unsafe and indecent living conditions. They are also least likely to report v olations.. Ms. Berry asked if Hillsborough instituted safeguards or through the inspections, there is no need for tenants to make complaints. Mr Lancaster believed that due to the inspections, it takes the pressure off of tenants. The inspectors show up on an annual basis and this has been a proven method to improve the quality of life. Ms. Stetson noted that it is difficult for tenants to find a lavryer who will assist them in processing their complaints through Washington State's current tenant/landlord act. Mr Duffle believed that this would protect the residents and help bring many structures into compliance with minimum housing standards. Ms. Stetson related that the City of Pasco's ordinance regarding inspections is being challenged in the courts. A decision is expected to be rendered by the end of the year Ms. Linder suggested that the registration process could be implemented prior to the inspection component being added while this is being handled. Mr Pace indicated -that a proposed ordinance could -be drafted -for discussion-and consideration. Ms. .Stetson suggested that workshops could be offered to help educate landlords and tenants or possibly telecast this information. Mr Duffle stressed the importance of working with the residents and soliciting input from them. He felt that this would be a valuable program. The City could certainly use the information gathered from other cities as a starting point. Ms. Linder pointed out that this would improve the housing stock in the City of Tukwila. Real estate values would increase for all property owners. Ms. Stetson referred to accessory dwelling units which may or may not be a rental unit. Mr Pace suggested that a registry be created and all accessory building units who registered would be grandfathered; any others discovered at a later time would need to meet current building standards. The Committee agreed that this is a program they would like to implement and asked that a proposed Ordinance be drafted for their review Return to future CAP with a DRAFT Ordinance. D. Consultant for Shoreline Master Program Update Mr Pace related that the City of Tukwila received a S65,000 grant from Department of Ecology to prepare an updated Shoreline Master Program (SMP). The City has designated S48,000 to pay for consultant services to assist in the update of its SNIP Staff is recommending that a contract be executed with Adolfson Associates to undertake this work. Forward to August 28 Committee of the Whole meeting. Old Business: Mr. Lancaster has been in contact with the City of SeaTac's Land Use Parks Committee to arrange for an informal joint meeting with this committee. October 12 was identified as a tentative date to get acquainted. Ms. Linder sought clarification on the requirements for emergency training for council member and possible impacts on grant funding. This will be researched. Adjournment: 6:30 p.m. Committee Chair Approval Minutes by DJ. Contract No. CONTRACT FOR SERVICES This Agreement is entered into by and between the City of Tukwila, Washington, a noncharter optional municipal code city hereinafter referred to as "the City and Adolfson Associates hereinafter referred to as "the Contractor", whose principal office is located at 5309 Shilshole Ave. N.W.. Sprite 2nn Seattle. WA 98107. WHEREAS, the City has determined the need to have certain services r L ed for its citizens but does not have the personnel or expertise to perform such services; and WHEREAS, the City desires to have the Contractor perform such services pursuant to certain terms and conditions; now, therefore, 1N CONSIDERATION OF the mutual benefits and conditions hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Scone and Schedule of Services to be Performed by Contractor. The Contractor shall perform those services described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth. In performing such services, the Contractor shall at all times comply with all Federal, State, and local statutes, roles and ordinances applicable to the performance of such services and the handling of any fonds used in connection therewith. Tne Contractor shall request and obtain prior written approval from the City if the scope or schedule is to be modified in any way 2. Comnensation and Method of Payment. The City shall pay the Contractor for services rendered according to the rate and method set forth on Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Tne total amount to be paid shall not exceed S4 8.000.00, 3. Contractor Budget The Contractor shall apply the funds received under this Agreement within the maximum limits set forth in this Agreement. The Contractor shall request prior approval from the City whenever the Contractor desires to amend its budget in any way 4. Oration of Agreement This Agreement shall be in ivll force and effect for a period commencing Sentember 5, 2005 and ending lime 90. 2007 unless sooner terminated under the provisions hereinafter specified 5, Independent Contractor. Contractor and City agree that Contractor 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 errploym between the parties hereto. Neither Contractor nor any employee of Contractor 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 cordributing to the State Industrial insurance Program, or otherwise assuming the duties of an employer with respect to the Contractor, or any employee of the Contactor. 6. Indemnification. The Contractor shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents and employees, from and against any and all claims, losses or liability, inn ding attorney's fees, arising from injury or death to persons or d®age to property occasioned by any act, omission or failure of the Contractor, its officers, agents and employees, in perfuming the work reqaired by this Agreement With respect to The performance of this Agreement and as to claims against the City, its officers, agents and employees, the Contractor expressly waives its immunity under Tdle 51 of the Revised Code of Washington, the Industrial Insurance Act, for injuries to its employees, and agrees that the obligation to indemnify, defend and hold harmless provided for in this paragraph extends to any claim brought by or an behalf of any employee of the Contractor. This waiver is mutually negotiated by the parties. This paragraph shall not apply to any damage resulting from the sole negligence of the City, its agents and employees. To the extent any of the daages referenced by this paragraph were caused m ed by or resulted from the comment negligence of the City, its agents or employees, this obligation to indemnify, defend and hold harmless is valid and enforceable only to the extent of the negligence of the Contractor, its officers, agents, and employees. 7. Record Keening and Reverting. A. The Contractor shall maintain accounts and records, including personnel, property, -gnan"iaa and programmatic records which sufficiently and properly reflect all direct and indirect costs of any nature expended and services performed in the performance of this Agreement and other such records as may be deemed necessary by the City to ensse the performance of this Agreement. 53 CL Ptnehaf2 t311rems AM $ViA5-2076 Sbadis Ccz1'CS ^_W CB nzil. A— Contract for Services Shoreline Master Program Update B. These records shall be maintained for a period of seven (7) years after termination hereof unless permission to desitu} them is granted by the office of the archivist in accordance withRCW Chapter 40.14 and by the City. 8. Audits and Inspections. The records and documents with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement shall be subject at all times to inspection, review or audit by law during the performance of this Agreement 9. Termination. This Agreement may at any time be terminated by the City giving to the Contractor thirty (30) days written notice of the City's intention to terminate the same. Failure to provide products on schedule may result in contract termination. 10. Discrimination Prohibited. The Contractor shalt not discriminate against any employee, applicant far employment, or any person seeking the services of the Contractor to be provided under this Agreement on the basis of race, color, religion, creed, sex, age, national origin, marital status or presence of any sensory, mental or physical handicap. 11. Amaianment and Subcontract. The Contractor shall not assign or subcontract any portion of the services coentplatedby this Agreement without the written consent of the City 12. Emirs A,3eement This Agreement ccmtains the enure Agreement between the parties hereto and no other Agreements, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement, shall be deemed to exist or bind any of the parties hereto. Either party may request changes in the a Proposed changes which are mutually agreed upon shall be incorporated by written amendments to this Agreement 13. Notices. Notices to the City of Tukwila sh all be sent to the following address: City Clerk (Sty of Tukwila 6200 Sonthcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 Notices to the Contractor shall be sent to the address provided by the Contractor upon the signature line below. 14. Annlicabie Law; Venue: Attorney's Fees, This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. In the event any suit, arbitration, or other proceeding is instituted to enforce any tam of this Agreement, the parties specifically understand and agree that venue shall be „...,„4„, laid in King County, Washington. The prevailing party in any such action shall be entitled to its attomey's fees and costs of suit DATED this day of 20 CITY OF TUKWILA CONTRACTOR Ib& f`Sdid CG Mayor, Steven M. Mullet Tate: sgi9eaY t/G ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: PrimedNeme: L40 yb -S ,e/AJ eort_- Jane E. Cantu, CMC, City Clerk ADDRESS• s S0 9 /GSto°L lety cow 5PP fl ‘o t7 7 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of the City Attorney BY. 5z" CL PEga sZ C!Iv1L` 699T:O Air Q4h'p5.2W6 S2rdbs Ccztrc&& 13ci&'C EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF WORK ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC, City of Tukwila SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM UPDATE The following tasks are numbered according to the City's Scope of Work for the Shoreline Master Program Update, as defined by the Department of Ecology Grant Contract (SMA Grant Agreement No.G0600234). This scope of work includes all tasks specified in the grant with anticipated consultant involvement. The total amount of the work shall not exceed $48,000 unless the Contract and Scope of Work are amended. The work shall be divided into two phases, with the first phase budget not to exceed $3 8,500. The second phase budget shall not exceed $9,500. Work on Phase 2 tasks shall not proceed until authorized by DCD staff This scope of work has been designed to comprehensively and efficiently approach the SMP Inventory, focusing on the most necessary requirements for compliance with the Shoreline Management Act and its associated guidelines. We the hours within the tasks identified on Exhibit 1 (budget) may fluctuate, Adolfson's level of effort will be limited to the hours and budget specified in the contract, unless otherwise amended by the City PHASE 1 Task 4: Inventory Task 4.1. Review existing data and identify data gaps Review existing information relevant to complete the shoreline inventory and characterization report and map folio (Task 6). This will focus on the current SMP and work prepared between 1999 and 2003 in an earlier SMP update effort, including inventory work documented in the Inventory of Shoreline Habitat and Riparian Conditions of the Green/Dulvamish River Within the City of Tukwila (Puttee Environmental, January 7, 2003). This task will also include review of other adopted City plans, such as the Draft Tukwila Urban Center Plan and the Master Plan for the South Annexation Area; plans prepared by other jurisdictions, such as the WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plan; and identification of areas of Tukwila's shorelines under other jurisdictions' SMPs. Identify gaps in data sources for inventory elements defined in WAC 173 26-201(3)(c). Task 4.2. Data Collection Coordinate with City staff to collect relevant city plans and technical reports as defined above in Task 4.1. Coordinate with City GIS staff to identify and acquire readily available mapping data to supplement the shoreline inventory referenced above to update existing information consistent with current shoreline requirements defined in WAC 173- 26- 201(3)(c). SS 8 /12/2006 Page 1 of 6 Exhibit A— Scope of Work Tukwila Shoreline Master Program Update Assumptions for Task 4: City GIS staff will assemble and deliver City owned GIS data, including data prepared by Pentec associated with the 2003 shoreline inventory report City GIS staff will acquire and deliver other readily available mapping data from other sources. City staff will coordinate with King County to obtain information and provide it to the consultant. Deliverables and Due Date for Task 4: Results of Task 4 work will be incorporated into the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report and Map Folio (Task 6). Data review and collection completed and working bibliography delivered by October 15, 2006 Task 5: Analysis of Shorelines Conduct preliminary analysis of the information and data collected in Task 4 that complies with the requirements of the SUP guidelines. The analysis will focus on the following. Task 5.1. Characterization of ecosystem -wide processes Analyze shoreline natural resources utilizing relevant available scientific and technical information such as data and planning documents from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and data collected for the WRIA 9 planning process. The analysis will encompass shoreline use and water quality issues, assessment of ecosystem-wide processes, assessment of ecological functions (existing and potential) and assessment of effects from historical land use change. Using existing and readily available mapping data for aquatic resources, wetlands, and floodplains, the characterization of ecosystem -wide processes will delineate boundaries and map the land and water area contained within the approximate minimum SMA jurisdiction. Task 5.2. Characterize shoreline functions: Separate the length of the shoreline into reaches based on land use and ecological processes, integrating work already performed in 2000 -2001 and describe the fractions associated with each reach to: Detail the physical, biological and land use components within the shoreline jurisdiction; and Evaluate and assess shoreline ecological function based on current scientific understanding of the relationship between the conditions of ecosystem -wide processes and conditions within shoreline jurisdiction. r 5.3. Identify opportunities for protection, restoration, public access and shoreline use. -8/18/2006 Pogo of Exhibit A— Scope of Work Tukwila Shoreline Master Program Update Identifypotential opportunities and possible constraints to the protection and restoration of ecological fimctions. Identify current public access and opportunities for future access sites. Estimate future demand for water dependent and associated water related uses, per WAC 173 -26 2O1(3)(d)(ii). Identify opportunities for SMA preferred shoreline uses and potential conflicts based on current use patterns and projected trends. Assumptions for Task 5: Adolfson GIS staff will create a data layer representing the minimum SMA jurisdiction and will divide the jurisdiction based on inventory reaches. City GIS staff will use the layer as a framework for analysis and mapping to quantify and characterize various elements of the shoreline inventory (e.g., land use and zoning, documented habitat and species use, etc.). Adolfson will use and interpret the results of GIS analysis (tables and spreadsheets provided by City GIS) in drafting the analysis report (Task 6). This task does not include collection of environmental measurement data that would require the preparation of a Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan as identified under Item 7 of the SMA Grant Agreement. Deliverables and Due Date for Task 5: Results of Task 5 work will be incorporated into the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report and Map Folio (Task 6) by November 15, 2006 Task 6: Prepare Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Analysis Report and Map Folio Task 6.1. Prepare DRAFT Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Analysis Report and Map Folio Prepare draft report with accompanying maps that summarizes the analysis, findings and information and data collected in Tasks 4 and 5. This will include refined shoreline jurisdiction boundaries and maps. The maps will begin at a macro, vicinity -wide scale with watershed boundaries and continue with several additional iterations of maps that examine and document the shoreline at Smaller scales. The maps will focus on information such as identified shoreline reaches, and significant geologic, hydrologic and ecologic features. Task 6.2. Prepare FINAL Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Analysis Report and Map Folio Prepare final report and map folio to address comments from Department of Ecology Assumptions for Task 6: Adolfson will coordinate with City GIS staff to determine the member, content, and scale of maps to be included in the map folio. City GIS staffwill prepare the maps. 8/18/2006 Page 3 of 6 E*hibit A Scope of work Tukwila Shoreline Master Program Update Deliverable due dates assume two weeks for City staff review and comment and two weeks for Adolfson to incorporate revisions. Adolfson will coordinate with City GIS staff to determine appropriate map revisions based on Ecology comments. City GIS staff will produce the maps. Deliverable due dates assume six weeks for Ecology staff review and comment and two weeks for Adolfson to incorporate revisions. Adolfson will author the Draft and Final Analysis Reports. Deliverables and Due Date for Task 6.1: Preliminary draft shoreline analysis report for City review November 15, 2006; Revised draft for submittal to Ecology December 15, 2006 Deliverables and Due Date for Task 6.2: Final shoreline analysis report and all GIS data developed for the analysis February 15, 2007 Task 7: Develop Shoreline Environment Designations The environment designations proposed in 2001 will be reviewed to determine if modifications are needed to make them consistent with the intent of the State SMA and new Ecology guidelines. Final maps will be prepared that Compare existing shoreline environment designations with the proposed designations; and Identify land and water area contained in mapped shoreline designations boundaries. A technical memorandum that provides recommendations and rationale for maintaining or changing shoreline designations will accompany maps. Assumptions for Task 7: City staff will coordinate. with adjacent jurisdictions to determine whether it is appropriate to use the same environment designations. Adolfson will coordinate with City GIS staff. City staffwill prepare GIS data and maps depicting existing and proposed shoreline environment designations. Adolfson will author the technical memo. Deliverables and Due Date for Task 7: Digital copy and three hard copies of technical memorandum and draft map with proposed shoreline environment designations February 15, 2007 Task 8: Restoration Plan Task 8.1. Begin Restoration Plan 58 8/18/2006 Page 4 of 6 Exhibit A— Scope of Work Tukwila Shoreline Master Program Update Begin work on a technical memorandum addressing restoration to promote improvements in shoreline ecological functions over time, where feasible. The restoration plan will take into account existing governmental and non governmental programs and plans related to restoration and will identify technical and financial resources available for restoration projects and incentives to encourage property owner initiated restoration. The plan will aim to restore shorelines in economically sustainable ways. The restoration plan will build on findings and restoration opportunities identified in the analysis report and maps. It will incorporate goals and policies for restoration and priorities for implementation. This plan will also incorporate restoration areas identified by the WRIA 9 process. Assumptions for Task 8: City GIS staff will prepare any maps to accompany the restoration plan. Work on the restoration plan during Phase 1 will be focused on restoration policies and finding opportunities. Deliverables and Due Dates for Task 8.1; Results of Task 8.1 work will be incorporated into Task 8.2 deliverables during Phase 2. PHASE 2 —WORK TO PROCEED WHEN AUTHORIZED BY DCD STAFF Anticipated deliverable due dates shown below are subject to revision based on the date of notice to proceed Task 8: Restoration Plan Task 8.2. Complete Restoration Plan Complete technical memorandum addressing restoration as described in Task 8.1. Assumptions for Task 8: City GIS staff will prepare any maps to accompany the restoration plan. Deliverable due dates assume two weeks for City staff review and comment and one week for Adolfson to incorporate revisions. Dates assume four weeks for Ecology review and that the fin al draft will be submitted as an element of the SMP. (Task 10). Work on the restoration plan during Phase 2 will be focused on identifying restoration priorities and implementation strategies. Deliverables and Due Dates for Task 8.2: Preliminary Draft Restoration Plan and Implementation Strategy Technical Memorandum January 26, 2007; Revised Draft February 15, 2007; Final Plan April 30, 2007 8/182005 Page 5 of 6 Exhibit A— Scope of work Tukwila Shoreline Master Prop Update Task9: Cumulative impacts Analysis Once draft SMP goals, policies, environment designations, and regulations are developed, Adolfson will provide a framework to evaluate cumulative impacts of the revised draft SMP to assess the standard of "no net loss of' ecological functions" referenced in the guidelines. Adolfson will provide an outline for a technical memorandum and relevant examples from past projects. Adolfson will review and comment on the draft technical memorandum once prepared by City staff Assumptions for Task 9: City staff will draft the technical memorandum with input and coordination from Adolfson. If needed, City staff will revise SMP policies, environment designations and other proposed regulations based on the cumulative impacts analysis. City staff will use the technical memorandum to support preparation of a SEPA Checklist. City staff will provide GIS analysis and mapping to support preparation of the technical memorandum if needed. Deliverables and Due Date for Task 9: Cumulative Impacts Technical Memorandum Outline May 15, 2007 Task 10: Draft Shoreline Master Program Task 10.1. Revise Draft SMP. At the direction of City stag support City staff in review, evaluation, and preparation of revised Draft SMP. Elements may include review of draft policies prepared in 2000 -2001; revision of draft policies; and/or development of new policies and regulations. Assumptions for Task 10: City staff will direct Adolfson for support on specific elements at their discretion, within the hours and budget specified for the tank Deliverables and Due Date for Task 10: Contributions to the draft SMP goals, policies, and regulations April 30, 2007 U 3 8/18/1006 Page 6 of 6 m -1'< -1 CO 9 g -1 ti: -i ^i' -y 9 g fl .=i ni i, -3 -1-A -F:' 'p' ?a i G 6 p A F F w .G w M F Z p 3 g F Pi.; S x x x 5 x x p ro i m c S Y D m s a ?9 p n D o 3 if= til 'a° cm: m N t1 m a m c m a CA pl 1 .RS N .a D m u 'r. p N p m_ :a Ll til u fir; CO 8 �7 m 3' F p 6 a O g D •afr v a a °a N -1 0 1:30 p e t -1 103j n O el O O ei ,3 ca m o p 8 gig ar 3 3i of 1 -1 v_ p a fl a as c33=1 a �1 O° v 4L g S U La N i a a v e -;'al g R pe nm Z 9 Tn Et c G ai A n o o a o c y i a c iii c o pp 3< 0 0° O O°_ a: o c 7 g S S u to •c v ay o i;3 0 p 3 p O c39c 3 a e:aao an g one 0 e, g 3 3m 7 3 gA g S. no-. r- o g36 ii re' t 9 3 3 o =i g -.3 i3 m `v =i 0 u y O M 3 A C p= a p t. a 3 p v 1,1' g e v 3,va' ka. C 5 s 4= g gg p j s V i e a a s C �ep Q o 4 al .0 ty e n v El S c g i, g E': a a o gr T p al p 9 a s a jg 0 fi p o a a: 6 N y 3 .i p- p C e 9 r Y, F to N 21 IK 1 e- N r a 5 q N v F `y. N P N 2 ar N O m Zia. f 41 3 s o n1 a N A N m a m "i a a a m m -p ry� O m SCR O a N o d m 4 :14! ml f I o e e m i p I q o 4 a e m m c. 9 A n ti -i to S iF j L L 3 4 O f y t 99 ium 'ma m is m o�i m m mm o� p CN s. z. At S iL a ih a N q N m y a m 4 p v i v: ez= m F j ai r. s w F M 1 m Si rt Yr N o fF a e a m m m m m a o C e t '444 N N P L w 1 a N g N a r'l a CO Co a O P. y 4 ggi N �C r_ is €f w 3 9 FF p f o p N N N N 21 a m N N ft o b e S L a a a a i t M m a S ca 0 a d N a 43- 12110/02-..n --5 a m m e 4 c m a "4 m (i p d m m m 41 m V la T ia irl -I O m O N e e F� O O m 3 m N A m p a m a m m ?i O mo 0 6 N o m o c 5' a o a o o o Kl o oa o o o a a o o co e o o -f o o o o 00 o eo oca ooe k; 6l