HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2005-02-14 Item 2A - Presentation - Klickitat / Southcenter Parkway and I-5 Access Design COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS
t y' Yu/laic ITEi1NO.
la' j
4 a 0 1 Meetinz Date Prepared bt 1 Matvr't review I Council review 1
r` 1 2/14/05 I CK r0 5....,
I I I a 0,_
tsoa I I 1 I
I I I I I
ITEM INFORMATION
CAS NUMBER: 05-016 I ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: FEBRUARY 14, 2005
AGENNDA ITEM TITLE Presentation Klickatat /Southcenter Pkwy /I 5 Access Revision
CATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other
lftg Date 2/14/05 MI Dat AUg Dat. TUg Date tg Date Mg Dot. AUg Dote
SPONSOR Council Mlfayor Adm Secs DCD Finanx Fin Legal Pt t Police PIV I
SPONSOR'S In 2003, a design was selected known as "Modified 3 -B which was a flyover ramp. As
SUMMARY questions arose on constructability, three design consultants were shortlisted to complete a
feasibility and cost benefit analysis and look at other alternatives. A $10,000 stipend was
offered in retum for their proposals. HNTB offered a combination bridge under the northbound
lanes and over the southbound lanes. This option requires less WSDOT approval, less mall land,
and can be constructed in phases. Negotiations are underway with HNTB and the design
agreement will return to Council for approval. This presentation will describe HNTB's proposed
design.
REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA&P Cmte FRJS Cmte Transportation Cmte
Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm Phonin Comm.
DATE: 1/24/05
RECOMMENDATIONS:
SPONSOR /ADMIN. Approve selection of HNTB as the design team and begin negotiations.
COMMITTEE Forward to COW for discussion
COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED CITY FUNDS REQUIRED
$1,000,000 $500,000
Fund Source: 104.02 Commercial Streets (page 42, 2005 CIP)
Comments: Expected Mitigation of $525,000 in 2005.
MTG. DATE 1 RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 1
2/14/05 1 1
I I
1
I I
MTG. DATE I ATTACHMENTS
1 2/14/05 1 Information Memo dated January 18, 2005 I
1 Consultant's Selection Worksheets 1
1 Transportation Committee Meeting Minutes from January 24, 2005
I
1 1
Il'I~OR1'L\TION I\1El\IO
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
Mayor Mullet
Public Works Direct~
January 18, 2005
Klickitat Desil!ll- Proiect No, 84-RW19
Consultant Selection
ISSUE
Update Mayor and Transportation Committee on the design consultant selection process.
BACKGROUND
In March 2003, the City held a charette with community stakeholders (such as City staff, WSDOT,
Westfield Mall) on the existing and future needs of the KIickitat aCCess area to the Southcenter area.
Using the information found during the charette, City staff and the comultant team working on the
TukwiIa Urban Center plan developed a report on potential solutions for the area's congestion. That
report, Southcenter/Tukwila Urban Center Access Improvement Project: Evaluation of Options Summary
Report, recommended a solution known as "Modified 3-B."
Multiple attempts at securing grant funding were made throughout 2004 but none were successful. At
this point, only S500,000 of City funds is secured for the design of this project, but impact mitigation fees
ITOm the Westfield Mall expansion and other potential developments could be collected in 2005. There
are also some potential sources of funding (Sl million federal appropriation and Boeing mitigation
monies) that could solidify in 200512006. Staff estimate approximately S3.5 million could be necessary
to fully design the improvements and have construction drawings ready for bid.
As funding was being pursued in 2004, some question arose as to the comtructability of Modified 3-B.
Staff decided to utilize an unusual approach to hiring a consultant team. A short list of three firms was
selected ITom the Statement of Qualifications submitted in September 2004. The teams short listed were
Berger/ABAl\1, HNTB, and DMJM+Harris, all large, national f"mns. The three f"1IDIS short listed were
offered a stipend of $10,000 in return for their proposal, which included a feasibility analysis of Modified
3-B, a feasibility analysis of an option of the consultant's selection if they felt another option would be
better, and a cost-benefit analysis on both options. Staff felt that this process would yield the best
qualified engineering team as well as accomplish some requirements for environmental review on an
accelerated time schedule.
At~AL YSIS
The competitive process was scored by the selection panel made up of Cyndy Knighton - Senior Engineer
and Project Manager, Bob Giberson - Acting City Engineer, Robin Tischmak - Senior Engineer, Jill
Mosqueda - Development Engineer, and Moira Bradshaw - Senior Planner. The scoring consistently
placed the HNTB team in flrst place.
The recommended solution put forth by HNTB is different trom Modified 3-B. It has many benefits that
Modified 3-B does not haye, including the possibility for phasing which is important in today's economic
climate.
RECmDIEi\1)ATION
Approve the selection ofHNIB as the design team and authorize staff to begin negotiations on scope and
fee for the work.
p:'C)l1dy\~dickilat\inforrnati(}n TT1W'rO - design consultant selection 1-18-05.doc
Southcenter Access Improvement Project
Klickitat Drive / Southcenter Parkway Area
-
E ""
%~~gE-
e.~.aClg
c.Q.9'C:'-9i
o.~GOi:-
e~:5/'~
O'I%~ ci'I~
Sl8'B-Eg
'O__€.<'iS-
'!) ~ ~ gO
E.a(1:iO-g'
g (l1 3- ~:a ~
(/'1:2. . <'is c::3
~::>,~g~~
~goQ~-
%.u.~.so'&
o-o":1w"O.s
c:gg~so
g
-0
~
-0
1.\
'6c
"'%
%0
~6
,,"",
'" '"
","
",-0
ijj.s
t t
~(!$
'" e
'0 <!
~~
~~
%a
..Go
,. ...
0$
... '"
'gg
-$;
~~
'" 0
~~
:;:
'$ ...
~O
~~
$;3<:
~,g.
~~
~-ci.
6";:%
gEQ
.g G-
.9i5-g~
~ c:. -000
~o"""-o"O
_~Q..-a
~% .~~
c:. CroW
'6~,gcc
c: f,f} ';:i .9 0
(:)015"'0$
(f,o.v1c:g
Q e c:2 Q
-00.0.:6
s~gb'8
-o~u;o~
,o.-?(/)'O
gg~$'6
7:f,
~..
'S
:\ ~
~ ~
<>
o~-o ~-
:?;-)a~%' ci
~5~~2\c:.%
~.o:S i4. Qgg
~OOCD'.G.~~
~3.DUic:-tr)-o-
b~oQ~b '5
o~c-c)~<I'>:Q-
rJ)~~#-g~6~
-::;j;_o<>"';:"
s;$-g~~EE~
5(/)"o-Q-......:=::
~_ c:. o.Q: ::--0;;::; g
c~~~~~~~
O(/)€":(\r-o~~o
oQ.c:;c-s(:)~'s
"7'082o~E$
&o.~'Q~c:.,s~
~~ 8-
(;) Q G
s:.':2E~(i:~
,g .G9 ,00
~~b$~3
1J),gE~~-g
5'6 \? ;: &~
~eo.~~.g
gg~g,,"<>
<'is c;. t:....5 ci
~g.~8~-oC:
x.=.~-o~Qo
~5'5<iE'&';,
2""%8;:g%"~
-t:......eO-ow3
o Q 00 Q .!. ~
~~"O{j)6~~
a:E "-::;,,,0 "
'j
<II
"t:
~S
~~
;<0
~~
0"-
<II
o
'"
;;;;0
.s::.g~
" ",'"
",,'"
e~Q) ...-
%,S5 '0
l"1 2!; '+"" 0-
~:;o €
5 6 ~ (;)
~.gD ~
o(/Jo ~
~Eo e.
t~~g1
u-Ucia.~
1 1 ...: 0 ~
~
~O<:6
(:::. '5
~ g~\
"\5),0;
:>;;;:; 0
-0--
~%~
" u. '"
(j). 0-
~(.g
5'5g
~ <fJ "
23 G
I t E
~
\c: ~ '5
c:; ,--:;::;
5, ~9,""
~ oc.s
c-o-,~t.J
ooo,",$:
~ 0 s:;. 0.. 0-
%(.9 V'.-o <J)
.... . IJ) 0 <)
o~fiiO-:S
,SO-Z'o::o--
o.gf3()-g
" t: g T,J" 0
5- ,",'-
~~g3-~
Q3,\>q}~C:
oc:~w~9
c; 0' ,,') z-tC1 "5
"9O?c;~J:t"O
O(Q8(')~1iJ
g
"
,O!J
'" '"
q) -a .
Z'c:-u
~Qc::I
QO e.
'e~g:
-;::. en GI
a,,'"
~~~
~g-%
00..0-
-0"0%
o " '"
8,,5
." '"
813
0>'"
i:"E
a'"
7 i>\
!!!.-o
'" "
Z'''
.. "
~.g
'6.a~
-egg
O"J~O
s:.-'"
",""'"
5 -0 c:.
~gg
~tO{
.,...-,""'" ~ <J}
~~g~~
:::~-oEe.
o_"5oQ
~~o~~
"'7>."
g(l)r5-g..g-i
~~8~cG%
'2. b 0..2 ~ '"
-.,-.;:; 0 G""'" ""
1 <:( o..o..~~
3':!!!.'" 07
~o.s:=.s:;.o.s
Q(ii_r~\-:"
~~~'bi~g
~~~o80
U) 0:> 0 (I) 0 (I)
ogoo,oo
cnoU'l-.....-
ro-g
.,,<11'"
(i)Q\J) E
(; ~~~(I)(')Q
~!~~~8~$
::z \-' 0' "5 (') o51
o ,,(') "06- ,...
o:;;..&OCo~o
o.~:;3'S~O~
0-- ...a -c. -c) <)
<q,&5~OO~-5
gg~B~e~E
-g~5:SC.~gg
E'-o",-0"5
g~.go~5~-;;~
'i'J~EE."::O-"S~~
g~o:s-aOOO~
~1:\%~~~,g~~
~
~
"%
,~
-
!i!-
f;;
g ~
~ ~
~ "'
o !/J t'$
f:(i'i -5.
"'5-t;~
~ a~
o~ ~c2)~
~g-~~~~
o.......O-~~~o
-'0" -~-
Si:"i"S~E~
t ~ (/) ~ g 1 (;)
'6
-ri. ~ B.
~ QtI)Qo:::::2
G>"5~iS-".--~~
- -oQ =?-
Bg~o.C:Og.s
)(~t:.Eg....... ~
o.ag;.,.f/)~~O
n~Q~-%~ag
~'B'5~.s .~.p
,z: ..... 3- c 'to . Q
(')O-__Q)$'o'
E."'O(Qg OO(i)~
cP:oGro~o""".p-
~Q<II;: -~""\%
.'" C) c:) d) 4) '" 7:>~ ~
-g . ~ ~~ ~5 cn-o.
t::.gt;'1~<<i~ c.(.()
o"'t~C~~~~
o.aC)c::g~ ro-
o. g~~4.?S: c..:(
"
.- ~ -0$
(!) ro. (;) D
>- ~1Ji~-o
~ gg~2
~,o~'8j;'"
() o~ :=' ~ 8-
o.~Q~>-;!.
gf5,.-g,g
CM'-cJ'5~<:;
o ",""-<i""
o~~\2'6-'
.;_c:(.i)oc:.
~~9~3e
S: g~E~.
3' . ~ c;:i 0."'0
... $ Q . $ ro e
~o.-~wo!/l~
6~&:~F=~g
Transportation Committee
January 24,2005
Jim Haggerton; Chair
Joe Duffie
Pam Carter
Jim Morrow
Bob Giberson
Gail Labanara
Robin Tischmak
Frank Iriarte
Pat Brodin
Cyndy Knighton.
Rhonda Berry
Lisa Vemer
Lucy Lauterbach
Brent Carson
David Markley
Dave Kautz
Bill Arthur
Greg Sherlock
1. Boeing Access Road Bridge Deck Proiect Acceptance Concrete Barrier, Inc won the
contract to reconstruct the bridge deck and overlay the Boeing Access Bridge over the railroad.
The work was done last summer, and had one price overrun due to increased depth of bridge
deck removal, repair and bridge deck overlay. The project has been approved, and is ready for
final acceptance. It is within budget. Recommend contract approval on consent agenda of a
Regular Meeting.
2. 2005 Traffic Count Contract Traffic counts are done monthly at 12 locations, and annually
in the CBD. Requests for proposals led to a proposal that is even lower than last year's contract.
Traffic Data Gathering won the contract with a proposal for $5,275. Committee approval.
.
3. 2005 Over1av Staff explained that they did not include KPG, who has done the design for
street overlays for many years in Tuk'wila, to bid, as they are invoJved in top many Tukw.ila
projects already. Three other finns were short-listed, and W &H Pacific was selected. They will
design 43rd Ave: 160'h-end; S. 164lh Military-51"; 49'h Ave. S S.164lh - end; Macadam Road S.
S. of 131stPl- N.ofS.128lh; Macadam Road S. S. 150lh-S. 144th; S. I 15lh Interurban to 40'\ and
tow alternatives: Southcenter Blvd 61 "_66lh; and 42nd Ave. Interurban- S. 124lh, Approve
selection of "V&H to design 2005 overlay to CO"V and Regular Meetings.
~~.
4. Crosswalk ReQuest The School District has asked the City to approved a mid-block
crosswalk at Thorndyke from the school to across S. 150111. The problem is that the parking lot
gets too congested by all the parents who pick their kids up. Some parents wait on the north side
of8. 150111, and with all the traffic, the school thinks it dangerous for kids to be crossing to those
waiting parents. Jim H agreed with Jim M's suggestion that it's a children/parent problem. A
crossing guard could be used instead of a crosswalk, which provides a false sense off safety. Jim
H also noted a better method would be to build the roadway from the parking lot to go around
the school, coming out on the east side of the school. The school had looked at that, and asked if
the City would build it. Committee support for Public Works decision.
1-5. Klickitat Design Consultant Selection A report was done after a charette and study on the
Klickitat area. A Modified 3-B option would have brought a flyover ramp over 1-5 from the
southbound 1-5 lanes. When they asked for design proposals from three finns, they offered
$10,000 if the finns would look at Option 3-B and analyze its feasibility, cost-benefit, and
perhaps suggest another alternative. The finn HNTB came up with what staff described as an
elegant and simple replacement for the flyover. It is a combination bridge under the northbound
Transportation Committee
January 24 -
Page 2
lanes and over the southbound lanes. Though it costs the same as 3-B, it will take much less
approval time ITom WSDOT, takes less Mall property, and allows for phasing of the project.
Design may cost $3.5 million, with the city now having $500,000. Endorse beginning
negotiation on scope and fee with HNTB; bring issue to CO\V for information.
-
6. Southcenter Parkwav Extension/S. 178'h Alh!llment La Pianta would li.lce the City to
design and build the Southcenter Parkway extension and the 8. 178th realignment by summer,
2007. This also includes the sewer and surface water systems near the roadway. For that to be
possible, design needs to be started immediately, and other projects would have to make room
for this project to proceed very quickly. At the end of November, 2004, the draft EIS ITom
Segale was given to the City. S. 178'h is shown winding around the storm water detention pond
at the north end near S. 180'h. Consti-uction will take two full seasons once the designs are all
finished_ Preloading of the road and utility spaces will be required. 12~-18" of settlement is
expected. The road and utiJity areas will also need to be de-watered throughout construction.
The contracts to construct will need to be advertised by December oftrus year so that
construction can begin in spring. Staffwould li.lce to extend the David Evans contract for
roadway extending the road to 8, 204th. Design is also needed to include both sewer and surface
water also, There is no budget for that design this year yet. There is some risk about designing
the realignment of8. I78th as it may not work for a couple of reasons. Extra design will cost
about $500,000 this year, Options for the funding are the Ending Fund Balance or an offset in
another project. Refer issue to Feb 7 meeting for discussion of options.
7. Level of Service Standards and Concurrencv Because the City's Transportation Element (-":
of the Comprehensive Plan needs to be strengthened, the City need.s to adopt a new standard for
development/concurrency ordinance to be a part of that. Concurrency is a very difficult and
complex issue. It affects how much each new development in the City must pay to mitigate the
impact of their traffic on the area. The level of service (LOS) tolerable at various areas in the
City, as well as the current deficiencies in traffic in the City are part of the problem, Whether to
charge a flat rate to all new businesses in the CBD for example, has to be balanced with the
current practice of requiring a traffic study of the new developments in orderto know the basis to
charge them. To charge everyone a flat rate would require the City to know the traffic needs and
levels of service throughout the CBD, If a business does not meet the LOS decisions must be
made for how to deal with the business. The disadvantage of our current system is it requires the
developer to do a traffic study, and delays the knowledge of how much the developer will need
to pay for mitigation. If the other method were used, the City would estimate city growth for the
coming year, calculate LOS throughout the City, and project the growth of each project's traffic.
It is much simpler for the developers, but requires more work ITom the City. There are many
ways to calculate what LOS the City wants. How the City should measure LOS is one of the first
questions, and how much traffic congestion the City ,viII tolerate is another question. Whether
developers should be charged for traffic at their site only or further afield needs to be answered.
Impact fees cannot be charged for existing deficiencies, maintenance, transit facilities, or
facilities funded by grants or taxes. Cyndy said because it is such a large issue, she will bring it
in smaller pieces when the Council discusses it. Information onlv.
, --riff . . I
~ .... Committee chair approva
--