Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTrans 2015-09-21 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETCity of Tukwila Transportation Committee ❖ Joe Duffie, Chair ❖ Allan Ekberg ❖ Kathy Hougardy AGENDA Distribution: P. Brodin J. Duffie R. Turpin A. Ekberg M. Hart K. Hougardy Clerk File Copy K. Kruller 2 Extra D. Robertson Pg. 1 Mayor Haggerton place pkt pdf on Z: \TC -UC D. Cline Agendas L. Humphrey e-mail cover to: A. Le, B. Giberson C. O'Flaherty, J. Duffie, F. Iriarte D. Almberg, B. Saxton, R. Tischmak S. Norris, M. Hart, G. Labanara L. Humphrey MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2015 — 5:15 PM FOSTER CONFERENCE ROOM — 6300 BUILDING (formerly known as Conference Room #1) Item Recommended Action Page 1. PRESENTATION(S) 2. BUSINESS AGENDA a) Residential Street Improvements/Walk & Roll Program a) Forward to 10/5/15 Pg. 1 Consultant Selection and Contract Regular Consent Agenda 3. SCATBd b) • SCATBd July 21, 2015 Meeting Summary b) Information Only Pg. 19 • SCATBd September 15, 2015 Meeting Agenda • Advanced Transportation Technologies Conference Overview and Agenda 4. MISCELLANEOUS c) Alternative Crosswalk Colors c) Discussion Only 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS Future Agendas: Next Scheduled Meeting: Monday, October 5, 2015 SThe City of Tukwila strives to accommodate individuals with disabilities Please contact the Public Works Department at 206 - 433 -0179 for assistance. Transportation Committee - 2015 Work Plan Description Qtr Dept Action or Briefing Status BNSF Intermoda) Facility Access Design contract (to COW only) 1 PW A Complete 42 Avenue South Phase III Design Contract Supplement — design undergrounding 2 PW A Complete Seattle City Light underground agreement & revised design 3 -4 PW A Follow -up on potential for coordination with SeaTac 2 PW B Complete ADA Improvements Design contract 2 PW A Complete Crosswalk Petition for TIB /S 1391 St - Engineering analysis 3 PW B Bid award 2 PW A Annual Overlay and Repair Program Bid Award 2 PW A Complete 53r Avenue S (S 1371 — S 1441 St) & Water /Sewer /SSWM Funding and Design contract 3 PW A Complete Approval to apply for TIB grant 3 PW A Complete Cascade View Safe Routes to School Closeout 3 PW A Complete Thorndyke Safe Routes to School Closeout 3 PW A TUC Transit Center /Andover Park West Closeout 3 PW A Small Roadway & Safety Improvements Allentown Roadside Barriers — outreach and design alternatives 2 PW B Complete Roadside Barrier Bid Award 3 PW A Residential Street Improvements /Walk & Roll Citywide Comprehensive Update & Safety Priority list Consultant selection 4 PW A Annual Bridge Inspections and Repairs Program update 4 PW B Major Maintenance on 3 Bridges 2015 - Design Contract 3 PW A Complete Duwamish/ S 1191h Ped Bridge — present condition and repairs 1 PW B Complete Boeing Access Road over BNRR Bridge Rehab Bid Award 4 PW A TUC Ped /Bike Bridge Right -of -way and Easement Acquisition /Ordinance 1 & 3 PW A Complete Bid Award 4 PW A Interurban Avenue S (S 143rd — Fort Dent Way) Status update 4 PW B S144 th St Phase 11 (42nd Ave S — TIB) Bid award 4 PW A OTHER TIB pedestrian bulb replacement (test locations) site tour 4 PW B Transit plan update contract 4 PW A Complete Transportation Improvement Program 2016 -2021 Resolution 2 PW A Complete CTR Grants 2 PW A Complete S.144 t St Bridge over 1 -5 (design, cost estimate) 4 PW B Standard Reports /Briefings Frequency Dept. Facility Tours As needed PW SCATBD Monthly CM Hougardy Committee Work Plan Council, Staff City of Tukwila Updated 8/17/15 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor TO: Mayor Haggerton Transportation Committee FROM: Bob Giberson, Public Works Director BY: Robin Tischmak, City Engineer DATE: September 18, 2015 SUBJECT: Residential Street Improvements / Walk & Roll Program Project Nos. 91510301 & 90710404 Residential Street Prioritization Study & Walk & Roll Plan Update Consultant Selection and Contract ISSUE Execute a contract with Perteet Engineering in the amount of $185,957.00 for engineering services to update the Residential Street Prioritization Study and to update the Walk & Roll Plan. BACKGROUND City staff created a prioritization list for residential street improvements in the mid- 1990's. That list has been used to prioritize funding, design, and construction of residential street improvements through the current adopted 2015 Budget. A high priority project list for the Walk & Roll Plan was prepared in 2010. The 2015 CIP includes funding for updates in Residential Streets and the Walk and Roll Plan. We will coordinate both updates and they will be used to prioritize improvements to residential streets to current urban design standards that include bicycle facilities on selected streets as well as undergrounding of overhead utilities. DISCUSSION Three engineering firms were selected from the Municipal Research and Services Center (MRSC) Consultant Roster that have experience working for the City on related projects. Perteet Engineering was selected based on their experience with the Walk & Roll Plan, residential street design expertise, and their staffing. Perteet has provided the attached contract, scope of work, and fee estimate to perform the proposed engineering services. FINANCIAL IMPACT Contract Budget Residential Street Improvements (CIP Page 8) $ 185,957.00 $140,000.00 Walk & Roll Program (CIP Page 22) 140,000.00 Totals $185,957.00 $280,000.00 RECOMMENDATION Council is being asked to approve the contract with Perteet Engineering for engineering services in the amount of $185,957.00 for the Residential Street Prioritization Study & Walk & Roll Plan Update and consider this item on the Consent Agenda of the October 5, 2015 Regular Meeting. Attachments: Consultant Selection Matrix 2015 CIP, pages 8 & 22 Perteet Contract, Scope of Work and Fee Estimate WAPW Eng1PROJECTSW RW & RS PrcjectslResidentlal streets prioritization study (91510301)\Consultant selection \Info Memo Perteet Consult Contract. docx Residential Street Prioritization / Walk & Roll Program Updates Consultant Scoring Matrix Total Possible Points �y V r . ' , e b Q' oo vy �� °a .4 i c 15 OA p �� �3 Tr li, 0 �� �� coF �4 oo� �� w. 0, K9 .?y ye /O 150 200 200 100 150 200 1000 Perteet 145 190 187 95 145 197 959 1 KPG 140 188 183 65 130 187 906 2 David Evans & Assoc. 140 180 177 78 130 187 887 3 Reviewer Name: Combined Average Scores from two Reviewers Robin Tischmak, Scott Bates Date: 9/8/15 W: \PW Eng \PROJECTS\A- RW & RS Projects \Residential streets prioritization study (91510301) \Scoring Matrix.xlsScoring Matrix.xls CITY OF TUKWILA CAPITAL PROJECT SUMMARY 2015 to 2020 PROJECT: Residential Street Improvements Project No. Varies DESCRIPTION: Select, design and construct residential streets and /or water and /or sewer projects. JUSTIFICATION: Neighborhood revitalization by improving residential streets. Program is project oriented to specific residential streets that require quick design and construction. 37th Ave S (135 - TIB) and S 132nd St (TIB - Military Rd) are potential future candidates. For 2015, $140k STATUS: will match the Walk and Roll Plan's $140k to develop a citywide comprehensive update and safety -based prioritization of residential street improvements, sidewalks, bike lanes, and discussion of undergrounding. MAINT. IMPACT: Reduce maintenance. COMMENT: Residential improvements have included 42nd Ave S (see page 2), S 150th St improvements have been included in Thorndyke Safe Routes to School (page 4), and 53rd Ave S (page 6). FINANCIAL Through Estimated n_ ennn-.% In41% 3n4A 9n45 9n1R 9n17 9n1R 2n19 2n2n RFYOND TOTAL EXPENSES Design 140 750 750 750 700 3,090 Land(R/W) 0 Const. Mgmt. 210 210 Construction 1,400 1,400 TOTAL EXPENSES 1 01 0 140 0 01 750 1 750 1 750 1 2,310 1 4,700 FUND SOURCES Awarded Grant 0 Proposed Grant 0 Motor Vehicle Tax 0 Mitigation Expected 0 City Oper. Revenue 0 0 140 0 0 750 750 750 2,310 4,700 TOTAL SOURCES 1 0 01 140 1 01 01 750 1 750 1 750 1 2,310 1 4,700 2015 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program 8 3 CITY OF TUKWILA CAPITAL PROJECT SUMMARY 2015 to 2020 PROJECT: Walk & Roll Program (Nonmotorized Transportation Plan) Project No. 90710404 DESCRIPTION: Evaluate deficiencies and create a prioritized list of projects and recommended design standards. JUSTIFICATION: Enhance bicycle, pedestrian, and vehicle safety, transportation choices, and encourage walking and biking as an alternative. Walk & Roll Plan was adopted in 2009. A Design Report for highest priority sidewalks and bicycle routes STATUS: was completed in 2010. A multi -modal level of service is identified as an outstanding program element in the City's Transportation Plans. MAINT. IMPACT: COMMENT: Ongoing program, intent is to sync up the non - motorized with the motorized transportation planning, which is conducted on a six -year cycle. Next Transportation Element of Comp Plan update will be in 2021. FINANCIAL Through Estimated tin tnnn,ai 2ni a 2n1d 2n1s 2n1a 2n17 2n18 2019 2020 BEYOND TOTAL EXPENSES Design 63 140 175 378 Land(R/W) 0 Const. Mgmt. 0 Construction 8 8 TOTAL EXPENSES 71 01 140 01 01 01 01 0 1751 386 FUND SOURCES Awarded Grant 8 8 Proposed Grant 0 Mitigation Actual 0 Traffic Impact Fees 0 City Oper. Revenue 63 0 140 0 0 0 0 0 175 378 TOTAL SOURCES 1 711 01 140 1 01 01 01 01 01 175 1 386 2015 - 2020 Capital Improvement Program 22 4 City of Tukwila Contract Number: •gy�psy 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila WA 98188 CONSULTANT AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT is entered into between the City of Tukwila, Washington, hereinafter referred to as "the City ", and , hereinafter referred to as "the Consultant ", in consideration of the mutual benefits, terms, and conditions hereinafter specified. 1. 2. 0 Project Designation. The Consultant is retained by the City to perform services in connection with the project titled Scope of Services. The Consultant agrees to perform the services, identified on Exhibit "A" attached hereto, including the provision of all labor, materials, equipment and supplies. Duration of Agreement; Time for Performance. This Agreement shall be in full force and effect for a period commencing upon execution and ending , unless sooner terminated under the provisions hereinafter specified. Work under this Agreement shall commence upon written notice by the City to the Consultant to proceed. The Consultant shall perform all services and provide all work product required pursuant to this Agreement no later than unless an extension of such time is granted in writing by the City. Payment. The Consultant shall be paid by the City for completed work and for services rendered under this Agreement as follows: A. Payment for the work provided by the Consultant shall be made as provided on Exhibit "B" attached hereto, provided that the total amount of payment to the Consultant shall not exceed without express written modification of the Agreement signed by the City. B. The Consultant may submit vouchers to the City once per month during the progress of the work for partial payment for that portion of the project completed to date. Such vouchers will be checked by the City and, upon approval thereof, payment shall be made to the Consultant in the amount approved. C. Final payment of any balance due the Consultant of the total contract price earned will be made promptly upon its ascertainment and verification by the City after the completion of the work under this Agreement and its acceptance by the City. D. Payment as provided in this section shall be full compensation for work performed, services rendered, and for all materials, supplies, equipment and incidentals necessary to complete the work. E. The Consultant's records and accounts pertaining to this Agreement are to be kept available for inspection by representatives of the City and the state of Washington for a period of three (3) years after final payments. Copies shall be made available upon request. 5. Ownership and Use of Documents. All documents, drawings, specifications and other materials produced by the Consultant in connection with the services rendered under this Agreement shall be the property of the City whether the project for which they are made is executed or not. The Consultant shall be permitted to retain copies, including reproducible copies, of drawings and specifications for information, reference and use in connection with the Consultant's endeavors. The Consultant shall not be responsible for any use of the said documents, drawings, specifications or other materials by the City on any project other than the project specified in this Agreement. . Compliance with Laws. The Consultant shall, in performing the services contemplated by this Agreement, faithfully observe and comply with all federal, state, and local laws, ordinances and regulations, applicable to the services rendered under this Agreement. 7. Indemnification. The Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits including attorney fees, arising out of or resulting from the acts, errors or omissions of the Consultant in performance of this Agreement, except for injuries and damages caused by the sole negligence of the City. Should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that this Agreement is subject to RCW 4.24.115, then, in the event of liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or damages to property caused by or resulting from the concurrent negligence of the Consultant and the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers, the Consultant's liability hereunder shall be only to the extent of the Consultant's negligence. It is further specifically and expressly understood that the indemnification provided herein constitutes the Consultant's waiver of immunity under Industrial Insurance, Title 51 RCW, solely for the purposes of this indemnification. This waiver has been mutually negotiated by the parties. The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. 8. Insurance. The Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees. Consultant's maintenance of insurance as required by the agreement shall not be construed to limit the liability of the Consultant to the coverage provided by such insurance, or otherwise limit the City's recourse to any remedy available at law or in equity. A. Minimum Amounts and Scope of Insurance. Consultant shall obtain insurance of the types and with the limits described below: 1. Automobile Liability insurance with a minimum combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage of $1,000,000 per accident. Automobile Liability insurance shall cover all owned, non - owned, hired and leased vehicles. Coverage shall be written on Insurance Services Office (ISO) form CA 00 01 or a substitute form providing equivalent liability coverage. If necessary, the policy shall be endorsed to provide contractual liability coverage. CA revised : 1 -2013 Page 2 2. Commercial General Liabilitv insurance with limits no less than $1,000,000 each occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate. Commercial General Liability insurance shall be written on ISO occurrence form CG 00 01 and shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, independent contractors and personal injury and advertising injury. The City shall be named as an insured under the Consultant's Commercial General Liability insurance policy with respect to the work performed for the City. 3. Workers' Compensation coverage as required by the Industrial Insurance laws of the State of Washington. 4. Professional Liability with limits no less than $1,000,000 per claim and $1,000,000 policy aggregate limit. Professional Liability insurance shall be appropriate to the Consultant's profession. B. Other Insurance Provision. The Consultant's Automobile Liability and Commercial General Liability insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain that they shall be primary insurance with respect to the City. Any Insurance, self - insurance, or insurance pool coverage maintained by the City shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not be contributed or combined with it. C. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than A:VII. D. Verification of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish the City with original certificates and a copy of the amendatory endorsements, including but not necessarily limited to the additional insured endorsement, evidencing the insurance requirements of the Consultant before commencement of the work. Certificates of coverage and endorsements as required by this section shall be delivered to the City within fifteen (15) days of execution of this Agreement. E. Notice of Cancellation. The Consultant shall provide the City with written notice of any policy cancellation, within two business days of their receipt of such notice. F. Failure to Maintain Insurance. Failure on the part of the Consultant to maintain the insurance as required shall constitute a material breach of contract, upon which the City may, after giving five business days notice to the Consultant to correct the breach, immediately terminate the contract or, at its discretion, procure or renew such insurance and pay any and all premiums in connection therewith, with any sums so expended to be repaid to the City on demand, or at the sole discretion of the City, offset against funds due the Consultant from the City. . Independent Contractor. The Consultant and the City agree that the Consultant is an independent contractor with respect to the services provided pursuant to this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be considered to create the relationship of employer and employee between the parties hereto. Neither the Consultant nor any employee of the Consultant shall be entitled to any benefits accorded City employees by virtue of the services provided under this Agreement. The City shall not be responsible for withholding or otherwise deducting federal income tax or social security or for contributing to the state industrial insurance program, otherwise assuming the duties of an employer with respect to the Consultant, or any employee of the Consultant. CA revised : 1 -2013 Page 3 7 10. Covenant Against Contingent Fees. The Consultant warrants that he has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bonafide employee working solely for the Consultant, to solicit or secure this contract, and that he has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bonafide employee working solely for the Consultant, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gifts, or any other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this contract. For breach or violation of this warrant, the City shall have the right to annul this contract without liability, or in its discretion to deduct from the contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or contingent fee. 11. Discrimination Prohibited. The Consultant, with regard to the work performed by it under this Agreement, will not discriminate on the grounds of race, religion, creed, color, national origin, age, veteran status, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, political affiliation or the presence of any disability in the selection and retention of employees or procurement of materials or supplies. 12. Assignment. The Consultant shall not sublet or assign any of the services covered by this Agreement without the express written consent of the City. 13. Non - Waiver. Waiver by the City of any provision of this Agreement or any time limitation provided for in this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other provision. 14. Termination. A. The City reserves the right to terminate this Agreement at any time by giving ten (10) days written notice to the Consultant. B. In the event of the death of a member, partner or officer of the Consultant, or any of its supervisory personnel assigned to the project, the surviving members of the Consultant hereby agree to complete the work under the terms of this Agreement, if requested to do so by the City. This section shall not be a bar to renegotiations of this Agreement between surviving members of the Consultant and the City, if the City so chooses. 15. Applicable Law; Venue; Attorney's Fees. This Agreement shall be subject to, and the Consultant shall at all times comply with, all applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations, and rules, including the provisions of the City of Tukwila Municipal Code and ordinances of the City of Tukwila. In the event any suit, arbitration, or other proceeding is instituted to enforce any term of this Agreement, the parties specifically understand and agree that venue shall be properly laid in King County, Washington. The prevailing party in any such action shall be entitled to its attorney's fees and costs of suit. Venue for any action arising from or related to this Agreement shall be exclusively in King County Superior Court. 16. Severability and Survival. If any term, condition or provision of this Agreement is declared void or unenforceable or limited in its application or effect, such event shall not affect any other provisions hereof and all other provisions shall remain fully enforceable. The provisions of this Agreement, which by their sense and context are reasonably intended to survive the completion, expiration or cancellation of this Agreement, shall survive termination of this Agreement. CA revised : 1 -2013 Page 4 8 17, Notices. Notices to the City of Tukwila shall be sent to the following address: City Clerk City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 Notices to Consultant shall be sent to the following address: 18. Entire Agreement; Modification. This Agreement, together with attachments or addenda, represents the entire and integrated Agreement between the City and the Consultant and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements written or oral. No amendment or modification of this Agreement shall be of any force or effect unless it is in writing and signed by the parties. DATED this .... day of CITY OF TUKWILA 1 - Attest /Authenticated: City Clerk, Christy O'Flaherty CA revised : 1 -2013 Page 5 9 EXHIBIT °A° r SCOPE OF SERVICES City of Tukwila Department of Public Works Residential Streets Prioritization Study (PW Project Number 91510301) Background The City of Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan includes policies aimed at the implementation of a "complete streets" approach to improve mobility for all users; allowing them to reach existing and planned schools, civic and recreational facilities, transit facilities, regional trails, and major activity centers. A crucial part of improving mobility is providing City residents and visitors with a diversity of transportation options. The City's Walk and Roll Program seeks to enhance bicycle, pedestrian, and vehicle safety, transportation choices, and encouraging walking and biking as alternative modes of travel to driving. With an enhanced level of safety due to its lower vehicular speed limits, the City's residential street network serves a critical role in facilitating alternative modes of travel. The City's Residential Street Improvement Program focuses on neighborhood revitalization through the selection, design, and construction of residential streets. In 2010, Perteet collaborated with the City on the Bicycle - Friendly Routes and Sidewalk Segments report, which included an analysis of existing conditions, recommended actions, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure goals, a list of pedestrian and bicycle projects, and performance goals and measurements. The Residential Streets Prioritization Study seeks to continue this work by updating and integrating various methods used by the City to identify and prioritize capital improvement projects. The cost of the study will be provided jointly by funds from the Walk and Roll Program and the Residential Street Improvement Program. The specific details of the funding allocation will be determined by the City. 1 C ' Users robot AppData Local Microsoft Windows Temporary Internet Files Content Outlook fl KEAMBB Tukwila - Residential Streets Prionttzation Study - Scope (3) doc 10 rV Perteet Project Purpose The City is currently using a methodology developed in the 1980s to prioritize the urban street improvements needed throughout the City's existing residential street network for eventual design and construction. The purpose of this project is to review this methodology and evaluate how it may be simplified, streamlined, and otherwise improved; document the revised methodology (if any) and present to the City for concurrence; and develop a spreadsheet -based tool to automate the use of the methodology for project prioritization. Once Perteet has developed the prioritization tool, it will be populated with the non - motorized projects currently listed in the City's Street Improvement Ratings sheet to determine an updated prioritization using the new revised methodology. The key project tasks include: Review "Pedestrian Improvements by Formula — A Process" memorandum by R. M. Cameron, PE. Review the prioritization methodology described by the memorandum to determine what improvements may be made, with a focus on simplification and streamlining. Cross - reference the projects listed in the City's Street Improvement Ratings sheet with the Bicycle - Friendly Routes and Sidewalk Segments report. Identify any projects not represented in the report and develop new (2015) planning -level cost estimates for each. Work may include the following tasks: • Analysis of existing roadway conditions (to include available right -of -way width, traffic volumes and speeds, topography, infrastructure) • Review the recommended facility type for each route and segment (i.e., bike lane, paved shoulder, drainage improvements). On routes where conditions change (due to right -of -way constraints, etc.) more than one cross - section may be necessary. • Design recommendations, costs of construction, and a ranking of construction feasibility for each bike route and sidewalk segment. • Escalate planning -level cost estimates for all projects in the Bicycle - Friendly Routes and Sidewalk Segments report from 2010 to 2015 that have not been constructed to -date. • Supplement planning -level cost estimates for all projects to include an additional planning -level cost for utility undergrounding. • Analyze each planning -level cost estimate to identify large projects and reduce to buildable segments. • Summarize new planning -level cost estimate totals for all projects in a single spreadsheet. Expand the prioritization methodology to include a cost component based on these cost estimate totals. • Develop a spreadsheet -based tool to automate the prioritization process using the revised methodology. 2 C Users robin AppData Local Microsoft Windows Temporary Internet Files Content.Outlook IIKE4 B Tuk%da - Residential Streets Prioritization Study - Scope (3) doc 11 Lt Perteet Scope of Services Perteet, Inc. (Hereinafter called the CONSULTANT) will conduct the following work elements for the City of Tukwila (Hereinafter called the CITY), as part of the Tukwila Non - Motorized Improvements Prioritization Array: The project is anticipated to begin in early October, 2015, with a project duration anticipated to be approximately five (5) months. Task 1: Project Management This work element will have the following sub - elements: 1.1. Kick -Off Meeting: The CONSULTANT will coordinate and participate in an initial project kick - off /chartering meeting with the CITY and other stakeholders at a location within the City. The CONSULTANT will prepare a Work Plan, to be reviewed by the CITY in advance of the kick -off meeting. 1.2 Client Contact: The CONSULTANT project manager will maintain day -to -day contact with CITY project manager via e-mail and telephone. The CITY will be kept informed on issues concerning work progress and factors affecting project progress. In addition, the CONSULTANT will develop a SharePoint (or similar) site to facilitate the sharing of large electronic files between the CONSULTANT and the CITY. 1.3. Progress Reports: The CONSULTANT project manager will prepare monthly progress reports and invoices that document progress to date, expenditures to date, and work anticipated in future months. The CONSULTANT will identify on the monthly invoice any changes and /or potential impacts to scope, schedule, and budget. The CITY and CONSULTANT shall review the issue(s) and both shall agree, in writing, as to the nature of the need for the change and /or impact, potential strategies to resolve the issue(s), and corrective action necessary to maintain and /or adjust the scope, schedule, and budget. The CONSULTANT project manager will keep the CITY project manager up -to -date with anticipated changes and /or potential impacts to scope, schedule, and budget on a weekly basis by phone, as outlined in sub - element 1.2 above. 1.4 Schedule: The CONSULTANT will prepare, monitor, and update the project schedule monthly. It will identify work element duration, deliverables, review periods and milestones. 1.5 Meetings: The CONSULTANT will attend up to six (6) additional meetings with the City project staff during the course of the project. It is anticipated that the CONSULTANT will prepare meeting agendas and notes for each meeting. 3 C Users robin App®ata Local Microsoft Windows Ternporary Internet Film Content Outlook ld A MTukwila - Residential Streets Prioritization Study - Scope (3) doc 12 k Perteet Deliverables: 1. Project Work Plan 2. Monthly Progress Reports and Invoices. 3. Project Schedule 4. Meeting agendas and notes Task 2: Review of Documents This work element will have the following sub - elements: 2.1. Review of Prioritization Methodology: The CONSULTANT will review "Pedestrian Improvements by Formula – A Process" memorandum by R. M. Cameron, PE, and evaluate the prioritization methodology described by the memorandum to determine what improvements can be made, with a focus on simplification and streamlining. The CONSULTANT will prepare a brief Methods and Assumptions Memorandum detailing any recommended changes and demonstrating why the revised process is more effective. 2.2 Review of City Street Improvement Ratings: The CONSULTANT will review the City's Street Improvement Rating sheet and cross - reference the projects listed with the Bicycle - Friendly Routes and Sidewalk Segments report (Hereinafter called the "REPORT ") to identify any projects not represented in the REPORT. The CONSULTANT will document these projects — collectively and hereinafter referred to as the "MISSING PROJECTS " —in the Methods & Assumptions Memorandum. 2.3 Review of Additional Supporting Documentation: The CONSULTANT will review the City's Walk and Roll Non - Motorized Transportation Plan to better understand the City's goals for non - motorized connectivity, the initial identified conditions and issues, and current design recommendations for specific pedestrian and bicycle facilities. The CONSULTANT will also review other documents, including the CITY's Design Standards, plans for adjacent jurisdictions, and transit routes. Deliverables: 1. Methods & Assumptions Memorandum (1 electronic master in PDF format) 4 C Users robin AppData Local Microsoft Windows Temporary Internet Files Content. Outlook llKE4MB0 Tukw ila - Residential Streets Prioritization Study - Scope (3).doc 13 Task 3: Missing Projects Task 3 will apply to the Missing Projects only. For purposes of estimating the work effort, the CONSULTANT assumes a maximum of 25 MISSING PROJECTS identified in Task 2. The work effort will consist of the following subtasks: 3.1. Review GIS Mapping: The CITY will provide and the CONSULTANT will review existing available GIS information for each MISSING PROJECT. The available GIS data will be used to review the available rights of way, utilities, contours, and other pertinent information. Project locations will be overlaid with the aerial photographs. This task will help us to determine whether the right of way is adequate for projects to meet the City's standards. 3.2. Conduct Field Reviews: The CONSULTANT will conduct an additional field review for each MISSING PROJECT, and document the existing conditions, including road width, channelization, existing curb conditions, parking, posted and observed speed limits, freight use, adjacent land use, major obstructions such as culverts, utility poles, rockeries or retaining walls, and hillsides. The field review will be used to identify opportunities and constraints. Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) may be used (if budget is available) to document existing conditions. The CONSULTANT will create an inventory matrix for each MISSING PROJECT to document existing conditions. 3.3. Improvement Options Report: The CONSULTANT will prepare an Improvement Options draft report for each MISSING PROJECT. The report will include a summary of existing conditions, constraintsibarriers (such as inadequate right of way, utility poles), opportunities, and potential design solutions for each project location. 3.4. Workshop: The CONSULTANT will conduct a half day workshop with selected City staff, to review preliminary identified improvement options for each MISSING PROJECT and provide additional input toward the improvement options for each affected facility. Issues, needs and policy implications will be identified such as the removal of on- street parking, emergency access, utility impacts, landscape buffers, low impact development opportunities, opportunities for use of sharrows or bike boulevards, and minimum width for bike lanes or shared lanes. The workshop format will include use of maps, field inventory data, photos, and if the room allows, use of internet resources, such as Google maps. The CONSULTANT will take notes — including review comments and design concurrence from City staff —during the Workshop. A goal will be to identify a 5 C Users robot AppData Local Microsoft Windows Temporary Internet Files Content 0utlook\llKE4MBB Tukwila Residentml Streets Prioritization Study - Scope (3).doc 14 rV Perteet preferred design solution for each corridor, prior to the development of the Preliminary Design Recommendations (See Task 3.5). 3.5. Preliminary Design Recommendations: The CONSULTANT will prepare conceptual design plans for each MISSING PROJECT (to include signage, such as the recommended type and number /spacing per project) and conceptual cross sections for each bicycle friendly route and missing sidewalk segment based on the results of the Improvement Options Report, workshop and input from City of Tukwila staff. Preliminary concepts will be developed for each corridor after alternatives have been reviewed and a preferred alternative is agreed upon for each corridor. Based upon feedback and review of the concepts, refined concepts will be developed. 3.6. Planning / Comparison Level Opinions of Cost: The CONSULTANT will prepare planning/ comparison level opinions of cost for each MISSING PROJECT. The opinions of cost will include engineering, and construction. Costs will be developed using the City's critical areas mapping and parcel lines and other layers available in the City's GIS database. This task will also include a screening analysis and matrix for the feasibility of construction of each pedestrian and bicycle project, taking into consideration factors including any environmental permits that would be required for construction of the project, and extra costs and difficulty that would be posed by steep slopes, the need to acquire additional right -of -way, etc. 3.7 Screening Analysis for Feasibility. For each MISSING PROJECT, the CONSULTANT will assign a feasibility rating of low, medium or high based on factors such as potential permitting needs, amount of right -of -way required, difficulty of construction, and other factors to be determined in concert with the City of Tukwila staff. 3.8 Missing Projects Addendum. The CONSULTANT will compile the work products from Field Reviews (Task 3.2) and Improvement Options (Task 3.3) into a draft Missing Projects Addendum for use during the Workshop (Task 3.4). The CONSULTANT will supplement the Addendum with the work products from the Workshop (Task 3.5), Design Recommendation (Task 3.5), Opinion of Cost (Task 3.6), and Screening Analysis (Task 3.7) to develop a final Missing Projects Addendum. Deliverables: 1. Draft Missing Projects Addendum (10 paper copies, 1 electronic master in PDF format) 2. Final Missing Projects Addendum (10 paper copies, 1 electronic master in PDF format) 6 C Users robimAppData Local Microsoft Wardens Temporary Internet Files Content Outlook RKE4MBB Tuk %vala -Residential Streets Prioritization Study - Scope (3).doc 15 Perteet Items to Be Furnished by the City of Tukwila 1. GIS datasets and other associated data for the update of all mapping for the study, including edge of pavement, right -of -way, building lines, contours, aerial photography 2. Electronic (WORD) version of the Walk and Roll Plan 3. Available pedestrian and bicycle accident data 4. Available average daily traffic counts (ADT) for all project locations and intersection turning movements 5. Current functional classifications Task 4: Update Bicycle- Friendly Routes & Sidewalk Segments Report The CONSULTANT will update the REPORT, pursuant to the following subtasks: 4.1. Update Cost Estimates: The CONSULTANT will escalate the Planning -Level Cost Estimates in the REPORT from year 2010 to year 2015 costs. The escalation will be based on Engineering News Report (ENR) construction inflation for the Seattle Metropolitan area. 4.2 Incorporate Missing Projects: The CONSULTANT will incorporate the Preliminary Design Recommendations (See Task 3.5) and Planning -Level Cost Estimates (See Task 3.6) for the MISSING PROJECTS into the REPORT. 4.3 Add Utility Undergrounding: The CONSULTANT will supplement each of the Planning -Level Cost Estimates in Task 4.1 and Task 4.2 to include proposed design and construction costs for moving existing overhead utilities underground based on information provided by the City. 4.4 Analyze Buildable Segments: The CONSULTANT will review the Planning - Level Cost Estimates from Task 4.3 to identify large projects with total delivery costs in excess of $3,000,000 (US dollars, 2015). The CONSULTANT will split large projects into "buildable segments" of $2,000,000 (US dollars, 2015) or less. 4.5 Produce Final Design Report: The CONSULTANT will produce draft and final versions of the revised REPORT and submit to the City for review. Deliverables: 1. Draft Design Report (5 paper copies; 1 electronic master in PDF format) 2. Final Design Report (10 paper copies; 1 electronic master in PDF format) 7 C Users robe, App Data Local Microsoft Windows Temporary Internet Files Content Outlook llKE4MBffiTukwila - Residential Streets Prioritization Study - Scope (3).doc 16 rV Lr Perteet Task 5: Update Prioritization Methodology 5.1. Master Spreadsheet: The CONSULTANT will summarize relevant geometric and cost data for all projects included in the revised DESIGN REPORT into a Master Project List contained in a single Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. 5.2. Develop Prioritization Array: The CONSULTANT will develop a spreadsheet - based tool (Hereinafter called the "PRIORITIZATION ARRAY ") to automate the prioritization process using the revised methodology described in the Methods and Assumptions Memorandum (See Task 2.1 and Task 2.2). The CONSULTANT will populate the PRIORITIZATION ARRAY with the information for each project in the Master Project List. 5.3. Summary Memorandum: The CONSULTANT will supplement the Methods & Assumptions Memorandum to document the development of the PRIORITIZATION ARRAY in a Summary Memorandum. The intent of the Summary Memorandum is to function as a "User's Manual" for the PRIORITIZATION ARRAY in the event that City staff want to add new projects or re- prioritize existing projects in the future. Deliverables: 1. Master Project List (1 electronic master in Excel format) 2. Prioritization Array (1 electronic master in Excel format) 3. Summary Memorandum (10 paper copies, 1 electronic master in PDF format) Task 6: Quality Assurance /Quality Control 6.1 Quality Assurance / Quality Control: The CONSULTANT will conduct QA/QC review of deliverables within this scope, including the Prioritization Array tool and summary memorandum, preliminary design concepts, and opinions of cost. Deliverables: No specific deliverables 8 C Users robut AppC Data Local Microsoft Windows Temporary lntemet Film Content Outlook llKE4 MTukwila - Residential Streets Prioritization Study - Scope (3) doc 17 Project Tukwila Non - Motorized Prioritization Arr Client City of Tukwila PM Marcus Elliott EXHIBIT "B" Contract Start Date 10/12/2015 Contract End Date 3/27/2016 Contract Duration: 5 Months Last Update date 9/14/2015 Perteet Project No. 20150206.000 Task Billing Rate Lead Technician/ Designer Planner II Principal Sr. Engineer / Mgr Accountant Clerical Engineer II Engineer II Total Hours Labor Dollars $33.50 $34.50 $75.73 $57.00 $31.50 $18.50 $30.50 $29.50 Project Management Expenses 3,195.00 Subconsultants CONTRACTTOTAL Kick -of Meeting 185,957.00 4.00 8.00 12.00 759.00 Client Contact 10.00 40.00 50.00 3,037.00 Monthly Progress Reports 8 Invoices 5.00 3.00 8.00 380.00 Schedule Updates 10.00 10.00 570.00 City Coord Meetings 12.00 18.00 6.00 36.00 2,046.00 Total Project Management 26.00 81.00 3.00 6.00 116.00 6,792.00 Review of Documents Prioritization Methodology 2.00 8.00 32.00 42.00 1,583.00 Street Improvement Ratings 2.00 8.00 40.00 50.00 1,827.00 Additional Documents 4.00 24.00 28.00 960.00 Total Review of Documents 4.00 20.00 96.00 120.00 4,370.00 Missing Projects Review GIS Mapping 30.00 5.00 5.00 40.00 1,473.00 Conduct Field Reviews 50.00 50.00 1 100.00 3,000.00 Improvement Options Report 8.00 40.00 200.00 248.00 8,986.00 Workshop 16.00 16.00 4.00 8.00 16.00 60.00 2,335.00 Preliminary Design Recommendations 150.00 40.00 100.00 290.00 10,355.00 Planning /Comparison Level Opinions of Cost 8.00 100.00 108.00 3,506.00 Screening Analysis for Feasibility 4.00 54.00 58.00 1,875.00 Missing Projects Addendum 2.00 24.00 4.00 30.00 680.00 Total Missing Projects 166.00 46.00 12.00 107.00 24.00 529.00 50.00 934.00 32,210.00 Update Report Update Cost Estimates 2.00 40.00 42.00 1,334.00 Incorporate Missing Projects 4.00 32.00 8.00 44.00 1,064.00 Add Utility Undergrounding 4.00 54.00 58.00 1,875.00 Analyze Buildable Segments 4.00 60.00 64.00 2,058.00 Produce Final Design Report 4.00 40.00 8.00 52.00 1,212.00 Total Update Report 18.00 72.00 170.00 260.00 7,543.00 Update Prioritization Methodology Master Spreadsheet 8.00 40.00 48.00 1,676.00 Develop Priortization Array 8.00 40.00 48.00 1,676.00 Summary Memorandum 8.00 40.00 48.00 1,676.00 Total Update Prioritization Methodology 24.00 120.00 144.00 5,028.00 Quality Assurance /Quality Control 32.00 32.00 2,423.00 Total Quality Assurance /Quality Control 32.00 32.00 2,423.00 Total Hours 166.00 46.00 74.00 250.00 3.00 102.00 915.00 1 50.00 1 1,606.00 Total Dollars $5,561.00 $1,587.00 $5,603.00 $14,250.00 $95.00 $1,887.00 $27,908.00 $1,475.00 $58,366.00 Expenses: CADD /Computer GIS Mileage - $.575 Totals: 2,160 690 345 3,195 SUMMARY Direct Salary Cost 58,366.00 Overhead Cost 183.13% 106,886.00 Fee 30% 17,510.00 Labor 182,762.00 Expenses 3,195.00 Subconsultants CONTRACTTOTAL $ 185,957.00 18 SOUTH COUNTY AREA TRANSPORTATION BOARD (SCATBd) July 21, 2015 MEETING SUMMARY Members Councilmember Bill Peloza (Chair) Councilmember Dana Ralph (Vice - Chair) Mayor Carol Benson Councilmember Linda Johnson Mayor Dave Hill Deputy Mayor Jeanne Burbidge Councilmember Debi Wagner Kelly McGourty Chris Arkills Charles Prestrud Lance Newkirk Councilmember Kathy Hougardy Commissioner Don Meyer Stacia Jenkins Tom Gut City of Auburn City of Kent City of Black Diamond City of Maple Valley City of Algona City of Federal Way City of Burien PSRC (Alternate) King County (Alternate) WSDOT (Alternate) City of Pacific City of Tukwila Port of Tacoma City of Normandy Park City of SeaTac (Alternate) I. Reports, Communications and Citizen Requests to Comment After introductions the Board approved the meeting summary for the June 16, 2015 SCATBd meeting. II. Reports, Communications and Citizen Requests to Comment Board members gave a shout out to their efforts over the past years that lead to the final passage of the transportation legislation by the 2015 State Legislature. They noted their past lobbying effort and the Legislative Message brochure that was produced by SCATBd to help in that lobbying effort. Councilmember Hougardy mentioned the continued work by the RTC's on the Transit Access Study, and mentioned the King County Metro Vision Survey. Charles Prestrud updated the Board on the regional projects in the State transportation package, he mentioned Triangle Improvements, gateway projects (SR 167/509),1-405 Renton to Bellevue widening, SR 518 Des Moines interchange improvements, JBLM Corridor Improvements, Port of Tacoma /I -5 Interchange. Mr. Prestrud offered to come back in a couple of months and provide a more detailed briefing on the transportation package. Councilmember Jenkins asked to include a discussion on SCATBd's 2016 legislative messaging in next meeting's agenda. Board discussed taking the month of August off. Councilmember Ralph informed the Board that Kent's Monic Whitman was leaving for Alaska and recognized Ms. Whitman for her service. SCATBd Action: A motion was made seconded to skin the August meeting. The Board passed the Motion. III. Possible SCATBd Assistance in ETP's Advanced Transportation Technologies Conference on October 9, 2015, Allan Van Ness, Eastside Transportation Partnership Councilmember Allen VanNess representing the Eastside Transportation Partnership (ETP) briefed the Board on ETP's sponsorship of an Advanced Transportation Technologies Conference that will be held on October 9, 2015. He said the major goals of conference will be the identification of emerging transportation technologies; a discussion on the potential consequences of these new technologies; and what changes in infrastructure planning will be needed to accommodate the new technologies. He said ETP has hired the Center for Advanced Transportation and Energy Solutions (CATES), to assist us with this project. He asked SCATBd if they wanted to participate in the planning and funding of the conference. ETP has contributed $5000 seed money to get the project started, and will also be asking SeaShore to participate in the conference. ETP felt that this is a worthwhile project in which the three subarea transportation forums should take the lead. 101 Board members agreed that they should participate in the conference and should provide financial support for the conference. Board members discusses what level of funding support should be appropriate, two contribution numbers were suggested by Board members, a $5,000 or a $2,500 contribution. SCATBd Action: A motion was made and seconded to provide $5000 in SCATBd funds towards the Advanced Transportation Conference. The motion was approved by the Board. Councilmember Linda Johnson and Mayor Hill volunteered to participate in the conference transportation technology planning meetings. IV. Washington State Freight and Goods Transportation System (FGTS) /Freight Truck Tracking Project: Wenjuan Zhao, WSDOT The Washington State Freight and Goods Transportation System (FGTS) is used to classify roadways, freight railroads and waterways according to the annual freight tonnage they carry. WSDOT, with the assistance of the Association of Washington Cities and the County Road Administration Board, updates the FGTS classifications on a periodic basis. Ms. Zhao said the update is used to establish project eligibility for Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) grants and fulfills other federal reporting requirements for truck and traffic counts. WSDOT has been using the FGTS to make various decisions, including designating freight economic corridors in State Freight Mobility Plan. This information also supports planning for mobility improvement, traffic congestion management, and other investment decisions at the local and statewide level. V. 2014 Puget Sound Regional Travel Study: Billy Charlton, PSRC The Executive Board reviewed the results of the Puget Sound Regional Travel Study. Mr. Charlton briefed the Board on the results of the Puget Sound Regional Travel Study. The Puget Sound Regional Council conducts household travel surveys every 7 to 8 years to determine the region's demographic characteristics and travel behaviors. This report compares results from the most recent 2014 survey to findings from 2006 and 1999 surveys. He said travel mode changes show an increase in the share of transit and nonmotorized trips, while the share of driving trips has declined. The rate of that change, however, has been gradual — 86% of trips were in personal vehicles in 1999, declining to 85% in 2006, and 82% by 2014. While the regional mode changes have been slight, much larger shifts from driving were observed in urban cores of Seattle and to a lesser degree in some areas of Bellevue, Everett, and Redmond. Between 2006 and 2014, shifting from automobiles was most pronounced for 18- 24 year olds, closely followed by 25 -35 year olds; mode shift was uniform for other age groups. VI. Public Comment Will Knedlick applauded the Board for their vote to participate in the transportation technology conference, and said that he thought it was a worthwhile endeavor by the Boards. Other Attendees: Jim Seitz, Renton Tamie Deady, Black Diamond Councilmember Monica Whitman, Kent Bob Lindskov, Covington Andy Williamson, Black Diamond Paul Takamine, KC DOT Hayley Bonsteel, Kent Katie Kuciemba, SCA Brandon Carver, Des Moines Rick Perez, Federal Way Pablo Para, Auburn Maiya Andrews, Burien Billy Charlton, PSRC Will Knedlick Wenjuan Zhao, WSDOT `11 SOUTH COUNTY AREA TRANSPORTATION BOARD (SCATBd) MEETING Tuesday, September 15, 2015 9:00 — 11:00 a.m. SeaTac City Hall 4800 South 188th Street SeaTac 1. Open Meeting Action 9:00 a.m. • Introductions • Approve June 16, 2015 SCATBd Meeting Summary 2. Reports and Communications Reports and 9:05 a.m. • Chair or Vice Chair Discussion • Participant Updates from RTC and Other Regional Committees • SCAT13d's 2016 legislative messaging 3. Update on State Projects in Adopted Report and 9:30 a.m. Transportation Package: John White, Discussion Assistant Regional Administrator at WSDOT 4. Update on King County Metro's Long Report and 10:00 a.m. Range Public Transportation Plan Discussion Development: Stephen Hunt, King County Metro 4. Update on Regional Transportation Report and 10:30 a.m. Technology Symposium: John Niles, Center Discussion for Advanced Transportation and Energy Solutions (CATES) • Report Out on Symposium Planning meetings - Councilmember Linda Johnson and Mayor Dave Hill 5. • Public Comment 10:50 a.m. • For the Good of the Order • Next SCATBd Meeting: October 20, 2015 • October Meeting Treats — City of Des Moines `Ai What's in the Future and How Do We Plan for It? Friday October 9, 2015 8:00am- 4:30pm at the Mercer Island Community and Events Center Developed and sponsored by the Eastside Transportation Partnership, the South County Area Transportation Board, and the Seashore Transportation Forum The public views transportation congestion as the number one Puget Sound regional problem — ahead of education and jobs. As the region recovers from the recession, vehicle miles traveled have increased, resulting in more congestion, more wasted time and less livability. At the same time, newly emerging technologies hold the promise of powerful tools that may help better diagnose and ease our transportation problems. The conference is intended for local, regional and state elected officials, policy makers, staff, planners, transportation professionals, and the general public interested in learning more about what the future may hold and how we plan for it. • What are the emerging new transportation technologies? The recent advent of smart, connected, increasingly autonomous vehicles and related technologies have the potential to transform traditional mobility. • What research -based expectations are likely to emerge regarding the direction of change in congestion, mode shares, and system efficiency? • What policy ideas may emerge for governments in Washington State to change and optimize infrastructure planning processes and outcomes? Speakers include: Bryan Mistele, CEO of INRIX, the leading international traffic measurement, analysis, and solutions company, also known for its annual Urban Mobility Scorecard. Alan Pisarski, America's leading independent analyst on commuter behavior in response to technology options, and author of Commuting in America, now in its fourth edition. Full agenda on the following two pages. Tickets are $40 and can be ordered online now. Q.I.ck h. E .. Price includes materials and lunch. 04 Advanced Transportation Technologies Conference What's in the Future and How Do We Plan for It? Friday October 9, 2015 Mercer Island Community & Event Center 8am- 4:30pm Developed and Sponsored by King County's Three Transportation Boards: Eastside Transportation Partnership South County Area Transportation Board Seashore Transportation Forum Co- Sponsored by Puget Sound Regional Council, King County Metro Transit, Washington State Department of Transportation, City of Mercer Island, Cascadia Academy, INRIX, Microsoft, Proterra, Tesla, Via Motors, Fehr & Peers, Transpo Group, Pacific Rim Resources, and others Organized and Moderated by the Center for Advanced Transportation and Energy Solutions (CATES) 8:00 AM Registration and coffee 8:30 Welcoming remarks: Secretary of Transportation Lynn Peterson; PSRC Executive Director Josh Brown; Bernard Talmas, Mayor of Woodinville and Chair of Transportation Boards' Conference Organizing Committee 8:45 Conference introduction and overview: Steve Marshall, Executive Director, Center for Advanced Transportation and Energy Solutions (CATES) 9:00 Morning Keynote presentation: Bryan Mistele, CEO of Inrix, "How Advanced Technologies Are Changing Our Ability to Diagnose, Plan for and Address Transportation Congestion and Safety" 9:30 "What is INRIX Forecasting for Puget Sound Congestion? What are the Opportunities for Improvement ?" I Steve Banfield and Lytang Kelley, INRIX 10:00 "Traffic, Mode Share, and Population Trends" I Alan Pisarski, author of Commuting in America I With additional information from University of Washington Professor Emeritus Richard Morrill 2 23 10:30 "Smart, Connected and Automated Vehicles: Trends and Outlook" Presentations and discussion moderated by John Niles, CATES Research Director; Shane Blackmer, Comet Robotics and U.S. Army; Baruch Feigenbaum, Reason Foundation; and others 11:15 "Advanced Signal Technologies for Municipalities" I Transpo Group 11:30 "Reducing Accidents, Fatalities, Injuries and Congestion: Target Zero and Technology Working Together" I Washington State Traffic Safety Commission 11:45 "Connected, Increasingly Autonomous Electric Buses" I Ryan Popple, CEO of Proterra 12:15 PM Lunch Keynote presentation: "The Mobility Internet and the Future of Transportation" I Susan Zielinski and Ford Motor Company 1:00 "Getting More Passengers into Fewer Vehicles" I Jim Stanton, Microsoft; Syd Pawlowski, King County Metro; and others 1:30 "Advanced Technology Transit: Right- sized, Flexible Transit Options" I Aaron Gooze of Fehr and Peers with Uber, Lyft, and King County Metro Transit 2:00 "Expert Reactions to Advanced Transportation Technologies" I Discussion panel of conference presenters from earlier in the day. 2:45 "Legislative Panel on Advanced Transportation Technologies: What's in Store for the Next Legislative Session and Beyond" I Panel discussion featuring State Legislators, including Judy Clibborn, Chad Magendanz, Mark Mullet, and Dick Muri. 3:15 Town Hall Q &A discussion with collected written questions to members of the expert and legislative panels from throughout the day 3:45 Conference closing remarks 4:00 Wine and cheese reception Tickets are $40 and can be ordered online now. Click here to ireaar,lh Eveirmtlbirite foir October 9"" eveint tirckets and . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . directions to eir eC Island Cornialumrty � l„ CeirmtaTMi� „a Price includes materials and lunch. Sponsorship and display opportunities are available. Questions? Contact Wes Edwards, s� .. ura � s jcoo „c u t .g y or Steve Marshall, n. �° o�c ...._ utq t s E Agenda current as of September 4, 2015. Subject to change. 3 24