The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOW 2014-07-14 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETc 40 Tukwila City Council Agenda vi 0 • COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ❖ Jim Haggerton, Mayor Councilmembers + Joe Duffie + Dennis Robertson -9 David Cline, CityAdministrator + Allan Ekberg + Verna Seal De'Sean Quinn, Council President + Kathy Hougardy + Kate Kruller Monday, July 14, 2014, 7:00 PM Tukwila City Hall Council Chambers 1. CALL TO ORDER / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS a. A design update on the Duwamish Hill Preserve. Nate Cormier, SvR Design. b. An update on Sound Transit's long -range plan. Chelsea Levy, Government and Community Relations Officer, and Karen Waterman, Planning and Development Manager. Pg.1 3. CITIZEN COMMENT At this time, you are invited to comment on items not included on this agenda is (p /ease limit your comments to five minutes per citizen). To comment on an item listed on this agenda, please save your comments until the issue presented for discussion. 4. PUBLIC HEARING An ordinance amending the Sign Code to allow limited changes to non - conforming freeway interchange signs. Pg.37 5. SPECIAL ISSUES a. An ordinance amending the Sign Code relating to freeway interchange signs. b. A resolution authorizing the issuance of claims prior to Council approval. c. A discussion on Washington Place Development fee deferral. Pg.37 Pg.45 Pg.71 6. REPORTS a. Mayor b. City Council c. Staff d. City Attorney e. Intergovernmental 7. MISCELLANEOUS 8. EXECUTIVE SESSION 9. ADJOURNMENT Tukwila City Hall is wheelchair accessible. Reasonable accommodations are available at public hearings with advance notice to the City Clerk's Office (206- 433 -1800 or TukwilaCityClerk @TukwilaWA.gov). This notice is available at wwwetukwilawaegov, and in alternate formats with advance notice for those with disabilities. Tukwila Council meetings are audio /video taped. HOW TO TESTIFY If you would like to address the Council, please go to the podium and state your name and address clearly for the record. Please observe the basic rules of courtesy when speaking and limit your comments to five minutes. The Council appreciates hearing from citizens but may not be able to take immediate action on comments received until they are referred to a Committee or discussed under New Business. COUNCIL MEETINGS No Council meetings are scheduled on the 5th Monday of the month unless prior public notification is given. Regular Meetings - The Mayor, elected by the people to a four -year term, presides at all Regular Council Meetings held on the 1st and 3rd Mondays of each month at 7:00 p.m. Official Council action in the form of formal motions, adopting of resolutions and passing of ordinances can only be taken at Regular Council meetings. Committee of the Whole Meetings - Council members are elected for a four -year term. The Council President is elected by the Council members to preside at all Committee of the Whole meetings for a one -year term. Committee of the Whole meetings are held the 2nd and 4th Mondays at 7:00 p.m. Issues discussed are forwarded to the Regular Council meeting for official action. GENERAL INFORMATION At each Council meeting citizens are given the opportunity to address the Council on items that are not included on the agenda during CITIZENS COMMENTS. Please limit your comments to 5 minutes. Special Meetings may be called at any time with proper public notice. Procedures followed are the same as those used in Regular Council meetings. Executive Sessions may be called to inform the Council of pending legal action, financial, or personnel matters. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearings are required by law before the Council can take action on matters affecting the public interest such as land -use laws, annexations, rezone requests, public safety issues, etc. Section 2.04.150 of the Tukwila Municipal Code states the following guidelines for Public Hearings: 1. The proponent shall speak first and is allowed 15 minutes for a presentation. 2. The opponent is then allowed 15 minutes to make a presentation. 3. Each side is then allowed 5 minutes for rebuttal. 4. Citizens who wish to address the Council may speak for 5 minutes each. No one may speak a second time until everyone wishing to speak has spoken. 5. After each speaker has spoken, the Council may question the speaker. Each speaker can respond to the question, but may not engage in further debate at this time. 6. After the Public Hearing is closed and during the Council meeting, the Council may choose to discuss the issue among themselves, or defer the discussion to a future Council meeting, without further public testimony. Council action may only be taken during Regular or Special Meetings. City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL U��U��U� nnmn ��nnnmn�an n��n��m�~ nmn�~n�n��nn��o��nmn TO: Mayor Haggerton City Council FROM: Brandon J. Miles, Economic Development Planner DATE: July 7, 2014 SUBJECT: Sound Transit's Long Range Plan Update Briefing by Sound Transit ISSUE Staff from Sound Transit will provide a briefing to the City Council regarding the agency's ongoing p 'ent to update ts long range plan. BACKGROUND Sound Transit is currently in the process of updating its Long Range Plan (Plan), The Plan outlines the agency's vision for the high capacity transit (HCT) system serving urban areas in Snohomish, King, and Pierce Counties. The Plan was last updated in 2005 and served as a foundation for voter approval of Sound Transit 2 in November of 2008. Sound Transit has indicated that is hopes to go to the voters in November of 2016 to seek authorization for Sound Transit 3, which would further expand HCT in the region. Prior to a vote, Sound Transit would need to obtain authority from the State Legislature to increase its taxing authority. On June 13, 2014. Sound Transit issued a draft Supplement Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) regarding proposed changes to the Plan. A copy of the Executive Summary to the draft SEIS is attached, The Executive Summary outlines various proposed corridors that Sound Transit may consider providing HCT in the future. Staff is currently reviewing the draft SEIS document and comments are due to Sound Transit on July 28, 2014. The Sound Transit Board will be considering updates to the Plan in fall of 2014, with final action scheduled in December. Sound Transit staff will provide a brief presentation to the City Council regarding proposed changes to the Plan. This presentation will be high level. It is important to note that the Long Range Plan is not fiscally constrained (limited by budget). The Plan presents a wide range of options to provide HCT in the Sound Transit service area. Once the Long Range Plan is adopted, the Sound Transit Board will consider changes to the Service Plan. The Service Plan is fiscally constrained and will set the stage for the actual p jects that will go before the voters as part of a future Sound Transit 3 vote. DISCUSSION Sound Transit Existing Long Range Plan provides many projects andsenioes#la1oOu|dbenofh the City, if implemented. The pr jBota|istadhe|owaFminSoundTnanSit`SexiStingLOngRenge Plan and the revised long range plan, discussed below, builds on these existing projects. These projects are currently not funded. 1. Light Rail, connecting Burien to Tukwila, via SeaTac. Sound Transit is currently stud ingdlispropooed|i0ht rail route (HCT Corridor Studies). The route may be extended to connect West Seattle to Burien, SeaTac, and Tukwila. 2. Increase Parking Capacity at Tukwila/International Blvd Station. INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 Sound Transit's current long range pan includes a project ject to increase parking capacity at the T|BStstion. The amount of needed parking is scheduled to be determined after the stations at South 2OOm Street and the University of Washington open. In 2004. as part of the initial permitting for the Tukwila International Blvd (TIB) Light Rail Station, the City issued a parking determination regarding the minimum number of parking stalls at the station, In 2004, it was presumed that the TIB Station would be the southern station in the Central Light Rail Link, However, Sound Transit has been able to secure funding to extend Light Rail toS.2QO ' Street and a station is currently under construction. The 200th station may relieve parking issues at the TIB Stctinn. Recognizing that conditions had changed, in 2011. the City and Sound Transit signed an agreement regarding parking at the TIB Station. The agreement, included as an attachment to this nnenno, defers the submission of parking studies by Sound Transit until 12 rnonths after the start of operations at both the 2OO Light Rail Station and the station at the University of Washington (UW). There is concern that any relief in parking caused by the opening of the S. 200th Station may be offset by increased parking demand associated with the station at the UW. 3. North Tukwila Light Rail Stations. Sound Transit's current long range plan includes light rail stations near Boeing Access Road and S. 133 m Street; both stations were part of Sound Move', but the placement of these stations was deferred. Initial modeling shows that if both of these stations were in operation it would increase total overall boardings on the Central Link by three percent (5,200 total boardings; 3,200 boardings at Boeing Access Road and 1.900 at S. 133m. ), while only increasing travel time between Kent/Des Moines and Westlake by about two and half minutes. The City's TIB Station would see boardings decrease by about 1,100, thus likely reducing parking demand at the station. The Sabey Corporation has approached the City about moving ahead as quickly as possible with a station near Boeing Access Road. Sabey has stated to the City staff that it is seeing more 4. HCT from Renton to Lynnwood. This route could include light rail and/or bus rapid transit and could help alleviate traffic on Interstate 405. It is unclear if this connection would extend to the City's Sounder Station If extended to the City's Sounder StadiOn, this could also allieviate congestion on State Route 167 and Interstate 5. The City may want to advocate for this extension The following projects, whiohnnaybenefhtheCih/.nnecurrendyshowntob8indudedinthe Long Range PIan Update. 1. New Light Rail Line from North Tukwila to SODO. No specific route has been identified. 2' Light Rail Line from Puyallup/Sumner to Renton, via 167, It is unclear if this would connect to the City's Sounder Station on Long acres way. � Sound Move was the intiaI vote in 'November of 1996 tbat provided Sound Transit its intiaI tax funding. Z:\ Brandon \Sound Transit\ FINAL INFO MEMO, 2014.07.14.doc 2 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 3 . Regional Express bus connecting Renton to Downtown Seattle. This would Hkely go through Tukwila and the City may want to advocate for a stop in the Southcenter area of the City. 4. Regional Express or Bus Rapid Transit, connectinq Tacoma to Bellevue. This would likely go through Tukwila and the City may want to advocate for a stop in the Southcenter area of the City. 5. Regional Express or Bus Rapid Transit, connecting Kent to SeaTac Airport. This route could go through the City and could be used to provide Tukwila South with increased bus transit. O. Regional Express or Bus Rapid Transit, connecting Puyallup to Rainer Valley. This route would likely pass by the City and the City may want to advocate that a stop is provided in the City. 7. Expanded HCT from the Tukwila Sounder Station to Downtown Seattle via Sea-Tac Air0Ort, Buri8n, and West Seattle. This route would expand HCT in the City's Southcenter area of the City. Access to HCT is vital to the City's businesses, residents, and property owners. Additionally, in order for the City's Urban Center and Manufacturing Industrial Center to remain competitive, they must have expansive linkage to HCT connecting the City to the region. Overall, the Sound Transit's current and Jong range plan assist in achieving this goal. The purpose of tonight's meeting is for the Council to have a high level discussion about Sound Transit's Long Range Plan update. The City's Police Department is working with Sound Transit on safety related issues at our light rail station but that topic is not part of the long range plan update and so is not intended to be part of tonight's discussion. Staff intends to have further discussions with the City Council in the coming months regarding Sound Transit's Long Range PIan and the City's advocacy priorities. FINANCIAL IMPACT None. RECOMMENDATION Information Only. ATTACHMENTS • Sound Transit's SEIS Executive Summary. • Dispute Resolution Settlement Agreement Regarding Noise and Parking Between the City and Sound Transit, July of2O11. Z: \Bmndon\Smmdrsmuit\ FINAL INFO MEMO, cowzn.wuoc 4 •11■01.0••■••.■11.1.1,i1.1!•■=111.1W,-. 1 1111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 111111111 iir INTRODUCTION y 1111111111111111111111 Sound Transit is updating its Regional Transit Long-Range Han, which outlines the agency's vision for a high-capacity transit (HCT) system serving the urban areas of Snohomish, King, and Pierce Counties The plan includes corridors for light rail, commuter rail, and regional express bus/bus rapid transit The plan focuses on the functional elements of the system how HCT and supporting services will continue to help meet the transportation needs created by future population and em- ployment growth in the region. Sound Transit is in the process of com- pleting the second phase of its investments, known as Sound Transit 2 (ST2), consistent with the current 2005 Long-Range Han. An updated Long-Range Han will look further ahead by addressing regional transit needs that remain after the ST2 system plan is fully implemented. -11."Ezzafr ilMa As required by the Washington State Environmental Policy Act, this Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) supports Sound Transit's current planning and decision-making efforts for an updated Long-Range Plan and future transit system plan. This Draft SEIS presents a plan-level environmental review of two Long-Range Plan Update alternatives, the Current Plan Alternative (the No Action Alternative) and the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative (the Action Alternative). Each alternative considers broad actions throughout the region—transit modes, corridors, types of sup- porting facilities, programs, and policies. Upon completion of the environmental review process, the Sound Transit Board will decide whether to revise the Long-Range Plan. S-1 5 Regional Transit Long -Range Plan Update iffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffill History and Background of the Regional Transit Long -Range Plan In 1996, Sound Transit developed and adopted its first Regional Transit Long -Range Vision, which later evolved into the agency's Long -Range Plan. At the same time, Sound Transit adopted The "Ten -Year Regional Transit System Plan, which became known as Sound Move. Sound Move was the first phase of investments for im- plementing the Long -Range Vision. The current Long - Range Plan was adopted in 2005 as an update to the original Long -Range Vision. The second phase of invest- ments, the ST2 System Plan, was subsequently adopted in 2008 and is in the process of being implemented. Sound Transit's Long -Range Plan is a fiscally uncon- strained plan that includes services and facilities to connect the region's growth centers with high- capacity transit. The regional transit system currently includes light rail, commuter rail, bus rapid transit (BRT), and re- gional express bus services and facilities. It also includes programs and policies that support these services. Sound Transit's services are integrated with local transit service, providing a "coordinated system of services" to make it easy to move around the region. The envisioned network of transit services described in the Long -Range 6 11 illuilogiii la:Liient:Pid;oro El oolollooplItierei NI ilsiloilloolo p, I 1111111111111111111,1,11111j o Plan is at a corridor -wide level; specific routes or align- ments are not defined. The Long -Range Plan has been implemented in phases through voter - approved funding programs, first through Sound Move and then ST2, which were both fiscally constrained. That is, they were limited by the funds projected to be available. Environmental Review Process This Draft SEIS is part of a phased environmental re- view process. It supplements and builds on the Regional Transit System Plan Final EIS of 1993 (JRPC 1993) and the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on the Regional Transit Long -Range Plan of 2005 (Sound Transit 2005), which were prepared to S -2 support Sound Transit's previous long -range planning efforts. This SEIS process precedes any future proj- ect -level environmental review for individual projects. They may be implemented under future funding pro- grams once ST2 is completed. This Draft SEIS evaluates the potential transportation and environmental effects of implementing the Current Plan Alternative and the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative using a 2040 planning horizon. Corridors in the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative could be selected in whole, or in part, by the Board when updat- ing the plan. Along with other information developed through the update process (e.g., the high- capacity transit corridor studies —see page 12), this SEIS will support the deci- sions of the Sound Transit Board to: • Ensure that the Long -Range Plan continues to meet Sound Transit's goals • Make revisions to update the Long -Range Plan Purpose and Need Purpose The purpose of the Long -Range Plan Update is to define a regional HCT system that could effective- ly and sustainably serve the mobility needs of the central Puget Sound region through 2040 and beyond, providing an alternative to travel by automobile and the congested freeway network. The Long -Range Plan Update will consider the projected regional popula- tion, employment, and transportation growth. This will be done in coordination with, and with the support of, the growth management strategies established in regional land use, transportation, and economic devel- opment plans. Need An update to Sound Transit's Long -Range Plan is need- ed to achieve the following: • Make it consistent with updated local and regional plans Sound Transit's Long -Range Plan is a part of the larger regional transportation picture and feeds into Transportation 2040, the Puget Sound Region's Transportation Plan. Since the 2005 Long -Range Plan was adopted, Transportation 2040, Vision 2040, and other local plans have been updated by the Puget Sound Regional Council, the region's federally June 2014 recognized metropolitan planning organization. County and city comprehensive plans throughout the region reinforce the need for HCT investments to support new and continued population and em- ployment growth, as well as to provide for vibrant urban communities that offer alternatives to travel via the automobile. Sound Transit's Long -Range Plan Update will help support these plans. • Incorporate current population and employment forecasts From a base of more than 2.8 million today, the region's population is expected to grow by over 30 percent to more than 3.7 million in 2040. During the same period, employment is expected to grow even faster, from approximately 1.5 million jobs to over 2.5 million, an increase of 62 percent. The projected increases in population and jobs in the Plan area will result in more congestion. The Long - Range Plan update will address appropriate HCT service to support the anticipated growth. • Identify potential modifications to the plan that could serve as a basis for the next phase of HCT improvements to continue to address long -term mobility needs It has been almost 10 years since the Long -Range Plan was last updated. During that time, several Sound Transit projects have been in varying stages of planning, design, and construction. Sound Tran- sit's system ridership has grown almost 155 percent and is expected to continue to increase. An update to the Long -Range Plan may identify potential new or modified HCT corridors and services. It may also clarify modal choices and services for HCT corridors in the current plan. r The goals of the current Long -Range Plan were re- fined for the Long -Range Plan Update and include the following: • Provide a public high- capacity transportation sys- tem that helps ensure long -term mobility, connec- tivity, and convenience for residents of the central Puget Sound region for generations to come • Strengthen communities' use of the regional tran- sit network • Create a financially feasible system • Improve the economic vitality of the region • Preserve and promote a healthy and sustainable environment Alternativ s C- nsidered in thn SEIS Two alternatives have been developed for evalua- tion in this Draft SEIS: the Current Plan Alternative (the No Action Alternative) and the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative (the Action Alternative). These alternatives include a wide range of high- capacity corridors and modes for purposes of updating the fis- cally unconstrained Long -Range Plan. S -3 7 Regional Transit Long -Range Plan Update iffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffill S -4 8 MAP KEY Current Plan Alternative 11111111111111111111111111111111111111 Light Rail Service 11111111111111111111 High- Capacity Transit III 111111 111111 II Future Light Rail Service MIMI Potential Rail Extensions rifirrifirrifirrr Commuter Rail Service 000 Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Regional Express Bus Service Local Bus Service Sound Transit District Boundary Edmonc Ba M u ki lteo Everett rek.. Ly` Snohomish County Woodihville King County— tl Redmond .r� Seattle West Seattle Qur1a ke elvuei t 'Sammamish� Bur n Sea Des Moines Federal Tacoma\ University, !Place Lakewood t uPon la 0 (1 o 1; li) 0 0 11 0 O 0 O 1,1 11 0 '"J 0 11 Auburn Puyallup q� 'n' Sumrieq Bonney L ke`■ King PiPCPco 01, ••! Thurston County /,6 Pierce County Frederickson Orting 0 N Miles 0 4 8 Figure S -1 Current Plan Alternative 4 June 2014 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement oee IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Development of alternatives Three primary HCT transit technologies and support- ing services were studied in this Draft SEIS —light rail, commuter rail, and regional express bus /BRT. In addi- tion, the Draft SEIS also looked at streetcar services. Each of these modes is further defined in Chapter 2 of the Draft SEIS. Sound Transit conducted a scoping process for the Long -Range Plan Update SEIS in fall 2013. The more than 5,000 comments received helped Sound Transit determine which alternatives and environmental issues would be studied in the Draft SEIS. The Scoping Summary Report for the 2014 Long -Range Plan Update presents more detailed information about the com- ments received. Many suggestions made during scoping were related to corridors and specific services or facilities within HCT corridors already in the Current Plan Alternative. These corridors and "representative projects" (see page S -8) were presumed to be developable under the Current Plan Alternative. Suggestions for new transit corri- dors were put through a screening process in order to develop the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative. The screening criteria used during this process were based on the purpose and need for the Long -Range Plan Update and the goals and objectives described in Chapter 1 of the Draft SEIS. Current Plan Alternative (No Action Alternative) The No Action Alternative, referred to in the Draft SEIS as the Current Plan Alternative, consists of the current 2005 Long -Range Plan plus the Sound Transit Board actions taken as part of the development and imple- mentation of the ST2 program. Key Board decisions that affected corridors in the Long -Range Plan are listed in Chapter 2 of the Draft SEIS. Figure S -1 shows the general corridors that would be served as part of the Current Plan Alternative. For purposes of analyzing potential impacts on the trans- portation system and on transit ridership, all of the corridors shown in Figure S -1 were included as part of the Current Plan Alternative. When analyzing potential environmental impacts for this alternative, the Draft SEIS focuses primarily (but not exclusively) on those corridor sections that do not yet have service in opera- tion, are not yet under construction, or have otherwise not begun project -level environmental reviews. Those corridors are shown in Figure 2. On Figure S -2, the light rail, commuter rail, and bus corridors in operation, under construction, or in project -level environmental review are screened back because they have already been, or are currently, subject to project -level environmental review. Light rail Some corridors previously designated in the 1996 and 2005 Long -Range Plans as potential rail extensions were subsequently funded through Sound Move and ST2. Light rail elements of the Current Plan Alternative that were funded through Sound Move and ST2 and are in operation, under construction, or in project -level envi- ronmental review include the following: • Central Link from Sea -Tac Airport to Downtown Seattle • S. 200th Link Extension from Sea -Tac Airport south to S. 200th Street • University Link Extension from Downtown Seattle to the University of Washington • Northgate Link Extension from Husky Stadium to Northgate • Lynnwood Link Extension from Northgate to Lynnwood • East Link light rail from Seattle to Downtown Redmond • Federal Way Link Extension from South 200th Street to the Federal Way Transit Center • Tacoma Link light rail from Tacoma Station to Downtown Tacoma and an extension to the west • Operations and maintenance facilities in Seattle and Tacoma and a satellite facility in either Lynnwood or Bellevue Some of the remaining corridors in the Current Plan Alternative were identified as "Potential Rail Extensions" in the 2005 Long -Range Plan but have not yet been included in a system plan for project develop- ment or construction. Therefore, decisions on mode in those corridors have not yet been made but could be light rail. For purposes of analyzing potential impacts associated with the Current Plan Alternative, corridors A through H reflect potential rail extensions that were analyzed as light rail corridors (see the Current Plan Alternative list on page S -6 and Figure S -2). Some of these corridors were also evaluated for commuter rail and /or BRT (see the "Commuter Rail" and "Regional Express Bus /BRT" sections below). Light rail corridors would have similar service charac- teristics as the Link light rail system implemented as S -5 9 Regional Transit Long -Range Plan Update iffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffill part of Sound Move and ST2 and would operate primar- ily on exclusive rights -of -way or on surface streets with protected rights -of -way. Commuter rail Sound Transit currently operates Sounder commuter rail service from Everett to Lakewood. Some of the corridors in the Current Plan Alternative identified as "Potential Rail Extensions" in the 2005 Long -Range Plan have not yet been included in a system plan for construction (or the project development phase). These corridors, I and J, are shown in Figure S -2 and the Current Plan Alternative list on this page. Since they could be implemented as commuter rail, they were evaluated as such for purposes of analyzing potential impacts associated with the Current Plan Alternative. Regional express bus /bus rapid transit Numerous corridors are identified for regional express bus, BRT, or —in most cases —both under the Current Plan Alternative. Sound Transit currently operates 26 regional express bus (ST Express) routes, many of which operate in high- occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes. For purposes of analyzing potential environmental impacts for the Current Plan Alternative, this Draft SEIS focuses on the regional express bus and BRT cor- ridors not yet implemented and includes corridors M through Y. For BRT corridors M through S, ST Express bus service currently operates in all of these corridors except corri- dor P, which is the Eastside Rail Corridor east of Seattle. Each of these corridors is also shown as a BRT corridor in the 2005 Long -Range Plan and therefore could also be considered for higher performing BRT operating within exclusive rights -of -way where feasible. Corridors T through Y of the Current Plan Alternative are identified exclusively for regional express bus service (no BRT) in the 2005 Long -Range Plan but are not yet in service. High - capacity transit The Current Plan Alternative includes two corridors identified in the 2005 Long -Range Plan as "HCT" without specifying a particular mode. These corri- dors could be implemented as light rail or as BRT. For purposes of analyzing potential impacts associated with the Current Plan Alternative, this Draft SEIS evaluates S -6 10 Current Plan Alternative LIGHT RAIL Potential light rail corridors in the Current Plan Alternative. Potential rail extensions, assumed light rail. A Tacoma to Federal Way B Burien to Renton C Bellevue to Issaquah along I -90' D Renton to Lynnwood along 1 -405 E Renton to Woodinville along Eastside Rail Corridor F Downtown Seattle to Ballard' G Ballard to University of Washington' H Lynnwood to Everett COMMUTER RAIL 1 Potential commuter rail corridor in the Current Plan Alternative. Potential rail extension, assumed commuter rail. 1 DuPont to Lakewood J Renton to Woodinville along Eastside Rail Corridor REGIONAL EXPRESS BUS /BUS RAPID TRANSIT Bus rapid transit (BRT) M Federal Way to DuPont along 1 -5 N Renton to Puyallup along SR 167 O Bellevue to Issaquah along 1 -90 P Renton to Woodinville along Eastside Rail Corridor Q Renton to Lynnwood along 1 -405 R Seattle to Everett along SR 99 S Lynnwood to Everett along 1 -5 Regional express bus T Puyallup to DuPont via Cross Base Highway U Puyallup to Lakewood ✓ Puyallup to Tacoma W SeaTac to West Seattle X Redmond to Kirkland Y North Bothell to Mill Creek to Mukilteo HCT (mode not specified) K University of Washington to Redmond via SR 520' L Northgate to Bothell on SR 522 Portions of these corridors could be constructed in tunnels. June 2014 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement oee IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Projects Approved in Sound Move/ ST2 System Plans (In Operation/In Design or In Construction/In Project Development) Future Light Rail Service Commuter Rail Service Sound Transit District Boundary Corridors in 2005 LRP (Not Yet Included in a System Plan) Hfl Potential Rail Extensions 1111111111111111111111 High-Capacity Transit Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Regional Express Bus (not in service) 1,1 Mill ek Edmond /LYnnwoock#0, , othell Snohomish County Shoreline ram 1/1/ oo-Oiriville King County Seatti Tukwila s; mq1c)lail ss Renton SeaTat Des Moines Urilversity 'Place /C) Sumner \ Bonney /cog c P'ercec!'‘ Figure S-2 Current Plan Alternative orridors analyzed in this Draft SE.IS Source: Sound Transit 2014 S-7 11 • 0•• • 44.gP rysp • s .,z, ER 3 these two HCT corridors shown on the Current Plan Alternative list on page S -6 and Figure S -2, as both light rail and BRT. Similar to the current Sound Transit system operating today, regional express bus /BRT service could be im- plemented as an interim HCT mode for all or portions of potential light rail corridors until funding becomes available. Representative projects, programs, and policies Stations, park and rides, operations and maintenance facilities, access improvements, and other supporting transit facilities may be implemented along any of the Current Plan Alternative corridors, whether or not they have been implemented as part of Sound Move or ST2. This includes new track infill stations or other infrastructure that may be needed along routes already in service. The 2005 SEIS referred to these as "repre- sentative projects" since they represent the types of projects that could be built along any existing or future corridor. Building from the list in the 2005 Long -Range Plan SEIS, an updated list of representative projects for the Current Plan Alternative can be found in Appendix A of the Draft SEIS. These types of projects and their potential environmental impacts are broadly discussed in the Draft SEIS. The types of representative projects are as follows, listed below by mode: • Light rail — Service expansion, transit stations and park - and -and ride facilities, pedestrian and bicycle S -8 12 access and safety, and operations and maintenance facilities • Commuter rail— Service expansion, new track, transit stations and park- and -ride facilities, pedes- trian and bicycle access and safety, and operations and maintenance facilities • Regional express bus /bus rapid transit — Service expansion or revised bus routes, transit stations and park- and -and ride facilities, HOV direct access, transit priority improvements, rider amenities, grade or barrier separation, and operations and maintenance facilities The following programs and policies have been adopt- ed by the Sound Transit Board and would continue to remain in effect as part of the Current Plan Alternative: • Transit- Oriented Development Policy (December 2012) • Sustainability Initiative (June 2007) • System Access Policy (March 2013) • Updated Bicycle Policy (April 2009) • Environmental Policy (April 2004) Potential Plan Modifications Alternative (Action Alternative) The Potential Plan Modifications Alternative assumes implementation of all the elements of the Current Plan and adds HCT corridors and services that are potential modifications to the Current Plan. These corridors, shown in Figures S -3 and S -4, represent a menu of op- tions that the Sound Transit Board could choose from when updating the Long -Range Plan. June 2014 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement iffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiliffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffin Light rail New light rail corridors considered under the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative would have the same characteristics as light rail corridors under the Current Plan Alternative. Commuter rail The additional commuter rail segments would have similar physical and operating characteristics to the existing Sounder line. There are existing rail lines along Corridors 16 and 18, while there are none along Corridor 17. ntia ' an ► o s ! cat! IIII WIIIIIIII RAIL Tigii Downtown o olia /Ballar horeline Commun ty Co ege Downt wn Seatt e to West Seatt a /Bu Ballard to Everett Stati n via Auro Lynnwood Everett to North Everett Lakewood t Spanaway to Fredericks ill to Puyal up uPont to Downtown Tacoma via Lakew• teilacoom, and Ruston Puyallup /Sumner to Renton via SR 167 Downtown Seattle along Madison St eet or t Madrona pmm Tukw. a to SODO via Duwamish 'ndustrial are °m 0 North K rkland or University of Washington othe I to Northgate via SR 522 1 al and to Bothell via Northgate Mill Creek, connecting to Eastside Rail Corrid acoma to Ruston - minal acoma to Park 1 ynnwood to Evere rving Sou hw st dustrial Center ( ine Fiel and el g) UTER RAIL uyallup /Sumn r o Orti akewood to Park and Tacoma to Freder ckson GIONAL EXPRESS BUS 'd'I IIIIIUS R Illu Bus rapid transit (BRT) 22 Puya up v an ty, a a on M 23 Ma is St eet in S at D Regional express bus /bus rapid transit The Potential Plan Modifications Alternative includes many new regional express and /or BRT corridors. High - capacity transit corridors Some suggestions for new HCT corridors or service did not specify a mode and are numbered as corridors 19, 20, and 21 on Figure S -3. Similar to HCT corridors in the Current Plan Alternative, these new HCT corridors were evaluated as both BRT and light rail corridors. gional express bus 24 Issaquah to Overtake v e Sam and Redmond 25 Renton to Downtown Seattle 26 UW Bothell to Sammamish via Redmond Titlow Beach to Downtown Tacoma Renton (Fairwood) to Eastgate via Factoria 29 145th Street from 1 -5 to SR 522 30 North Kirk and to Downtown Seattle invi e to Bellevue inville iiiverett ection Mint Base Lewis - McChord Regional express m " 110 34 Tacoma to B 35 Kent to Sea -Tac Airport 36 Puya lup to Rainier Vali HCT (mode not specified) kw.la Sounder Station to Downtown Seattle a Sea-Tac Airport, Burien, and West Seattle owntown Seattle to Edmonds via Bal oreline Communi pun I est Seattle ueen A STREETCAR 111111111111111111111 11111111 I II 1111111111 Streetcar corridors were i.enti e. in t e 'otentia n Modifications Alternative typically as options t • nal transit hubs •tenthatlh W pn N lndet wntownScatticcould �, q�� I tp, y port i ihl �t�I ie I iit rail line, which is mclw in the Cwrept Plan S -9 1 13 Regional Transit Long-Range Plan Update iffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffill S-1 0 14 MAP KEY Potential Plan Modifications Alternative sop Light Rail worm High-Capacity Transit mum Commuter Rail Current Plan Alternative Light Rail Service High-Capacity Transit Future Light Rail Service Potential Rail Extensions Commuter Rail Service Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Regional Express Bus Service Local Bus Service Sound Transit District Boundary Mu kilted Everett Mill Creek Edmonds, s _94 i.,11111111111 ,p,:/d Both e, If iii,,IIIII I — ShoreWli ok °III Ballard Seattle - 91 7.,:„ twill Illh , urier ,112,,1111 Renton SeaTat 1 i Des Moines 1° Kent 0 III 10111 .,1 \\ 4:1? Snohomish County Woodinville King County We Seatt Redmond ) (f/ Bellevue Mercr Sam ma mi5h.:.' IsIand Issaquah Tukwila Puyallup DuPont 1/41 (1/4 tory, Thurston Count"ty Pierce County Frederickson Auburn Orting Sumner 4.2s Bonney Lake \—i7- ou/zy /erce 'oty r N Miles 0 4 8 Source: Sound Transit 2014 Figure S-3 Potential Plan Modifications Alternative light rail, commuter rail, and high-capacity transit June 2014 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement oee 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 MAP KEY Potential Plan Modifications Alternative Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Regional Express Bus Regional Express Bus/BRT Current Plan Alternative Light Rail Service High-Capacity Transit Future Light Rail Service Potential Rail Extensions Commuter Rail Service Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Regional Express Bus Service Local Bus Service Sound Transit District Boundary Mu kilteo,,,„ I / ' / 1 Edmonds, 1-„iflinwOd / / Bothell , c Shoreling Kir klan ' fthgate ' Ballard Everett ill Creek Snohomish County King County Woodinville Seattle West Seattleli Burien Redmond SeaTa Des Moines Fed es* Way Taconia\ ...„ , Uiiiversity Place 1 " Lakewood - Thurston County Pierce County IMercor Isjand wila amish on Kent Puyallup Frederickson Auburn 0 ing Issaquah Bonney Lake', -%g.Cot.0 Ice col-. • 0 N ■=1 Miles 0 4 8 Si..)Lirce.: &Mild T,ni.ii 2014 Figure S-4 Potential Plan Modifications Alternative regional express bus and bus rapid transit S-11 1 5 i `lamr'9;100:1010110i 000 al Streetcar Streetcar services were identified in the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative, typically as options to con- nect areas to regional transit hubs. Representative projects, programs, and policies The types of representative projects or support facilities described by mode for the Current Plan Alternative could similarly be implemented along any of the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative corridors. A list of representative projects for the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative can be found in Appendix A of the Draft SEIS. The Potential Plan Modifications Alternative could in- clude new programs and policies or it could build upon existing programs and policies. For example, it could include new initiatives related to: • System access • Demand management • Research and technology iraLJsportatuon :.npacts Impacts of plan alternatives on total transit ridership This section describes the impacts on total transit rid- ership of two scenarios: 1) the Current Plan Alternative as compared to the Sound Transit system implemented through completion of ST2, and 2) the Potential Plan High - capacity transit corridor studies ST2 directed Sound Transit to conduct the follow- ing high- capacity transit corridor studies: • Ballard to Downtown Seattle HCT Corridor Study • Central to East HCT Corridor Study — Ballard to University District — Redmond to Kirkland to University District - Kirkland -to Bellevue to Issaquah — 1-405 BRT — Eastside Rail Corridor • Federal Way to Tacoma HCT Corridor Study • Lynnwood to Everett HCT Corridor Study • South King County HCT Corridor Study — Downtown Seattle to West Seattle to Burien - Renton to Tukwila, SeaTac, and on to Burien All of the corridors listed above are also evaluat- ed in the Draft SEIS as part of the Current Plan Alternative (except Downtown Seattle to West Seattle, which is evaluated as part of the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative). However, the HCT corridor studies and the Long -Range Plan Update SEIS are evaluating potential transit improvements in these corridors at a different scale. The HCT corridor studies are evaluating options within a more localized area and in greater detail, while the Draft SEIS generally identifies plan -level alter- natives and evaluates their impacts at a broader regional level. To the extent possible, the Draft SEIS incorporates information available from these HCT corridor studies. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII S -12 16 June 2014 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Modifications Alternative compared to the Current Plan Alternative. The description of impacts focuses on how corridors included in the alternatives affect transit ridership at selected screenlines shown on Figure S -5. Current Plan Alternative When compared to completion of ST2, the corridors included in the Current Plan Alternative would expand HCT service to communities throughout the Plan area (Sound Transit's service area). The changes in ridership resulting from the Current Plan Alternative when compared to completion of ST2 reflect the relative effectiveness of Plan corridors in attracting riders. One major change under the Current Plan Alternative is reduced transit travel times as compared to ST2. These changes in transit travel times result from exclusive right -of -way for transit as compared to mixed opera- tions in ST2. The reduced travel times could also result from more direct transit connections under the Current Plan Alternative as compared to connections in ST2. Examples of reduced transit travel times include: • Tukwila to Bellevue central business district (CBD) • SeaTac to Tacoma CBD • Ballard to Everett CBD • Kirkland to Kent CBD • Paine Field to Seattle CBD The reduced transit travel times would result in transit ridership increases. The extent of ridership changes in the year 2040 from new corridors would vary substan- tially, ranging from approximately 15,000 additional transit riders per day to less than 3,000 additional tran- sit riders per day at selected screenlines. The effectiveness of a corridor in terms of increasing ridership could be particularly high if it has one or more of the following characteristics: • It is resulting in a major increase in daily transit rid- ership (5,000 or greater) at one or more screenlines • It is resulting in transit ridership increases at more than one screenline • It is the only corridor affecting ridership changes at a screenline; at most screenlines, multiple corridors are affecting transit ridership changes The following information summarizes the relative effectiveness of the corridors in the Current Plan oee Alternative in influencing transit ridership changes. The corridors, shown on Figure S -2, are in order of daily transit ridership increases. Corridor A —Light rail between Tacoma and Federal Way: Corridor A would contribute to a major increase in daily transit ridership (15,000) at King County/ Pierce County Line West (screenline 6). Corridor A also would increase ridership (5,000) at North of Spokane Street (screenline 2), as riders continue from Tacoma to Seattle. Corridor B —Light rail between Burien and Renton: On its own, this corridor would result in a major in- crease in daily transit ridership (10,000) at West of SR 167 /Rainier Avenue (screenline 14). 0m000 l l Ij I III 11 I 111111111 11111111111111111110 11 II I l i u m 00001 00, 00 01M 0 10 1 1 000 010.111001f1 i 'MOM dui( 001( MOO' 100111-1. 011 la 1 On N II 101000 1111111111111111111111111111 1lill mio IL e se i ill 000 1,11'1 III 1 11111111111111111111111111 All III 1 1111 1 Corridor F —Light rail between Downtown Seattle and Ballard: Corridor F would contribute to the major increase in daily transit ridership of 10,000 at Ship Canal (screenline 1). Corridor G —Light rail between Ballard and University of Washington: Corridor G would result in a major increase (15,000) in daily transit ridership at Wallingford (screenline 20). Corridor H —Light rail transit extension from Lynnwood Transit Center to Everett: Corridor H would contribute to a major increase in transit rider- ship (10,000) at the Ship Canal (screenline 1). Corridor H would also contribute to a major transit ridership increase (10,000) at the King County /Snohomish County Line West (screenline 6), as well as a ridership increase (5,000) at North of SR 526 South of Everett (screenline 5). S -13 17 Regional Transit Long -Range Plan Update iffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffill S -14 18 SELECTED SCREENLINES 1. Ship Canal 2. North of Spokane St 3. West Seattle Bridge 4. King /Snohomish Line —East 5. North of SR 526 6. King /Snohomish Line —West 7. SR 522 8. Crosslake —SR 520 &I-90 Bridges 9. West of 148th 10. North of Totem Lake 11. East of Lake Sammamish 12. North of Renton 13. North of SR 518 14. West of SR 167 /Rainier Ave 15. South of Renton 16. King /Pierce Line —West 17. King /Pierce Line —East 18. North of S 72nd St 19. East of Canyon Rd E 20. Wallingford 21. North of Downtown Bellevue Mukiltg. Everett Ed�4 m ' Ly r ©mammmm� W, mmmimmmmmmW WWWWWW11111h WWWWWWWWWWWW Snohomish County ell Wooille Ing County Shor eline WWWWW WWW 1, w MN 11111111111111111111111111D mmmmum Northgate ' :allard :u Kirland r a u ©MI elarn c, err Seattle eattle tl IG 11111 1111111111111Gm11111! 111 f Sammmish Bellevue Burien 1111 1111111111111 SaTac Des Moines Fpder`a1 Way ro^ n JTacoma University Lakewood '1DuPont' fJ Thurstor. County f f ierce County Tukwila 1111111111 ,WWWWWWWW®WWWWWWWWWWWW1, '14k111111111111111111111111111111, it11111111111111111111111111 0111111111111111111E11111111111111111111111111111, i d Puyallup `w V °wiry ."‘' Wity wl Orting 0 N Miles 0 ` 4 8 Figure S -5 Selected Screenlines June 2014 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement oee IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Corridor D —Light rail from Renton to Lynnwood along I -405: Corridor D would contribute to transit ridership increases (5,000) at King County /Snohomish County Line East (screenline 4). In addition, corridor D would contribute to transit ridership increases (5,000) at North of Totem Lake (screenline 10) and North of Renton (screenline 12). The remaining transit corridors in the Current Plan Alternative would result in relatively low transit rider- ship increases at the selected screenlines. Potential Plan Modifications Alternative When compared to the Current Plan Alternative, the elements included in the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative would result in further expansion of HCT service throughout the Plan area. It should be noted that the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative does not represent an integrated HCT system but is instead a menu of potential additions to the Current Plan Alternative. Accordingly, there are corridors that may duplicate other corridors in serving the same trav- el market. One major change under the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative is reduced transit travel times to many locations as compared to the Current Plan Alternative. In some cases, operating characteristics for the corridors would involve exclusive right -of -way for transit as compared to mixed operations in the Current Plan Alternative. In other cases, the reduced transit travel time would result from more direct connections under the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative as compared to transit service connections in the Current Plan Alternative. Examples of reduced transit travel times include: • West Seattle to Seattle CBD • Bellevue CBD to Kent CBD • Paine Field to Everett CBD • U- District to Kent CBD • Seattle CBD to Tacoma CBD These reduced transit travel times would result in transit ridership increases. The extent of ridership changes in the year 2040 from new corridors would vary substantially, ranging from approximately 20,000 addi- tional transit riders per day to less than 3,000 additional transit riders per day at selected screenlines. The following information summarizes the rela- tive effectiveness of corridors in the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative in increasing transit rider- ship. These corridors are shown on Figures S -3 and S -4. As is the case with corridors in the Current Plan Alternative, the effectiveness of any corridor in the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative would be particularly high if it has one or more of the following characteristics: • It is resulting in a major increase in daily transit rid- ership (5,000 or greater) at one or more screenlines • It is resulting in transit ridership increases at more than one screenline • It is the only corridor affecting ridership changes at a screenline; at most screenlines, multiple corridors are affecting transit ridership changes Corridor 2 —Light rail between Downtown Seattle, West Seattle, and Burien: This corridor is affecting transit ridership at four locations, North of Spokane Street (screenline 2), West Seattle Bridge (screenline 3), North of SR 518 (screenline 13), and West of SR 167/ Rainier Avenue (screenline 14). The extent of rider- ship changes is major— between 10,000 and 20,000 per location. At three locations, other corridors contribute to the ridership increases. However, at West of SR 167/ Rainier Avenue (screenline 14), corridor 2 would be the only one contributing to the ridership increases. Corridor 19 —HCT line from Tukwila Sounder Station to Sea -Tac Airport to Burien to Downtown Seattle via West Seattle: This corridor is resulting in major transit ridership increases (20,000) at North of Spokane Street (screenline 2) and West Seattle Bridge (screenline 3). Corridor 19 is also contributing to rider- ship increases (10,000) North of SR 518 (screenline 13). Corridor 7 —Light rail from Puyallup /Sumner to Renton via SR 167: This corridor contributes to rid- ership increases at North of SR 518 (screenline 13). Corridor 7 is also resulting in transit ridership increases at two other locations: South of Renton (screenline 15) and King County /Pierce County Line East (screenline 17). At all locations, the added daily transit ridership is 10,000 at each screenline. Corridor 10 —Light rail from North Kirkland to UW Bothell to Northgate via SR 522: This corridor is increasing transit ridership at SR 522 (screenline 7) and at North of Totem Lake (screenline 10). Daily transit S -15 19 u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u m ridership increases at each screenline would be approx- imately 5,000. Corridor 11 —Light rail from Ballard to Bothell via Northgate: This corridor is contributing to tran- sit ridership increases at two locations, Ship Canal (screenline 1) and SR 522 (screenline 7). Daily transit ridership increases at each screenline would be approx- imately 5,000. Corridor 20 —HCT line from Downtown Seattle to Edmonds via Ballard and Shoreline Community College. This corridor is contributing to transit rider- ship increases (5,000) at the Ship Canal (screenline 1). Several corridors would be affecting one location. These are corridors: • 1 —Light rail north /south– Downtown Seattle to Magnolia /Ballard to Shoreline Community College • 5 —Light rail from Lakewood to Spanaway to Frederickson to South Hill to Puyallup • 6 —Light rail from DuPont to Downtown Tacoma via Lakewood, Steilacoom, and Ruston • 9 —Light rail from Tukwila to SODO via Duwamish industrial area • 12 —Light rail to Mill Creek, connecting to Eastside Rail Corridor The remaining transit corridors in the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative would result in relatively low transit ridership increases at the selected screenlines. Impacts of plan alternatives on the regional transportation system Implementation of the Current Plan Alternative and the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative would impact physical components of the multimodal transportation system, including public transit, operations of free- ways and local streets, parking, non - motorized modes (pedestrian and bicycle facilities), safety, and freight. The items included in this section address impacts relat- ed to both operations and construction. This assessment of potential impacts is a high -level overview of what could occur. No specific alignments have been selected for any transit mode, and there is no determination as to corridor profile (whether any particular element would be underground, at grade, or elevated). S -16 20 llllllliw Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement oee IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Local bus service New rail service and regional express bus /BRT could replace some transit services provided by local agencies, potentially freeing service hours for the local transit provider to use elsewhere. Demand could increase for local bus service connecting to new light rail and commuter rail stations and regional express /BRT services. Buses that use streets or freeways undergoing construction of new transit facilities could temporarily travel more slowly or be detoured to adjacent streets, which could increase walking or bicycling travel times to access the bus. Highways and roads Consistent with Transportation 2040, the assumption is that all limited access roadways will be tolled or man- aged by 2040. However, if lanes are not managed to allow 45 mile per hour speeds 90 percent of the time on limited- access roadways, then speeds for buses on these roadways could be much lower in some cases. Both alternatives include new rail and bus corridors that, depending on the alignment and design, could impact local streets and freeways. These impacts could include use of lane capacity for HCT guideways and stations, at -grade crossings for rail or BRT, and increased conges- tion around stations and park and rides. Construction of HCT could occur on or adjacent to the freeway system, arterials, or local streets. This construction could close road and freeway lanes for short or long durations, which could reduce lane capacity, lower speeds and increase congestion, and require detours diverting traffic from the freeway system, arterials, and local streets to alterna- tive routes. Parking With expanded rail or BRT service, demand for park- ing at stations could increase, which could spill over into surrounding neighborhoods. Decreased on- street parking in some corridors could occur to accommodate new guideways and stations. Loss of parking on- street and at park- and -ride facilities could be expected during guideway and station construction and where new or expanded park- and -ride facilities occur. Safety Rail and BRT facilities could create safety impacts for at -grade crossings or where operating in mixed traffic. Projects include safety features and often upgrades for unprotected pedestrian crossings on commuter rail lines. With new rail and bus service, there would be increased vehicular, walk, and bike activity in station areas potentially impacting the safety of roadway and non - motorized systems. Non- motorized systems — pedestrian and bicycle facilities Both the Current Plan Alternative and the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative could include potential pedestrian and bicycle facilities that improve access to transit facilities. With expanded transit operations under each alternative, there could be potential impacts on pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Construction could temporarily close or restrict pedes- trian and bicycle facilities such as sidewalks, bike lanes, and trails. Construction also would temporarily result in other localized impacts, such as increased conges- tion, restricted access to facilities, and a lower quality pedestrian and bicycle environment. Freight movement A reduction in vehicle miles traveled from both alterna- tives would benefit freight movements on highways. In some cases, new guideways and stations could reduce access to driveways used to access businesses. In addi- tion, rail development could displace on- street loading capacity for trucks delivering goods. Construction of transit facilities could temporarily re- strict freight movement and access to businesses. New commuter rail service could require that some existing freight rail lines be upgraded or improved, which would result in construction activity in the railroad right -of- way or adjacent areas. Key Environmental Impacts The Draft SEIS describes the affected environment and potential impacts and mitigation for the Current Plan Alternative and the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative. The impact analysis is at a level of detail consistent with the broad, plan -level issues being ad- dressed in the Long -Range Plan Update. For the Current Plan Alternative, the environmental impact analysis focuses on corridors A through Y, as shown in Figure S -2. A qualitative summary of poten- tial environmental impacts and benefits is depicted in Table S -1 (light rail and commuter rail corridors) and Table S -2 (regional express bus /BRT corridors). For the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative, corridors 1 through 36, as shown on Figures S -3 and S -4, refer to S -17 21 Regional Transit Long-Range Plan Update iffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffill Table S-4 (light rail and commuter rail corridors) and Table S-5 (regional express bus/BRT corridors). The ratings used in these summary tables reflect a relative comparison between corridors based on the analysis in the Draft SEIS. Overall, increasing HCT under either the Current Plan Alternative or the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative is generally expected to decrease energy consumption and reduce greenhouse gas and other air emissions in the region as more people choose to use transit instead of travel in single-occupancy vehicles. In addition, an expansion of regional high-capacity transit is consistent with state and regional growth manage- ment goals and is consistent with the vast majority 10010 Lliterlitilligodeinfiltir""1";° I 1,110111111111 II 11j1111111„11111111j1111j11j11111111111111111J111111111,11,—' 1 VIII 111111111111111111111111111111111,11111"""""")1011" 1 III 111111II1111111111111II 1 11111111 jIIIIIII1VVIIIIII1V1111111111111,111,11 V 0' 11111111111 10100000000000111111101111100000 1111111111111111111 00M0 00 OM ,,,,,, , 1,0,1,1,1,1,v,v,„1„1,, 0 011i oo 1110H1111010111111111111 00 0000 0001 1.000111111111111 11 1,1,1,1,1,11,1,1,1,111,1,1,1,1,1,11 1,1111„111111111„111„111„1111,1111111111111,1111111111111 1111111111 11111111111111111111111111111181 ill 22 of local plans in the region. Other key environmental effects include potential noise and/or vibration impacts to surrounding land uses, impacts to wetlands and streams, adverse effects to historic properties, and the use of parks and recreational facilities. The extent to which impacts could occur varies depend- ing on the concentration of resources within a corridor and the transit mode being evaluated. In general, imple- menting any of the transit modes within existing road- way or railroad rights-of-way would likely have the least amount of environmental impacts. If additional lanes were to be constructed for exclusive BRT lanes or light rail guideways, the potential for impacts to surrounding resources could increase. Light rail, BRT, or commuter rail on new alignments have the highest likelihood of impacts to surrounding land uses or resources; however, such impacts would be avoided and minimized to the extent possible during future project-level planning and environmental reviews. Earth • Risks are related to geologic hazards that already exist, including steep slopes that are more prone S-1 8 to erosion or landslides, soft soils, and seismic and liquefaction hazards. • Depending on location, all modes would have com- parable susceptibility to geologic hazards. • Corridors in areas with the highest susceptibility to certain geologic hazards include N in the Kent Valley along SR 167 and V in the Puyallup River Basin, both in the Current Plan Alternative; and 7 (also in the Kent Valley along SR 167) and 16 between Puyallup and Orting, both in the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative. Air quality • The Current Plan Alternative would reduce green- house gas and other air emissions in the region as more people choose to use transit instead of travel in single-occupancy vehicles. • The Potential Plan Modifications Alternative would provide an incremental reduction as transit corri- dors are added. Noise • Commuter rail has the highest maximum noise levels of all transit modes; however, it operates less frequently, with service occurring during peak commute hours. In terms of potential noise impacts, light rail and BRT are similar, although BRT generates more noise for a similar number of passengers served. • The highest potential for noise impacts occurs in corridors with dense residential development. This includes BRT or light rail corridors along SR 99 such as R (BRT from Seattle to Everett) and 3 (light rail from Ballard to Everett Station), and 20 (BRT from Downtown Seattle to Edmonds). • Light rail corridor 19 from Tukwila to Downtown Seattle via West Seattle is also very densely de- veloped, potentially resulting in a high number of residences impacted. Water quality and hydrology • Runoff from new impervious surfaces can cause bank erosion and increase stream bed depth; how- ever, commuter rail tracks on ballast and ties are not impervious. • Pollutants on new impervious surfaces can de- crease water quality; however, operation of light rail alone is not a pollutant-generating activity. • Light rail corridors D (Renton to Lynnwood along 1-405 under Current Plan Alternative) and 7 June 2014 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Table S -1 Current Plan Alternative summary of Impacts light rail, commuter rail, high - capacity transit 0 0000 101111111111111 ( % Ila4loe of alefiylaoN (OZS iJS e!n) puouapaa of Mn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (m3) all!nu!pooM of uoluaa poonna)e3 0l luodnd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . llaaan3 0l poonnuuki M(1 0l paellea paellea of epees unnolunnod (m3) all!nu!pooM of uoluaa (sol-I) poonnuuki 0l uoluaa oee Ally i i i/( Ally Ally Ally' Ally iif Ally Ally (iii d JAd � JAd � JAd (06-1) genbessl of annalla8 uoluaa of ua!an8 AeM leaapa3 0l euaoDel POTENTIAL EFFECTS lity a c 0 V 0 • E 0 a, 0 d d 0 a E a, a 0 a, ,13 0 0 E a co co c C ',, 0 a1 o en rn a, 0 V 0 E 0 a, 0 d ist a, a, a, 0 a, a, a, .� L, a, a, 0 j 0 Q `o E o L ,13 ',, o_ ', L 0 ',,. 0 co co o_ 0- O .E .E O O 0 CO CO CO C c c CU a, a, d d d Z _0 W _ cv cc = H T O a u .d O s a a R T al _ o Cr tv i 4- 4- W OC w Q Z g V C C fo 7 ++ ',. w ', w w ', J d 4- S -19 23 Regional Transit Long -Range Plan Update Table 5 -2 Current Plan Alternative summary of Impacts regional express bus and bus rapid transit S -20 24 �IIIIIII II II IIIIIIIII� 1111111 IIII 1111 Fm m oa�I!�InW o.)IaaaD II!UV of Ila43oe 41aoN puepo puowpab alieas IsaM of neJ -eas ewoael dnlleAnd pooMal ei of eAnd (AMH sea ssoaj e!A) luodnd dnlleAnd (S-I) 1.1.aaan3 pooMUUki (66 bs) llaaan3 o alueas (S017-I) pooMUUki of umuab (M3) all!nu!pooM uoluab (06-1) yenbessi annapae (L9 L bS) dnlleAnd of UmUab (S-1) luodnd AeM Ieaapad Halloo aae6yiaoN (0Zs as e!n) puowpab 01 Mfl co co o V v o _, a, w Cr) LL ' a z Q W V Benefit from reduction in greenhouse gases CU = CU CU co = C O To To aJ aJ O o co co 7 a w a z° aJ Regionally important ecosystem resourc >, = a, t E Potential for encountering hazardous waste sites a, 3 n co a, O o a, a, Q = d = = v� n O r=6 To C C E - Q ( > L L Q O o 26 26 t ra = — co = - a - E , 0 .E 1111 L ++ C co o co V _ 2 C _ u a, O m e E = v v -0 cc o c a . ,, v, c u O `, . En co _ - o w w 5 d d 2 co E co June 2014 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement oee Table 5 -3 Potential Plan Modifications Alternative summary of impacts light rail, commuter rail, high- capacity transit auuy uaanb 'lDUls!a lealua) e!■ paepe8 of @Incas Isom )) au!IaaoyS 'pJelleB e!■ spuowp3 of allleaS uMoluMoa allleaS Isom e!■ allleaS uMoluMoa - uaun8- laoda!y Del -eaS of el!M) nl uosppapaa3 of ewoDel puepped of pooMale3 ,uuulll@ puuuuuu, •uuulllll@ ,uuulllll@ ,d111 0 1110 l@ �uuuum�, ,0um1, puulll@ ,uuulll@ .d111 , 1110 l@ pd111 p puuuIIIIV ,uuulll@ puuuuuu, @ @ pu0°llllil , (iii 0 0' 01 01 (iii �lll� �lll� 6w1a0 0l aauwnS /dnlle (nd 0 aalua) le!alsnpui llaaan3 MS 6u!naas llaaan3 0l pooMuuA3 (L Hs) puepped of ewoDel Iewwaal Ana] uolsna of ewoDel )H3 0l 6u!pauuoD Pal) II!W ale6ylaoN e!■ paylo8 of paelle8 ) (US HS) ale641JON of I1a41-0e Mfl ao puepm 41aoN eaay le!alsnpuI ys!weMna e!A OQOS of el!Mlnl uos!peL 6uole @Incas uMoluMoa (L9 1 HS) uoluaa of aauwnS /dnlleAnd ) uolsna 'wooDepals 'pooMale3 e!■ ewoDel uMoluMoa of luodna dnlleAnd of II!H ylnos- uos)IDUapaa3- AeMeueds- pooMale3 llaaan3 ylaoN of llaaan3 pooMuuM /a6ell!A eaoany e!■ uo!lelS llaaan3 0l paelle8 uaun8 'allleaS Isom of allleaS uMoluMoa )) au!Iaaoys of paelle8 'e!Iou6ev- allleaS uMoluMoa POTENTIAL EFFEC H 2 ▪ W Z l.! o cc c 5o r W cc ',, w 0 C CU v CO 0- • d CO L Potential for im O L 17s n: CY an z - C O V CL CC H S -21 25 Regional Transit Long -Range Plan Update iffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffill Table 5 -4 Potential Plan Modifications Alternative summary of impacts light rail, commuter rail, high- capacity transit S -22 26 (alleA Ja!u!e8 01 dnlle (nd 11111UyJJJJJJJJ o f Z Z S dS S I apans ylSb bud • • aueas 0uoua puowpaa pue yswewwes en alepano oyenbessl uodicu. luaN anallacu. woOl uoipauuo) B uaan01 apupooanaa0anwpooM aa pea S unouno4 0PUhi!14lioN a2!).■ a6sc. (Poonni!) euIJoOae wo gl unnounno4 yannoll!1 puowpaP uys!wwwn IlMf uos!pe\ buole aueas unnounno4 (and uepuaW) Al!upn dnleAnd auud uaanb 13u1s!a eiw ) en p'ele8 oa gas IsaM au!aJo4S'p'ele8 e!n spuowP3 o apeas unnolunno4 a was j.saM e!n apeas unoIunoa - uaun8 -uodnd uel -ea5 0 ate+ } co 4-, O C O C E C7- c O a C o_ a ' m K Potential for encountering hazardous waste sites +�E 0 _ E O General consistency with plans and policie w — major utilities otential for conflicts Historic Resources June 2014 (Puyallup to Renton via SR 167 in the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative) could cross the greatest number of streams. Potential Plan Modifications Alternative corridor 12 (Mill Creek connecting to the Eastside Rail Corridor) could cross the greatest number of streams per mile of corridor. • Corridors in the Plan area near the Puget Sound shoreline and large rivers (such as the Puyallup, Snohomish, and Duwamish Rivers) are at risk for inundation from rising sea levels that may occur as the result of climate change. • Fill within floodplains could impede flows and increase the risk of flooding. Climate change could also result in localized flooding in floodplain areas due to increased precipitation from storm events. Corridors in the Current Plan Alternative that in- clude a higher concentration of floodplains include light rail corridors C and D along Lake Sammamish and the Snohomish River, respectively. In the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative, light rail corridor 7 and BRT corridor 36 along SR 167 from Puyallup to Renton, as well as corridor 34 from Tacoma to Bellevue, also have a high concentration of floodplains. Ecosystems The removal, degradation, or fragmentation of habitat could disturb fish and wildlife movement. Areas potentially affected include those with high concentrations of natural resources, high- quality native ecosystems, and major lakes or rivers. • Current Plan Alternative corridors C (Bellevue to Issaquah) and H (Lynnwood to Everett) and Potential Plan Modifications Alternative corridors 7 (Puyallup /Sumner to Renton) and 12 (Mill Creek connecting to Eastside Rail Corridor) have the greatest density of wetland areas. • Priority conservation areas within corridors near Cougar Mountain and Issaquah Creek (light rail corridor C, BRT corridor 0), Edmonds Point (HCT corridor 20), and a portion of the Joint Base Lewis - McChord between Lakewood and Parkland (commuter rail corridor 17) could be affected. Energy • Under either the Current Plan Alternative or the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative, transportation - related energy consumption is gen- erally expected to decrease as more people choose to use transit instead of traveling in single- occupan- cy vehicles. Environmental health • During construction, the disturbance or release of hazardous materials could occur, particularly in areas with high concentrations of contaminants such as industrialized areas. The Current Plan Alternative includes industrialized areas around the Port of Tacoma (corridor A) and Ballard (corridor F). The Potential Plan Modifications Alternative includes industrialized areas around the Port of Tacoma (corridors 6, 13, and 14) and Ballard (corri- dors 1, 3, 11, and 20). • Electromagnetic fields (EMF) associated with light rail operations could require mitigation to avoid S -23 27 Regional Transit Long-Range Plan Update iffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffill impacts to sensitive electronics located in medical and research facilities. Visual quality • Transit features, such as walls, stations, at-grade or elevated guideways, infill stations, operation and maintenance facilities, park-and-ride facilities, and other structures, could result in the alteration or removal of some visual resources (such as a view or structure). • In general, new transportation facilities constructed in existing transportation corridors would be less likely to negatively affect visual quality than those built in new corridors. Land use • In general, both alternatives would be consistent with state, regional, county, and municipal plans, policies, and legislation. However, Potential Plan Modifications Alterative corridor 16, commuter rail service from Puyallup/Sumner to Orting, may not be consistent with Orting's goal to preserve its small-town character. • The alternatives would improve transit service to regional growth centers and manufacturing and industrial centers, and would focus growth within the boundaries of Urban Growth Areas. • Under the Current Plan Alternative, connections generally would be added between regional cen- ters and/or manufacturing industrial centers. Connections to other smaller communities include Woodinville (corridors E, J, and P), DuPont (cor- ridors I, M, and T), West Seattle (corridor W), Mukilteo (corridor Y), and Issaquah (corridor 0). • Under the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative, connections generally would be added between regional centers and/or manufacturing industrial centers. Connections to other smaller communities include Woodinville (corridors 31 and 32), DuPont (corridor 6), Mill Creek (corridor 12), Ruston (cor- ridor 13), Parkland (corridors 14 and 17), Orting (corridor 16), Sammamish (corridor 26), Titlow Beach (corridor 27), Eastgate (corridor 28), Rainier Valley (corridor 37), West Seattle (corridor 21), and Issaquah (corridor 24). • Commercial, industrial, and residential land uses could be affected by property acquisitions, displace- ments, and land use conversions. Public services and utilities • Depending on location, all modes would have S-24 28 comparable impacts to public services and utilities. Overall, long-term impacts on utility services and systems are expected to be minimal. • In the Current Plan Alternative, corridors B (Burien to Renton), D (Renton to Lynnwood), and H (Lynnwood to Everett) cross either natural gas in- ter/intra state pipelines or transmission lines. In the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative, corridors 5 (Lakewood-Spanaway-Frederickson-South Hill- Puyallup), 7 (Puyallup/Sumner to Renton), 12 (Mill Creek connecting to the Eastside Rail Corridor), 16 (Puyallup/Sumner to Orting), 18 (Tacoma to Frederickson), 22 (Puyallup vicinity), and 36 (Puyallup to the Rainier Valley) cross either natural gas inter/intra state pipelines, petroleum product pipelines, or transmission lines. If necessary, these utilities would be relocated. Park and recreation facilities • Both alternatives could result in the acquisition of all or a portion of a park or recreation facility, particularly when other physical constraints limit avoidance or minimization options. King County parks and recreation facilities could be particularly affected given their high density. • In the Current Plan Alternative, light rail cor- ridors D (Renton to Lynnwood), E (Renton to Woodinville), F (Downtown Seattle to Ballard), and G (Ballard to UW) have the greatest potential to impact park and recreation facilities. • For the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative, corridors 1 (Downtown Seattle to Shoreline Community College), 2 (Downtown Seattle to West Seattle/Burien), 19 (Tukwila Sounder Station to Downtown Seattle to Ballard), 8 (Downtown Seattle along Madison Street), and 21 (West Seattle to Ballard) have the greatest potential to impact park and recreational facilities. Historic resources • Property acquisitions could result in the alteration or demolition of architectural properties. • Portions of the corridors between downtown Seattle and Northgate and near downtown Tacoma could be particularly affected given the high concentrations of architectural historic properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places. • In the Current Plan Alternative, light rail corri- dor F (Downtown Seattle to Ballard) would have the greatest potential to affect historic properties. For the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative, June 2014 corridors 1 (Downtown Seattle to Shoreline Community College), 2 (Downtown Seattle to West Seattle /Burien), 4 (Everett to North Everett), 8 (Downtown Seattle along Madison Street), 19 (Tukwila Sounder Station to Downtown Seattle via West Seattle), and 20 (West Seattle to Edmonds) would have the greatest potential to affect historic properties. • Archaeological sites and traditional cultural properties could be affected by ground- disturbing activities, such as the installation of piers to support elevated rail lines or other activities associated with new stations, park- and -ride facilities, or other support facilities. Cumulative impacts • Differences in cumulative impacts between the two alternatives would be relatively minor when consid- ered on a regional scale. • Both alternatives would offer environmental bene- fits. These benefits, combined with other regional plans and projects to help manage growth in a more sustainable manner, could result in greater cumu- lative benefits because they would help to reduce vehicle trips and urban sprawl. Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Sound Transit has established programs, best practic- es, and policies that would guide the implementation of this Long -Range Plan Update and the projects that would follow. These include the agency's commitment to satisfying all applicable laws and regulations and to mitigate significant adverse impacts responsibly and reasonably, consistent with Sound Transit's policies. In addition to meeting environmental commitments, Sound Transit will continue to avoid and minimize impacts where possible. Several environmental ele- ments analyzed in this Draft SEIS are not likely to have significant adverse long -term impacts requiring mitiga- tion after standard project measures are applied, such as earth, air quality, energy, public services, utilities, and water resources. The following text summarizes key areas where mitigation measures are expected to be required. More specific measures would be identified during future project -level environmental reviews. Transportation Mitigation would be required to address impacts to lo- cal transit service, local roadway and freeway facilities, parking, safety, non - motorized facilities in station areas, and freight movement resulting from plan implementa- tion and project development. For construction activities affecting freeways, Sound Transit would work with the Washington State Department of Transportation to develop a plan to coordinate construction with incident management, construction staging, and traffic control where the con- struction could affect freeway traffic, as well as provide construction closure information to the public. Truck access points from the freeway would be identified to minimize impacts on general purpose traffic and inter- change operations. S -25 29 111111',.11°' `tl Mitigation for impacts on local roadway facilities, park- ing, safety, non - motorized facilities, and freight move- ment would comply with local regulations governing construction mitigation, including traffic control and truck routing. For local transit service and facilities, potential route service changes would be coordinated with affected transit systems. For freight - related items, mitigation would be coordinated with local jurisdictions and affected businesses and operators. Noise and vibration Potential measures to control noise and vibration could include acquisition of land for buffer zones, project realignment, bus and roadway design and maintenance, track and wheel design and maintenance for rail systems, minimization of audible warning systems to only the levels necessary, construction of noise walls and other barriers, and sound insulation for buildings. Track sub -base and support structures could be designed to reduce vibration and ground - borne noise levels. Ecosystems Sound Transit would mitigate impacts in accordance with applicable federal and state regulations and local critical area ordinances and their permit requirements. Sound Transit is committed to no net loss of wetland functions and wetland areas. Potential measures to minimize impacts could include minimizing land clear- ing, avoiding sensitive habitat and wetlands, designing fish - passable structures, establishing time -of -year construction restrictions in sensitive areas, enhancing S -26 30 remaining habitat, and compensating or replacing lost wetland areas. Environmental health The Current Plan Alternative and the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative would adhere to all applicable regulations regarding hazardous materials handling and spill response during construction and long -term oper- ation. Any hazardous materials sites in the construction area would be identified and addressed to avoid the potential for exposure or spread of hazardous mate- rials during construction. Should EMF impacts from light rail be identified, modified power delivery designs would be expected to mitigate such impacts. Visual quality and aesthetics Measures to reduce or minimize adverse long -term impacts on visual quality could include avoidance of visually sensitive areas; design or aesthetic treatments to reduce the impacts of transit facilities by integrating them with existing plans, minimizing their size, making them compatible with their surroundings, and shielding light from reaching surrounding properties; and the provision of landscaping and other screening features. Land use Sound Transit would provide relocation assistance and advisory services where property acquisitions and displacements would be unavoidable. The relocation program would be in accordance with state and federal laws and Sound Transit policy. June 2014 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement oee IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Parks and recreation Sound transit would coordinate with the agencies with jurisdiction over parklands to minimize impacts. Mitigation could include restoration of disturbed parks and open space to pre - project conditions, park enhancement, or replacement of acquired parkland. Construction- period mitigation measures could include maintaining access during road and trail closures and providing coordinated information on access options. Historic resources Sound Transit would determine appropriate mitigation measures in consultation with the lead federal agencies, the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Native American tribes, affect- ed local governments, and other interested parties. Potential mitigation measures could include design- ing facilities to be compatible with historic resources, employing construction methods to minimize impacts, conducting rehabilitation or relocation to appropriate standards, preparing interpretive information for the public, and fully documenting properties if no alterna- tive to relocation or demolition exists. Mitigation mea- sures for archaeological sites could include performing archaeological testing and monitoring in high- proba- bility areas prior to and during construction and data recovery of significant sites. Significant Avoidable Adverse Impacts that Cannot be Mitigated No significant unavoidable adverse impacts to earth, air quality, energy, and public services and utilities are expected with either the Current Plan Alternative or the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative. With implementation of the avoidance, minimiza- tion, and mitigation measures listed above, significant unavoidable adverse impacts to noise and vibration, water quality and hydrology, ecosystems, environmental health, visual quality, parks and recreation facilities, and historic and cultural resources could be minimized for most plan elements under the Current Plan Alternative and the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative. However, significant unavoidable adverse impacts to noise and vibration, environmental health, visual quali- ty, land use, parks and recreation facilities, and historic and cultural resources could occur in some corridors and with some modes. Temporary unavoidable adverse impacts could occur to water quality and hydrology and ecosystems during construction. Even with the mitigation measures described above, there could be unavoidable adverse transportation impacts, primarily during construction of the corridors and facilities included in the Current Plan Alternative or the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative. Construction impacts could include temporary lane or roadway closures, loss of parking, increased truck traffic and congestion, and reduced access to businesses. Areas of Controversy and Uncertainty and the Issues to be Resolved The Sound Transit Board will evaluate many issues as it considers updates to the Long -Range Plan. Those issues include understanding the need for projects, achieving balance among the various service areas of the region, and obtaining funding to make the plans a reality. Unresolved regional issues that may affect the updated Long -Range Plan are discussed below. Several corridors were analyzed as part of the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative for possible inclusion in the updated Long -Range Plan. Using the transportation and environmental analysis, as well as other studies, the Sound Transit Board may consider adding some of the Potential Plan Modification Alternative corridors to the updated Long -Range Plan. Sound Transit will consider the specific modes for the HCT corridors included in the Plan. Corridors evalu- ated in this Draft SEIS include light rail, commuter rail, BRT, regional express bus, and streetcar. Each of the mode technologies has distinct advantages. In some corridors, the mode decision could include two or more possibilities. For example, a corridor may be identified as an HCT corridor and /or designated as a potential future light rail extension in the Long -Range Plan. Sound Transit can also consider annexing areas into the Sound Transit district or extending services beyond the current district boundary. Annexation and ser- vice extensions can occur under the Long -Range Plan Update alternatives as long as the legislatively mandated requirements are met. Extensions of service can occur without changing or annexing the district boundary. During the scoping process, Sound Transit received suggestions both to expand the district boundary and S -27 31 Regional Transit Long-Range Plan Update iffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffill to extend service outside the current boundary. Sound Transit would work with interested jurisdictions to annex or extend service beyond the current boundary if a proposal is made. Next Steps: Plan Adoption and Implementation With publication of this Draft SEIS, Sound Transit is presenting the results of the plan-level environmental impact analysis on updating the Long-Range Plan and starting a public comment period, which will close on July 28, 2014. C tti I t th Draft SEIS o pee e ra January to June Public Comment Period June 13 to July 28 2014 After the close of the public comment period, Sound Transit will use the comments received, along with any updated information, to prepare a Final SEIS. As part of the Final SEIS, comments received on this Draft SEIS will be responded to. Following the issuance of the Final SEIS, the Sound Transit Board will make final decisions on updating the Regional Transit Long-Range Plan. The updated Long-Range Plan will then provide the basis for future transit investments. Future system plans would be submitted to voters for approval. If funding is approved, project-level planning and environmental re- view would be performed, followed by implementation of the projects as appropriate. Figure S-6 Environmental review process S-28 32 Complete FEIS and respond to comments on the Draft SEIS August to November Board Updates LRP December June 2014- 11 -104 Council Approval N/A Dispute Resolution Settlement Agreement Regarding Noise and Parking Between City of Tukwila, Washington And Sound Transit (Reference City Contract Number 04 -086) The purpose of this Dispute Resolution Settlement Agreement is to confirm the agreement between Sound Transit and City of Tukwila regarding the issues discussed during the dispute resolution process initiated on November 9, 2010. Since the opening of the light rail system in July 2009, issues have arisen between the City and Sound Transit regarding noise and parking at the Tukwila International Boulevard Light Rail Station (Tukwila Station). Over the past few months, Sound Transit and the City have met in a good -faith effort to resolve these disputes, as provided for in the Development and Transitway Agreement executed between our two agencies in December 2004. We have reached a mutually satisfactory resolution of the issues and both agencies remain committed to working together in a collaborative manner to see that the commitments included in this letter are completed in a timely and efficient manner. To this end, the City and Sound Transit have agreed to settle the disputes as follows, subject to necessary approvals: Link Light Rail Noise Mitigation A dispute arose following initial noise level readings in the First Year Noise and Vibration Testing Results prepared by Michael Minor and Associates (dated December 9, 2009), which exceeded the FTA noise criteria in certain places along the Link Light Rail route in Tukwila. The resolution to this dispute is as follows: 1. Sound Transit is currently in compliance with the FTA noise criteria, and will continue to comply with the FTA noise criteria throughout the City. 2. Sound Transit will install approximately 2700 feet of Type I noise barrier in the vicinity of the Duwamish River neighborhood area, replacing the existing Type II noise barrier. The existing Type 2 barriers in three other locations will remain. 3. Sound Transit will mitigate and maintain noise levels at all other locations along the alignment with measures that may include continued use of Type 2 noise barriers, rail grinding, track lubricators, residential sound insulation, or other measures as determined by Sound Transit to be necessary and effective. 4. Sound Transit will prepare a supplement to the 2010 noise report required under the Unclassified Use Permit addressing the proposed mitigation; a schedule for installing the Type 1 barriers, reasoning for proposing Type 1 barriers as mitigation in the Duwamish River neighborhood area; durability of Type 2 noise 1 f�sof may' 33 barriers; maintenance and/or replacement requirements for the Type 2 noise barriers; and commitment and schedule for monitoring. The supplement to the noise report will be submitted to the City within 30 days of the effective date of this Agreement. 5. The goal of the Parties is to maintain and monitor noise mitigation as necessary, and to sunset the monitoring requirement within two years following completion and submission of the 2011 Wheel -Rail Noise Study to the City, as contemplated by the original UUP noise condition, unless the Parties mutually agree to an extension. In 2011, the City will perform a review of the 2010 noise report and supplement including field measurements of noise and vibration. Sound Transit will not submit a 2011 noise and vibration report but will submit a 2012 report following installation of the Type 1 barrier, and will submit a 2013 final report. Sound Transit will develop and implement a long -term noise maintenance and monitoring program based on recommendations in the 2011 Wheel -Rail Noise Study, authorized by the Sound Transit Board on March 10, 2011. Sound Transit will share the monitoring results with the City at various intervals, as recommended in the study. 6. The City will review the supplement to the 2010 noise report, for compliance with the original UUP noise condition. Any permit applications and nighttime noise variance application required for installation of the Type 1 noise mitigation will be reviewed administratively and concurrently. A public works permit (long term type D) will be required for installation of the Type 1 barriers, but a building permit is not required. There will be a public informational meeting and comment period for the above - mentioned actions and the City will issue its decisions in a timely manner. The City's decisions may be appealed to the City Hearing Examiner. Tukwila International Boulevard Light Rail Station Parking A dispute arose regarding the need for additional parking at the Tukwila Station, consistent with the City's 2004 Parking Determination. The resolution to this dispute is as follows: 1. Conditions have changed since the 2004 Parking Determination was issued by the City. Sound Transit's long -term strategy is to extend light rail to South 200th Street on an accelerated schedule, subject to Sound Transit Board approval anticipated in July 2011, where 600 to 1050 additional parking stalls are currently planned. It is anticipated that the South 200th and University Link projects will be completed in 2016 when passenger service will commence. It is further . anticipated that the addition of parking spaces south of the Tukwila Station, will provide an attractive alternative for some of the current users of Tukwila Station parking. 34 2. Sound Transit shall provide the Airport Link Extension Parking Demand Study to the City within 30 days of the effective date of this Agreement. 3. Sound Transit shall continue to monitor on -site and off -site Link Light Rail related parking utilization, and implement measures to help mitigate significant hide & ride parking should it occur as required by the 2004 Parking Determination. 4. Following a twelve month period of operation of the South 200`h and University Link projects (2017), during which service levels and ridership are expected to normalize, Sound Transit will prepare and submit to the City a parking study for the Tukwila Station based on a mutually agreed upon scope of work. No other parking studies will be required until this time except the scope of work shall be submitted as part of the Parking Determination amendment request referenced in paragraph 6 below. 5. The City shall defer the requirements of the July 1, 2004 Parking Determination, including the requirement to provide additional parking at the Tukwila Station, until December 31, 2017, provided Sound Transit makes measurable progress to accelerate the extension to South 200th. The measurable progress shall include obtaining Sound Transit Board approval; obtaining all required permits from the City of SeaTac; and awarding the contract for construction so that additional parking is constructed prior to University Link opening. 6. Sound Transit and the City will work together in good faith to identify potential revisions to the 2004 Parking Determination consistent with this Agreement and Sound Transit will request amendments to the 2004 Parking Determination, together with all supportive documents before December 31, 2012. This will be processed as a Type II Decision pursuant to the City's Land Use Code. The parties have executed this Agreement as of the last date indicated below. This Agreement shall become effective subject to approval by the Sound Transit Board. SOUND TRANSIT CITY OF TUKWILA By , -274 Joan arl, CEO Date: ly, , 2011 3 By c Steve Lancaster, City Administrator Date: July 2011 35 36 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS - Initial ..,_ Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review 07/14/14 CO 07/21/14 CO ❑ Motion Mtg Date / A Ordinance ❑ Bid Award Mtg Date ►1 Public Hearing ❑ Other Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date 7/21/14 Mtg Date 7/14/14 SPONSOR ❑ Council ❑ Mayor ❑ HR ITEM INFORMATION ITEM No. 4& 5.A. 37 STAFF SPONSOR: NORA GIERLOFF ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 7/14/14 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Freeway Interchange Signs CATEGORY /1 Discussion 7/14/14 ❑ Motion Mtg Date Resolution Mtg Date A Ordinance ❑ Bid Award Mtg Date ►1 Public Hearing ❑ Other Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date 7/21/14 Mtg Date 7/14/14 SPONSOR ❑ Council ❑ Mayor ❑ HR ❑ Finance ❑ Fire ❑ IT ❑ P&R ❑ Police ❑ P11- A DCD SPONSOR'S SUMMARY Based on being asked restrictions conforming feet for all direction at the June 23, 2014 Committee of the Whole Meeting, the Council is to conduct a public hearing and consider an ordinance that would relax on what maintenance and repair work can be completed to an existing non- freeway sign and allow an increase in area up to 125 feet per face (250 square sides). REVIEWED BY ❑ CA &P Cmte ❑ F &S Cmte ❑ Transportation Cmte Cmte ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. & 6/23/14 COMMITTEE CHAIR: A COW Mtg. ❑ Utilities DATE: 6/9/14 RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. COMMITTEE Department of Community Development COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $N /A $N /A $N /A Fund Source: N/A Comments: N/A MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 7/14/14 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 7/14/14 Informational Memorandum dated July 3,2014 Ordinance in Draft Form 7/21/14 37 38 TO: City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL U��U��U� nn�n ��nn^nmn��n n��n��u~ nmo�~n�n��n�x��n��n�n Mayor Haggerton Committee of the Whole FROM: Jack Pace, Director BY: Nora Gierloff, Deputy DCD Director DATE: March 3, 2014, Updated June 3, 17, and July 3, 2014 SUBJECT: Sign Code Regulations - Freeway /nterchange Signs 4th Briefing Memo (Updated Following 6/23 COW Meeting) ISSUE Should sign code regulations prohibiting new and enlarged freeway interchange signs within the City be modified? BACKGROUND Atthe February 11, 2014 Community Affairs and Parks meeting, the owners of the Union 76 gas station at 13310 Interurban Avenue discussed their desire to see the regulations regarding freeway interchange signs modified. As part of an expansion to include a diesel fuel station on an adjacent parcel the owners want to reface and expand the non-conforming 200 square foot freeway interchange sign (100 sf per face) in a manner that is not permitted under the City's Sign Code. Their proposed sign would have had a total square footage of 488 square feet (244 sf per face). The|orgeStfneevvayinterchange3ignpennhtedunderthephOrGignCodevvas250Sf(125sf per face). Under the current Sign Code no new freeway interchange signs are permitted and existing ones may be refaced and have copy changes until August of 2015, provided the height and area of the sign remain unchanged. Any changes to the sign code must remain content neutral, meaning that we can no longer legally limit certain types of signs to specific types of businesses as in the previous freeway interchange sign regulations. CAP brought the issue back for further discussion on March 25, 2014 and then forwarded this matter to the June 9, 2014 Committee of the Whole for discussion without a recommendation. The COVV considered the options and asked staff to develop them further. Staif drafted some ordinance options and presented them at the June 23m COW. The consensus was to have a public hearing on an ordinance that would aUow expansions of the existing freeway signs up to 125 sf during the grace period. DISCUSSION The attached ordinance would relax the restrictions on what maintenance and repair work can be completed to an existing non-ccnforming freeway sign and allow an increase in area up to 125 feet per face (250 square feet for all sides). The sign would still be non-conforming and after August of 2015 changes to the freeway interchange sign would not be permitted and eventually the sign would be removed when the business changed or the sign was damaged. 40 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 At the June 9' COW meeting the Petersons indicated that a 125 sf sign face would be acceptable to them, Under this ordinance the four existing freeway interchange signs that are less than 125 square feet per face (250 square feet for all sides) would be permitted to enlarge their signs in conjunction with a reface or copy change. One option that was discussed but not included in the draft ordinance was an extension of the grace period during which refaces, copy changes and area increases would be permitted to non-conforming freeway signs. This would have the effect of allowing investment in freeway interchange signs and transitions to new businesses for a longer time, making it less likely that the signs would be removed over the long term. FINANCIAL IMPACT No direct costs other than staff time. RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to hold a public hearing on the attached ordinance at the July 14, 2014 Committee of the Whole meeting. A final ordinance could be ready for adoption at the July 21, 2014 Regular Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS Draft Ordinance Amending the Non-Conforming Provisions of the Sign Code VVA2014 Info Memos-Council\Freeway SignMerno_forCOVV.clocx FT AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO 2303 §10 (PART), AS CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 19.36.050, TO UPDATE THE REGULATIONS FOR FREEWAY INTERCHANGE SIGNS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, regulation of signage is needed in order to preserve and protect the public welfare, preserve and enhance the appearance of the built environment, control visual clutter, protect private and public property, and ensure the orderly movement of motorized and non - motorized forms of transportation; and WHEREAS, on August 16, 2010, the Tukwila City Council adopted a new comprehensive Sign Code for the City of Tukwila, which is codified in Title 19 of the Tukwila Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Tukwila recognizes that signs are an important component of the built environment and assist in way finding, advertising, and personal expression for Tukwila businesses, property owners, and residents; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to regularly update the City's regulations regarding signage in order to respond to the needs of Tukwila businesses and to address the ongoing changes in the urban landscape of the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on July 14, 2014, to gather public input on the issue of non - conforming freeway interchange signs; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Ordinance 2303 §10 (part), as codified at Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Section 19.36.050, "Existing Freeway Interchange Signs," is hereby amended to read as follows: W: Word Processing \Ordinances\Amend Sign Code re freeway interchange signs strike -thru 7 -3 -14 NG:bjs Page 1 of 3 41 19.36.050 Existing Freeway Interchange Signs Existing Ssigns classified as freeway interchange signs under the previous Sign Code are permitted to remain for a five year grace period starting from the effective date of this °Ordinance No. 2303 (August 24, 2010). During the grace period, freeway interchange signs may be enlarged to a maximum of 125 square feet per side, 250 square feet total, have unlimitedbe refaceds and have copy changes provided the area -, height; and location of the sign remain unchanged. Relocation or re- erection of the sign gracc period is not permitted. Application for a as sign permit is required for all sign face, area or copy changes to a freeway interchange sign. After the grace period has terminated; the sign is permitted to remain as -is indefinitely; however, compliancees with the Sign Code is triggeredrequired for by any relocation, re- erection, alteration, replacement or change in any way to the structure or sign panel /face /copy. Ordinary maintenance and repair of a sign shall be permitted without loss of non - conforming status if the cost of all maintenance and repair over a two -year period is less than 25 percent of the cost of replacing the sign. Section 2. Ordinance 2303 §10 (part), as codified at TMC Section 19.36.070, "Additional Signage Prohibited," is hereby amended to read as follows: 19.36.070 Additional Signage Prohibited No additional permanent building- mounted signage is permitted on a tenant space that contains a non - conforming building- mounted sign. No additional permanent freestanding signs are permitted on a premises that contains a non - conforming freestanding sign other than a sign that was classified as "freeway interchange" under the previous Sign Code. Section 3. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section /subsection numbering. Section 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage and publication as provided by law. W: Word Processing \OrdinancesWmend Sign Code re freeway interchange signs strike -thru 7 -3 -14 NG:bjs 42 Page 2 of 3 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2014. ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Rachel Turpin, Assistant City Attorney Jim Haggerton, Mayor Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: W: Word Processing \OrdinancesWmend Sign Code re freeway interchange signs strike -thru 7 -3 -14 NG:bjs Page 3 of 3 43 44 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review 07/14/14 PMC,;, 0 Resolution Mtg Date 07/21/14 LA 07/21/14 PMC ❑ Other Mtg Date 1..",\ SPONSOR'S Approve Resolution authorizing the issuance of checks before Council has acted to approve SUMMARY such claims. This would allow the City to pay invoices that would otherwise be paid late due to unforeseen circumstances with vendors or mail delivery issues. Based upon input by the FS Committee, staff agreed to revise the voucher review process to include a mechanism to alert the Council to claims that have already been paid. REVIEWED BY ❑ COW Mtg. ❑ CA &P Cmte ❑ Utilities Cmte ❑ Arts Comm. DATE: 07/08/14 0 F &S Cmte ❑ Transportation Cmte Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. CHAIR: SEAL ❑ Parks COMMI I"I hE RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. COMMIv Finance ITEM INFORMATION ITEM No. 5.B. 45 STAFF SPONSOR: PEGGY MCCARTHY ORIGINAL. AGENDA DATE: 07/14/14 AGENDA ITEM TITLI? Resolution authorizing the issuance of checks in payment of claims before the Council has acted to approve such claims CATEGORY / 1 Discussion Mtg Date 07/14/14 ❑ Motion Mtg Date 0 Resolution Mtg Date 07/21/14 ❑ Ordinance Mtg Date ❑ Bid Award Mtg Date ❑ Public Hearing Mtg Date ❑ Other Mtg Date SPONSOR ❑ Council ❑ Mayor n HR ❑ DCD 0 Finance ❑ Fire ❑ IT ❑ P&R ❑ Police ❑ PW SPONSOR'S Approve Resolution authorizing the issuance of checks before Council has acted to approve SUMMARY such claims. This would allow the City to pay invoices that would otherwise be paid late due to unforeseen circumstances with vendors or mail delivery issues. Based upon input by the FS Committee, staff agreed to revise the voucher review process to include a mechanism to alert the Council to claims that have already been paid. REVIEWED BY ❑ COW Mtg. ❑ CA &P Cmte ❑ Utilities Cmte ❑ Arts Comm. DATE: 07/08/14 0 F &S Cmte ❑ Transportation Cmte Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. CHAIR: SEAL ❑ Parks COMMI I"I hE RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. COMMIv Finance I :I. Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURIi REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $ $ $ Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 07/14/14 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 07/14/14 Informational Memorandum dated 07/02/14 Resolution in Draft Form CrimeSHIELD Policy for Governmental Entities RCW 42.24.180 Taxing district -Issue checks before approval by leg. body- conditions Minutes from the Finance and Safety Committee Meeting of 07/08/14 07/21/14 45 46 2 906 T{]: of City _' '--'''--,_ Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM Mayor Haggerton Finance & Safety Committee FROM: Peggy McCarthy, Finance Director BY: Vicky Carlsen, Deputy Finance Director DATE: July 2, 2014 SUBJECT: Resolution authorizing issuance of checks before approval by Council ISSUE Approve Resolution authorizing the City to issue checks before Council has approved such claims through the Consent Agenda process. BACKGROUND The City currently pays claims twice a noonth, immediately after Regular Council meetings. Most cVntr8ctS, professional services and utilities are paid via a regularly issued check. Many supplies are purchased via a City issued credit card (PCard program) through US Bank. (JCca3iOnaUy, invoices are paid late due to unforeseen circumstances with vendors, mail delivery issues, etc. DISCUSSION The City is seeking formal approval from Council to issue checks prior to Council approval to address urgent claims ssues that sometimes arise. While this does not happen frequently, it does occasionally occur, and having authority to pay claims prior to Council approval gives the City the flexibility to pay the invoices immediately rather than waiting for the next Regular Council meeting. FlCVV42.24.18O allows taxing districts, including Cddes, to issue checks before approval by the legislative body. In order for the City to seek Council authority to implement this process, the City must meet 3 conditions. The conditions are outlined in the chart below and show the current practice and what changes could occur if Council allows the City to pay claims prior to Council approval. Requirement per RCW 42.24.180 The Auditing Officer and the individuals designated to sign checks shall have in place an official bond for the faithful discharge of his or her duties in an amount equal to or exceeding $50,000 Current Practice Revised Practice The Finance Director and other City staff are currently bonded for $250,000 per loss No change INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 The City CouncH shall adopt contracting, hiring, purchasing and disbursing policies that implement effective internal controls • The City Council shall provide for its review of the documentation supporting claims paid and for City Council approval of all checks issued for payment of claims at a Council meeting within one month of issuance of the checks The City Council shall require that if, upon its review, it disapproves some claims, the Director of Finance and individuals designated to sign checks shall jointly establish the disapproved claims as receivables of the City and pursue collection diligently until the amounts disapproved are collected or until the City Council is satisfied and approves the claims Policies currently in p|@ce, policies reviewed and updated as necessary Council reviews all documentation prior to issuing checks Necessary process change upon implementation of proposed resolution No change Council would continue to review all documentation on a regular schedule. Most claims would be paid after Council review and approval. The City would have the authority to pay invoices immediately when necessary. Upon Council review, if a claim is disapproved, the claim will be recognized as a receivable to the City and the City will pursue collection until either the funds are recovered or the Council approves the claim for payment. While paying claims prior to Council approval gives the City flexibility to handle claims issues that can arise, the Council shall continue to retain full authority for review and approval. If the City needed to issue a check prior to Council approval, no more than 3 weeks would lapse before Council would have the opportunity to review and approve the check. It is not uncommon for government entities to seek this authority. Many cities and other government agencies have already implemented the provisions in RCW 42.24.180 including the Cities of Federal VVay, Kent, SeaTac, and Newcastle. Having this ability will allow the Finance department to optimize efficiency and effectiveness and improve service quality and better ensure timely payment of invoices, RECOMMENDATION Council is being asked to approve the resolution and consider this item at the July 14, 2014 Committee of the Whole meeting and subsequent July 21, 2014 Regular Meeting. ATTACHMENTS Draft Resolution CrimeSHIELD Po!icy for Governmental Entities RCW 4224.180 Taxing district — Issuance of warrants or checks before approval of legislative body Conditions 48 FT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF CHECKS IN PAYMENT OF CLAIMS BEFORE THE COUNCIL HAS ACTED TO APPROVE SUCH CLAIMS WHEREAS, RCW 42.24.180 authorizes the legislative body of local governments to authorize issuance of checks in payment of claims, after the designated officer has signed the checks; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Tukwila has determined that it would be in the best interest of the City and its citizens, and would promote effectiveness and efficiency in the administration of the accounts payable of the City, to implement this enabling statute at the City of Tukwila effective August 1, 2014; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Mayor and Auditing Officer of the City of Tukwila are authorized to sign or co-sign checks. The Mayor is the designated officer of the City, and the Finance Director shall serve as the Auditing Officer. Both the Mayor and the Auditing Officer shall be required to furnish an official bond for the faithful discharge of his or her duties in an amount not less than $50,000. Section 2. Any authorization provided by this resolution is subject to the adoption of policies and procedures for purchasing and disbursement of funds, which shall implement effective internal controls over funds and property of the City. Such policies and procedures shall be approved by resolution or other official City Council action. Section 3. Whenever checks are issued prior to City Council review and approval, as supported by this authorizing resolution, such review and approval of claims and supporting documentation shall occur at a regularly scheduled City Council meeting within one month from the date of issuance. W:\Word Processing \Resolutions\Authorize issuance of checks before Council approval 7-9-14 VC:bjs Page 1 of 2 49 Section 4. Upon the City Council's review of claims and supporting documentation, if the Council disapproves one or more claims, the Auditing Officer and Mayor shall jointly cause the disapproved claim or claims to be recognized (and shown on the City's financial books and records) as accounts receivable of the City. Collection of such accounts receivable shall be diligently pursued until the amounts are collected or until the City Council is satisfied and approves such claim or claims. Section 5. The City shall implement the policies and procedures authorized per RCVV 42.24.180 and this resolution effective August 1, 2014. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2014. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk De'Sean Quinn, Council President APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Rachel Turpin, Assistant City Attorney Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Resolution Number: W:\Word Process ng\Resolutions\Authorize issuance of checks before Council approval 7-9-14 VC:bjs 50 Page 2 of 2 C ri me D Policy cy for Governmental Entities es Co Code Hartford Fire Insurance Company Hartford, CTOS115 Hartford Casualty Insurance Company Hartford, CT 06115 The Company is shown above by Co. Code Co Code Hartford Insurance Company of lllinois Naperville, IL 60566 Hartford lnsurance Company of the Midwest Indianapolis, IN 46204 Hartford Insurance Company of the Southeast Maitland, FL 32751 F In return for the payment of the premium, and subject to all the terms of this Policy, we agree with you to provide �. DECLARATIONS ITEM CITY OF TUKWILA 1. Named Insured: Mailing Address: 62OO SOUTHCENTER BLVo. TUKWILA, WA 98I88 3. Policy Period: �um »or�z �' �»»s until cancelled (12:01 A.M. Standard Time at Your Mailing Address) 4. Coverages, Limits of Insurance and Deductibies: Insuring Agreements, Limit of Insurance and Deductible Amounts shown below are subject to all of the terms of this policy that apply. Insuring Agreements Forniirig Part of This Pollcy 1�L Employee Theft Per Loss 1.B. Employee Theft - Per Employee 2, Depositors Forgery or Alteration 3. ThnM, Disappearance and Destruction Money, Securities and Other Property 4. Robbery and Safe Burglary ' Money and Securities 5. Computer and Funds Transfer Fraud Limit of Deductible Insurance Amount $250,000 $I,000 $D so so SO so SO SO $O so so 5. Form Numbers of Endorsements Forming Part of This PoIicy When Issued: F-4290-0, F-4298-0 G. Cancellation of Prior Insurance: By acceptance of this Policy you give us notice cancelling prior policies or bonds numbered: the cancellations to be effective at the time this policy becomes effective. This Policy has been signed by the Company's President and Secretary, but it shall not be binding unless it is countersig ried by its authorized representative. Michael S. Wilder, Secretary Countersigned by: Ramani Ayer, President aCOO . Authorized Representative Form F-4202-0 P:me 1 of 12 © 1998, The Hartford Throughout this Policy the words "you" and your" refer to the named Insured in the Declarations. The words "we", "us", and "our" refer to the Company providing this insurance. Other words and phrases that appear in quotation marks have a special meaning. Refer to Section V., Exclusions; Section VI., General Conditions; and Section VII., Definitions, to determine where this Policy restricts coverage. L CONSIDERATION CLAUSE In exchange for the payment of premium and subject to the Declarations, Insuring Agreements, Exclusions, General' Conditions, Definitions and terms of this Policy, we will pay for Foss which you sustain resulting directly from acts committed or events occurring at any time and discovered by you during the Policy Period shown in the Declarations or during the period of time provided in General Condition L. EXTENDED PERIOD TO DISCOVER LOSS. II. INSURING AGREEMENTS Coverage is provided under the foliowing Insuring Agreements if either an amount is stated in the Insuring Agreement or for which there is a Limit of Liability shown in the Declarations. A. INSURING AGREEMENT 1 A. - EMPLOYEE THEFT - PER LOSS VVemi||payfor|oauofordamageto"money^.^neouhtims^and^oMherproperty^|nanyonn^ocournenue^ whiohrosu|tsdirect|yhnm^theff'byen^*mpdoyao".whetherornotidenhfiabln.whUeauhnga|oneorin collusion with other persons. In this Insuring Agreement, "occurrence" means all loss caused by, or invn|ving, one or more "employees" whether the result of a single act or a series of acts. B. INSURING AGREEMENT 1.B. - EMPLOYEE THEFT - PER EMPLOYEE We will pay for loss of or damage to "money", "securities" and "other property" In any one "occurrence" which results directly from "theft" by an ^emp|uyee^, whether or not idenbfab|e, while acting alone or in collusion with other persons. In this Insuring Agreement, "occurrence" means all loss up to the Limit of Liability caused by each ''omp|oyoe'', whether the result of a single act or a series of acts. C. INSURING AGREEMENT 2. - DEPOSITORS FORGERY OR ALTERATION 1. We will pay for loss resulting directly from "forgery" or alteration of checks, drafts, promissory notes, or similar written promises, orders or directions to pay a sum certain in "money" that are a. made or drawn upon you; or b. made or drawn upon one acting as your agent and drawn on your account or that are purported to have been so made or drawn. 2. We will treat mechanically reproduced signatures the same as handwritten signatures. 3. If you are sued for refusing to pay any instrument in C.1. above, on the basis that it has been forged or altered and you have our written corisent to defend against that nuit, we will pay for any reasonable legal expenses that you incur and pay in such defense. The amount that we will pay is in addition to the Limit of Liability applicable to this Insuring Agreement. If a Deductible Amount applies to this Insuring Agreement, we will also apply it to the amount of legal expenses incurred ir this Insuring Agreement. 4. You must include with your proof of loss any instrument involved in that |nas, or, if that is not posoib|a, an affidavit setting forth the amount and cause of loss and describing both sides of said instrument. 5. This Insuring Agreement covers loss you sustain anywhere in the world; the'Tenitury General Condition does not apply. Form F-4202-0 52 © 1998, The Hartford Page 2 of 12 D. INSURING AGREEMENT 3. - THEFT, DISAPPEARANCE AND DESTRUCTION- MONEY, 1. INSIDE THE PREMISES a. We will pay for loss of "money" and "securities" inside the "premises" or "banking premises" resuitThg directiy from "theft", disappearanoe or destruction. b. We will payfor|oasofnrdemmgeto''otherproperty^ (1) inside the "premises" resulting directly from an actual or attempted "robbery" of a "custodian"; or (2) inside the "premises" in a safe or vault resulting directly from an actual or attempted "safe burglary". c. We will pay for Ioss from damage to the ~pnemiman" or its exterior resulting from an actual or attempted (1) "theft" of money" or 'securities"; or (2) "robbery" or "safe burglary" of "other property" if you are the owner of the "premises" or are liable for damage to it. d. We will pay for Ioss of or damage to a locked uafe, vou|t, cash reQister, or cash box or cash drawer located inside the "premises" resulting directly from an actual or attempted "theft" or unlawful entry into those containers. 2. OIJTSIDE THE PREMISES We will pay for a. loss of "money" and "securities" outside the "premises" in the care and custody of a "messenger" or an armored motor vehicle company resulting directly from "theft', disappearance or destruction; or b. loss of or damage to "other property" outside the "premises" in the care and custody of a "messenger" or an armored motor vehicle company resulting directly from an actual or attempted "robbery". E. INSURING AGREEMENT 4. - ROBBERY AND SAFE BURGLARY - MONEY AND SECURITIES 1. INSIDE THE PREMIS ES We will pay for l of or or damage to "money" and "securities" a. resulting directly from an actual or attempted "robbery" a "custodian" inside the "premises"; or b. resulting directly from an actual or an attempted "safe burglary" occurring inside the "premises" or inside a "banking premises". 2. OIJTSIDE THE PREMISES We will pay for Ioss of or damage to "money" and "securities' outside the "premises" in the care and custody of a "messenger" or an armored motor vehicle company resulting directly from an actual or attempted 'robbery", F. INSURING AGREEMENT 5. - COMPUTER AND FUNDS TRANSFER FRAUD We will pay for Ioss of and loss from damage to "money", "securities" and "other property" following and directly related to the use of any computer to fraudulentry cause a transfer of that property from inside the "premises" or 'banking premises" 1. to a person (ot erthama^mesmenger")outoideth000^pnaminao^;or 2. to a place outside those "prernises". An$, we will pay for Ioss of "money" or "securities" through "funds transfer fraud" resulting directly from "fraudulent transfer instructions" communicated to a "financial inetitution" and instructing such institution to pay, deliver, or transfer "money" or "securities" from your "transfer account". G. INSURING AGREEMENT 6. - MONE? ORDERS AND COUNTERFEIT CURRENCY Form F-4202-0 Page 3 of 12 0 1998, The Hartford 1. We will pay for loss resulting directly from your having in good faith, in exchange for merchandise, "money" or services accepted a. money orders issued by any post offiuo, express company or bank in the United States of America or Cnada that are not paFd upon presentation; and b. "counterfeit' United States of America or Canadian Paper currency that is acquired during the regular course of business. The Limit of Insurance under this insuring agreement is $50,000. and there is no deductible applying to foss covered under this agreement. 2. You must notify the police if you have reason to believe that you have accepted a "counterfeit" money order or "counterfeit' paper currericy. 111. LIMIT OF INSURANCE The most that we wiIJ pay for loss in any one "occurrence" is the applicable Limit of Insurance shown in the Declarations. W. DEDUCTIBLE We will not pay for loss in any one "occurrence" unless the amount of the loss exceeds the Deductible Amount shown in the Declarations. We will theri pay the amount of Ioss in excess of the Deductible Amount, up to the Limit of Insurance. In the event that more than one Deductible Amount could apply to the same oss, only the highest Deductible Amount will be applied, You must give us notice as soon as possible of any loss of the type insured under the Policy if, in your best estimation, such loss will, or will appear to exceed 25% of the current Deductible Amount for the Insuring Agreement under which the loss has occurred. V. EXCLUSIONS (App!ying To Al! Insuring Agreements Unless Otherwise Specified) This Policy Does Not Apply To And We Will Not Pay For: A. Accounting or Arithmetical Errors or Omssions Loss resulting from aocounting or arithmetical errors. B. Acts of Employees, Managers, Directors, Trustees or Representatives Loss resulting from ''theft' or any other dishonest or criminal act committed by any of your "emp|oyeeu'', managero, direotoru, trustees or representatives whether acting alone or in collusion with other persons or while performing services for you or otherwise except when covered under Insuring Agreement 1.A. or 1.B. C. Bonded Employee Loss caused by any 'employee" required by law to be individually bonded, D. Damages Damages for wtiich you are legally liable as a result of: 1 the deprivation of the civil rights of any person by an "employee"; or 2. the tortious conduct of an "employee" except conversion of property of other parties held by you in any capacity E. Employee Cancelled Under Prior Insurance Loss cause by any "employee" of yours or predecessor in interest of ynunn, for whom similar prior insurance has been cancelled and not reinstated since the last cancellation. F. Exchanges or Purchases Loss resulting from the giving or surrendering of property in any exchange or purchase. G. Fire Loss from damage to the premises resulting from Mny, however caused, except for loss of or damage to "money" or "securities" and loss from damage to a safe or vault under Insuring Agreement 3. and 4. B. Governmental Action Loss resulting from seizure or destruction of property by order of governmenta] authority. Form F-4202-0 Page 4 of 12 01AA8. The Hartford 54 I. Indirect Loss Loss that is an indirect result of any act or "occurrence" covered by this Policy including but not limited to Ioss resulting from 1. your inability to realize income that you would have realized had there been no loss of or damage to "money", "securities" or "other property". 2. payment or darnages of any type for whicb you are !egally Iiable. But we wiI pay compensatory damages arising directly from a Ioss covered under ths policy. 3. payment of costs, fees or other expenses you incur in establishing either the existence of or the amount of Ioss under this policy. J. Inventory Shortages Loyo, or that part of any |ooa, the proof of which in as to its existence or amount is dependent upon 1. an inventory computation; or 2. a profit and loss computation. Hmwever, where you establish wholly apart from such inventory computations that you have sustained a loss covered under this Po|ioy. then you may offer your inventory records and actual physical count of nventory in support of the amourit of Ioss claimed. K. Legal Expenses Expenses related to any legal action except when covered under Insuring Agreement 2. L. Money Operated Devices Loss of property contained in any money operated device unless the amount of any "money" deposited in ft is recorded by a continuous recording instrurnent in the device. M. Motor Vehicles or Equipment And Accessories Loss of or damage to motor vehicles, tnai|ene, or semi-trailers or equipment or accessories attached to them. N. Nuclear Loss resulting from nuclear reaction, nuclear radiation, or radioactive contamination, or any related act or incident. 0. Trading Losses Loss resulting directly or indirectly from tnading, whether in your name or in a genuine or fictitious account. P. Transfer or Surrender of Property Loss of or damage to property of any kind after it has been transferred or surrendered to a person or place outside the "premises" or "banking premises" 1. on the basis of unauthorized instructions; or 2. as a result of a threat to do bodily harm to any person; or 3. as a result of a threat to do damage to any property. But this Exclusion does not apply under Insuring Agreement 3. or 4. to loss of "money", "securities" and "other property" whUe outside the "premises" or "banking premises" in the care and custody of a "messenger" if you: 1. had no knowledge of any threat at the time that the conveyance began; or Z. had knowledge of a threat at the time the conveyance began, but the loss was not related to the threat. Q. Treasurer or Tax Collector Loss caused by a treasurer or tax collector by whatever name known. R. Vandalism Loss from damages to the "premises' or to the exterior of any safe, vau|t, cash box, cash drawer or cash register by vandalism or mischief. S. Voluntary Parting of TiUe To or Possession of Property Loss resulting from your, or anyone acting on your express or implied authorih/, being induced by any dishonest act to voluntarily part with title to or possession of any property. T. War and Similar Actions Loss resulting from war, whether or not deo|orod, warlike action, insurrection, raba||ion, or revu|ution, or any related act or incident. Form F-4202-0 Page 5 of 12 0 1998, The Hartford VI. GENERAL CONDITIONS A. ARMORED MOTOR VEHICLE COMPANIES Under Insuring Agreements 3. and 4. we will pay only for the amount of loss you cannot recover 1. under your coitract with the armored motor vehicle company; and 2. from any insurance or indemnity carried, by or for the benefit of customers of the armored motor vehicle company or from the armored motor vehicle company. B. CALCULATION OF PREMIUM The premium shown in the Declarations was computed based on rates in effect at the time the Policy was issued. On each ronovma|, continuadion, or anniversary of the effecive date of this Po|icy, we will compute the premium in accordance with our rates and rues then in effect. C. CANCELLATION OR NONRENEWAL OF POLICY 1. CANCELLATION a. The first named Insured shown in the Declarations may cancel this Policy by mailing or deUvering to us advance wiltten notice of cancellation. b. We may cancel this policy by mailing or delivering to the first named Insured written notice of cancellation at least: (1) 10 days before the effective date of cancellation if we cancel for non-payment of premium; or (2) 90 days before the effective date of cancellation if we cancel for any other reason. c. We will mail or deliver our notice to the first named |nnured'o last mailing address known to us. d. Notice of cancellation will state the effective date of cancellation. The Policy Period will end on that date e. If this policy is cancelled, we will send the first named Insured any premium refund due. If we mynoe|, the refund will be pro rata. If the first named Insured oanoe|n, the refund may be less than pro rata. The cancellation will be effective even if we have not made or offered a refund. f. If notice is mailed, proof of mailing will be sufficient proof of notice. 2. NONRENEWAL a. We may elec not to renew this Pohcy at each annual anniversary date. b. If we decide not to renew this po|ioy, we will mail or deliver written notice to the first named Insured shown in the Declarations, at the address shown in this Pn|ioy, ot least 9O days before the annual anniversary date. c. If notice is mai|ed, proof of mailing will be sufficient proof of notice. Q. CANCELLATION AS TO ANY EMPLOYEE Insur[ng Agreement 1.A. or 1.B. iscancelled astoany "employee" a. immediately upon discovery by you or any official or employee authorized to monmge, govern, or control your "employees", of "theft" or any other dishonest act committed by the ''emp|oyee'' whether before or after becoming emptoyed by you, b. on the date specified in a notice mailed to you. The date will be at least 30 days after the date of the mailing. And, the mailing of notice to you at the last mailing address known to us will be sufficient proof of notice. Delivery of notice is the same as mailing. E. CHANGES This Policy contains all of the agreements between you and us concerning the insurance afforded. The first named Insured shown in the Declarations is authorized to make changes in the terms of this Policy with our consent. This Policy's terms can be amended or waived only by endorsement issued by us and made a part of this Policy. Form F-4202-0 Page 6 of 12 0 1998, The Hartford 56 F. CONCEALMENT, MISREPRESENTATION OR FRAUD This Policy in void in any case of fraud by you as it relates to this Policy at any time. It is also void if you or any other Insured, at any time, intentionally conceal or misrepresent a material fact concerning 1. this Policy; 2. the property covered under this Policy; 3. your interes in the property covered under this Poflcy; or 4. a claim under this Policy. G. CONSOLIDATION OR MERGER If through consolidation or merger with, or purchase or acquisition of assets or liabilities of, some other ontity, any additional persons become "employees" or you acquire the use and control of any additional "premises" 1. you must give us written notice and obtain our written consent to extend this insurance to such additional "employees" or "premises". We may condition our consent upon payment of an additional premium; but there shall only be a premium charge if such merger or acquisition results in a 1596, or greater, increase in the number of "employees", assets or revenues acquired through the merger or acquisition. 2. For the first 60 days after the effective date of such consolidation, mwrger, acquisition of assets or |iabi|itiem, any insurance afforded for "employees" or "premises" also applies to these additional "employees" or "premises" for acts committed within this 60 day period. H. DISCOVERY 1. We will pay for lmsswhkch you sustain through acts or events committed or occurring at any time and which are discovered by you during the Policy Period or during the period provided in General Condition L., EXTENDED PERIOD TO DISCOVER LOSS. 2. Discovery of loss occurs when you first become aware of facts which would cause a reasonable person to assume that a loss covered by this Policy has been, or may be incurred even though the exact amount or the details of the toss may not then be known. 3. Discovery also occurs when you receive notice of an actual or potential claim against you alleging facts, which if true, would constitute a covered loss under this policy. L DUTJES IN THE EVENT OF LOSS After you discover a loss or a situation which may result in a loss of or damage to "money", "securities" or "other property", you must 1. notify us as soon as possible but no later than 60 days after discovery of loss. 2. submit to examination under oath at our request and give us a signed statement of your answers. 3. give us dedai|ed, sworn proof of loss within 120 days. 4. cooperate with us in the invest[gation and settlement of any claim. 5. notify the police if you have reason to believe that your loss involves a violation of law. J. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS 1. If any one or more "employee benefit Plans" are insured jointly with any other entity under this Po|icy, you or the plan administrator rnust select a Limit of Insurance for Insuring Agreement 1. that is sufficient to provide a Limit of lnsurance for each Plan which is at least equal to that required if each Plan were separately insured. 2. If the flrst named Insured is an entity other than a P|an, any payments we make to the Insured for loss sustained by any Plan will be held by that Insured for the use and benefit of the Plan(s) sustaining the toss. 3. If two or more Plans are insured under this Po{icy, any payment which we make for loss sustained by two or more P|onn, or of commingled ^fundo" or "other property" of two or more P|nny, which arises out of one ^onourrence^, is to be shared by each Plan sustaining loss in the proportion that the Limit of nsurance required for each PIan bears to the total of those Jimits. 4. This Policy insures those Plans which are named as additional Insureds in the Declarations or on any attached Schedule for loss through fraud or dishonesty as defined in Section 2580.412-9 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) as amended. For any Plans not specifically named as Insureds, this Policy is deemed to be in compliance with, and satisfy the Form F-4202-0 Page 7 of 12 0 1998, The Hartford bonding requirements of Section 2580.412.11 of the ant. This insurance provides a Limit of Insurance which is equal to 10Y6 of the amount of the funds handled or $500,000., whichever is less, for each Plan bonded and the minimum Limit of Insurance for any Plan shall be $1.000, The Limit of Insurance avaifable for any Plan loss will be determined by the amount of funds handled on the date when any covered loss occurs subject to the foregoing limitations. 5. The Deductible provision which applies to the Employee Theft Insuring Agreement shall not apply to loss which is sustained by any Plan subject to ERISA and which Plan is covered under this insurance. K. EXAMINATION OF YOUR BOOKS AND RECORDS 1. We may examine and audit your books and records as they relate to this Policy at any time during the Policy Period and up to three years afterward. 2. We may also examine and audit the books and records of any organation which you newly acquire and that is deemed to be a named Insured under this Policy. L. EXTENDED PERIOD TO DISCOVER LOSS 1. We will pay for loss which you sustained prior to the effective date of termination or cancellation af this insurance, which is discovered by you a. no later than 60 days from the date of the termination, cancellation or non-renewal; and b. as respects any "employee benefit Plan(s)", no later than 1 year from the date of that termination, uoncel|ationnrnon'reneva|. 2. Hmwever, this extended period to discover loss terminates immediately upon the effective date of any other insurance obtained by you to rmp|aoe, in whole or in part, the insurance afforded by this Po|icy, whether or not such other insurance provides coverage for loss sustained prior to its effective date. M. FACSIMILE SIGNATURES We will treat mechanically reproduced facsimile signatures the same as handwritten signatures. N. INDEMNIFICATION We will indemnify any of your officials who are required by law to give bonds for the faithful performance of their service against loss through "theft'' by an "employee" who serves under them, subject to the Limit of Insurance. Q. INSPECTION AND SURVEYS 1. We have the right but are not obligated to a. make inspections and surveys at any time; b. give you reports on the conditions we find; and n. recommend changes. 2. Any inapectiono, sun/aya, reports or recommendations relate only to insurability and the premiums to be charged. We do not make safety inspections. We do not undertake to perform the duty of any person or organization to provide for the health or the safety of workers or the public. And, we do not warrant that conditions a. are safe or healthful; or b. comply with ]avns, regulations, codes or standards. 3. This condition applies not only to un, but also to any nahng, odvioory, rate service or similar organization which makes insurance inspections, surveys, reports or recommendations. P. JOINT INSURED 1. If more than one Insured is named in the Declarations, the first named Insured will act for itself and for every other Insured for all purposes of this Policy. If the first named Insured ceases to be covened, then the next named Insured will become the first named Insured. 2. If any Insured or officer of an Insured has knowledge of any information relevant to this Policy, that knowledge is considered to be knowledge of every tnsured. S. An employee" of ny Insured is consfdered to be an "employee" of every ?risured. 4. If this Policy or any of its Insuring Agreements is oanoo||ad, terminated or non-renewed as to any Insured, loss sustained by that Insured is covered only if discovered by you during the period of time provided in General Condition L., EXTENDEL) PERIOD TO DISCOVER LOSS. And, this extended period to discover loss also terminates in accordance with paragraph 2 of that condition. Form F-4202-O Page 8 of 12 0 1998, The Hartford 58 5, We will not pay a greater amount for loss sustained by more than one Insured than we would pay if all of the loss had been sustained by one Insured. LEGAL ACTION AGAINST 0S You may not bring any legal action against us nvolving loss 1. unless you have compl[ed with all the terms of this PoIicy; and 2. until 90 days after you have filed proof of oss with us; and 3, unless such action is brought within 2 years from the date that you discover such loss. R. LIBERALIZATION If we adopt any revision that would broaden the coverage within the Policy without additional premium within 45 days prior to or during the Poicy Period, the broadened coverage will immediately apply to this Policy. S. LOSS COVERED UNDER MORE THAN ONE INSURING AGREEMENT OF THIS POLICY If two or more Insuring Agreements of this Policy apply to the same loss we will pay the lesser of 1. the actual amount of loss; or 2. the sum of the Limits of Insurance applicable tn those Insuring Agreements. T. NON ACCUMULATION OF LIMIT OF INSURANCE Regardless of the number of years this Policy remains in force or the number of premiums paid, no Limit of Insurance cumulates from year to year or Policy Period to Policy Period. U. OTHER INSURANCE 1. This policy does not apply to loss recoverable or recovered under other insurance or indemnity. If the limit of the other insurance or indemnity is insufficient to cover the entire amount of the loss, this Policy will apply to that part of the |onn, other than that falling within any Deductible Amount, not recoverable or recovered under the other insurance or indemnity. 2. However, this Policy will not apply to the amount of Ioss that is more than the applicable Limit of Insurance shown in the Declarations. V. OWNERSHIP OF PROPERTY; INTERESTS COVERED 1, The property covered under this Poticy is limited to property a. that you own or lease; or b. for which you are legally liable. W. PREMIUMS The first named Insured is responsible for the payment of all premiums and will be the payee for all returnpremiums we pay. X. RECORDS You must keep records of all property covered under this policy so we can verify the amount of any Y. RECOVERIES 1. Any recoveries, less the cost of obtaining thom, made after the settlement of loss covered by this Policy will be distributed a. to you, until you are reimbursed for any loss that you sustain that exceeds the Limit of Insurance and the Deductible Amount, if any; b. then to us, until we are reimbursed for the settlement made; and c. then to you, until you are reimbursed for that part of the loss equal to the Deductible Amount, if any. 2, Recoveries do not include any recovery e from inauranoe, suretyship, reinsuronce, security or indemnity taken for our benefit; or b. of ortginat 'securities" after duplicates of them have been issued. Z. SOLE BENEFIT This insurance is for your sote benefit. No legal proceeding of any kind to recover on account of loss under this policy may be brought by anyone but you. Form F-4202-0 Page 9 of 12 © 1998, The Hartford AA. SPECIAL LIMIT OF INSURANCE FOR SPECJFIED PROPERTY (Insuring Agreement 3.) We will pay no more than $5.000. for any one "occurrence" of loss of or damage to 1. precious mota|a, precious or semi-precious stnneo, pemds, furs or completely or partially completed articles made of or containing such materials that constitute the principal value of such articles; or 2. monuouhpto, drawings or- records of any kind or the cost of reconstructing them or reproducing any information contained in them. BB. TERRITORY This Policy covers acts committed or events occurring within the United States of America, U.S. Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico or Canada. However, we will pay for loss under Insuring Agreement 1. which is caused by an ''emp|oyem''while temporarily outside of the territories named in this General Condition for a period of not more than 90 consecutive days. CC. TRANSFER OF ¥OUR RIGHTS OF RECOVERY AGAINST OTHERS TO US You must transfer to us all your rights of recovery against any person or organization for any loss you sustained and for which we have paid or settled. You must also do everything necessary to secure those rights and do nothing after Ioss to impair them. DD. VALUATION 1. Subject a. Ioss of"money" but only up to and including its face value. We may, atour option, pay for a loss of "money" issued by other than the United States of America in either the face value in the "money" issued in that uuuntry, or, in the United States of America dollar equivalent detemiined by the rate of exchange on the day that the loss occurred. b. loss of "securities' but only up to and including their value at the close of business on the day that the oss was discovered. But, we may, at our option, 1) pay the value of such "securities", 2) replace them in kind in which event you must assign to us all your rights, title and interest in and to those "securities" or 3) pay the cost of any Lost Securities Bond required in connection with issuing duplicates of the "securities". Homever, we will be liable only for the payment of so much of the cost of the bond as would be charged for a bond having a penalty not exceeding (1) the value of the "securities" at the close of the business on the day the loss was discovered; or (2) the Limit of lnsurance. c loss of or damage to 'other property or loss from damage to the "premises" or its exterior for the replacement cost of the property without deduction for depnacietion, subject to 2. below. However, we will not pay for more than the tesser of (1) the Limit of lnsurance applicable to the lost or damaged property; or (2) the cost to replace the lost or damaged property with property of comparable material and quality and used for the same purpose; or (3) the arnount that you actually spend that is necessary to repair or replace the lost or damaged property. 2. We will not pay on a replacement cost basis for any loss or damage a. until the lost or damaged property is actually repaired or replaced; and b. unless the repair or replacement is made as soon as reasonably possible after the loss or damage. If the lost or damaged property is not repaired or replaced, we will pay based on actual cash value. 3. We may, at our option, pay for loss of or damage to properly other than "money" in the "money" of the country in which the loss occurred; or in the United States of America dollar equivalent of the ^money" of the country where the loss occurred determined by the rate of exchange on the day the loss was discovered. Any property that we pay for or replace becomes our property. 4. Loss of or Ioss from damage to any books or records of account or other necorda, tapes, disks, or electronic media used by you in the business but orily if a. such books, reuords, tapes or disks are actuatly reproduced and then only for not more than the blank booko, pages, tapes and disks or other materials plus the cost of labor for the actual transcription or copying of data which you shall furnish to reproduce such books, records, tapes or disks. VU DEFINITIONS Form F-4202-0 60 © 1998 The Hartford Page 10 of 12 A. premises" means the interior portion of that part of any building occupied by a banking institution or similar safe depository. B. "Counterfeit" rneans an imitation of an actual valid original which is intended to deceive and to be taken as the original C. "Custodian" means any "employee" while having the care and custody of property inside the ^pnamiuea'', excluding any person while acting as a ^watnhperuon^orjanitor. D. "Employee" means 1. any natural person a. while in your service or for 60 days after termination of service; and b. who you compensate directly by salary, wages, commissions; and c. who you have the right to direct and control while performing services for you; including one d. who is performing services for you as the uhainnan, or a member of any committee and whether compensated or not; or f. who is a noncompensated officer; or g. who is a volunteer who is not oompennotod, other than one who is a fund ao!icitor, while performing services for you that are usual to the duties of an 'employee"; or h. who is a former emp|oyeo, director or trustee retained as a consultant while performing services for you; or \ who inn student intern or guest student pursuing studies or dutles in any of your offices or "premises". 2. a natural person who is a trustee, officer, "emp|oyee", administrator or monager, except an administrator or a manager who is an independent contractor, of any "employee benefit Plan(s)" insured under this Policy; and your director or trustee while that person is handling "funds" or "other property" of "employee benefit P|an(n)" insured under this Policy. 3. a natural person who is furnished temporarily to you to substitute for a permanent "employee' to meet seasonal or short term work load conditions and while that temporary person is subject to your direction and control and performing services for you. However, such persons are excluded while having care and custody of property outside the "premises"; and e. ^emp|oyee^doesNOTmoon (1) any agent, broker, person leased to you by a labor leasing firm, footor, commission merchant, oons{gneo, ndependent contractor or representative of the same general character; or (2) any manager, director or trustee except while performing acts coming within the scope of the usual duties of an "employee". E. "Employee benefit Plan(s)" means any welfare or pension Plan listed in the Oen|arat\onn, on an attached schedule or for which automatic coverage is afforded that is subject to the Employee Retirement lncome Security Act (ERISA) of 1974, as amended. F. "Financial institution" means a benk, savings bank, savings and loan association or similar thrift inntitution, a stookbroker, mutual fund, liquid assets fund, or similar investment institution in which you maintain a "transfer account". G. "Forgery' means the signing of the name of another person or organization with intent to deceive; it does not mean a signature which consists in whole or in part of one's own name signed with or without authority, in any capacity, for any reason. H. "Fraudulent transfer instructions" means 1, fraudulent a|eotronic. te|e0raphio, facnimi|e, ceb|e, teletype or telephone instructions to a "financial institution" to debit a "transfer account" and to pay, transfer or deliver "money" or "securities" from such account and which instructions purport to have been authorized by you but which have been fraudulently transmitted by another; or 2, fraudulent written instructions to a "financial institution" to debit a "transfer oncount" and to pay, transfer or deliver 'money" or 'securities" from such account through an electronic funds transfer system at specified times or urder specified conditions and which instructions purport to have been duly authorized by you but which have been fraudulently iasued, forged or altered by another. |. "Funds transfer fraud" means "theft" of "money" or "securities" from any of your "transfer accounts" at a "financial institution" and occurring through "fraudulent transfer instructions" communicated to such "financial institution". J. "Messenger" means you or any "employee" while having care and custody of property outside the Form F-4202-0 Page 11 of 12 0 1998, The Hartford K. Money" means currency, coins and bank notes in current use and having a face value; and travelers nhecks, register checks and money orders held for sale to the general public. L. "Occurrence" means 1. as respects the Employee Theft Insuring Agreement, all foss caused by, or involving, one or more "employees", whether the result of a single act or a series of acts, 2. as respects the Forgery or Alteration Insuring Agreement, all loss caused by any person or in which that person is involved, whether the loss involves one or more instruments. 3 as respects all other Insuring Agreements, an act or series of related acts involving one or more persons; or an act or event or a series of related acts or events not involving any person. M. "Other Property" means any tangible property other than 'money" or "securities' that has intrinsic value but does not include any property excluded under this Policy. "Other property" does not include trade secrets, proprietary infurmation, confidential information or any oopyrights, paLento, trodemarks, proprietary manufacturing or processing pronedunms, or secret or confidential infnrmotion, including but not limited to credit card nurnbers, bank account numbers or any similar iriformation. N. "Premises" means the interior of that portion of any building which you occupy in conducting your business. O. "Rnbbery" means the unlawful taking of property from the care and custody of a person by one who has caused or threatened to cause that person bodily herm, nr, committed an obviously unlawful act witnessed by thet person. P. 'Safe burglary" means the unlawful taking of property from within a locked safe or vault by a person unlawfully entering the safe or vault as evidenced by marks of forcible entry upon its exterior, or, the taking of a safe or vault from inside the "premises". "Securities" means negotiable or non-negotiable instruments or contracts representing either "money" or property and includes tokens, tickets, revenue and other stamps (whether represented by actual stamps or unused value in a meter) in current use; ond, evidences of debt issued in connection with credit or charge cards, which cards are not issued by you; but does not include "money". R. "Theft" means the unlawful taking of "money", "securities" or uother property" to the deprivation of the Insured. S. "Transfer account means an account maintained by you at a "financial institution" from which you or your authorized representative may cause the payment, transfer or delivery of "money" or "securities" by any means described in the "fraudulent transfer instructions" definition. T. "Watchperson" means any person who you retain specifically to have the care and custody of property iriside the "premises" and who has no other duties. Form F-4202-0 Page 12 of 12 0 1998, The Hartford 62 THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. BRIDGE ENDORSEMENT The word "Policy" replaces the phrases "Crime General Provisions" and "Crime Coverage Forms" or "Coverage Part" wherever they appear in this Policy or in any endorsement made a part of the Policy. Form F-4290-0 Page 1 of 1 © 1998, The Hartford 63 64 THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. WASHINGTON CHANGES A. The foliowing General Conditions in the Policy are deleted in their entirely and replaced with the following: CANCELLATION a. The first named Insured shown in the Declarations may cancel this Policy by mailing or delivering to us advance written notice of cancellation, b. We may cancel this Policy by mailing or delivering to the first named Insured and the first named Insured's agent or broker written notice of msnue||ation, including the actual reason for the oonue)|adon, to the last mailing address known to us, at Ieast: (1) 10 days before the effective date of cancellation if we cancel for nonpayment of premium; or (2) 45 days before the effective date of cancellation if we cancel for any other reason. c. We will also mail or deliver to any mortgage holder, pledgee or other person shown in this Policy to have an interest in any loss which may occur under this Policy, at their last mailing address known to uo, written notice of cancellation, prior to the effective date of cancellation. This notice will be the same as that mailed or delivered to the first named Insured. d. Notice of oancellation will state the effeotive date of cancellation. The Policy Period will end on that date. e. If this Policy is canceled, we will send the first named Insured any premium refund due. if we cance, the refund will be pro rata. If the first named Insured oanoo|s, the refund will be at least 90% of the pro rata refund. The cancellation will be effective even if we have not made or offered a refund. [ If notice is rnai|ed, proof of maiHrtg will be sufficient proof of notice. CHANGES This Policy contains all the agreements between you and us concerning the insurance afforded. The first named Insured shown in the Declarations is authorized on behalf of all insured to agree with us on changes in the terms of this Policy. If the terms are ohanQem, the changes will be shown in an endorsement issued by us and made a part of this Policy. EXAMINATION OF YOUR BOOKS AND RECORDS 1. We may examine and audit your books and records as they relate to this Policy at any time during the Policy Period and up to three years afterward. 2. We may do the same as to the books and records of any organization you newly acqui re or form that is deemed to be named lnsured underthis Rolicy. INSPECTIONS AND SURVEYS We have the right but are not obligated to: 1. Make inspections and surveys at any time; 2. Give you reports on the conditions we find; and 3. Recommend changes. Any inspections, surveys, reports or recommendations relate only to insurability and the premiums to be charged. Such inspections are not safety inspections. We do not undertake any duty to prcvide for the health or safety of any person. And we do not represent or warrant that conditions: 1. Are safe or healmful; or Form F-4298-0 O1998. The Hartford Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc. with its permission ©copyright, Insurance Services Office, Inc., 1988, 1997 Page 1 of 2 2. Compiy with laws, regulations, codes or standards. This condition applies not only to us, but also to any rotng, mdvisnry, rate service or similar organization which makes insurance inspections, surveys, reports or recommendations on our behalf. NONRENEWAL VVe may elect nottonanowthioPo|ioybymai|ingordeAk/ndngwrittonnotoeofnnn-renewaLnbsingthe reasons for nonrenewai, to the first named tnsured and the first named Insured's agent or broker at their last mailing addresses known to us. We wiIl also mali to any mortgage hoider, pedgee or other persori shown in this Policy at their Iast mailing address known to un, written notice of nonrenewal. We will mail or deliver these notices at Ieast 45 days before the: a. Expiration of the Policy; or b. Anniversary date of this Poiicy if this Policy has been written for a term of more than one year. Otherwise, we wili renew this Poiicy uniess: a. The first named Insured fails to pay the renewal premium after we have expressed our willingness to renew, including a statement of the renewal premium, to the first named Insured and the first named Insured's agent or broker at ieast 20 days before the expiration date; or b. Other coverage acceptable to the insured has been procured prior to the expiration date of the Policy. PREMIUMS The first named Insured shown in the Declarations: 1. Is responsible for the payment of ali premiums; and 2. Will be the payee for any return premiums we pay. RECOVERIES Any recovery or salvage on a loss will accrue entirely to our benefit until the sum paid by us has been made up. But, we will be entitled to any other recovery only after you have been fully compensated for the loss. B. The TRANSFER OF YOUR RIGHTS OF RECOVERY AGAINST OTHERS TO US General Condition is replaced by the following: If any person or organization to or for whom we make payment under this Policy has rights to recover damages from another, those rights are transferred to us to the extent of our payment. That person or organization must do everything necessary to secure our rights and must do nothing after loss to impair them. Form F-42S8'O Page 2 of 2 01SS8. The Hartford Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc. with its permission ©copyright, Insurance Services Office, Inc., 1988, 1997 66 RCW 42.24.180. *Taxing district — Issuance of warrants or checks before approval by legislative body . Page of 1 RCW 42.24.180 *Taxing district -- Issuance of warrants or checks before approval by legislative body Conditions. In order to expedite the payment of claims, the legislative body of any *taxing dishiot, as defined in RCVV43,US,28O. may authorize the issuance of warrants or checks in payment of claims after the provisions of this chapter have been met and after the officer designated by statute, or, in the absence of statute, an appropriate charter provision, onJinance, or resolution of the *taxing district, has signed the checks or warrants, but before the legislative body has acted to approve the claims. The legislative body may stipulate that certain kinds or amounts of claims shall not be paid before the board has reviewed the supporting documentation and approved the issue of checks or warrants in payment of those dainno. Hovvever, all of the following conditions shall be met before the payment: (1) The auditing officer and the officer designated to sign the checks or warrants shall each be required to furnish an official bond for the faithful discharge of his or her duties in an amount determined by the legislative body but not less than fifty thousand dollars; (2) The legislative body shall adopt contracting, hirinO, purnhaaing, and disbursing policies that implement effective internal control; (3) The legislative body shall provide for its review of the documentation supporting claims paid and for its approval of all checks or warrants issued in payment of claims at its next regularly scheduled public meeting or, for cities and towns, at a regularly scheduled public meeting within one month of issuance; and (4) The legislative body shall require that if, upon review, it disapproves some o|aims, the auditing officer and the officer designated to sign the checks or warrants shall jointly cause the disapproved claims to be recognized as receivables of the *taxing district and to pursue collection diligently until the amounts disapproved are collected or until the legistative body 5 satisfied and approves the claims. [1994 c 273 § 18; 1984 c 128 § 11.] Notes: *Reviser's note: "Taxing district" redesignated "local government" by 1995 c 301 § 15. hcUp:/6onps]cg.vvo.gov/oc v/dcfauhaapx?citc=4224.!XU 6/30/2C67 68 x-.` Tukwila ��/C� of ��2�a �� Finance and Safety Committee FINANCE AND SAFETY COMMITTEE Meeting Minutes July 8, 2014 — 5:30 p.m.; Hazelnut Conference Room PRESENT Councilmembers: Verna Seal, Chair; Joe Duffie, Kathy Hougardy Staff: Derek Speck, Joyce Trantina, Vicky Carlsen, Eric Dnsver, Bob Giberson, Laurel Humphrey Guests: Omar Lee, Christine Lee, and Matthew Chan, Washington Place CALL TO ORDER: Committee Chair Seal called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. I. PRESENTATIONS No presentations. U. BUSINESS AGENDA A. Purchase of Replacement Malor Crimes Vehicle Staff is seeking Committee approval to purchase a Ford Taurus in the amount of $26,497.82 for the Major Crimes Division using surplus funds. Due to a significant cost savings in the replacement of the Jail Transport Van, the 2014 Police fleet replacement budget has a surplus of $78.690.58. so funds are available to accelerate the replacement of one of the Major Crimes vehicles, six of which will be approaching or surpassing their 100,000 mile replacement criteria in the 2015-2016 budget cycle. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. B. Resolution: Authorizing Issuance of Checks Before Council Action Staff is seeking Council approval of a resolution that would allow the City to occasionally issue checks before the Council has taken action to approve those claims. The City currently pays *claims twice o month, immediately e�erRegular ��eedings. {}nnaaionaUyissues arise that result in invoices being paid late. |naddidon. the City receives a large rebate for tinne|ypeynnenttoU8 Bank for the P<�ard program. R(�VV42,24,18O allows taxing districts, including Q�es, to issue checks prior to legislative approval if certain conditions are met. If this proposal is approved, the City Council will continueto retain full authorityfor review and approval. |faclaim is disapproved by Counci|, it will be recognized as a receivable to the City and collection will be pursued until funds are recovered or the Council approves the claim. Committee members asked clarifying questions and asked that the voucher review form be revised to include a mechanism to alert them to which claims have already been paid under this practice. Staff agreed to revise the document. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO JULY 14, 2014 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. C. Discussion of Options for Washinqton Place Fees Staff provided a briefing to the Committee regarding a request from Omar and Christine Lee that the City reduce or defer fees and taxes for their mixed-use development project at223 Andover Park East known as Washington Place. Because financing for this 8100 million project is nha||onging, and the Lees are looking at ways to address an $18 million budget deficit, they have requested the City examine any possibility for reduction or deferral in taxes and/or fees to ensure funding success. The Lees plan to use the Federal foreign investor program (EB'5) to provide at least $50 million nf the project funding.andUivontherepoyment schedule they would arrange with those investors, they believe they would have greater ability to pay the City starting five years following receipt of the certificate of occupancy. 70 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Meetin ' Date P ',tired b Ma or review Council review 07/14/14 DCS ma= ; °- ❑ Bid2lward Mtg Date ❑ Public Hearing Mtg Date ❑ Other Mtg Date SPONSOR ❑ Council /1 Mayor ❑ HR 0 DCD ❑ Finance ❑ Fire ❑ IT ❑ P&R ❑ Police ❑ PW SPONSOR'S The owners of 223 Andover Park East would like to develop a mixed -use building that SUMMARY includes 370 multi - family residential units and 189 hotel rooms. They have requested a property tax exemption on the multi - family portion and a reduction and deferral of permit and impact fees. The Council is being asked to discuss and provide guidance to staff. No action is requested at this time. REVIEWED BY ❑ COW Mtg. ❑ CA &P Cmte ❑ Utilities Cmte ❑ Arts Comm. DATE: 07/08/14 I4 F &S Cmte ❑ Transportation Cmte Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. h CHAIR: DUFFIE ❑ Parks COMMIT 1 ITEM INFORMATION ITEM No. 5.C. 71 STAFF SPONSOR: DEREK SPECK ORIGINAL AGENDA DA i i:: 07/14/14 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Washington Place Development Fees and Property Tax CATEGORY /1 Discussion Mtg Date 07/14/14 ❑ Motion Mtg Date ❑ Resolution Mtg Date ❑ Ordinance Mtg Date ❑ Bid2lward Mtg Date ❑ Public Hearing Mtg Date ❑ Other Mtg Date SPONSOR ❑ Council /1 Mayor ❑ HR 0 DCD ❑ Finance ❑ Fire ❑ IT ❑ P&R ❑ Police ❑ PW SPONSOR'S The owners of 223 Andover Park East would like to develop a mixed -use building that SUMMARY includes 370 multi - family residential units and 189 hotel rooms. They have requested a property tax exemption on the multi - family portion and a reduction and deferral of permit and impact fees. The Council is being asked to discuss and provide guidance to staff. No action is requested at this time. REVIEWED BY ❑ COW Mtg. ❑ CA &P Cmte ❑ Utilities Cmte ❑ Arts Comm. DATE: 07/08/14 I4 F &S Cmte ❑ Transportation Cmte Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. h CHAIR: DUFFIE ❑ Parks COMMIT 1 RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. COMMI!TEE Mayor's Office - Economic Development Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $0 $0 $0 Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 07/14/14 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 07/14/14 Informational Memorandum dated 7/9/14 Informational Memorandum dated 7/2/14, including attachments Minutes from the Finance and Safety Committee meeting of 7/8/14 71 72 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Economic Development Administrator DATE: July 9, 2014 SUBJECT: Washington Place Development Fees and PropertyTax ISSUE On July 8, 2014 the Finance and Safety Committee discussed the development fees and property tax for the proposed Washington Place development. At that meeting, the Committee requested a summary of options for the Council to consider. Those options are provided below. BACKGROUND The property owners of 223 Andover Park East would like to develop a mixed-use project C8U8d Washington Place and has requested the city to reduce or defer fees and taxes. The staff memo dated July 2, 2014 to the Finance and Safety Committee provides background information. DISCUSSION If the City is interested in adjusting fees and property tax to encourage construction of new multi-family residential units in the Urban Center, the City has four options. (1) Reduce the building permit fees and/or impact fees (2) Approved deferral of a portion of the building permit fees (3) Approve deferral of some or all of the development impact fees (traffic, parks, and fire) (4) Approve a property tax exemption on the multi-family residential portion of the project. It is important to note that while we are still performing some legal nysearCh, it is unlikely that the City could approve changes for this specific p ject. Most ikely, the City would need to adopt a fee deferral or multi-family property tax exemption program that would be based on specific criteria and apply to any pr jeot meeting that criteria. There is a significant amount of staf work needed to further research these general options. Before embarking on that work, staff would appreciate guidance as whether the Council is interested in exploring any or all of these, If sn, staff would return at a future Council meeting with specific recommendations. FINANCIAL IMPACT This topic is addressed in the July 2, 2014 memo. RECOMMENDATION The Council is requested to provide guidance on this topic. ATTACHMENTS Informationai Memorandum dated July 2, 2014 74 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Finance and Safety Committee FROM: Derek Speck, Economic Development Administrator DATE: July 2, 2014 SUBJECT: Washington Place Fee Deferral Options ISSUE The property owner of 223 Andover Park East would like to develop a mixed-use project called Washington Place and has requested the City reduce or defer fees and taxes. BACKGROUND Omar and Christine Lee, as owners of the former Circuit City site at 223 Andover Park East have been working for the past few years to demolish the Circuit City building and construct a mixed-use building that would comprise 370 multi-family residential units, 188 hotel rooms and a small cafe. The Lee's are still working on pr ject design and financing. Currently, the total project cost is over $100 million. The Lee's have explained that financing the p ject is very challenging and have requested the City for any possible reduction or deferral in taxes and fees in order to increase the probability that the p jectCanbefunded.Theyp|antousetheFedera|foneigninvesturprognann(EB-5)to provide at Ieast $50 million of the project ject funding. Given the repayment arrangements they would have with those investors, the Lee's have indicated they would have greater ability to pay taxes and fees starting five years after receiving certificate of occupancy. Currently, the Lee's have requested: (1) the development permit fees to be limited to $600,000, (2) the development impact fees to be reduced to the extent possible and deferred for payment in years five through eight after receiving a certificate of occupancy, and (3) to receive approval for an eight year property tax exemption on the multi-family residential portion of the project. Following is our most current estimate of the permit and impact fees and when they would be required to be paid per current City policy. The fees are based on the City's adopted fee schedules and are intended to cover the City's costs of providing the related services. INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 Current Estimate of Development Fees Due at Permit Application Due at Permit Issuance Total Building $208,000 $336,000 $544,000 Mechanical 13,000 54,000 67,000 Plumbing 2,000 7,000 9,000 Electrical 16,000 67,000 83,000 Traffic Concurrency 12,000 0 12,000 Traffic Impact 47,000 47,000 Fire Impact 484,000 484,000 Parks Impact 546,000 546,000 Total $251,000 $1,541,000 $1,792,000 Fees are estimates based on 189 hotel rooms and 370 apartments. Actual amounts will be calculated based on the application when submitted or when permits are issued, Additional permit fees may apply such as pavement mitigation, fire hydrants and sprinkers, special inspections, etc. Fees from non -City agencies such as water, sanitary sewer, and power are not reflected in this analysis. Developer may be required to install or contribute to infrastructure such as sanitary sewer. DISCUSSION The primary question is whether the City needs to make adjustments to the fees in order to ensure the development can move forward. We do not have a definitive answer to this question. On the one hand, the fees are less than 2% of the total project budget. Projects of this magnitude and risk do not typically move forward with higher projected returns that 2% would not make the go or no -go decision. On the other hand, this is not a typical project. Under conventional financing arrangements, this project would not be feasible since the estimated market rents for multi - family residential in Tukwila do not justify the investment. Because of the EB -5 funding method, the property owners and investors are willing to accept lower returns in early years in expectation of greater returns in later years. As such, smaller costs can add up to become significant enough to affect the go or no -go decision. The second question is whether the City would like to do what it can to adjust or defer fees to facilitate the project. Following are a number of reasons why the City may want to do so: Vision - The project supports the City's vision for future development of the urban center and would start new multi - family residential development with higher amenities (e.g. view, rooftop clubhouse) than market demand would traditionally support. Unique Opportunity - New development is often financed based on comparable rents at other properties. Since Tukwila has not had new apartment or condominium construction in decades, traditional financial markets are cautious about our market. 76 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 3 Given the property owner's knowledge and history in the region, alignment with the City's vision, and contacts with potential foreign investors, this is a unique opportunity. Renovation - New, quality market rate multi-family residential would garner higher rents than other apartments in Tukwila. Those higher rents may help other multi-family properties in Tukwila justify redevelopment and renovation. • Image - This would be the tallest building between Seattle, Bellevue, and Tacoma. It will be very visible and can improve Tukwila's image and solidify Tukwila's Southcenter District as the premier location to live, work, and play between Seattle and Tacoma. • Public Safety - May increase public safety with more "eyes on the street" in the urban center. Housing - Offers a type of housing that some Tukwila residents may desire. As units convert to ownership, it can encourage greater residential stability. • Tax Revenues — The proposed p ject has a significantly much higher property value than would be likely under traditional market conditions. The property valuation for the proposed development is probably ten times greater than as a single story retail building. That additional valuation can result in higher construction sales tax and property taxes. Even if the City approves a multi-family property tax exemption, the one-time construction sales would be approximately $600,000 and annual property tax, sales tax, and real estate excise tax would range from S95,000 in year one to nearly $150,000 in year eight (see attached exhibit). It is important to remember that the City will incur costs to provide police, fire, parks, and public infrastructure services. We have not quantified those costs but believe they would be Iess than the revenues. Attracts Investment— Some of the EB-5 investors have significant wealth and may want to invest in future p j8ctSb8G8dOnth8SUCC8SSOfthiSOO8. Stimulates De t— If this p ject is successful, it provides an example that will facilitate other multi-family p jects to develop and may stimulate development of other types in the urban core. • Capacity to Defer— The City has some discretion as to when to incur the costs related to impact fees. For instance, if the fees are deferred, the City can choose to defer the related capital improvements to match with when the fees are received. Or, the City could borrow to complete the p jects and repay the debt as impact fees are collected. Even if the Council agrees with the above reasons to support the adjustments, there are a number of considerations why the City may not want to adjust or defer fees such as: • Precedence — The City cannot sustainably function if it reduces or defers fees on all projects. Approving adjustments for this p je{t can encourage other property owners to make similar requests. INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 4 • Necessity — As mentioned before, it is not completely certain that adjusting the City's fees would be the deciding factor in the success of the p jeCt. The third question is what method would be most acceptable. State law provides for cities to provide multi-family property tax exemptions and some fee adjustments or deferrals. Attached is some information from the Municipal Research and Services Center (MRSC) on those programs. If the Council is interested in considering adjustments or deferrals, staff would return with specific options. The attached spreadsheet shows the fee and revenue cash flows assuming the City makes no adjustments to the fees but defers the impact fees to be paid over years five through eight after the p j8ctr8C8iv8S8CertifiC818ofoccupencyandasaumin8th8CitV8pprOveS8neiOhtye8[ multi-family property tax exemption. The Administration is interested in seeing what the City can do to encourage this development while ensuring our costs re!ated to the deveopment are covered. Staff is still researching the fee deferral and multi-family property tax exemption program and will be prepared to make a recommendation in August. Staff would like to hear Council discussion of this item to help guide the research. FINANCIAL IMPACT An estimate of the city's tax and fee revenues for the project is attached. It is important to remember that the City will incur costs to provide police, fire, parks, and public infrastructure services. We have not quantified those costs but believe they would be less than the revenues. Revenues and cost savings related to development stimulated by this project are difficult to quantify and are not included in the analysis. RECOMMENDATION The Committee is being asked to forward this item to the July 14th, 2014 Committee of the Whole meeting for discussion. Based on the discussion at COW, staff will return to a future council meeting with a recommendation. ATTACHMENTS MRSC information on Multi-Family PropertyTax Exemption MRSC Information on Fee Deferrals Projected Tax and Fee Revenues Spreadsheet 78 Municipal Research Service Center (MRSC) Multi-Family Tax Exemption Under RCW 84.14, Washington cities with a population of 15,000 or more may establish a tax exemption program to stimulate the construction of new, rehabilitated, or converted multi-family housing within designated areas of the citicn, including affordable housing. (Cities in "Buildable Lands" counties under RCW 36.70A.215, and the largest city in a GMA county where no city has 15,000 or more population may also utilize the tax exemption program.) When a project is approved under this program, the value of eligible multifamily housing improvements is exempted from property taxes for 8 or 12 years. Land, existing improvements, and non- residential improvements are not exempt. Only multiple unit projects with 4ormore units are eligible for either the 8- or 12'yoarcxcoopdon, and only property owners who commit to renting or selling at least 20 percent of units as affordable housing units to low and moderate income households are eligible for a 12-year exemption. If the property use changes in a manner inconsistent with program requirements before the 8- or 12-year exemption ends, back taxes are recovered based on the difference between the taxes paid and the taxes that would have been paid without the tax exemption. • Bellingham Municipal Code Ch. 17.82.030 - Tax Exemptions for Multi-Family Housing in Targeted Residential Areas • Kirkland Municipal Code Ch. 5.88 - Multifamily Housing Property Tax Exemption • Moses Lake Municipal Code Ch. 18.23 -Multi-Family Housing Tax Exemption � Olympia Municipal Code Ch. 5.86 - Multi-Family Dwelling Tax Exemption • Spokane Municipal Code Ch. 8.15 - Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption ° Tacoma Municipal Code Title 6A, Ch 6A.II0 (m) - Tax Exemption for Multi-family Housing in Target Areas - Eight or Twelve-year property tax exemption • Vancouver Municipal Code Ch. 3.22- Multi-Family Housing Tax Exemption • Wenatchee Municipal Code Ch. 5.88 - Property Tax Exemptions for Eligible Improvements in Residentially Deficient Urban Centers • Yakima Municipal Code Ch. 11.63 - Downtown Redevelopment Tax Incentive Program Municipal Research Service Center (MRSC) Impact Fee Payment Deferral Programs Introduction Local jurisdictions have taken different approaches regarding when to collect impact fees. Most jurisdictions in Washington do not issue building permits, or in other cases, subdivision or development pconiie, until impact feeabuvebeeupuid./\ developer ibeobusu major iocooiive to pay up, since the de may not proceed with the project until fees are paid. Once permits are issued, some fear that it may become more difficult to collect the fees. Also, collection at eudiccaiugoyprovidcScnonc]cudhcuc[orpluouinguodconahoctiono[tucUihcabe[occibencvv dcrnundiszculized.flovvcvor,irupuot[ccscoUcctcduiibeocour|icra{ugcarcprcScntasigoificuot upfront expense which a developer must pay before the pr ject is generating any revenues. As a result, developers have pushed for state legislation to require jurisdictions with impact fee programs to allow deferred payrnent. Initia! attempts to pass such legislation failed. More recently, in large part to assist a building construction industry in recessi times, a number of jurisdictions have adopted new ordinances allowing deferment of impact [ocpuycncn1. Both Pierce County and Olympia have fashioned new deferred payment programs despite concerns with earlier programs. In April 2Ol3, the legislature appruvedESIlB 1652, which would have required local jursidiciioosin adopt a fee collection deferral system. However, the legislation was vetoed by the Governor. For more information about irnpact fees in Washington, see our wehpage: Impact Fees. Deferred Impact Fee Payment Code or Ordinance Examples • ICitsap County Code Ch. 4.110 - Impact Fees - See especially Sec. 4.II0.020(B) and (F) - Impact fees must be paid before issuance of certificate of oocnDarzol, w Olympia Municipal Code Sec. I5.04.040(B) - To defer impact fee payment, a developer is required to execute an impact fee deferral agreement, which is recorded and creates a lien on the property. Note, however, that some lenders have required that the impact fee deferral agreement lien be subordinated to their financing before approving loans. Ordinance includes sunset clause. • Pierce County Code Sec. 4A.I0.080(D - H) and Pierce County Ordinance No. 2010-65o - This ordinance allows owners of residential properties being constructed or improved for resale to request a voluntary lien to defer paying traffic and park impact fees until a property is sold, but no later 80 than 2 years from the date of building permit issuance, whichever comes first. Also, the webpage for the ordinance includes links to documents related to adoption process • Redmond Ordinance No. 2501, 11/2009, and Ordinance No. 2469, 06/2009 - Impact fees must be paid at time of drywall construction for individually permitted single family and detached residential construction. Ordinance includes sunset clause. • Renton Development Regulations §4-1-190(G)(6) - (12) - Fees for some types of development can be delayed until after sale of unit or 18 months from date of building permit issuance, subject to a lien • Woodland Municipal Code Ch. 3.41 - Development Impact Fees— Fire and Park, Recreation, Open Space or Trail Facilities - Woodland allows payment deferral for parks and fire facilities, but not for schools, or for its newly adopted transportation impact fees Impact Fee Deferral Programs and Documents • Sammamish Affidavit of Impact Fee Deferral • Kitsap County o Deferred Impact Fees (#5) - Handout explaining program in Q & A format o Deferred Impact Fee Acknowledgement form - Scroll down to form • Olympia Impact Fees, Community Planning and Development, 01/01/2013 - Brochure • Pierce County Impact Fee and Connection Charges Deferral Program - Includes link to brochure with questions and answers, and Request for Deferral Lien form 81 82 Projected City of Tukwila Tax and Fee Revenues Washington Place Paid at Time of Year After Certificate of Occupancy Application Issuance C of O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ongoing Permit Fees Building $ 208,000 $ 336,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 544,000 $ Mechanical 13,000 54,000 - - - - - - - - - 67,000 Plumbing 2,000 7,000 - - - - - - - - - 9,000 Electrical 16,000 67,000 - - - - - - - - - 83,000 Traffic Concurrency 12,000 - - - - - 12,000 Traffic Impact - - - - - - 11,750 11,750 11,750 11,750 47,000 Fire Impact - - - - - - 121,000 121,000 121,000 121,000 484,000 Parks Impact - - - - - 136,500 136,500 136,500 136,500 546,000 Subtotal $ 251,000 $ 464,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 269,250 $ 269,250 $ 269,250 $ 269,250 $ 1,792,000 $ Construction Sales Tax - 600,000 - - - - 600,000 Property Tax - - 75,000 75,750 76,508 77,273 78,045 78,826 79,614 80,410 621,425 239,582 Real Estate Excise Tax - - - - - - 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 200,000 50,000 Sales Tax on Hotel 20,000 40,000 41,200 42,436 43,709 45,020 46,371 47,762 326,498 50,000 Total $ 251,000 $ 464,000 $ 600,000 $ 95,000 $ 115,750 $ 117,708 $ 119,709 $ 441,004 $ 443,096 $ 445,235 $ 447,422 $ 3,539,924 $ 339,582 Subtotal Notes: (a) This table estimates taxes and fees the City of Tukwila would receive if Washington Place is completed with 370 apartments and 189 hotel rooms as a total deveopment cost of $100 million including $75 million in "hard" costs. (b) Current City policy requires impact fees to be paid at time of permit issuance. This table reflects a deferral of impact fees until years 5 -8 after issuance of a CofO. (c) Permit fee assumptions listed on separate exhibit. (d) Construction sales tax estimated based on $70 million in taxable construction costs. (e) Property tax estimated at $0.00295 per dollar of valuation. Year 1 property tax based on $25 million of assessed valuation for hotel. Increased at 1% annually. (f) Property tax assumes City approves a multi - family property tax exemption for years 1 through 8 resulting in no additional property tax for the multi - family portion until after year 8. After that, the multi - family valuation is assumed to be $50 million escalated at 1% annually. (g) Real estate excise tax assumes property sales start in year 5 with 25 residential units per year at $400,000 per unit. (h) Sales tax assumes 189 hotel rooms rented at 70% occupancy at $100 /night with phasing during year 1. (i) This table includes revenues only and does not reflect the City's associated costs of providing services. (j) This table does not reflect taxes and fees paid to other government agencies, even if collected by the City. (k) This table does not reflect what the taxes and fees would be if the Washington Place development did not occur. (I) The City would receive loding tax but that is not included in this table due to its restricted use. Mayor's Office - Economic Development Updated: July 2, 2014 84 x-,` 'T�..I `7 ��t[�/ �� yC��Jt/LJ �� Finance and Safety Committee FINANCE AND SAFETY COMMITTEE Meeting Minutes July 8[20/4-5:3Op.nn.. Hazelnut Conference Room PRESENT Councilmembers: Verna Seal, Chair; Joe Duffie, Kathy Hougardy Staff: Derek Speck, Joyce Trantina, Vicky Carlsen, Eric Orevor, Bob Giberson, Laurel Humphrey Guests: Omar Lee, Christine Lee, and Matthew Chan, Washington Place CALL TO ORDER: Committee Chair Seal called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. I. PRESENTATIONS No presentations. U. BUSINESS AGENDA A. Purchase of Replacement Major Crimes Vehicle Staff is seeking Committee approval to purchase a Ford Taurus in the amount of $26,497,82 for the Major Crimes Division using surplus funds. Due to a significant cost savings in the replacement of the Jail Transport Van, the 2014 Police fleet replacement budget has a surplus of $79.698.58. so funds are available to accelerate the replacement of one of the Major Crimes vehicles, six of which will be approaching or surpassing their 100,000 mile replacement criteria in the 2015-2016 budget cycle. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. B. Resolution: Authorizing Issuance of Checks Before Council Action Staff is seeking Council approval of a resolution that would allow the City to occasionally issue checks before the Council has taken action to approve those claims. The City currently pays claims twice a month, immediately after Regular Meetings. Occasionally issues arise that result in invoices being paid late, In addition, the City receives a large rebate for timely payment to US Bank for the PCard program. RCW 4224180 aliows taxing districts, including Cities, to issue checks prior to legislative approval if certain conditions are met, If this proposal is approved, the City Council will continue to retain full authority for review and approval. If a claim is disapproved by Council, it will be recognized as a receivable to the City and collection will be pursued until funds are recovered or the Council approves the claim. Committee members asked clarifying questions and asked that the voucher review form be revised to include a mechanism to alert them to which claims have already been paid under this practice. Staff agreed to revise the document. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO JULY 14, 2014 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. C. Discussion nf Options for Washington Place Fees Staff provided a briefing to the Committee regarding a request from Omar and Christine Lee that the City reduce or defer fees and taxes for their mixed-use dove|oprnentproject ot223 Andover Park East known as Washington Place. Because financing for this S100 million project is ohaUenging, and the Lees are looking at ways to address an $18 million budget ��`�� de�cit.they have requested the Chvexamine any possibility for reduction ordefena|intaxes �� and/or fees to ensure funding success. The Lees plan to use the Federal foreign investor program (EB-5)to provide at Ieast $5O million of the project funding.andgiventhereVayment schedule they would arrange with those investors, they believe they would have greater ability to pay the City starting five years following receipt of the certificate of occupancy. Finance &Safety Committee Minutes July 8,2D14- Page 2 Under the City's current pV|icies, building permit fees and development impact fees for this project are estimetedto be $1,792,000 (based on 189 hotel rooms and 370 apartments), $251,000 of which is due at the time of permit application and $1,541,000 due at the time of permit issuance. The Lees have requested that the City limit the development permit fees to $800.000.O0. reduce the development impact fees to the extent posnib|e, defer those fees for payment in years 5-8 after receiving the certificate of occupancy, and receive approval for an eight-year multi-family property tax exemption. City staff agreed to evaluate the requests and contracted Heartland LLC to provide a third-party market-based perspective of the pr ject's feasibility. The Heartland analysis deems the pr jeotfinenciaUyremsonmb|eon|y as a result of the EB-5 program and the property owner's connection to investors but also indicates that a city's building permit and development impact fees are not normally responsible for project feasibility or infeasibility. 86 Staff requested that the Committee discuss the proposal and consider whether or not there is merit in moving it forward to the Committee of the Whole for further review. The Council may ultimately opt to do nothing, grant a multi-famUy tax exemption proQnann, defer bui|ding, permit or traffic, fir8, and park impact fees, or reduce permit or impact fees. Multi-family tax exemptions are common and there is staff support for such a program being applied to a limited region in the Tukwila Urban Center core. Deferral of permit fees or impact fees is also something other Cities have granted. Reduction of fees would be challenging and requires more research, which staff will provide if there is Council direction to do so. Administration's position is that it is interested in seeing what can be done to encourage this innovative development while also ensuring the City's costs are covered. It is important to note that there is no precedent in Tukwila for reduction or deferral of fees, and any consideration to do so much be carefully considered. Staff is prepared to complete its research and make a recommendation in August, but believes Council discussion will guide the remaining research. To aid in the Committee's disnusaion, staff prepared and reviewed a document outlining a scenario for deferral of traffic, fire, and parks impact fees and a multifamily property tax exemption for 8 years. Committee members asked clarifying questions and requested to hear from Mr, and Mrs. Lee and Mr. Chang, who each spoke to the difficulties in financing as well as the project's great value as a pioneering development. Mrs. Lee raised the concern that impact fees are charged per unit rather than per square foot which is a disadvantage for a project such as Washington P|ace, which includes studios and one-bedrooms alongside Iarger units. The Committee agreed to forward this item to the Committee of the Whole for further discussion, and requested that staff clearly outline the options discussed. In addition, Committee Chair Seal asked that the Heartland report be provided to Council, NO RECOMMENDATION. FORWARD TO JULY 14, 2014 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR DISCUSSION. D. Resolution: City of Opportunity Scholarship Staff is seeking Council approval of a resolution that would amend the ~Tuhvv|e. City of OpportunityGchu|onship^poognannbyincnaoninQthefunding|eve|andn*finingproceduresin response to Iessons learned during the inaugural 2014 process. The Committee reviewed and discussed the proposal at its June 3 and June 17 meetings, most recently requesting the foliowing two changes: � Include a request for the applicant to provide a written statement that describes his or her financial need; . � Add a procedure that prohibits an employee or elected official on the selection panel from scoring a candidate to whom they are related. Upcoming Meetings & Events July 2014 14th (Monday) 15th (Tuesday) 16th (Wednesday) 17th (Thursday) 18th (Friday) 19th (Saturday) ➢ Transportation Cmte, 5:15 PM (Foster Conference Room) ➢ City Council Committee of the Whole Mtg., 7:00 PM (Council Chambers) ➢ Community Affairs & Parks Cmte, 5:30 PM (Hazelnut Conference Room) ➢ ale Co:54on, Cancelled > Tukwila Historical Society, 7:00 PM (Tukwila Heritage & Cultural Center, 14475 59`h Ave S.) ➢ Human Services Advisory Board, 10:00 AM (Human Services Office) Movies on the Green Showing "The Great Gatsb��" (PG-13) Foster Golf Linl s Outdoor seating opens at 8:00 PM. Movie begins at dusk. Summer Splashtacular at Tukwila Pool h, : 3:00 - 5:00 PM FREE water safety and swim fun! For more information call 206 -267 -2350. C.A.S.T.T. performances (Community Actors' Summer Theatre in Tukwila) July 18 and 19 7:00 PM Foster Performing Arts Center For more information call 206 - 767 -2342. 21st (Monday) 22nd (Tuesday) 23rd (Wednesday) 24th (Thursday) 25th (Friday) 26th (Saturday) ➢ Utilities Cmte, 5:15 PM (Foster Conference Room) ) ➢ City Council Executive Session, 6:15 PM (Hazelnut Conference Room) ➢ City Council Regular Mtg., 7:00 PM (Council Chambers) ➢ Finance & Safety Cmte, 5:30 PM (Hazelnut Conference f Room) ➢ Planning Commission, Work Session 6:30 PM (Council Chambers) ➢ Tukwila Metropolitan Park District Board of Commissioners, 5:30 PM (Council Chambers) ➢ Planning Commission, Public Hearing 6:30 PM (Council ( Chambers) Movies on the Green Showing "ET " (PG) Foster Golf Outdoor seating opens at 8:00 PM. Movie begins at g dusk. Tukwila Int'l. Blvd. Action Cmte's Trash Pickup Day 9:00 location 10:00 AM For location or information contact Sharon Mann 206- 200 -3616 Touch - a - Truck Safety and Emergency Preparedness Fair 10:00 AM to 2:00 PM (Foster High School parking lot 4242 S. 144th) Explore Tukwila's biggest heavy -duty rigs. A variety of exhibitors will also be on site with summer safety tips and emergency preparedness information. Free Fun! Touch - a Truck $1.00 Swim at Tukwila Pool 3:00 - 5:00 PM FREE water safety and swim fun! ➢ City Council Committee of Whole (C.O.W.) Meeting: 2nd & 4th Mon., 7:00 PM, Council Chambers at City Hall. ➢ City Council Regular Meeting: 1st & 3rd Mon., 7:00 PM, Council Chambers at City Hall. ➢ Community Affairs & Parks Committee: 2nd & 4th Tues., 5:30 PM, Hazelnut Conf. Room (A) Acceptance of a grant for the Duwamish Gardens Project. (B) A contract with Heartland, LLC for Landscape Conservation and Local Infrastructure Study. (C) An Interlocal Agreement between the City of Tukwila and the Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District relating to operation of the Tukwila Pool. ➢ Equity & Diversity Commission: 1st Thurs., 5:15 PM, Hazelnut Conf. Room. Contact Joyce Trantina at 206 -433 -1868. ➢ Finance & Safety Committee: 1st & 3rd Tues., 5:30 PM, Hazelnut Conf. Room. ➢ Park Commission: 3rd Wed., 5:30 PM, Community Center. Contact Dave Johnson at 206 - 767 -2308. Meeting Cancelled. ➢ Planning Commission /Board of Architectural Review: 4`hh Thurs., 6:30 PM, Council Chambers at City Hall. Contact Wynetta Bivens at 206 - 431 -3670. ➢ Transportation Committee: 2nd & 4th Mon., 5:15 PM, Foster Conf. Room (A) Thorndyke Safe Routes to School Construction Management Selection and Agreement. (B) South 144`h St Phase II (42 "1 Ave S- TIB) Design Consultant Selection and Agreement. ➢ Tukwila Historical Society: 3rd Thurs., 7:00 PM , Tukwila Heritage & Cultural Center, 14475 59`hh Avenue S. Contact Joan Hernandez at 206 -248 -0260. 87 Tentative Agenda Schedule MONTH MEETING 1- REGULAR MEETING 2 - C.O.W. MEETING 3 - REGULAR MEETING 4 - C.O.W. July 7 14 See agenda packet cover sheet for this week's agenda (July 14, 2014 Committee of the Whole Meeting). 21 28 Special Presentation: 6:15 PM EXECUTIVE SESSION Fire Exploratory Committee Update. Budget Update 2015 - 2016 and CIP. Special Issues: Special Presentation: King County Committee to End Homelessness. Proclamations/ Amendments to the Ethics Code. A resolution regarding the City of Opportunity Scholarship Program. Appointments: - Proclamation for National Night Out Against Crime. - Appointment to the Landmark Commission Board. Unfinished Business: - An ordinance amending the Sign Code to allow limited changes to non - conforming freeway interchange signs. A resolution authorizing the issuance of claims prior to Council approval. Washington Place Fee Deferral. August 4 Appointments: 11 Special Presentation: 18 Public Hearing: 25 New and Reappointments to the Equity and Diversity Commission. Unfinished Business: Introduction of Jerry Hight - Building Official. Special Issues: Comprehensive Plan Element. Special Issues: Comprehensive Plan Element review. Review of the Comprehensive Plan elements. - A resolution regarding the City of Opportunity Scholarship Program. Amendments to the Ethics Code. 88