HomeMy WebLinkAboutTrans 2016-01-19 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETCity of Tukwila
Transportation Committee
❖ Dennis Robertson, Chair
❖ Verna Seal
❖ De'Sean Quinn
Distribution:
R. Turpin
D. Robertson
M. Hart
V. Seal
Clerk File Copy
D. Quinn
2 Extra
Mayor Ekberg
D. Cline
Place pkt pdf on Z: \TC -UC
L. Humphrey
Agendas
B. Giberson
e-mail cover to: A. Le,
F. Iriarte
C. O'Flaherty, D. Robertson,
R. Tischmak
D. Almberg, B. Saxton,
G. Labanara
S. Norris, M. Hart,
P. Brodin
L. Humphrey
0e. rue5doy AGENDA
TUESDAY, JANUARY 19, 2016 — 5:30 PM
FOSTER CONFERENCE ROOM — 6300 BUILDING
Next Scheduled Meeting: Monday, February 1, 2016
SThe City of Tukwila strives to accommodate individuals with disabilities
Please contact the Public Works Department at 206 - 433 -0179 for assistance.
Item
Recommended Action
Page
1.
PRESENTATION(S)
2.
BUSINESS AGENDA
a) Interurban Ave S (S 143 d St to Fort Dent Way)
a)
Forward to 2/1/16 Consent
Pg. 1
CM Consultant Supplement No. 3 with Anchor QEA
Agenda Meeting
b) Interurban Ave S (S 143rd St to Fort Dent Way)
b)
Forward to 2/1/16 Consent
Pg. 5
CM Consultant Supplement No. 4 with KPG, Inc.
Agenda Meeting
c) 40 -42 Ave South (S 1601h St — S 131St PI) Phase III
c)
Information Only
Pg. 11
42nd Ave S/S 160th Street Intersection Cost Estimate
d) Strander Boulevard Extension Phase 3
d)
Forward to 2/1/16 Consent
Pg. 19
Consultant Contract, Scope of Work and Fee
Agenda Meeting
3.
SCATBd
4.
MISCELLANEOUS
e) Transportation Committee Work Plan
e)
For Discussion
5.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Future Agendas:
Next Scheduled Meeting: Monday, February 1, 2016
SThe City of Tukwila strives to accommodate individuals with disabilities
Please contact the Public Works Department at 206 - 433 -0179 for assistance.
C 0
I'l a Allan Ekberg, Mayor
Public Works Department - Bob Giberson, Director
TO: Mayor Ekberg
Transportation Committee
FROM: Bob Giberson, Public Works Director A
BY: Michael Ronda, Construction Project Manager
DATE: January 15, 2016
SUBJECT: Interurban Avenue South IS 143rd St to Fort Dent Way)
Project No. 90310402, Contract No. 14-066
CM Consultant Supplement No. 3 with Anchor QEA
ISSUE
Execute a contract supplement with Anchor QEA (Anchor) in the amount of $200,000.00 to perform continued construction
management (CM) services through the end of February 2016 for the Interurban Ave S Project.
laiTecge
Construction has been underway on Interurban Ave S from S 143rd St to Fort Dent Way since July 2014. Early Change
Orders and multiple construction delays have extended the contract time past the original completion date. Contract time
extensions nearly always require additional construction management oversight and costs. City staff makes every effort to
make adjustments to the contract management effort to avoid additional costs. In this case, the significant contract time
extension necessitates additional engineering and inspection time and costs cannot be absorbed through the existing
contracts. We now believe the project will extend into the spring of 2016. Work continues to progress but continued
inspection support is needed.
DISCUSSION
Anchor has provided the attached contract supplement and fee estimate to continue to perform construction management
services into 2016. The negotiations for this supplement anticipate a shift in consultant personnel to better position the team
for an extended construction contract and potential additional budget past February 2016.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
W:\PW Eng\PROJECTS\A- RW & RS Projects\lnterurban Ave S (90310402)\Consultant Selection\lnfo Memo CM Anchor Supplement #3 01.15-16 gl.docx
Contracts
Awarded Bud-get
Construction Contract
$7,597,833.39
$8,737,508.39
Change Order Obligations to Date
246,311.29
Remaining Construction Contingency (Originally 15%)
54,870.76
Anchor QEA Current Construction Management Encumbrance
1,542,648.00
1,666,693.00
Anchor QEA CM Supplement #3
200,000.00
KPG Current On-Call Construction Support Encumbrance
357,973.00
KPG On-Call Construction Support Supplement #4
59,045.66
Tukwila Staff, Field Office Expenses, WSDOT
225,000.00
Other Additional Support Costs (DOT Extensions, etc.)
115,519.29
Potential Utility Conflicts
100,000.00
Storm Quality Retrofit Budget (CIP page 83)
95,000.00
Totals
$10,499,20139
$10,499,201.39
W:\PW Eng\PROJECTS\A- RW & RS Projects\lnterurban Ave S (90310402)\Consultant Selection\lnfo Memo CM Anchor Supplement #3 01.15-16 gl.docx
Info Memo AnchorTitle or Addressee
January 15, 2016
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION
Council is being asked to approve the construction management contract Supplement No. 3 with Anchor QEA in the amount
of $200,000.00 for the Interurban Ave S Project and consider this item on the Consent Agenda of the February 1, 2016
Regular Meeting.
Attachment: Anchor QEA Contract Supplement #3
W:\PW Eng\PROJECTS\A- RW & RS Projects\lnterurban Ave S (90310402)\Consultant Selection\lnfo Memo CM Anchor Supplement #3 01-15-16 gl.docx
� Washington State
TI/ Department of Transportation
Supplemental Agreement
Organization and Address
Number Three
Anchor QEA, LLC
720 Olive Way, Suite 1900
Seattle, WA 98 101
Original Agreement Number
STPUL -1045 (007); 14- 066(c)
Phone: 206 287 -9130
Project Number
Execution Date
Completion Date
90310402
June 6, 2014
June 30, 2016
Project Title
New Maximum Amount Payable
Interurban Avenue South Improvements
$ 1,742,648.00
Description of Work
Provide Construction Management Services for roadway improvements from S. 143rd Street to Fort Dent
Way, including walls, storm drainage, illumination, landscaping, paving and pedestrian facilities.
The Local Agency of City of Tukwila
desires to supplement the agreement entered in to with Anchor QEA, LLC
and executed on June 6 2014 and identified as Agreement No. 14 -066
All provisions in the basic agreement remain in effect except as expressly modified by this supplement.
The changes to the agreement are described as follows:
Section 1, SCOPE OF WORK, is hereby changed to read:
Expansion of level of services and time allocation of staff as identified in the original agreement scope of
work and Supplement No. 1. Estimated completion time extended to June 2016 by Supplement No. 2.
Section IV, TIME FOR BEGINNING AND COMPLETION, is amended to change the number of calendar days
for completion of the work to read: N/A
I11
Section V, PAYMENT, shall be amended as follows:
Increase the maximum amount payable by $200,000 from $1,542,648.00 to $1,742,648.00
as set forth in the attached Exhibit A, and by this reference made a part of this supplement.
If you concur with this supplement and agree to the changes as stated above, please sign in the Appropriate
spaces below and return to this office for final action.
By: Ed Berschinski. Principal Construction Manager
_ -✓ Consultant Signature
DOT Form 140 -063
Revised 09/2005
Approving Authority Signature
Supplement No. 3
Exhibit A
Consultatnt Fee Determination - Summary Sheet
(Cost Plus Fixed Fee)
Project: Interurban Avenue South - S. 143rd Street to Forth Dent Way
Direct Salary Cost (DSC):
Classification Man Hours
Rate
Cost
Principal - Construction Manager 246
x
$ 87.00 *
_ $
21,402.00
Senior Staff - Lead Inspector 600
x
$ 40.00
= $
24,000.00
Office Engineer 540
x
$ 27.00
= $
14,580.00
Inspector - Specialty 210
x
$ 42.00
= $
8,820.00
Project Coordinator /Administration 16
x
$ 26.00
= $
416.00
* Rate capped at $87.99 for this contract
Total DSC
$
69,218
Overhead (OH Cost including Salary Additives):
OH Rate x DSC of 160.94%
x
$ 69,218.00
$
111,399
Fixed Fee (FF):
FF Rate x DSC of 25.00%
x
$ 69,218.00
$
17,305
Subtotal Labor
$
197,922
Reimburseables:
Mileage
$ 1,000.00
Copier /Copies
$ 1,000.00
Misc Supplies and Equipment
$ 78.00
Subtotal Reimburseables
$
2,078.00
Subtotal - Supplement No. 3
$
200,000
Previous Total (Original + Supplement No. 1 and 2)
$
1,542,648
Revised TOTAL (Original + Supplement No. 1, 2 and 3)
$
1,742,648
Prepared by: Ed Berschinski Date: 1/12/2016
4
City Tukwila
Allan Ekberg, Mayor
Public Works Department - Bob Giberson, Director
TO: Mayor Ekberg
Transportation Committee
FROM: Bob Giberson, Public Works Director '14
BY: Michael Ronda, Construction Project Manager
DATE: January 15, 2016
SUBJECT: Interurban Avenue South (S 143rd St to Fort Dent Way)
Project No. 90310402, Contract No. 13 -028
On -Call Design Support Supplement No. 4 with KPG, Inc.
ISSUE
Execute a contract supplement with KPG Inc. (KPG) in the amount of $59,045.66 to perform continued on -call design
support services during construction through the end of March 2016 for the Interurban Ave S Project,
BACKGROUND
Construction has been underway on Interurban Ave S from S 143rd St to Fort Dent Way since July 2014. Early Change
Orders and multiple construction delays have extended the contract time past the original completion date. KPG was able to
shift their original support budget to compensate for the slower pace of construction and make the initial budget last through
the end of 2015 by using budget for closeout services (as -built generation, etc). Subsequent minor changes encountered
during the installation of the new waterline and ongoing difficulties cannot be absorbed through the existing contracts. We
now believe the project will extend into the spring of 2016. Close out services and additional on -call support is needed to
reach the end of construction.
110 &1 M[*P►1
KPG has provided the attached contract supplement and fee estimate to continue to perform design support services during
construction extending into 2016. The negotiations for this supplement anticipate a shift in consultant personnel to better
position the team for an extended construction contract and potential additional budget past March 2016.
Totals $10,499,201.39 $10499,201.39
W: \PW Eng \PROJECTS\A- RW & RS Projects \Interurban Ave S (90310402) \Consultant Selection \Info Memo KPG Supplement #4 01 -15 -16 gl.docx
Contracts
Awarded Budget
Construction Contract
$7,597,833.39
$8,737,508.39
Change Order Obligations to Date
246,311.29
Remaining Construction Contingency (Originally 15 %)
54,870.76
Anchor QEA Current Construction Management Encumbrance
1,542,648.00
1,666,693.00
Anchor QEA CM Supplement #3
200,000.00
KPG Current On -Call Construction Support Encumbrance
357,973.00
KPG On -Call Construction Support Supplement #4
59,045.66
Tukwila Staff, Field Office Expenses, WSDOT
225,000.00
Other Additional Support Costs (DOT Extensions, etc.)
115,519.29
Potential Utility Conflicts
100,000.00
Storm Quality Retrofit Budget (CIP page 83)
95,000.00
Totals $10,499,201.39 $10499,201.39
W: \PW Eng \PROJECTS\A- RW & RS Projects \Interurban Ave S (90310402) \Consultant Selection \Info Memo KPG Supplement #4 01 -15 -16 gl.docx
Info Memo KPG
January 15, 2016
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION
Council is being asked to approve the on call design support contract Supplement No. 4 with KPG, Inc. in the amount of
$59,045.66 for the Interurban Ave S Project and consider this item on the Consent Agenda of the February 1, 2016 Regular
Meeting.
Attachment: KPG Contract Supplement #4
W: \PW Eng \PROJECTS\A- RW & RS Projects \Interurban Ave S (90310402) \Consultant Selection \Info Memo KPG Supplement #4 01 -15 -16 gl.docx
Washington State
PDepartment of Transportation
Supplemental Agreement Organization and Address
KPG, Inc.
753 9th Avenue N
Original Agreement Number Seattle, WA 98109
13- 028(b) Phone: 206.286.1640
Project Number Execution Date Completion Date
90310402 1/29/2013 6/15/2016
Project Title New Maximum Amount Payable
Interurban Avenue S, Fort Dent Way to S 143rd Street $ 803,798.31
Description of Work
Provide construction engineering services during the construction and closeout of the Interurban Avenue S -
S 143rd Street to Fort Dent Way project.
The Local Agency of City of Tukwila
desires to supplement the agreement entered in to with .KP....
and executed on ..01/29/.0..1 3 and identified as Agreement No, 13 -028
All provisions in the basic agreement remain in effect except as expressly modified by this supplement.
The changes to the agreement are described as follows:
Section 1, SCOPE OF WORK, is hereby changed to read:
This supplement includes additional scope for construction engineering services identified in the attached
Exhibit A -4.
Section IV, TIME FOR BEGINNING AND COMPLETION, is amended to change the number of calendar days
for completion of the work to read:. Nb _chantt t. cc, l,t' �_1O.,l...h .. .....
III
Section V, PAYMENT, shall be amended as follows:
Payment for the added scope items shall not exceed $59,045.66 as shown in Exhibit E -4 without prior
approval by the City.
as set forth int eh attached Exhibit A, and by this reference made a part of this supplement.
If you concur with this supplement and agree to the changes as stated above, please sign in the Appropriate
spaces below and return to this office for final action.
p.
By..... _.. By:
................................................. ...............................
Consultant Signature Approving Authority Signature
Orate
DOT Form 140 -063
Revised 09/2005
EXHIBIT A -4
City of Tukwila
Interurban Avenue S
S 143rd Street to Fort Dent Way
Supplement No. 4
Construction Engineering Support
KPG
Scope of Work
January 12, 2016
A. BACKGROUND
The following represents the general Scope of Services (Scope) to be performed by KPG Inc.
(Consultant) during the ongoing construction and closeout of the Interurban Avenue S — S 143rd Street to
Fort Dent Way project (Project), for the City of Tukwila (City). This supplement is to provide for
construction engineering services for approximately three months of 2016 and to replenish funds for
closeout record drawing assistance as described below. It is anticipated that budgets between Tasks
may be adjusted as required to provide the requested services.
B. SCOPE OF WORK
TASK 3A — CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES
3.1 The Consultant shall continue to provide on -call support, which may include, weekly progress
meetings, review of shop drawings, interpretation of plans and specifications, minor change
exhibits, property restoration details and construction change order assistance on an as- needed
basis. The level of effort assumes providing these services through approximately March 2016
and may include the following items of work:
• Construction Meetings: Attend weekly construction meetings or other project meetings at
the construction site to review, in conjunction with the City, the Contractor's progress and
construction schedule. Weekly attendance is not anticipated for the project duration;
however, the project engineer and other engineers will attend as requested. Provide
feedback and follow up as appropriate.
• Submittals: Review and comment on the Contractor's submittals as requested, including
shop drawings. Many of the submittals will be reviewed by the City or Construction
Management Services Consultant. It is anticipated that the Consultant will receive the
following submittals for review:
• Interpretation of Plans and Specifications: Provide technical assistance to clarify and
interpret the contract documents at the request of the City. Assist the City in answering
Contractor questions. Respond to requests for information (RFIs), prepare requests for
quotation (RFQs), and prepare construction field directives (CFDs).
• Change Order Assistance: In the event that the provisions of the Contract Documents
need to be revised, prepare the necessary revisions to the drawings and specifications.
On request, provide engineering or independent peer review of contractor, City, or utility
proposed plan changes.
• Field Engineering Assistance: Various design details are best performed in the field.
These items have been identified during construction and discussed with the design
team. The design team will provide additional assistance to clarify the scope and intent of
these Extra Work items on an as needed basis within the scope of the approved budget.
City of Tukwila Page 1 of 2 KPG
Interurban Ave S Construction Engineering Support 111212016
Subconsultant Construction Support: Project Subconsultants for structural (CivilTech)
will be retained for construction support on an as requested basis. A budget allowance of
$5,000 is included in the attached Exhibit E.
On -call survey support: Provide surveyor support to verify contractors survey or layout,
assist with quantity verification, or other support needs as requested by the City.
Task.3 Deliverables: Documentation as requested in support of on -call construction support
TASK 5 — CLOSEOUT ASSISTANCE
5.1 This task is provided to replenish closeout budget that has been reallocated during the project to
address ongoing priorities for construction engineering. The overall budget amount is reduced
from the original budget estimate as a result of efficiencies that have been realized in
documenting record changes as they occurred.
Task.5 Deliverables:
• Record Drawing Mylars (full size)
• Half -size copy of draft
• Full -size and half -size copies of final record drawings
• Electronic files
C. OTHER SERVICES
The City of Tukwila may require other services of the Consultant. These services could include other
work tasks not included in the scope of work. These services may include, but are not necessarily limited
to, additional construction support; assistance with property restoration issues; utility, agency, or audit
support in excess of the budget allowances contained in Exhibit E; or other services deemed necessary
by the City. At the time these services are required, the Consultant shall provide the City with a detailed
scope of work and an estimate of costs. The Consultant shall not proceed with the work until the City has
authorized the work and issued a Notice to Proceed.
City of Tukwila Page 2 of 2 KPG
Interurban Ave S Construction Engineering Support 511212014
HOUR AND FEE ESTIMATE
Project: City of Tukwila
Interurban Avenue S
S 143rd Street to Fort Dent Way
Supplement No. 4- Construction Engineering Services
EXHIBIT E-4
• Architecture •
Larirtexip.- Architecture
• Civil Engineering •
Task 3A - Estimate throu.h , •ril2016
Level of effort at 3 day per week + mgrntiadrnin
$ 26,430.33
Subcontractor Allowance to completion
$ 5,000.00
Mileage
$ 250.00
Re9roduction
$ 50.00
Task Totals
12
12
31,730.33
Task 5 - Record Drawings (Replenish funds)
Prepare Draft Record Drawings
4
16
20
0
20
30
0
0
4
$ 10,192.73
Final Record Drawings
4
4
8
0
10
20
0
0
4
$ 5,229.24
PMR audit support
Mileage
0
0
12
20
0
0
0
40
24
$
$ 10,193.35
200.00
Reproduction
5 1,500.00
Task Totals
8
20
40
20
30
50
0
40
32
s 27,315.33
Hourly rates are based on the following:
Direct Salary Costs
Overhead Rate
Fixed Fee
,4tt< , 44 , $
$ 65.00 $ 52.06 $ 41.83 $ 45.67 $ 36.06 $ 31.25 $ 50.75 $ 40.87
145.78%
30%
1/13/2016
City of Tukwila
Allan Ekberg, Mayor
TO: Mayor Ekberg
Transportation Committee
FROM: Bob Giberson, Public Works Director
BY: Cyndy Knighton, Senior Program Manager
DATE: January 15, 2016
SUBJECT: 40 -42 Ave South (S 160th — S 131 PI) Phase III
Project No. 99410303, Contract No 12 -010
42nd Avenue S/S 160th Street Intersection Cost Estimate
ISSUE
Cost estimates to improve the intersection of 42nd Ave S and S 1601h St, as part of the 42nd Avenue S Phase III Project.
I )_T41 &C %11P►1i7
On July 24, 2015, a Small Group Joint Meeting was held between the Tukwila Transportation Committee and elected officials
from the City of SeaTac. The focus of that meeting was coordination between the two jurisdictions on common issues such as
the Tukwila International Boulevard /Link Light Rail area, code enforcement, fire services, and other issues between the two
cities. Tukwila and SeaTac agreed to look at the intersection of 42nd Ave S & S 160th St and study what could be done to
improve the intersection safety, perhaps as part of Tukwila's 42nd Ave S Phase III Project, even though the actual intersection is
under SeaTac's jurisdiction. Tukwila's design work on the project is currently at the 90% level and is scheduled to begin
construction in 2016. SeaTac currently has no plans for improvements to the intersection or that portion of 42nd Ave S south of
the Tukwila city limits.
To study the potential improvements and develop planning -level cost estimates for the intersection, staff directed the design
consultant team at CH2MHill to produce conceptual drawings and cost estimates.
DISCUSSION
Two options were developed by the CH2MHill design team. Option 1 is for full intersection improvements that would include
repaving the entire intersection, improving the turning radius at the SE corner, installation of ADA compliant sidewalks, and
associated stormwater improvements (see attachment for Option 1). For this exercise, the assumption was made that the PSE
electrical pole relocation required is completed at no cost to the City. Actual costs for the PSE relocation would need to be
determined based on any franchise agreement that SeaTac has with PSE.
Option 2 would simply grind and overlay the entire intersection and sidewalks would only be installed on the north side of the
intersection, which is under Tukwila's jurisdiction (see attachment for Option 2).
FISCAL IMPACT
Due to the very preliminary nature of the cost estimates listed below, a large contingency has been factored in to provide a
buffer for budgeting considerations. The cost estimates for the two options include both design and construction costs, but do
not include any analysis for potential right -of -way acquisition. A more detailed cost estimate is included as an attachment.
Options
Cost Estimate
Option 1: Full Intersection with sidewalk improvements
$102,807.82
Option 2: Grind and Overlay Only
$19,318.00
RECOMMENDATION
For information only.
Attachments: Plan Drawings for Options 1 and 2 (2 pages)
Planning level cost estimate breakdowns for Options 1 and 2 (2 pages)
Meeting summary Small Group Joint Meeting 7/24/15 (2 pages)
11
WAPW Eng \PROJECTSIA• RW & RS Projects \42nd Ave S Phase 111 (99410303 94 -RS03) \Design \Info Memo 42nd Ave S -S 160th St Intersection Cost Estimate 1 -15 -16 gI sb.docx
IR
IR
IRR
IRR
V IN
IRU
1
1
IRI
IRR
1
IRUN IP IN
1
IRR
IRR
IMO
IRI
INN
INN
IRI
INN
IRI
1
JRU
IRI
IMO
UV
u
i-I , NrsD -
Mitlatal
.............
FULL DEPTH HMA PAVEMENT
40TH - 42ND AVENUE SOUTH - PHASE III
S 160TH ST TSIDEWALK
IMPROVEMENT OPTION 1
DATE: 01-08-16
PLANING BITUMINIOLIS PAVEMENT
AND HMA OVERLAY
1
SCALE: 1" 20'
0
N
FILL
PLANING BITUMINIOUS PAVEMENT
and HMA overlay
40TH - 42ND AVENUE SOUTH - PHASE III
S 160TH ST MILL & OVERLAY OPTION 2
DATE: 01-08-16
CA)
SCALE: 1" = 20'
40th - 42nd Ave South - Phase III
S 160th St/42nd Ave S Intersection
Option 1: Full Intersection with Sidewalk Improvements
Cost Estimate
Item No.
Sec.
No.
Item Description
Quantity
Unit
Unit Price
Total Price
SP/ST
D
1
1-09
Mobilization (assume 8% total)
1
LS
$ 3,900.00
3,900.00
STD
2
Traffic Control (assume 7% of total) not including Mobilization
1
LS
$ 3,200.00
3,200.00
SP
3
2-01
Clearing and Grubbing
0.04
AC
$ 15,000.00
533.82
STD
4
2-02
Remove Existing Drainage Structure
1
EA
$ 350.00
350.00
SP
5
2-02
Pavement Sawcutting
112
LF
2.50
280.00
SP
6
2-03
Roadway Excavation Incl. Haul
167
CY
15.00
2,505.00
STD
7
2-03
Gravel Borrow Incl. Haul
19
CY
35.00
665.00
STD
8
4-04
Crushed Surfacing Top Course (or Base Course)
26
TON
25.00
650.00
STD
9
5-04
Planing Bituminious Pavement
43
SY
10.00
430.00
STD
10
5-04
HMA Cl. 1/2-inch PG 64-22 (Class B)
54
TON
92.00
4,968.00
STD
11
5-04
HMA Cl. 1-inch PG 64-22 (Class E)
8
TON
92.00
736.00
STD
12
7-04
Corrugated polyethlyene Storm Sewer Pipe 12 In. Diam.
133
LF
38.00
5,054.00
STD
13
7-04
Corrugated polyethlyene Storm Sewer Pipe 18 In. Diam,
13
LF
42.00
546.00
STD
14
7-05
Catch Basin Type 1
4
EA
$ 1,200.00
4,800.00
STD
15
7-05
Connection to Drainage Structure
1
EA
$ 700.00
700,00
STD
16
7-05
Abandon and Fill Pipe
50.00
LF
25.00
1,250.00
SP
17
8-02
Topsoil Type A
3
CY
50.00
150.00
SP
18
8-02
Seeded Lawn Installation
42
SY
10.00
420.00
STD
19
8-04
Cement Conc. Traffic Curb and Gutter
156
LF
20.00
3,120.00
STD
20
8-14
Cement Conc Sidewalk
40
SY
32.00
1,280.00
STD
21
8-14
Cement Conc Curb Ramp Type Parallel A
4
EA
$ 1,500.00
6,000.00
STD
22
8-24
Modular Block Retaining Wall
373
SF
30.00
11,190.00
SP
Subtotal
$ 52,727.82
Contingency
I I
50%
26,360.00
Subtotal $
79,087.82
Design
15%
$ 11,860.00
Construction management
15%
11,860.00
Total Option 1
$ 102,807.82
Assume PSE pole relocation will be at no cost to City.
01 11 2016
SEATAC S 160th St -cost.xisx
40th - 42nd Ave South - Phase III
S 160th St/42nd Ave S Intersection
Option 2: Mill and Overlay Only
Cost Estimate
Item No.
1
2
3
Sec.
No.
1-09
5-04
Item Description
Mobilization (assume 8% total)
Traffic Control (assume 7% of total) not including Mobilization
Planing Bituminious Pavement
Quantity
1
1
410
Unit
LS
LS
SY
Unit Price
$ 700.00
$ 600.00
10.00
Total Price
700.00
600.00
$ 4,100.00
SP/ST
D
STD
SP
STD
4
5-04
HMA Cl. 1/2-inch PG 64-22 (Class B)
49
TON
92.00
$ 4,508.00
STD
Subtotal
$ 9,908.00
Contingency
I I
50%
$ 4,950.00
01/11/2016
Subtotal
$ 14,858.00
SEATAC S 160th St -cost.xlsx
Design
15%
$ 2,230.00
Construction management
15%
$ 2,230.00
Total Option 2 $19,318.00
SEATAC S 160th St -cost.xlsx
Small Group Joint Meeting
Meeting Summary
Small Group Joint Meeting Tukwila /SeaTac
Location:
SeaTac City Hall, McMicken Room
Date:
July 24, 2015
Begin Time:
9:00 a.m.
End Time:
10:27 a.m.
PRESENT
From SeaTac: Mia Gregerson, Mayor; Tony Anderson and Pam Fernald, Councilmembers;
Todd Cutts, City Manager; Joe Scorcio, Community and Economic
Development Director
From Tukwila: Joe Duffie, Dennis Robertson, Kathy Hougardy Councilmembers; David
Cline, City Administrator; Laurel Humphrey, Council Analyst
Welcome & Introductions
The meeting began with a welcome from Mayor Gregerson and self- introductions of attendees.
Tukwila International Boulevard Light Rail Station Area Update
Mr. Scorcio provided an update on planning in the South 154th Street station area, including
land assembly and infrastructure investment. The vision is for mixed -use, transit and pedestrian
friendly redevelopment with localized retail and high density housing. The development
community is aware of future opportunities in this area. Additionally, SeaTac is working with
the State on cleanup of the Betty Brite property. SeaTac will receive 1.25 million in State capital
funding for the International Marketplace project, which will be included in the development
concept for the area. Development in this area will include improvements to the intersection at
152nd and TIB. In its assessment of this area, the Urban Land Institute recommended fee -
based parking in support of light rail ridership and local business. He distributed copies of the
Station Area Project Background and Urban Land Institute recommendations.
Councilmember Robertson shared that current efforts toward the Tukwila International
Boulevard Comprehensive Plan update are focusing on a vision of a walkable area with main
street character. A consultant hired by the City advised that the market is not quite ready for
new housing.
Attendees discussed the importance of having a unified vision for this area, with common goals
and elimination of service redundancies. Leadership and planners from both cities are in
regular communication toward this effort. Councilmembers agreed that it would be useful to
have shared talking points when lobbying for funding or describing the common vision, and are
11111
supportive of staff collaboration with regular updates to Councils. Mayor Gregerson would like
this group to meet again on this topic with each group respectively reporting back to their
Councils on the outcome.
Code Compliance /Enforcement Update
Mr. Scorcio provided an update on code enforcement strategies in the City of SeaTac. The
program was adjusted during the last budget cycle and is currently undergoing review by a
dedicated, cross - departmental working group. There will be more focus on proactive practices
and community outreach than in the past. Their code was originally based on King County's
code and has evolved over time to better meet their needs. Substantial code amendments are
being developed now and expected to be reviewed by Council in September, Code
Enforcement staff from both cities regularly meet to share best practices. SeaTac is
considering a rental housing inspection program of their own. Councilmember Hougardy noted
that Tukwila's Strategic Plan was instrumental in giving staff the guidance to put resources into
strengthening code enforcement.
Fire Services Update
Mr. Cline provided an update on Tukwila's current examination of the possibility of annexing to
the Kent Regional Fire Authority. There is a steering committee, a finance committee, and a
governance committee evaluating various aspects, and the steering committee is on track to
make a recommendation to Council by the end of the year. Depending on the outcome and
Council approval there is possibility of a public vote in April 2016, concurrent with Kent RFA's
next vote. He noted that regardless of the outcome, the close proximity of SeaTac's Station
47 and Tukwila's Station 54 present a valuable opportunity for partnership and he would like to
continue that conversation.
Other
Mr. Cline noted the award of $1 billion in funding from the Legislature for the SR 509 extension
project. The project will benefit the whole area and is worth celebrating.
He also shared that Tukwila's Transportation Committee recently receive an update on the
intersection at 42nd Avenue South and South 160th Street. Tukwila is in the design phase of a
project that will construct ADA improvements in the northern corner. At that meeting Public
Works staff shared that SeaTac has no plans regarding the southern corners of the intersection.
He brought this to Mr. Cutts' attention and the two will have further discussions about
possibilities for aligning improvements for a cohesive intersection.
Mayor Gregerson thanked Tukwila for its participation in regional transportation planning efforts
and noted the Sustainable Airport Master Plan currently being developed by the Port.
Stakeholders in South King County are meeting regularly and cities should ensure their
transportation plans are written to accommodate impacts from the projected future airport
expansion.
Councilmember Duffle noted that as 2016 Council President, he would like to have two Tukwila -
SeaTac cooperative meetings,
Meeting Summary by LH
Joint Meeting: Tukwila/ SeaTac ................................................................................................... ............................... July 24, 2015 — Page 2 17
18
mzmw s
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Ekberg
Transportation Committee
FROM: Bob Giberson, Public Works Director
BY: Robin Tischmak, City Engineer
DATE: January 15, 2016
SUBJECT: Strander Boulevard Extension Phase 3
Project No. 98610403
Consultant Contract, Scope of Work, and Fee
Mayor
a • N �r
ISSUE
Execute a consultant contract with Berger Abam to provide Phase 3A Early Start Work design services
for the Strander Boulevard Extension Phase 3 Project.
BACKGROUND
The City of Renton completed Phase 1 of the Strander Blvd /SW 27th St (Oaksdale Ave to Naches Ave)
in 2008 and Phase 2 in 2014 (from Naches to the new Sounder Commuter Rail Station parking lot,
between BNSF and UPRR). Phase 3 is being led by the City of Tukwila, but we were unsuccessful in
securing TIGER grant funding for 2015 and 2016. However, Tukwila City Council has approved $2
million for preliminary design services for 2016, although we will only be contracting for the critical early
start items.
DISCUSSION
Berger Abam was selected from the MRSC Consultant Roster as one of three top engineering firms
that are experienced in designing similar railroad grade separation projects. Staff has negotiated a
consultant agreement that includes the attached scope and fee for this limited scope Phase 3A Early
Start work. Beginning this preliminary design will enhance Tukwila's competitiveness with upcoming
federal and state grant opportunities as we move forward towards construction.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The negotiated firm fixed fee for Berger Abam's scope and fee outlined in Exhibit A is $399,383. The
budget for Strander Boulevard Phase 3 is currently $2,000,000.
RECOMMENDATION
Council is being asked to approve the agreement with Berger Abam for the Phase 3A Early Start Work
design services in the amount of $399,383 for the Strander Boulevard Phase 3 Project and consider
this item on the Consent Agenda at the February 1, 2016 Regular Meeting.
Attachments: Page 28, Draft 2016 -2021 CIP
Consultant Contract, Scope of Work and Fee
W: \PW Eng \PROJECTSW- RW & RS Projects \Strander Extension (98610403) \Phase III \Info Memo Contract Berger Abam 01 -15 -16 bg gl sb.docx 19
CITY OFTUKWILA CAPITAL PROJECT SUMMARY
2016 to 2021
PROJECT: StranderBh/d Extension Phase III 0�,i Nu. 38610403
Dee�nandoons�ucta�eha|i {��8�anderBhd0SVY2�hSt
DESCRIPTION:
^'~'~
from West VaUayHighway 0o N���y���mton.
JUSTIFICATION: East/west capacity between |'4O5 an- S 18USCis needed to serve Tukwila and Renton access.
Project will be constructed in three phases. Phase I extended Slander Blvd/SW 27th St from Oaksdale Ave to
STATUS: Naches Ave SW. Phase 11 constructed a 2 lane roadway from Naches to the Sounder Train's Tukwila Longacres
Station's parking lot. Phase III will construct the undercrossing of the UPRR and complete the 4 lane roadway
from West Valley Highway in Tukwila mwa,xoa Ave svvinPenton.
MA|NT.|MPACT: New street.
Project partners include the City of Renton, Boeing, WSDOT, FMSIB, Sound Transit, Metro, Amtrak, and
COMMENT: 8NSF and UP Railroads. Funds in2O15'10 are for updated cost estimates and grant applications.
8TP(P8RC) and TIGER grants were unsuccessful in2014 and 2015.
FINANCIAL Through Estimated
(in $000'sl 2014 2015 2016 2017 201 R 2n1A 2020 ?A71 RFYONr) TOTAI
20
mnn - znu/Cepitalmpm,nmonpmgram 28
Tukwila's Share
1,000
Tukwila's Share
of Renton's
Phases &
1,000
Design
41
14
1,500
3,000
4,555
Land (R/W)
104
450
1,000
1,554
Wetland Mitigation
50
500
550
Const. Mgmt.
3,750
1,050
4,800
Construction
20,500
6,700
27,200
FUND SOURCES
Proposed TIGER Grant
20,000
20,000
Proposed State TIB Grant
3,000
3,000
Proposed STP Grant
2,000
2,000
Proposed FMSIB Grant
5,000
5,000
NW Arena Mitigation
3,000
2,000
5,000
City Oper. Revenue 1,145
14
2,000
750
750
0
0
0
0
4,659
TOTAL SOURCES 1,145
14
2,000
1 28,750
1 7,750
1 01
01
01
0
1 39,659
20
mnn - znu/Cepitalmpm,nmonpmgram 28
EXHIBIT A - SCOPE OF WORK FOR PRELIMINARY DESIGN, ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENTATION AND RIGHT -OF -WAY PLANNING
CITY OF TUKWILA STRANDER AVENUE GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT
PROJECT BACKGROUND
The cities of Renton and Tukwila have been working in partnership to complete a connection of
Strander Boulevard in the City of Tukwila with Southwest 27th Street in the City of Renton. As
lead agency for the first two phases of the project, the City of Renton completed an
undercrossing of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway in 2014, connecting
Southwest 27th Street with the Tukwila Sound Transit Station. The City of Tukwila will
complete Phase 3 of the project as shown in Figure 1.
In order to reduce the cost of the first two phases of the project, the BNSF undercrossing was
completed by installing a pump station to pump both stormwater and groundwater entering
the roadway excavation from the surrounding area. This was envisioned as an interim
condition until construction of a full, four -lane arterial connection of Strander to Southwest
276th. The full build -out was anticipated to require the construction of watertight walls and a
bottom seal for the underpasses.
The proposed Phase 3 would complete an undercrossing of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR)
and, as a minimum, a two -lane arterial connection of Southwest 27th Street to Strander and to
the West Valley Highway. The arterial would be widened to four lanes if funding allows as
shown in Figure 1. Phase 3 of the project will continue to use the interim groundwater pumping
system if possible. Therefore, a key issue for the design of development of Phase 3 is to confirm
the amount of groundwater that will be encountered by completing Phase 3 and establishing a
plan for managing the groundwater.
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
Phase 3 of the project will be implemented in five design sub phases (A, B, C, D, and E) as
funding is made available. The anticipated project design phases will be as described below.
This scope of work addresses only the first two phases (Phases 3A and 313). Phases 3C, 3D, and
3E will be provided as supplemental services when and /or if funding is made available. The
completion of Phases 3A and 3B is anticipated to provide a design that is, in many respects,
approximately 50% complete, but may include elements that are not less than 30% complete.
This level of design completion will result in a "shovel ready' project that includes all the
information necessary to confirm the plan for managing groundwater, complete a reevaluation
of the environmental documentation for the project, and initiate the acquisition of right -of -way
(ROW) for the project.
Phase 3A - Preliminary Design
During Phase 3A, BergerABAM (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT ") will work with
the CITY and UPRR to determine the footprint of the project; establish a groundwater
management strategy; identify an approach to anticipated utility relocations; identify the
location of the shoofly required to construct the underpass; and update the planning level
project cost estimate and budget completed previously. The key deliverables of this phase will
`Ai
Figure 1— Project Phasing
`tea
be a design memorandum /report confirming the groundwater management strategy for the
project and a conceptual railroad bridge design submittal to UPRR for their review and
approval of the proposed project. The conceptual design submittal to UPRR will fulfill the
requirements of Table 3 -2 of the BNSF -UPRR Guidelines for Railroad Grade Separation Projects
(1/24/2007), and will be used in establishing a Preliminary Engineering Agreement with UPRR.
It is anticipated that these products would establish the location, as well as the preliminary
extent and size of all project features in sufficient detail to identify ROW needs, and to estimate
quantities of work required to construct the project. It is anticipated that these products would
provide the necessary information required for the CITY to confirm /update its planning level
cost estimate and define potential funding partnerships.
Phase 3A Early Start Activities - Tasks 11, 12, and 13 are the key tasks required for determining
the groundwater management strategy. The costs for completing only these tasks have been
identified in Exhibit B to allow the CITY to authorize them separately from remainder of the
Phase 3A preliminary design effort.
Phase 3B - Environmental Documentation and Thirty Percent Plans, Specifications, and
Estimates (PS &E)
The purpose of Phase 3B will be to begin the preparation of construction contract documents
and provide the detailed information required to complete a revaluation of the existing NEPA
and SEPA environmental documentation of the proposed project.
Phase 3B will also finalize all required ROW and easements for the project, prepare ROW plans,
and obtain approval of the 30 percent UPRR bridge from UPRR. This approval is the key
approval required from the railroad and will allow the construction plans to be completed and
a construction and maintenance agreement to be finalized with UPRR in later phases of the
project.
The key deliverables of this phase will include preliminary engineering anticipated to represent
an approximate 30 percent complete set of PS &E; updates to all NEPA and SEPA environmental
documentation; 90 percent complete right -of -way plans and a 30 percent design submittal to
UPRR for their review and approval of the underpass construction methods and details of the
UPRR overpass.
Phase 3C - Right -of -Way Acquisition
Phase 3C will acquire the ROW, and obtain certification of the ROW from WSDOT Local
Programs if required. This phase may also include additional work on the construction
documents, as required to complete the ROW plans, culminating in 60 percent PS &E, and
submittal to UPRR for review and approval. This phase is not included in this scope of work,
but will be provided as supplemented services if requested.
Phase 3D - Construction Documents
Phase 3D will complete the construction documents, culminating in 90 percent PS &E, 100
percent PS &E, and Ad Ready submittals to the CITY, WSDOT, and UPRR for review and
23
approval. This phase would culminate with a signed construction agreement from UPRR and a
construction contract complete and ready for bidding. This phase is not included in this scope
of work, but will be provided as supplemented services if requested.
Phase 3E - Construction
Phase 3E will construct the project. This phase would include Ad, Bid, and Award services;
construction contract administration; inspection and engineer of record (EOR) services required
to respond to contractors questions (RFIs); and review design- related submittals. This phase is
not included in this scope of work, but will be provided as supplemented services if requested.
PROPOSED BASIS OF DESGIN FOR PHASES 3A AND 3B
Phase 3 of the Strander Grade Separation Project will place Strander Boulevard beneath the
UPRR tracks by extending the excavation for the BNSF underpass to the west and under the
UPRR. Since the water table is only about 10 feet below the existing track grade, the
undercrossing will utilize the pumping system constructed as part of the first two phases of the
project to pump stormwater for the proposed Phase 3 extension to the existing pond, which
may need to be enlarged. Other modifications to the existing drainage system, including
modifications to the pump station and water collection system constructed by the CITY, may be
required.
Groundwater will be separated from the stormwater and an additional, new groundwater
pumping system will be used to pump groundwater to an outfall in the Green River. The
discharge location has yet to be determined. The roadway section will be established in
consultation with the CITY and is anticipated to be similar to the two -lane roadway section
constructed by the City of Renton. Other features of the project include modifications to access
several businesses located to the west of the UPRR, and utility relocations, permanent or
interim, and /or protection.
SCHEDULE (see attached schedules)
The target dates for completing Phases 3A and 3B are shown on the attached schedule. These
target dates assume that the notice to proceed (NTP) for Phase 3A is provided on 18 January
2016. These dates are the basis for the scope and fee estimates for Phases 3A and 3B. However,
issuance of the NTP for Phase 3B is contingent on the results of Phase 3A and the confirmation
of the groundwater management strategy based on pumping, as opposed to the construction of
watertight underpass structures. It is recognized by both parties that scope of work and level of
effort for Phase 3B may change as a result of work completed in Phase 3A. The attached
schedule also shows a preliminary schedule for Phases 3, 4, and 5. The schedule for these
phases will be finalized in future supplements.
SUBCONSULTANTS
The following subconsultants will participate in the delivery of this scope of work as follows.
• Fehr & Peers - Traffic Engineering
• Hanson Professional Services - Railroad Track and Bridge Design
• Shannon & Wilson - Geotechnical Engineering
24
• Sitts & Hill - Surveying
• Abeyta & Associates - Right -of -Way Services
• Widener & Associates - Environmental Documentation and Permitting
PROJECT ASSUMPTIONS
The following list is included to confirm the understanding between the CITY and the
CONSULTANT and will be used to guide the work.
Throughout this scope of work, it is understood that the CITY will provide the
CONSULTANT with one set of consolidated review comments for each draft review
round. The CONSULTANT will respond to the comments and incorporate the agreed -
upon resolution into the final document(s).
2. All design, including 30 percent Plans, Specifications and Estimates (PS &E) will be
based on an interim project configuration consisting of two lanes in an open cut. All
design will be forward compatible, as much as practical, with a four lane, water -tight
facility consisting of a bottom seal and retained cuts.
3. The roadway section will be a two -lane roadway, with a center turn lane if appropriate,
and will be determined in consultation with the CITY. The project underpass
configuration will be in accordance with the CONSULTANT's concept design described
previously in the Project Implementation Section, but will include a UPRR bridge that
would accommodate full build out of the roadway section without significant structural
modifications to the UPRR bridge.
4. The underpass will not be watertight and it is assumed that the groundwater from the
underpass can be discharged in an environmental- acceptable fashion that involves
discharging into the Green River through a new outfall.
5. UPRR may require a separate utility agreement for the new discharge line described
above. The cost for obtaining this are not included in the scope of work.
6. It is assumed the City of Renton and WSDOT will allow the CITY to use the Springbrook
Creek wetland mitigation bank constructed by the City of Renton and WSDOT.
7. Stormwater treatment will be consistent with the Washington State Department of
Ecology's (WDOE) Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, February
2005, and the Flow Control Guidance for Highly Urbanized Areas, May 2006.
8. The City will need to establish a Preliminary Engineering Agreement with UPRR and
reimburse UPRR for their review time.
9. It is assumed that CONSULTANT will design the new UPRR overpass, as well as the
proposed shoofly. It is assumed that UPRR will provide comments to the
CONSULTANT in a timely manner to facilitate the CONSULTANT's design of project.
`I
10. Utility relocation and reconstruction plans for power, gas, and communication
purveyors will be prepared by the respective utility. The CONSULTANT will
coordinate directly with the utility companies and the CITY.
11. Primary survey control will be based upon found monuments with published values.
Monuments of any kind will not be set as part of this effort. If additional work is
required, this work will be billed as an extra to the contract as a directed service.
12. It is assumed that enough monumentation still exists to determine the necessary
boundaries for this project's efforts. If additional work, such as exhaustive title research
and complete section breakdown work is required, a portion of that work may be billed
as an extra to the contract as directed services.
13. Public utility locating services provided by callbeforeyoudig.org will be utilized to do an
initial location of utilities in the public ROW. A private utility locating company is
included in this proposal, to provide complete information to verify the location of
publicly and privately owned buried utilities (sanitary, storm, water, power, gas,
telecommunications, etc.) with painted locate marks.
14. Underground utility potholing is not included in this proposal. If potholing is required,
it will be performed in subsequent phases of the design work.
15. The CITY will provide complete title report guarantees, with supporting documents, for
those parcels affected by this project that require the conveyance of real property rights.
16. Additional support for vacations of existing ROW or boundary line adjustments (BLA)
of resulting parcels is not included in this proposal as it is not quantifiable without
knowing the design. If these services are required, those services will be billed as an
extra to the contract as directed services.
17. The CITY will provide right -of -entry onto private lands prior to field survey crew
visitation, environmental explorations, and geotechnical investigations, including
drilling.
18. Coordinate mapping values will be based upon a "project datum" being a ground
realization of state plane grid coordinates.
19. Preparing and recording a Record of Survey (ROS) is not included in this proposal. If
additional work is required, this work will be billed as an extra to the contract as a
directed service.
`z:1
SCOPE OF WORK
Phase 3 work will be accomplished as follows with the tasks listed below. Detailed task
descriptions, and a level -of- effort estimate, are provided for both Phase 3A and 3B. Separating
the scope and level of estimate by phase allows the work to be authorized separately and
Phase 3B adjusted, if necessary, based on the outcome of Phase 3A.
Task 1.0
Project Management
Task 2.0
Public Involvement
Task 3.0
Business Access Design and Coordination
Task 4.0
Survey and Base Mapping
Task 5.0
Utilities
Task 6.0
Traffic Engineering, Illumination, and Signal Design
Task 7.0
Right -of -Way
Task 8.0
Environmental Documentation and Permitting
Task 9.0
Railroad Engineering and Design
Task 10.0
Structural Engineering
Task 11.0
Geotechnical Engineering
Task 12.0
Drainage Design
Task 13.0
Pump Station Design
Task 14.0
Roadway Design
Task 15.0
Design Report
Task 16.0
Waterline Monitoring Plan
Task 17.0
Sanitary Sewer Relocation
Task 18.0
Directed Services
PHASE 3A - TASK DESCRIPTIONS
The following detailed task descriptions define the Phase 3A scope of work (and associated
engineering fee estimate) for these tasks.
TASK 1.0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Subtask 1.1 Project Coordination
The CONSULTANT shall provide project management and communications between the
CONSULTANT team and the CITY. The CONSULTANT shall perform project administration
and management tasks as follows.
• Prepare and submit monthly invoices, including a tabulation of hours expended, broken
down by each major task.
• Prepare monthly progress reports summarizing the status of the budget, identifying trends,
and taking corrective actions if necessary.
• Prepare and update project schedule periodically as circumstances require or as requested
by the CITY. The project schedule shall be developed using MS Project.
`A
• Prepare subconsultant agreements and perform ongoing subconsultant coordination.
• Maintain all contract - required documentation.
• It is anticipated that the Phase 3A effort will last approximately eight months.
Subtask 1.2 Quality Assurance
The CONSULTANT shall provide quality assurance /quality control (QA /QC) for all design
work in accordance with the CONSULTANT's QA /QC standards.
Subtask 1.3 Meetings
Project Team Meetings
The CONSULTANT shall facilitate eight internal project team coordination meetings during
Phase 3A. Meetings shall be approximately 1 hour in duration and shall be attended by an
average of five CONSULTANT team members, including three of the CONSULTANT's project
management and /or project engineering staff and two other CONSULTANT discipline
specialists.
Meetings with CITY Staff
The CONSULTANT shall facilitate a total of four progress /project meetings with CITY staff.
Meetings shall be approximately 2 hours in duration and shall be attended by an average of
four CONSULTANT team members, including two of the CONSULTANT's project
management and /or project engineering staff and two other CONSULTANT discipline
specialists.
Subtask 1.4 CITY Council Meetings and Presentations
The CONSULTANT shall prepare materials and presentations for use at up to one Council
meeting. It is assumed that this would come near the end of Phase 3A to present the results of
Phase 3A to the CITY Council.
Deliverable(s)
• Monthly progress report and invoice (one copy)
• Updated project schedules if required (one copy)
• Updated contract forms and certifications
• Meeting notes for all meetings
• QA /QC documentation for all design work will be made available to the CITY upon request
TASK 2.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT (NOT USED IN PHASE 3A)
TASK 3.0 LOCAL BUSINESS ACCESS DESIGN
This task involves engineering, design, and coordination required to reconfigure access to the
Taco Bell and Jack -in- the -Box restaurants located at the intersection of Strander Boulevard and
West Valley Highway. This work may involve potential revisions to the parking configuration
at a conceptual design level. The level of effort for this task assumes up to three meetings each
28
with these businesses; one to confirm operations, a second to present potential solutions, and a
third follow -up meeting, if required, to be determined in consultation with the CITY. This work
is to be completed in coordination with the roadway design effort described in Task 14.
Assumptions(s)
• One round of CITY review comments
Deliverable(s)
• Preliminary conceptual design of revised access to Taco Bell and Jack -in -the -Box, required
modifications to parking, and other changes as may be agreed to with each business
• Conceptual design to be included in the design report and conceptual plans (see Task 15)
TASK 4.0 SURVEY AND BASE MAPPING (Sitts & Hill)
The CONSULTANT will provide existing site condition data in addition to the preparation of
existing condition documents for this project's design.
Subtask 4.1 Record Research, GPS RTK Control, and Terrestrial Control Survey Work
GPS, using WSRN RTK solutions, will be used to establish horizontal baseline control in the
Washington State Plane Coordinate System, South Zone, US Foot NAD83/2011. The GPS
observations will establish state plane coordinates on our baselines at the project. Terrestrial
control will be constrained to the GPS baselines horizontally. This terrestrial control will be set
out of the expected project extents to ensure a good basis for this project's future construction.
Horizontal project control values will be established relative to the GPS baselines. Vertical
project control values will be established relative to published CITY control benchmarks
disclosing NGVD 29 values. Monumentation local to the site will be tied into this survey, to aid
as a confirmation of the ROW in the project area.
Subtask 4.2 Topographic Survey
The mapping provided will be in support of the design of improvements to design the roadway
extension of Southwest 27th Avenue to Strander Boulevard, and the associated sidewalks,
utilities, and underpass beneath the existing railroad tracks as shown in Figure 2. The
topographic mapping will cover approximately 13 acres and will include the following.
• Locate two sets of transmission line poles both north and south of the crossing, for a total of
four sets of transmission line poles
• Topo for UPRR embankment and tracks, with elevations of top of both rails, for 1,000 feet
north of, and 1,000 feet south of, the crossing of Strander. Track survey shall be at 50 -foot
intervals in curves and 100 -foot intervals in tangent track.
• Buildings, structures
• Striping and channelization for existing roadways. West Valley Highway and businesses
with limits shown in Figure 1
`1
Figure 2 — Limits of Survey
Kill
• Concrete, asphalt, gravel, curbs, paths
• Drainage courses, swales
• Visible utilities, painted utility locates
• Ground elevations sufficient to create 1 -foot contours
• Trees 6 inches DBH and larger, labeled and tagged
• Invert elevations with descriptions of storm /sanitary sewer structures
• UPRR embankment and tracks, with elevations of top of both rails, for 1,000 feet north of,
and 1,000 feet south of, the crossing of Strander. Track survey shall be at 50 -foot intervals in
curves and 100 -foot intervals in tangent track.
• CONSULTANT will apply for a UPRR "PERMIT TO BE ON RAILROAD PROPERTY FOR
NONINTRUSIVE CIVIL ENGINEERING SURVEY." CITY will assist, if necessary, in
obtaining this permit.
Subtask 4.3 Utility Locate Services
The CONSULTANT will provide underground utility locate information on existing site
condition documents as provided by callbeforeyoudig.org. Utility locate survey will be
performed within the extents as shown in cyan in Figure 2. In addition, a private utility
locating company is included in this proposal, to provide the complete information to verify the
location of publicly and privately owned buried utilities (sanitary, storm, water, power, gas,
telecommunications, etc.) with painted locate marks. All utility marks will be located as part of
the topographic survey.
Subtask 4.4 Additional Topographic Survey of Adjacent Wetland(s)
A topographic survey of the wetlands connected by culverts under the UPRR is not included in
Task 4.2 above and it is assumed that reasonable assumptions about the topography of these
wetlands can be made using existing, available information.
Deliverable(s)
• The base map for the project will be updated to include the additional topographic survey
of adjacent wetland(s).
TASK 5.0 UTILITIES
The CONSULTANT shall coordinate with the utility companies during the conceptual design
process in order to determine the necessary impacts to their systems, staging alternatives,
upgrades to utilities, and to assess any utility relocation costs.
Subtask 5.1 Existing Utility Data
The CONSULTANT shall contact all utilities within the corridor to obtain and review available
as- builts and construction record drawings for the existing utilities. A private utility locate
1951
service will determine the location of all the underground utilities. This work is included in
Task 4 - Surveying and Base Mapping. As -built information and other information obtained
from the utility companies will be incorporated into the project base map. The CONSULTANT
shall provide the CITY with an APWA color -coded Existing Utility Map Exhibit. Utilities
known to exist in the project area, and anticipated to be affected by construction of the project
include the following.
• Olympic Pipe Petroleum Gas Lines (12 -inch and 14 -inch)
• PSE Overhead Power (transmission and distribution)
• PSE Substation
• Fiber Optic (AT &T, Level 3, and Sprint located in UPRR ROW)
• King County Sanitary Sewer
• 60 -inch Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) waterline to the north, perpendicular to UPRR.
Affected by shoofly.
• Utilities in vicinity of West Valley, including PSE gas communications, and water, sewer
and power services, all of which may or may not be affected.
The CONSULTANT shall identify options for maintaining sewer service during the project and
for relocating or replacing the permanent utilities. The following research work will need to be
completed for this task.
• Collect and review available paper and electronic as- builts and construction record
drawings for the existing utilities and associated equipment, including valves, structures,
and other features.
• Collect and review available sanitary system masterplan, hydraulic model, and any reports
from King County, with an emphasis on the design criteria used for the existing sanitary
force main line
Deliverable(s)
• Draft existing utility map exhibit (color 34x22 roll plot)
Subtask 5.2 Preliminary Coordination with Utilities
The CONSULTANT will facilitate the coordination efforts with both the public and private
utilities within the corridor. The CONSULTANT will coordinate directly with the utility
companies.
The CONSULTANT shall attend a utility kick -off coordination meeting with each of the utility
companies, which will be held at the CITY. The CONSULTANT will endeavor to reduce the
number of meetings by meeting with more than one at a time. The purpose of the kick -off
19N
meeting is to inform them of the project, discuss impacts to the utilities based on the
preliminary conceptual construction staging, discuss utility upgrades, determine existing utility
easements, and to get initial feedback on the utilities' concerns and their anticipated level of
effort for the project.
Based on utility company feedback from the utility coordination meeting, the CONSULANT
shall develop utility construction staging and relocation concepts. The concepts will be
incorporated into the draft utility relocation /protection conceptual design for CITY and utility
review. All comments will be consolidated into a single set of comments by the CONSULTANT.
As part of the effort described above, the CONSULTANT will facilitate one additional
coordination meeting with each of the utility companies, which will be held at the CITY. The
purpose of this coordination meeting is to present the proposed utility relocation plan and to
get final feedback on the utilities' concerns and their anticipated level of effort for the project.
Because it may not be possible to have all the utilities present at one time, an allowance has
been made for at least one separate meeting with each utility.
It is assumed the respective utility owners will provide timely concurrence on relocation plans
for all utilities and will provide design of the relocation to the CITY and CONSULTANT in
subsequent phases of the project. The CONSULTANT shall assist the CITY in preparing any
necessary agreements by providing a memorandum documenting proposed relocation plans
and including meeting minutes and other correspondence generated by the utility coordination
effort.
Assumptions(s)
• Final utility relocation /protection conceptual design will be used by the CITY in their Utility
Memorandum of Understanding
Deliverable(s)
• Draft utility relocation /protection conceptual design (11x17 electronic copies)
- Construction phase relocation /protection
- Final condition relocation /protection
• Consolidated comments (Excel electronic format)
• Final utility relocation /protection conceptual design (11x17 electronic copies)
- Construction phase relocation /protection
- Final condition relocation /protection
TASK 6.0 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS, ILLUMINATION, AND SIGNAL DESIGN (Fehr & Peers)
Fehr & Peers will collect, review, evaluate and synthesize prior traffic analyses prepared for the
Strander Blvd extension and other projects in the study area (Northwest Arena DEIS,
Southcenter Subarea Plan EIS, Transportation Element Update, etc.). In addition, we will
coordinate with partner agencies /jurisdictions to understand expectations for the project. The
33
primary purpose of this task will be to gather additional background information to inform the
full traffic analysis and ultimately the design of the extension project.
Specific tasks include the following.
• Coordinate with WSDOT, Renton, and Tukwila to obtain and review relevant traffic studies.
• Review the analyzed scenarios, including traffic forecasts and horizon years associated with
phasing the project.
• Coordinate with the City to determine the roadway cross section and active transportation
access needs to analyze in Phase 3B and the appropriate horizon years to analyze.
Deliverable(s)
• Summary of prior reports /studies
• Detailed scope for Phase 3B traffic analysis, including assumptions about adjacent land use
growth and horizon years
• Preliminary construction cost estimates for anticipated signal modifications
TASK 7.0 RIGHT -OF -WAY (NOT USED IN PHASE 3A)
TASK 8.0 ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION AND PERMITTING (Widener &
Associates)
Currently the project has approved NEPA and SEPA documentation. However this
documentation needs updating, and the projects NEPA and SEPA determinations need to be
updated, prior to the next federal action.
Widener & Associates will provide design assistance and early agency coordination during
Phase 3A of the project. Early input into the formation of project alternatives will be provided
to ensure each alternative includes provisions to minimize impacts to the surrounding
environment. This coordination within the various design elements of the project will identify
and incorporate minimization measures early in the alternative development phase of the
project and will ensure that an appropriate range of stormwater and groundwater management
alternatives are developed prior to agency coordination.
Subtask 8.1 Design Assistance and Early Agency Coordination
The CONSULTANT, with assistance from Widener & Associates, will assist the CITY in
presenting the alternatives to both the state and federal permitting agencies to identify the
regulatory issues associated with each alternative. Potential minimization measures for each
alternative will also be identified during the coordination with agency representatives. All
permitting issues and the recommended permitting process for the preferred alternative will be
documented in the project design report. It is assumed that this effort will be accomplished
with graphics and design drawings required to complete the design report and to conduct the
open houses, and that no other special presentation materials are required.
34
Deliverable(s)
• The CONSUTLANTS's permitting specialist will prepare meeting minutes and memoranda
documenting the coordination activities with state and federal agencies, as required
Subtask 8.2 Prepare the Area of Potential Effect (APE)
The CONSULTANT will coordinate with the environmental engineering subconsultant and
provide support for updating the APE if required.
Deliverable(s)
• The CONSUTLANTS's permitting specialist will prepare a draft APE for the project
TASK 9.0 RAILROAD ENGINEERING AND DESIGN (Hanson Professional Services)
Subtask 9.1 Project Coordination
Deliverable(s)
• None. Hanson will manage /administer Task 9.0 and coordinate with others as appropriate
Subtask 9.2 Railroad Shoofly and Phasing Concept
1. Conduct a site review concurrent with the topographic survey and prepare a one -page
field report of rail weight, tie type, rail weight transitions, insulated joints, culvert
locations, and general observations. The purpose of this item is to collect required track
and tie information and to provide the track designers with first -hand knowledge of the
project site.
2. Prepare a construction phasing plan in schematic format, and prepare a phasing
narrative to be used in supporting preparation of a MOU with UPRR.
3. Prepare an opinion of probable cost of construction for the shoofly track and
embankment.
Subtask 9.3 Railroad Bridge and Shoring Concepts
Review roadway underpass concept drawings.
2. Review geotechnical data and coordinate with geotechnical engineer.
3. Develop bridge design parameters.
4. Prepare bridge superstructure and substructure design for UPRR bridge over Strander.
Bridge to be similar to adjacent BNSF structure, which is steel plate girder with pile
supported footing extending full width of underpass.
5. Integrate bridge concept with adjacent permanent or temporary retaining wall designs if
necessary
6. Prepare utility concepts for utility conduits on bridge.
Kl..1
7. Prepare shoring concepts (wall type and preliminary evaluation of tieback type and
cost).
8. Prepare staging options at bridge.
9. Prepare bridge sheets for submittal to UPRR. The conceptual design submittal will
fulfill the requirements of table 3 -2 of the BNSF -UPRR Guidelines for Railroad Grade
Separation Projects (1/24/2007), and will be used in establishing a Preliminary
Engineering Agreement with UPRR.
10. Prepare an opinion of probable cost of construction for the bridge superstructure and
temporary shoring based on the conceptual design.
Deliverable(s)
• Field report of rail weight, tie type, transitions, and observations
• Phasing plan - schematic format
• Phasing narrative
• The conceptual bridge design submittal to fulfill the requirements of table 3 -2 of the BNSF-
UPRR Guidelines for Railroad Grade Separation Projects (1/24/2007).
• Bridge general plan and elevation(s) (GPE) - Phase 3 construction
• Bridge typical section(s) - Phase 3 construction (including shoring)
• Structure type selection report
• Opinion of probable cost of construction for
- Proposed bridge
- Phase 3 track, embankment, and shoring
TASK 10.0 STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING
Structural engineering for retaining walls shall be deferred to Phase 3B. For the purpose of cost
estimating, the CONSULTANT shall assume wall design similar to Phase 2. This information
will be used, along with judgment based on previous experience, to estimate the quantities of
materials required to construct the underpass.
Deliverable(s)
• Plans and cross sections of walls will be incorporated into the design report described in
Task 14.
TASK 11.0 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SUPPORT (Shannon & Wilson)
Shannon & Wilson will evaluate the subsurface conditions at the project site based on available
existing subsurface data and data from a new exploration program. Based on the subsurface
Kiy
conditions and updated groundwater modeling, the CONSULTANT will provide geotechnical
engineering recommendations for design of the project. Recommendations would include
foundations, walls, temporary shoring, settlement, stability, seismic considerations, and
groundwater flow /seepage.
Subtask 11.1 Subsurface Explorations and Testing
Shannon & Wilson (S &W) will prepare a subsurface exploration plan for obtaining additional
subsurface information for Phase 3 of the project. The plan will include proposed exploration
type, location, depth, and any proposed field testing. The subsurface exploration plan would
likely include drilling three soil borings, installing groundwater monitoring wells in each
boring, and performing seven cone penetration test (CPT) soundings. One boring would extend
to a depth of 200 feet, and two borings would extend to depths of about 100 feet. The CPT
soundings would extend to depths of about 75 feet.
Soil borings would be used to obtain soil samples for geotechnical and environmental
laboratory testing. Samples from the borings would be obtained in accordance with the
Standard Penetration Test (SPT), generally at 2.5 -foot intervals in the upper 20 feet and 5 -foot
intervals thereafter. Where near - surface soft, compressible soil (e.g., soft clay) is encountered, it
would be sampled using a relatively undisturbed sampler (e.g., Shelby tube) so that advanced
geotechnical laboratory testing (e.g., consolidation or triaxial tests) could be performed. Drilling
spoils would be placed in drums and disposed of based on the results of subsequent
environmental testing.
CPT soundings would be used to obtain continuous data about soil strength and stiffness. At
two locations during each sounding, a dissipation test would be performed to evaluate soil
compressibility. Soil shear wave velocity measurements would be taken in two of the
soundings to evaluate soil stiffness. At least one CPT sounding would be performed adjacent to
a soil boring so that the soil units in each exploration could be correlated.
S &W would install groundwater monitoring wells in each boreholes. The monitoring wells will
be completed as 2- inch - diameter PVC casing (from ground surface to 20 feet) and screen (from
30 to 40 feet). In one borehole, S &W will also install a vibrating wire piezometer at a depth of
15 feet to record groundwater levels in near - surface soft, compressible soil. The wells will be
capped with a monument that will contain a datalogger, which will continuously monitor
groundwater levels.
S &W would slug test the three monitoring wells to evaluate soil groundwater flow
characteristics (e.g., permeability). S &W would perform a pumping test in the test well to more
thoroughly evaluate groundwater and aquifer hydrogeologic characteristics and recharge
influence of the Green River and stormwater pond. A groundwater sample would be taken
from each well and sent to a subconsultant laboratory for environmental testing.
An S &W representative will collect soil samples and prepare a log of each boring (the pumping
test borehole would not be logged). Samples will be brought to the S &W laboratory for
19YA
geotechnical testing, and sent to a subconsultant laboratory for environmental testing.
Geotechnical laboratory testing will include visual classification, moisture content
determinations, grain size analyses, Atterberg limit tests, consolidation tests, and triaxial
strength tests. The S &W Seattle laboratory will perform the tests according to ASTM
International standard test procedures.
Assumption(s)
• All field explorations will be located on public property, or properties that the
CONSULTANT or the CITY has received permission for entry. S &W is not responsible for
obtaining right -of- entry.
• If street -use permits, traffic control, or UPRR flaggers will be required to perform the
subsurface explorations, the CONSULTANT or CITY will plan, coordinate, and procure the
required items. S &W is not responsible for obtaining permits, traffic control, or flaggers.
• To locate utilities on public property, S &W will call the One -Call Utility Locate number; any
private utility location would be done by the CONSULTANT.
• The CONSULTANT or CITY will survey the exploration locations.
Deliverable(s)
• Phase 3 field exploration plan
• Boring logs, CPT logs, and other results from the explorations will be incorporated into the
geotechnical report for Phase 3 of the project.
Subtask 11.2 Update Existing Groundwater Flow Model Structure
During previous project phases, a groundwater flow model ( "the model') of the project area
was developed to provide input to the design of temporary (construction) and permanent
groundwater control systems. S &W will update the model as described below:
• Incorporate the pond and wetland as explicit source /sink features that enable the model to
represent the interchange of shallow surfacewater and groundwater
• Incorporate findings from the subsurface explorations (Subtask 11.1), including additional
soil structure (hydrostratigraphy) and aquifer properties (hydraulic conductivity, storage
coefficients)
• Add transient boundary conditions to the model so that model inputs (e.g., Green River
stages and precipitation- derived recharge) can be allowed to dynamically vary
• Revise the computational mesh to include model cells with dimensions no more than 10 feet
by 10 feet in the railroad crossing area, to provide a finer resolution of groundwater data at
the railroad crossing
The model will simulate the potential for the pond and wetlands to recharge water, and to
quantify the flow returning directly to the grade separation. The model domain will also be
38
adjusted to include the river that is approximately 900 feet west of the railroad crossing as a
recharge (constant head) boundary.
Deliverable(s)
• None
Subtask 11.3 Update Groundwater Flow Model Calibration
For this subtask, S &W will update the groundwater model calibration. The purpose of the
calibration is to establish a model that has an acceptable level of confidence for use as a design -
predicting tool. This will involve adjusting the key model hydraulic parameters and transiently
(time- varying) simulating a specific time period and hydrologic conditions to match
(a) observed groundwater levels in monitoring wells and (b) discharge rates from the extension
underpass structure. We anticipate that the time period will cover the period for which
groundwater collection and stormwater data are available (at least 12 months).
The primary cases to be modeled are
• Base Scenario 1: This scenario represents the surface and groundwater conditions during
late fall and winter seasons. S &W will include Green River stages and precipitation inputs
for two storm events that are followed by dry periods. Pond and wetland will be assumed
full.
• Base Scenario 2: This scenario represents the surface and groundwater conditions during
spring season. S &W will include Green River stages and precipitation inputs for one storm
event followed by a dry period. Pond will be assumed full and wetland water stage will be
reduced.
• Base Scenario 3: This scenario represents the surface and groundwater conditions during
summer and early fall seasons. S &W will include Green River stages and precipitation
inputs for the dry season. Pond will be assumed full and wetland will be assumed dry.
The outcome will be an updated model calibration that more accurately represents the
permanent dewatering and pond infiltration /discharge systems. The updated model would be
used to facilitate the design of Phase 3.
Assumption(s)
• CONSULTANT would support S &W's groundwater flow model calibration by providing
stormwater runoff estimates and pump station interpretation.
Deliverable(s)
• Brief letter presenting a summary of the model update and calibration results (Subtasks 11.2
and 11.3).
[cTR]
Subtask 11.4 Groundwater Flow Model Simulations to Incorporate Phase 3A
Explorations and Proposed Phase 3 Design
For this subtask, S &W will use the updated, calibrated model to simulate the proposed Phase 3
design features. This groundwater flow analyses will be used to prepare the preliminary
drainage and stormwater design for the project.
Inputs for this effort, to be developed as part of Task 12, include the following.
• Underpass permanent dewatering system pumping rates
• Groundwater levels (if available)
• Stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces during rainfall events
• Depth and extent of wetland inundation
Up to six scenarios will be run by varying hydraulic conditions of the aquifer, infiltration rate,
river stage, pond /wetland elevations, and geometry (changes in dimension and shape). The
details of these analyses will be determined after reviewing the above base scenarios. Using the
groundwater model, coupled with the results of the hazardous materials memorandum
(Subtask 8.5, by others), S &W would evaluate the potential for contaminate transport during or
after construction.
Deliverable(s)
• A technical memorandum that presents the approach, assumptions, results, and limitations
of the analyses will be provided
Subtask 11.5 Geotechnical Engineering
S &W will perform geotechnical analyses in support of the conceptual engineering design.
These analyses will be based on the subsurface information available from Subtasks 11.1
through 11.3. S &W will prepare a draft report summarizing services provided in Phase 3A and
providing recommendations for the design of the project. Because these analyses will be based
on the limited design information, they will be considered preliminary and subject to revision
following the completion of a more detailed design in Phase 3B. The final report would be
completed in Phase 3B as part of the detailed design effort.
S &W will provide preliminary, conceptual design recommendations in accordance with
applicable standards, including CITY, WSDOT, and UPRR. Phase 3A engineering services will
include
• Evaluate seismic geologic hazards. S &W would provide seismic design spectra in
accordance with applicable standards, and evaluate potential for liquefaction and associated
hazards (e.g., settlement, instability, downdrag loads).
• Evaluate groundwater flow rates. S &W would log the results of the groundwater modeling
to evaluate groundwater inflow rates into the underpass.
• Evaluate construction considerations. S &W would evaluate construction considerations
related to site preparation, earthwork, excavations, and temporary shoring.
El to]
• Evaluate settlement induced by groundwater drawdown. S &W would evaluate settlement
caused by changes in the groundwater regime, both during and after construction.
• Evaluate proposed stormwater facility locations. S &W would evaluate soil types and
infiltration rates for new stormwater facilities.
• Evaluate new outfall foundations. S &W would evaluate foundation types and settlement
of the new outfall.
• Evaluate impacts on existing utilities. S &W would evaluate the impacts (e.g., settlement,
vibration) of new construction on existing utilities.
Deliverable(s)
• Draft geotechnical report documenting results of the Phase 3 exploration program and
updated groundwater flow modeling, and other geotechnical engineering analyses required
to complete the design of the project.
TASK 12.0 DRAINAGE DESIGN
This task involves engineering and design work to determine the stormwater treatment and
detention requirements for the project; investigate low- impact development (LID) alternatives;
and provide preliminary sizing and a preferred site location for an additional stormwater pond
and outfall to the Green River. The following work will need to be completed for this task.
Subtask 12.1 Calibration of Phase 2 Groundwater Model
Shannon & Wilson shall provide groundwater modeling and infiltration analyses as described
in Task 11. The CONSULTANT will work with Shannon & Wilson to update the Phase 2
groundwater model as described in Task 11. This will include the following.
• Existing dewatering pumping rates (to be provided by the City of Renton)
• Groundwater levels if available (not likely to be available)
• Estimates of stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces during rainfall events
• Estimates of wetland inundation (extent and depth) at various periods of time throughout
the year
• Estimates of the size of the basin draining to the site. Because detailed topo is not available,
basin size will be estimated using judgement to establish boundary conditions for Shannon
& Wilson's groundwater model
The CONSULTANT will estimate the volume of runoff from impervious surfaces feeding the
Strander Grade Separation drainage system. Hourly runoff volumes will be estimated for up to
six different storm events for which corresponding pump station pump rates are available.
These volumes will be subtracted from the pump station volumes to provide an estimate of
total groundwater flowing into the excavation of the grade separation.
Cyl
Deliverable(s)
• Inputs to groundwater modeling and infiltration analysis as described above and in Task 11.
Subtask 12.2 Phase 3 Stormwater and Groundwater Management /Design Strategy
The CONSULTANT shall use the information from the updated groundwater model developed
in Task 11 to develop the proposed stormwater design for the project. It is assumed that the
outcome of this effort will involve no changes to the existing pond, the possible addition of a
second pond (assuming a suitable location is available), and a new outfall to the Green River. It
is assumed that modifications to the existing stormwater /groundwater system may be required
in order to separate the groundwater from the stormwater.
As part of this effort, the CONSULTANT will develop a Stage- Storage- Discharge Rating table
for the wetland adjacent to the pond. The extent of wetland inundation is not precisely known.
It will be assumed the wetland is discharging to the existing pipe under the BNSF railroad
embankment. Water levels in the pond will be assumed based on visual observations of the
wetland during the winter of 2014/2015 and again in the winter of 2015/2016.
The CONSULTANT will provide the CITY with the layout of the preliminary conceptual
drainage design for discussion and review. CITY comments will be incorporated into the
conceptual drainage design. The drainage research, requirements, calculations, and
assumptions will be documented in a draft drainage memo. The drainage design report will
summarize the estimated flows from all sources, identify treatment and detention methods, and
provide preliminary conveyance design for all flows. CITY will provide one round of review
comments that will be incorporated into the final drainage memo.
Deliverable(s)
• Preliminary conceptual drainage design
• Draft drainage memo
• Final drainage memo
TASK 13.0 PUMP STATION
It is assumed that the existing pump station has sufficient capacity to pump the anticipated
groundwater and stormwater flows from the completed Phase 3 project. This will be confirmed
by comparing pump run -time and flow metering records with rainfall data. The CITY will
provide the CONSULANT with pump run -time and flow metering records for existing pump
station. However, it is assumed that a separate pumping system will be required for the
groundwater. This task will use the results of Tasks 11 and 12 to verify this assumption and
identify any changes that may be required to the existing system in order to accommodate
and /or separate the groundwater flows from the stormwater for both the existing and proposed
construction.
This task would also select a route for the proposed groundwater discharge to the Green River
and size the discharge pipe. It is assumed that up to two alternative routes may be evaluated in
04
consultation with the CONSULTANT's environmental subconsultant and CITY. The location,
approximate size, and necessary controls for the new groundwater pumping system would be
determined. The new groundwater pumping system will share components of the existing
drainage system and pump station to the extent possible. This task will also identify any
modifications to the existing drainage system and pump station that may be required to
accommodate the new groundwater pumping system. The CONSULTANT will provide the
CITY with a memorandum outlining the pump station design criteria, proposed changes to the
existing configuration, if necessary, and preliminary construction cost estimate.
Deliverable(s)
• Draft pump station memo
• Final station memo
TASK 14.0 ROADWAY DESIGN
This task involves engineering and design work for the roadway, trail, and project construction
phasing at a conceptual design level. This work will provide the basis for the design report and
conceptual plans also included in this task. This task includes a preliminary evaluation of the
ROW needs for the project, which will require some preliminary coordination with the ROW
subconsultant.
Subtask 14.1 Roadway Geometry
The CONSULTANT will verify and update the roadway alignment, profile grade, and cross
sections to accommodate the proposed interim Phase 3 conditions, as well as a future Phase 4
roadway. The design will be used to prepare the conceptual roadway drawings, develop the
cost estimate, and to support the next phase of the project.
Deliverable(s)
• Preliminary design of the roadway, including driveways and /or approaches to local
businesses as determined in Task 3, to be included in the design report and conceptual plans
Subtask 14.2 Trail Layout
The existing interurban trail parallels the UPRR on the west side of the UPRR and may require
pedestrian bridge over the grade separation, which would affect the profile and length of the
underpass. In order to bring Southwest 27th up to grade in the shortest distance, the trail will
likely need to be rerouted to the west or the east. The CONSULTANT shall investigate up to
three alternative routes and prepare a preliminary layout of the preferred trail route. The trail
shall meet the requirements of the current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines.
Assumptions(s)
• One round of CITY review comments
• The trail will require a prefabricated bridge over the grade separation. A 30 percent design
of this bridge will be included in Phase 3B
Deliverable(s)
• Preliminary design(s) of the trail to be included in the design report.
43
Subtask 14.3 Project Construction Staging
The CONSULTANT will develop construction staging and phasing concepts for the project. The
concepts will include major construction activities and the sequencing of these activities. The
staging will also consider the full build -out of the future four -lane arterial and potential for a
future overpass to access the Tukwila Sound Transit Station. The CONSULTANT will meet
with the CITY to review the preliminary construction staging concepts. The CITY will provide
one round of review comments that will be incorporated into the construction staging concept
plans. These plans will be included in the design report and conceptual plans.
Deliverable(s)
• Preliminary construction staging concepts
Subtask 14.4 Conceptual Plans
This task initiates work on what will ultimately become construction plans for the project. These
plans will become the basis for development of the final construction plans and will be used for
the determination of ROW necessary for these improvements.
Deliverable(s)
• Preliminary roadway drawings
• Preliminary driveway layout of affected restaurant properties at the west end of the project
• Preliminary intersection layout at West Valley Highway
• Preliminary utility relocation plans
• Preliminary wall plans and cross sections
TASK 15.0 DESIGN REPORT
This task involves engineering and design work for the roadway, trail, and project construction
phasing at a conceptual design level. This work will provide the basis for the design report and
conceptual plans also included in this task. This task includes a preliminary evaluation of the
ROW needs for the project, which will require some preliminary coordination with the ROW
subconsultant.
The CONSULTANT will address the following project elements in the report.
• Document the scope of the project
• Document the stormwater treatment and groundwater management strategy for the project
• Document the design principles /standards used for all major elements of the project
• Assemble this material into a draft design report and submit five copies of the document
• Finalize the design report based on one round of CITY review and submit five copies of the
final design report, including a complete set of 11x17 preliminary plans with each copy and
the cost estimate
Deliverable(s)
• Preliminary utilities relocation plan
• Drainage design report with stormwater treatment and groundwater management approach
• Preliminary roadway drawings
44
• Preliminary construction staging plan
• Preliminary cost estimate of the construction for the project
• Preliminary ROW plan showing the areas of take needed
PHASE 3B - TASK DESCRIPTIONS
Phase 3B will supplement and add tasks as described below. The following detailed task
descriptions define the Phase 3B scope of work (and associated engineering fee estimate) for
these tasks.
TASK 1.0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Subtask 1.1 Project Coordination
The CONSULTANT shall provide project management and communications between the
CONSULTANT team and the CITY. The CONSULTANT shall perform project administration
and management tasks as follows.
• Prepare and submit monthly invoices, including a tabulation of hours expended, broken
down by each major task.
• Prepare monthly progress reports summarizing the status of the budget, identifying trends,
and taking corrective actions if necessary.
• Prepare and update project schedule periodically as circumstances require or as requested
by the CITY. The project schedule shall be developed using MS Project.
• Prepare subconsultant agreements and perform ongoing subconsultant coordination.
• Maintain all contract - required documentation.
Subtask 1.2 Quality Assurance
The CONSULTANT shall provide QA /QC for all design work in accordance with the
CONSULTANT's QA /QC standards.
Subtask 1.3 Meetings
Project Team Meetings
The CONSULTANT shall facilitate an average of four internal project team coordination
meetings per month. Meetings shall be approximately 1 hour in duration and shall be attended
by an average of five CONSULTANT team members, including three of the CONSULTANT's
project management and /or project engineering staff and two other CONSULTANT discipline
specialists.
Meetings with CITY Staff
The CONSULTANT shall facilitate a total of twelve progress /project meetings with CITY staff.
This is based on the assumption that Phase 3B will take at least twelve months to complete, but
no more than eighteen months. Meetings shall be approximately 2 hours in duration and shall
El 11
be attended by an average of four CONSULTANT team members, including two of the
CONSULTANT's project management and /or project engineering staff and two other
CONSULTANT discipline specialists.
Subtask 1.4 CITY Council Meetings and Presentations
The CONSULTANT shall prepare materials and presentations for use at up to one Council
meeting. It is assumed that this would come near the end of Phase 313 to present the results of
Phase 313 to the CITY Council.
TASK 2.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
The CONSULTANT shall conduct one public open house to describe the purpose and need for
the project, present key issues, and solicit input. Up to three CONSULTANT technical staff will
attend to answer questions about the project. It is anticipated that this open house will be held
at the beginning of Phase 313. Written responses to comments received are not anticipated, but
can be provided as a supplementary service. Additional stakeholder involvement in the
planning of the project is included in Task 1.
Deliverable(s)
• Up to five exhibits
• 100 notices for mailing
• Written summary of comments received
TASK 3.0 LOCAL BUSINESS ACCESS DESIGN
This task was completed in Phase 3A. Roadway and drainage design will be further developed
in Phase 313 under Task 13 and Task 14.
TASK 4.0 SURVEY AND BASE MAPPING
Task 4 will be supplemented with the following tasks.
Subtask 4.2 Topographic Survey (Supplemented)
Additional areas may need to be surveyed as the design progresses. This task provides hours to
complete this additional work. The additional topographic survey will be performed within the
extents as shown in colored areas in Figure 1 (included in Phase 3A above). Ground elevations,
tops, toes, grade breaks, trees over 6 inches in diameter, rock extrusions, and wetland
delineations. Utility structures (surface and subsurface) will be as -built in these areas. Some of
these areas are difficult to access as there is very dense tree and ground cover in some areas.
Subtask 4.5 Title and Right -of -Way Review
Available public records will be compiled and researched to aid in the identification of the
ROW lines required by this project. Review of ROW plans to verify accuracy and available title
report guarantees with supporting documents will be used to verify existing ROW and
adjoining parcel lines.
Deliverable(s)
• A file, developed in AutoCAD Civil 3D 2015, will be the delivered product. This file will
contain the parcel and ROW map for the project
E1ry
TASK 5.0 UTILITIES
This task is supplemented as described below.
Subtask 5.3 Coordination with Utilities for Final Design
The CONSULTANT shall attend two meetings with utility representatives and the CITY, one
before and one after the preliminary design (30 percent PS &E) submittal. Decisions from these
meetings will be documented in the meeting minutes and incorporated into the plans. The
CONSULTANT will provide exhibits and the minutes for these meetings. Meetings for the
water main and sanitary sewer force main will be held separately and are included under Tasks
16 and 17. Two meetings will be held.
Assumptions(s)
• Two utility coordination meetings.
• One round of comments from CITY and utilities on the preliminary design submittal.
• CONSULTANT will compile comments from utilities into the utility coordination log.
Deliverable(s)
• Consolidated set of utility comments for the preliminary design submittal in MS Excel
format.
• Meeting minutes in MS Word electronic format
• Hard copy of plans (11x17) for each meeting
• Hard copy roll plot (2204) depicting all utility relocations will be provided to each utility at
a 30 percent design level
TASK 6.0 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND ILLUMINATION (Fehr & Peers)
Subtask 6.1 Preliminary Illumination (30 percent PS &E)
Fehr & Peers will prepare 30 percent design plans and construction cost estimates for
illumination within the project area and for a traffic signal modification at the Strander
Blvd/West Valley Highway intersection. As part of the design process, a site visit will be
conducted to verify existing conditions, utility locations, sight - lines, traffic detection
infrastructure, etc. The 30 percent plans will identify required changes to signal phasing and
existing traffic signal equipment. The plans will also help to identify potential impacts to right -
of -way and to determine if other design measures are needed to accommodate the project. Fehr
& Peers will develop construction cost estimates based on the 30 percent design plans. Fehr &
Peers will address one round of comments from the CITY and submit revised 30 percent plans
and estimates.
Deliverable(s)
• Thirty percent plans and construction cost estimates for signal modification at West Valley
Highway and illumination within the study area (between West Valley Highway and the
existing street end)
EfA
Subtask 6.2 Traffic Study for Environmental Documentation
Fehr & Peers will prepare a traffic study to verify the intersection /roadway geometrics and that
satisfies environmental documentation requirements. This process will consist of the following.
Data Collection
PM peak period traffic counts and traffic signal timing plans will be collected within the study
area that will be defined as part of Phase 3A. For the purpose of budgeting, it is assumed that
the following intersections will be analyzed.
• Strander Blvd and West Valley Highway
• South 180th Street and West Valley Highway
• Southwest Grady Way and West Valley Highway
• Strander Blvd and Andover Park W
• Longacres Way and West Valley Highway
• South 156th Street and West Valley Highway
• Fort Dent Way and Interurban Avenue South
Relatively recent traffic counts during the PM peak hour may have been collected as part of the
Northwest Arena EIS project. To the extent that relevant traffic counts are available, those
counts will be used.
24 -hour tube counts with vehicle classification and average speed for up to 20 locations will also
be collected for the noise and air quality analysis.
The rationale behind the relatively large study area is to understand how traffic patterns will
shift with the completion of the Strander Boulevard extension, understand if there are any
traffic signal timing modifications are warranted at nearby intersections, and to fully capture
the potential environmental impacts of the new traffic pattern.
Traffic Operations Analysis
PM peak hour intersection level of service will be evaluated for the above intersections
according to the Highway Capacity Manual 2010 standards. Traffic operations will be evaluated
using Synchro /SimTraffic software. Scenarios evaluated include existing conditions, the design
concept, and future no action scenarios. A field visit during the peak hours will be conducted to
verify model results.
Operations will be evaluated for existing conditions, year of opening, and a horizon year
determined through coordination with the City staff. The build and no build scenarios will be
evaluated for the opening and horizon year. One option for the horizon year analysis is to
increase traffic volumes until the interim design begins to experience LOS degradation. Based
on growth rates from the City of Tukwila Travel Demand Forecasting model, a "year of failure"
can be identified to determine at which point the full widening project would be warranted.
48
The future no action scenario is included for environmental documentation purposes. As an
optional task, additional scenarios can also be evaluated to determine potential design
modifications to accommodate events at the Northwest Arena.
Additional data will be documented for the build and no build scenarios to support the noise
and air quality analysis. This includes documenting assumed roadway characteristics, vehicle
speeds, vehicle classification, traffic volumes, and traffic signal characteristics.
Recognizing that this project will seek competitive grant funding, we also propose a greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions /vehicle -miles of travel analysis. This type of analysis can demonstrate
how reduced congestion and less circuitous vehicle circulation can reduce vehicle emissions
and improve area connectivity.
Deliverable(s)
• Memo describing the traffic analysis methods and assumptions.
• Traffic operations report.
• Intersection /signal /channelization design recommendations.
• Coordination to incorporate traffic analysis into environmental noise and air quality
analysis.
TASK 7.0 RIGHT -OF -WAY PLANS AND ACQUISITION
The CONSULTANT will identify real property rights (permanent and temporary) required for
the project and evaluate the potential acquisition impacts as they may relate to preliminary
ROW acquisition costs and timeline to complete the ROW acquisition process.
Deliverable(s)
• Preliminary cost estimates for anticipated ROW acquisitions and easements. Input to the
project schedule regarding the timeline for completing and certifying the project ROW
• Detailed scope of work for completing the ROW acquisition
TASK 8.0 ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION AND PERMITTING
Task 8 is supplemented with the following tasks required to document the reevaluation of the
project's currently approved NEPA and SEPA documents. Depending on the outcome of
updated traffic modeling amendments /supplements to existing environmental documentation
will be required for noise, air, Section 106, wetlands and wetland bank use, hazardous
materials, and City permits. New documents are required for the biological assessment (BA),
the Joint Aquatic Resource Permit Application (DARPA) and environmental justice.
Subtask 8.3 Section 106 Report (Cultural and Historic Resources)
This work would include the preparation of the Section 106 report amendment in accordance
with the State Historic Preservation Office standards and guidelines for any new areas that
maybe impacted. The work will include the following.
C1*]
Pertinent literature on the archaeology, ethnography, and history of the project area will
be reviewed to determine the existence of archaeological sites and to refine the
probability of archaeological resources and traditional cultural places in the project
areas.
2. The CONSULTANT will maintain contact with the local tribes for any information on
historic Indian use of the project area.
3. A systematic field reconnaissance will be conducted to identify previously recorded
and /or unrecorded archaeological sites for the proposed project where ground -
disturbing activities are expected to take place. Field reconnaissance will consist of the
traverse of pedestrian transects at varying intervals, depending on terrain throughout
the proposed project area. Shovel probes (digging a hole with a shovel) will be
excavated, as deep as feasible, and in areas expected to have a high probability for
cultural resources. Shovel probes will be augmented through auger probes to explore
the deepest possible deposits. Shovel probes will be screened in highly probable areas
and in soil matrixes too dense to identify small chipping debris.
4. All new sites will be mapped, photographed, and recorded on Washington State
Archeological Inventory forms and submitted to the state Office of Archeological and
Historic Preservation (OAHP) for Smithsonian numbers. Every effort will be made to
include Tribal cultural resources personnel in assisting the field effort. Rights -of -entry
will be provided by the CITY.
Deliverable(s)
• Three copies of a draft Section 106 Report will be prepared to describe cultural resources
identified in the project area to meet state and federal standards for reporting as outlined in
the guidelines provided by the OAHP. The report will include summary background
information appropriate to a cultural resources assessment of the project area, including
environment, previous cultural resources studies, ethnography /ethno history, and history.
A discussion of agency and Tribal consultation, methodology, the results of the
investigation, and a map of located archaeological sites will be provided. Recommendations
will also be extended to any cultural resources that may be significant. Monitoring of
construction excavation recommendations may also be included. The historic structures
inventory form and /or archaeological site inventory form will be attached to the report as an
appendix.
• Three copies of a revised draft Section 106 report incorporating CITY comments.
• Three copies of a final Section 106 report incorporating WSDOT comments.
Subtask 8.4 Noise Study
The CONSULTANT will prepare a traffic noise report is to evaluate traffic noise levels at
sensitive receptors near the project that would be potentially affected by traffic noise and to
identify potential mitigation measures. The traffic noise report will be developed in accordance
with WSDOT's Environmental Procedures Manual.
Sound Level Measurements
After review of the proposed project alternatives, the CONSULTANT shall visit the
project area to identify potentially sensitive noise receivers and to take measurements of
existing sound levels. The CONSULTANT will measure existing noise levels during the
peak hours to be used in calibrating the noise model. Measurements will be undertaken
in accordance with WSDOT and FHWA guidelines and will be made with a Type 1
sound level meter. During these measurements, sources of existing noise and
topographical features will be noted and traffic speeds and vehicle numbers and mix
will be noted.
2. Construction Noise Impact Evaluation
The noise analysis will evaluate potential short -term impacts of noise from construction
activities. Construction noise on nearby sensitive receptors will be evaluated based on
estimates published by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of maximum
noise levels of typical construction equipment in conjunction with simple distance
attenuation. Computer modeling of construction noise levels will not be performed.
3. Traffic Noise Impact Evaluation
The CONSULTANT will evaluate traffic noise impacts using the FHWA Traffic Noise
Model (TNM) to estimate future traffic noise levels for the worst -case build alternative.
The worst -case scenario will be selected from among the build alternatives, and will be
chosen based on expected future traffic volumes and the location of the alignment
relative to sensitive receivers. The noise modeling will predict PM peak -hour Leq noise
levels from traffic at a maximum of 15 receptor locations that could be affected by the
proposed project and will consider existing conditions and design year conditions.
Modeling to calculate noise contour lines is not included.
4. Mitigation Analysis
The CONSULTANT will identify mitigation measures to reduce noise levels during
construction. If predicted long -term traffic noise levels from operation of the project
would cause noise impacts, mitigation measures will be developed in cooperation with
the lead agency and design engineers. Mitigation analysis, if required, will include
evaluation of the effectiveness and general size and location of natural and man -made
noise barriers using the TNM model.
Deliverable(s)
• Three copies of a draft traffic noise analysis report for review by CITY with accompanying
draft special provisions if required
• Three copies of a draft traffic noise analysis report, incorporating the CITY's comments, for
submittal to FHWA/WSDOT
:1I
• Three copies of a revised draft traffic noise analysis report, incorporating comments by
FHWA/WSDOT, for submittal for approval
Subtask 8.5 Hazardous Material Memorandum
The CONSULTANT will prepare a hazardous materials memo to evaluate the presence, or
likely presence, of potential hazardous substances within the physical limits of the project that
would have an effect on the overcrossing project. Sites with potential for environmental
issues /impacts include those that indicate current or past uses as service stations, battery shops,
dry cleaners, chemical storage, or manufacturing facilities; sites with fuel or chemical storage
tanks or drums present; or those with strong pungent or noxious odors. The scope of services
for this study will include
A review of the results of a federal, state, and local environmental database search
provided by an outside environmental data service for listings of known or suspected
environmental problems at the sites or nearby properties within the search distances
specified by WSDOT.
2. A review of historical aerial photographs, fire insurance maps, city directories, chain -of-
title reports, and tax assessor records, as available and appropriate, to identify past
development history on the parcels relative to the possible use, generation, storage,
release, or disposal of hazardous substances. An attempt to identify uses of the sites
from the present to the time that records show no apparent development of the site, or
to 1940, whichever is earlier.
3. Conduct of a visual reconnaissance of the parcels and adjacent properties to identify
visible evidence of potential sources of contamination. .
4. A letter report that will summarize the results of this study. The letter report will briefly
discuss the project activities and include a table ranking the parcels (low, moderate,
high) by their potential for contamination from either on -site or off -site sources. A draft
letter report will be provided for review and comment. Upon receiving comments, the
letter will be modified as appropriate and made final.
Deliverable(s)
• Three copies of the draft hazmat memo will be provided
• Three copies of the hazmat memo will be provided incorporating CITY comments
• Three copies of the final hazmat memo will be provided incorporating WSDOT/FHWA
comments if required. It is assumed that WSDOT/FHWA comments will not alter the basic
conclusion of the documentation or require further alternative studies
Subtask 8.6 Biological Assessment (BA)
A BA (NO EFFECT LETTER) will be prepared for the preferred alternative in accordance with
WSDOT guidelines. The following subtasks will be undertaken in preparation of the project BA
(NO EFFECT LETTER).
M
Collect available documentation concerning the project activities and pertinent
biological information. Biological information will include priority habitat and species
data from the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, along with rare plant
and high - quality ecosystem data from WDNR. This information will be reviewed and a
consultation strategy will be developed.
2. Check with United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National
Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries to verify lists of
endangered, threatened, proposed, and candidate species.
3. Conduct a field reconnaissance to investigate on -site habitat conditions.
4. Make telephone contact with the appropriate resource agency staff for input on species
occurrence, habitat use, and potential project impacts.
5. Prepare a draft BA (NO EFFECT LETTER) addressing listed species, proposed species,
candidate species, species of concern, and critical habitat. The BA (NO EFFECT
LETTER) will include a project description, a list of species, a description of the species
and their habitat, an analysis of project effects, and mitigation recommendations.
6. Provide the draft BA (NO EFFECT LETTER) to the CITY for review and approval.
7. Revise the BA (NO EFFECT LETTER), as appropriate, and submit the final BA (NO
EFFECT LETTER) to WSDOT for their approval.
Deliverable(s)
• One electronic copy of a draft BA (NO EFFECT LETTER) for review by CITY
• One electronic copy of a draft BA (NO EFFECT LETTER), incorporating the CITY's
comments, for submittal to WSDOT
• Three copies of a final BA (NO EFFECT LETTER) that incorporates WSDOT comments
Subtask 8.7 Air Quality Analysis
The purpose of the air quality report is to identify any significant impacts and necessary
mitigation measures, and to determine conformity with pertinent air quality rules. The air
quality modeling assessment will meet the requirements of federal and state conformity
regulations and the procedures in EPA's Guidelines for Modeling Carbon Monoxide from
Roadway Intersections (1992), and will provide a project -level conformity determination for the
project.
After review of the proposed project alternatives and the results of the traffic analysis,
the CONSULTANT will select intersections for project -level air quality modeling. The
CONSULTANT will visit the project area to assess the presence of potentially sensitive
receivers and to measure the physical parameters of the selected intersections.
53
2. Traffic Impact Evaluation: The CONSULTANT will conduct an air quality impact
analysis using approved regulatory models and modeling techniques. This analysis will
include use of the latest MOBILE series emission factor prediction model and Version 2
of the CAL3QHC dispersion model. In this process, the CONSULTANT will coordinate
as necessary with the appropriate regulatory agencies. The modeling will calculate
carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations near each intersection for the following scenarios:
(1) existing conditions; (2) opening and design year no action; and (3) opening and
design of the build alternative.
3. Mitigation Analysis: In the event the impact analysis modeling indicates the project
would cause significant air quality impacts, it will be necessary to quantitatively
consider mitigation measures for each of the intersections where impacts are expected.
For purposes of estimating a budget, the CONSULTANT will assume modeling
mitigation measures are necessary at all four affected intersections for the worst -case of
the build alternatives, and will allow one day for the iterative process of WASIT or
CAL3QHC and available traffic modeling.
4. Air Quality Technical Study: The CONSULTANT will prepare a draft technical air
quality report to document the methods and the results of the impact and mitigation
analyses, and to provide a conformity statement for the project. The CITY will review
the draft report and prepare consolidated comments. The CONSULTANT will
incorporate the CITY's comments into a final technical report
Deliverable(s)
• Three copies of the draft will be provided
• Three copies of the final air conformity analysis report will be provided to WSDOT /FHWA
incorporating CITY comments
• Three copies of the final air conformity will be incorporating WSDOT/FHWA comments
Subtask 8.8 NEPA Environmental Classification Summary Update
Services will be provided to prepare the ECS form by reviewing technical reports related to the
project, applying project- specific data to the form and coordinating approval for the project by
both WSDOT.
Deliverable(s)
• Three copies of the draft ECS will be provided
• Three copies of the final ECS documentation will be provided incorporating CITY
comments
• Three copies of the final ECS documentation will be provided incorporating
WSDOT/FHWA comments if required. It is assumed that WSDOT /FHWA comments will
not alter the basic conclusion of the documentation or require further alternative studies
54
Subtask 8.9 Wetland and Critical Areas Study
The purpose of this report is to identify jurisdictional wetland within the project corridor and
critical areas, as well as provide mitigation if necessary. The CONSULTANT will develop,
implement, and complete field surveys to identify and delineate wetlands in the project area
using the appropriate methods described in the USACE Wetlands Delineation Manual
(Environmental Laboratory, 1987), Wetlands Research, Technical Report Y -87 -1, January 1987.
The CONSULTANT will delineate wetlands within 200 feet of the project area.
The CONSULTANT will prepare a comprehensive report that includes detailed wetland maps,
documentation of survey methods, results, potential impacts from project actions, and
recommendations for wetland protection and mitigation. The report also will contain
appropriate forms for wetland identification, delineation, and function assessment required by
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The information in this report is intended for use in
compliance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The final report and associated documents
will be in a format acceptable to USACE.
Delineated wetland boundaries will be identified on the ground with flagging. The delineated
wetland boundaries will be mapped with accuracy acceptable to USACE.
Four copies of the draft report will be provided to the CITY for review and comment. Four
copies of the final report that incorporated the CITY's requested revisions requested will be
provided.
Deliverable(s)
• An electronic copy of a draft wetland delineation for review by the CITY with
accompanying critical areas provisions if required
• An electronic copy of a draft wetland delineation, incorporating the CITY's comments, for
submittal to USACE and DOE
• An electronic copy of a final wetland delineation, incorporating comments by USACE and
DOE
Subtask 8.10 Wetland Mitigation Use Plan
A wetland mitigation plan will be prepared for the development of the CITY owned properties.
The plan will be completed to meet the requirements of USACE and DOE. The following
subtask will be undertaken in preparation for the project mitigation use plan.
Condition assessment of the proposed mitigation site.
2. Analysis of the proposed impacts and the proposed mitigation site to show how the
mitigation site comply with USACE and DOE regulations.
3. Complete a draft of the wetland mitigation use plan which will include a narrative
describing the proposed mitigation site, a vicinity map, a plan view and /or detail maps
:�7
of the proposed mitigation and other informational maps as required by the permitting
agencies.
4. Revise the plan based on agency comments
Deliverable(s)
• Three copies of a draft mitigation use plan for review by the CITY with accompanying draft
special provisions if required
• Three copies of a draft mitigation use plan, incorporating the CITY's comments, for
submittal to USACE and DOE
• Three copies of a revised draft mitigation plan, incorporating comments by USACE and
DOE
Subtask 8.11 SEPA
The CONSULTANT shall complete appropriate SEPA documentation, including all needed
studies, modeling, and analysis in accordance with State Environmental Policy Act (RCW
43.21C) and SEPA Rules (WAC 197 -11). The CONSULTANT will coordinate with the CITY of
Tukwila to address comments on the SEPA Checklist and provide support for the SEPA
process.
Deliverable(s)
• SEPA Checklist
Subtask 8.12 State and Federal Permits
Widener will assemble and organize all necessary environmental permit applications to a
standard acceptable by the permitting agencies. Anticipated permits include the following.
1. Section 404 Permit
2. Section 401 Permit
3. Shorelines Permit
Permit applications shall include all requested information, such as application forms, all
necessary permit drawings, an attachment describing project location, project purpose and
need, alternatives considered, and a summary of project impacts. The CONSULTANT shall
also provide a draft transmittal letter for submittal of the application by the CITY. Draft
applications, including supporting information, shall be submitted to the CITY for review and
comment. Revised permit applications shall be provided to the CITY for signature and
submittal to permitting agencies. The CONSULTANT shall perform the necessary coordination
to obtain the permits.
Deliverable(s)
• Three copies of the draft DARPA for review by the CITY
• Three copies of the revised draft DARPA incorporating CITY comments
• Three copies of the final DARPA will be prepared incorporating agency comments
:7y
Subtask 8.13 CITY Permits
CONSULTANT will assemble and organize all necessary environmental permit applications to
a standard acceptable by the permitting agencies. Anticipated permits include the following.
• Critical Area Permit
• Fill and Grade permit
Permit applications shall include all requested information, such as application forms, all
necessary permit drawings, an attachment describing project location, project purpose and
need, alternatives considered, and a summary of project impacts. The CONSULTANT shall
also provide a draft transmittal letter for submittal of the application by the CITY. Draft
applications, including supporting information, shall be submitted to the CITY for review and
comment. Revised permit applications shall be provided to the CITY for signature and
submittal to permitting agencies. The CONSULTANT shall perform the necessary coordination
to obtain the permits.
Deliverable(s)
• Two draft copies of the permit applications
• Two final copies of the permit applications
TASK 9.0 RAILROAD ENGINEERING AND DESIGN
Subtask 9.1 Project Coordination (supplemented)
Hanson will manage /administer Task 9.0 and coordinate with others as appropriate.
Subtask 9.4 30 Percent Railroad Shoofly and Phasing Plan
Prepare shoofly design and list of questions for submittal to UPRR.
2. Update the Opinion of Probable Cost of Construction for track and embankment to
30 percent level.
Subtask 9.5 30 Percent Railroad Bridge and Shoring Design
1. Prepare a response memo to UPRR in response to comments received on the bridge and
shoring concept submittal.
2. Incorporate UPRR- recommended changes into the 30 percent bridge and shoring plans.
3. Prepare a structure type selection report. This is a brief report, typically in memo format,
that will provide UPRR background on how the bridge type was selected. This is
applicable to the 30 percent UPRR submittal package.
4. Provide substructure loading parameters to CONSULTANT (railroad bridge loading
parameters).
5. Prepare preliminary shoring details and staging details (30 percent).
6. Add UPRR general notes to the structures plans.
7. Prepare 30 percent utility concepts for conduits attached to the bridge.
8. Prepare 30 percent bridge plan sheets.
9. Update the Opinion of Probable Cost of Construction for the bridge superstructure and
temporary shoring to 30 percent.
Deliverable(s)
• Response memo to UPRR comments on bridge and shoofly concept submittals
• Thirty percent Phasing Plan - Schematic Format
• Thirty percent Phasing Narrative
• Thirty percent Bridge General Plan and Elevation (GPE) - Phase 3A Construction
• Thirty percent Bridge Typical Section - Phase 3A Construction (incl. shoring)
• Thirty percent Bridge General Plan and Elevation (GPE) - Phase 3B Construction
• Thirty percent Bridge Typical Section - Phase 3B Construction (incl. shoring)
• Preliminary shoring details (30 percent)
• Thirty percent Opinion of Probable Cost of Construction for
- Proposed Bridge
- Phase 3A track, embankment and shoring
- Phase 3B track, embankment and shoring
TASK 10.0 STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING
The CONSULTANT shall prepare 30 percent structural design of underpass retain walls and
the pedestrian bridge. The extent of retaining walls is assumed to be similar to Phase 2 based
on a two lane roadway. It is assumed the pedestrian bridge will be prefabricated steel truss
similar the trail bridge over 180th.
Deliverable(s)
• Thirty percent wall plan, elevations, and sections
• Thirty percent elevations and sections for the trail bridge
TASK 11.0 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SUPPORT
This effort is a continuation of geotechnical engineering support that began in Phase 3A. S &W
will provide design recommendations in accordance with applicable standards, including CITY,
WSDOT, and UPRR. Engineering services will include
• Develop bridge foundation recommendations. S &W would provide LRFD axial and
lateral resistances for deep foundations, or bearing and lateral resistance for shallow
foundations, if applicable. If we recommend deep foundations, we would provide
parameters for developing lateral resistance curves, but would not perform lateral resistance
analyses (e.g., LPILE).
58
• Develop retaining wall recommendations. Provide LRFD bearing resistances, static earth
pressures, and seismic earth pressures, as applicable.
• Evaluate foundation, embankment, and retaining wall settlement. Evaluate settlement
using elastic and /or one - dimensional consolidation theory.
• Perform global stability analyses. Use the computer program SLOPE/W (limit equilibrium
method) to analyze the static and seismic stability of the proposed retaining walls and
shoofly embankment.
• Evaluate groundwater flow rates. Update our groundwater modeling to evaluate
groundwater inflow rates into the underpass based on the new design.
• Evaluate construction considerations. Evaluate construction considerations related to site
preparation, earthwork, excavations, and temporary shoring.
• Evaluate proposed stormwater facility locations. Evaluate soil types and infiltration rates
for new stormwater facilities.
• Evaluate new outfall foundations. Evaluate foundation types and settlement of the new
outfall.
• Evaluate impacts on existing utilities. Evaluate the impacts (e.g., settlement, vibration) of
new construction on existing utilities.
Deliverable(s)
• Updated draft geotechnical report
TASK 12.0 DRAINAGE DESIGN
The CONSULTANT shall prepare a drainage report and preliminary conveyance design for the
project in sufficient detail to support the completion and approval of the environmental
documentation for the project. The drainage report will be prepared per the criteria of the
Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (February
2005) and any additional requirements of the CITY and WSDOT. The drainage report shall
include
I. Project overview
2. Detailed project description
3. Runoff /detention calculations
4. Water quality computations
5. Stormwater conveyance calculations
6. Maintenance and operation of facilities
Assumptions(s)
• Groundwater seeping into the underpass will not need to be treated, but will be of a
sufficiently low volume that it will not need to be collected and treated separately from the
stormwater runoff from the roadway.
• A dissipation structure will be required where underpass water is pumped into the
detention /treatment pond.
• The CONSULTANT will develop stormwater designs in consultation with CITY staff, but
no more than two stormwater options will be investigated.
• The stormwater design process will include up to three meetings with the CITY and other
involved parties to review and discuss options being considered. One additional meeting
with the CITY will be required to review and discuss comments on the draft drainage
report.
• Once the preferred stormwater design has been agreed upon, the CONSULTANT shall
provide drainage plans and profiles, including layouts and details of any low- impact design
facilities in the 30 percent PS &E submittal.
Deliverable(s)
• Meeting minutes
• Draft and final drainage report (one electronic and two hard copy)
• Preliminary conveyance design with 30 percent PS &E submittal
TASK 13.0 PUMP STATION
This task would advance the design of the pump station sufficiently to finalize pump sizes, and
identify pump manufacturers acceptable to the CITY maintenance staff, and if possible comply
with "Buy American' provisions for this potentially federally funded project. Preliminary
layout of pump facilities and outfall will be established, the discharge route finalized, and
updated cost estimates prepared.
Deliverable(s)
• Preliminary (30 percent PS &E) design plans and cost estimates for the pump station and
groundwater discharge system included with the project submittals described in Task 14
TASK 14.0 ROADWAY DESIGN
This task involves engineering and design work required to advance the design of the
driveways, roadway, utilities, and trail to approximately 30 percent level of design in order to
finalize the geometric design and footprint of the project as required to complete the
environmental documentation for the project. The CONSULTANT shall prepare preliminary
PS &E documents for the construction of the proposed project consistent with City, state, and /or
county design standards. Plans shall be formatted to provide sufficient detail for convenient
field layout of all proposed facilities. City standard details, King County standard plans, and
WSDOT standard plans will be supplemented with project- specific details as required. The
60
plans will be completed in a manner to eventually facilitate completion in subsequent design
phases to provide competitive bidding by contractors.
Subtask 14.5 Roadway Drawings
The CONSULTANT shall prepare 30 percent roadway plans in accordance with the drawing list
included with the level of effort estimate for Phase 3B.
Deliverable(s)
• Permitting (30 percent) roadway plans submittal
Subtask 14.6 Specifications
The underpass construction is not common and special provisions will be required to
supplement the current edition of the WSDOT Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and
Municipal Construction and the associated amendments and general special provisions.
During Phase 3B, the CONSULTANT will prepare outline specifications identifying all
anticipated payment items. Draft special provisions will be prepared where required. It is
anticipated that there will be a special provision required for each of the following.
• Secant pile walls
• Bottom seal construction
• Railroad construction
• An allowance for one other draft special provision not yet identified is included in the level
of effort for Phase 3B.
Deliverable(s)
• Three hard copies of the outline specifications and draft special provisions
Subtask 14.7 Construction Cost Estimate
An engineer's construction cost estimate shall be prepared based upon the list of anticipated
pay items and quantities obtained from the 30 percent design effort.
Deliverable(s)
• Three hard copies of the construction cost estimate
• One electronic copy (PDF) of the construction cost estimate
• One electronic copy (MS Excel) of the construction cost estimate
TASK 16.0 WATERLINE MONITORING PLAN
The CONSULTANT shall propose a plan to the CITY to monitor the Seattle Public Utilities
waterline for settlement or other movement.
Deliverable(s)
• One PDF of a draft waterline monitoring plan
61
TASK 17.0 SANITARY SEWER RELOCATION
The CONSULTANT shall propose to the CITY an option or options to relocate the King County
Sanitary Sewer Interceptor (between existing County Manhole No. R -18 -16 located at the NW
corner of the Tukwila property and intersection of Southwest 27th Street/Naches Avenue).
Once an option to relocate the Interceptor has been agreed to by the CITY and King County, the
CONSULTANT shall generate 30 percent plans for inclusion into the roadway drawings
described in Task 14.
Assumption(s)
• Three sanitary sewer coordination meetings
• One round of comments from King County and CITY on the preliminary design submittal
• CONSULTANT will compile comments from CITY and King County into the utility
coordination log
• If applicable, the CONSULTANT will coordinate and obtain written concurrences from the
County on any requested deviation from the County's standards prior to the beginning of
construction of the Interceptor Adjustment Work
Deliverable(s)
• Consolidated set of sanitary sewer comments for the preliminary design submittal in MS
Excel format
• Meeting minutes in MS Word electronic format
• Hard copy of plans (11x17) for each meeting
• Hard copy roll plot (2204) depicting all utility relocations will be provided to King County
at a 30 percent design level
DESIGN CRITERIA
All documents prepared shall be developed in accordance with the latest edition and
amendments of the following, unless otherwise directed by the City of Tukwila.
WSDOT Publications
• Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction, English Edition
(M41 -10)
• Standard Plans for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction, English Edition (M21 -01)
• Design Manual (M22 -01)
• Bridge Design Manual, Volumes 1 and 2 (M23 -50)
• Plans Preparation Manual (M22 -31)
62
• Construction Manual
• Local Agency Guidelines Manual
Railroad Standards
• BNSF -UPRR Guidelines for Railroad Grade Separation Projects (1/24/2007).
• UPRR Public Projects - Plan Submittal Guidelines (rev. 10/10/2014).
• UPRR Standards (.zip file containing Microstation seed files)
• UPRR Plan Preparation Checklist
• BNSF -UPRR Guidelines for Temporary Shoring (10/25/2004)
AASHTO Publications
• AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, Third Edition, 2004
• Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, August 1991
• A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (1994, 'Green Book')
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration
• Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways
Other Publications /Design Guides
• Americans with Disability Act (ADA)
• Ecology, "Stormwater Manual for Western Washington February 2005"
• Standard drawings and sample documents provided by the CITY and furnished to the
CONSULTANT shall be used as a guide in all applicable cases
63
EXHIBIT B: Consultant Fee Determination
City of Tukwila - Strander Avenue Grade Separation Project
DIRECT SALARY COSTS (DSC)
Personnel
Hours
Phase 3A Early Start
1/12/2016
Rate Cost
1 Principal /Project Manager
88
X
$
87.50
= $
7,700
2 Project Engineer
432
X
$
54.09
= $
23,368
3 Structural Engineer
16
X
$
54.95
= $
879
4 Civil Engineer
534
X
$
38.20
= $
20,397
5 Construction Specialist
28
X
$
57.60
= $
1,613
6 Designer/ CAD Oper
182
X
$
39.92
= $
7,266
7 Graphics
30
X
$
36.68
= $
1,100
8 Project Coor. / Admin
84
X
$
33.15
= $
2,784
Total Hours 1,394 Subtotal Direct Salary Costs (DSC) _ $ 65,107
Salary Escalation (SE) = 0% of DSC = $ -
Subtotal (DSC + SE) _ $ 65,107
Overhead (OH) 166.65% of (DSC + SE) _ $ 108,501
Fixed Fee (FF) 30.35% of (DSC + SE) _ $ 19,760
TOTAL SALARY COSTS (DSC + SE + OH + FF) _ $ 193,369
DIRECT NONSALARY COSTS (DNSC)
Mileage Design Team 200 miles @ $ 0.560 $ 112
Expendables (photographs, equip rental, etc) 1 Estimate @ 200 $ 200
TOTAL REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES (DNSC) _ $ 312
SUBTOTAL BergerABAM = $ 193,681
SUBCONSULTANTS
Fehr and Peers - Traffic
Hanson - Rail
Shannon & Wilson - Geotechnical $ 186,226
Sitts & Hill - Survey
Abeyta & Associates - ROW Services (Not Used in Phase 3A) $ -
Widener & Associates - Environmental $ 19,476
SUBTOTAL SUBCONSULTANTS = $ 205,702
EARLY START (Tasks 11, 12 & 13) _ $ 399,383
Page 1 of 4
64
EXHIBIT B: Consultant Fee Determination Total Cost Summary
City of Tukwila - Strander Avenue Grade Separation Project 1/12/2016
TOTAL SALARY COSTS (DSC + SE + OH + FF) _ $ 1,151,630
TOTAL REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES (DNSC) _ $ 3,172
SUBTOTAL BergerABAM = $ 1,154,802
SUBCONSULTANTS
Fehr and Peers - Traffic $ 62,164
Hanson - Rail $ 171,318
Shannon & Wilson - Geotechnical $ 257,626
Sitts & Hill - Survey $ 56,830
Abeyta & Associates - Right of Way Services $ 7,500
Widener & Associates - Environmental $ 149,286
SUBTOTAL SUBCONSULTANTS = $
704,724
SUBTOTAL PHASE 3A & 3B = $
1,859,526
CONTINGENCY /MGMT. RESERVE _ $
125,000
TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT = $
1,984,526
Page 2 of 4
65
EXHIBIT B: Consultant Fee Determination Phase 3A Cost Summary
City of Tukwila - Strander Avenue Grade Separation Project 1/12/2016
DIRECT SALARY COSTS (DSC)
Personnel
Hours
Rate
Cost
1 Principal /Project Manager
186
X
$
87.50
= $
16,275
2 Project Engineer
1,010
X
$
54.09
= $
54,634
3 Structural Engineer
180
X
$
54.95
= $
9,891
4 Civil Engineer
1,178
X
$
38.20
= $
44,995
5 Construction Specialist
158
X
$
57.60
= $
9,101
6 Designer/ CAD Oper
706
X
$
39.92
= $
28,185
7 Graphics
96
X
$
36.68
= $
3,521
8 Project Coor. / Admin
190
X
$
33.15
= $
6,298
Total Hours 3,704 Subtotal Direct Salary Costs (DSC) _ $ 172,900
Salary Escalation (SE) = 0% of DSC = $ -
Subtotal (DSC + SE) _ $ 172,900
Overhead (OH) 166.65% of (DSC + SE) _ $ 288,137
Fixed Fee (FF) 30.35% of (DSC + SE) _ $ 52,475
TOTAL SALARY COSTS (DSC + SE + OH + FF) _ $ 513,512
DIRECT NONSALARY COSTS (DNSC)
Mileage Design Team
Expendables (photographs, equip rental, etc)
SUBCONSULTANTS
400 miles @ $ 0.560 $ 224
1 Estimate @ 1000 $ 1,000
TOTAL REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES (DNSC) _ $ 1,224
SUBTOTAL BergerABAM = $ 514,736
Fehr and Peers - Traffic $ 6,900
Hanson - Rail $ 82,354
Shannon & Wilson - Geotechnical $ 186,226
Sitts & Hill - Survey $ 56,830
Abeyta & Associates - ROW Services (Not Used in Phase 3A) $ -
Widener & Associates - Environmental $ 19,476
SUBTOTAL SUBCONSULTANTS = $ 351,787
SUBTOTAL PHASE 3A = $ 866,523
Page 3 of 4
66
EXHIBIT B: CONSULTANT FEE DETERMINATION
CITY OF TUKWILA - STRANDER AVE GRADE SEPARATION
DIRECT SALARY COSTS (DSC)
Personnel
Hours
Phase 3B Cost Summary
1/12/2016
Rate
Cost
1 Principal /Project Manager
250
X
$
87.50
= $
21,875
2 Project Engineer
932
X
$
54.09
= $
50,415
3 Structural Engineer
400
X
$
54.95
= $
21,980
4 Civil Engineer
1,192
X
$
38.20
= $
45,530
5 Construction Specialist
104
X
$
57.60
= $
5,990
6 Designer/ CAD Oper
1,166
X
$
39.92
= $
46,549
7 Graphics
62
X
$
36.68
= $
2,274
8 Project Coor. / Admin
302
X
$
33.15
= $
10,010
Total Hours 4,408 Subtotal Direct Salary Costs (DSC) = $ 204,623
Salary Escalation (SE) = 5% of DSC = $ 10,231
Subtotal (DSC + SE) = $ 214,854
Overhead (OH) 166.65% of (DSC + SE) = $ 358,055
Fixed Fee (FF) 30.35% of (DSC + SE) = $ 65,208
TOTAL SALARY COSTS (DSC + SE + OH + FF) = $ 638,118
DIRECT NONSALARY COSTS (DNSC)
Mileage Design Team
Expendables (photographs, equip rental, etc)
SUBCONSULTANTS
800 miles @ $ 0.560 $ 448
1 Estimate $ 1,500 $ 1,500
TOTAL REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES (DNSC) = $ 1,948
TOTAL BergerABAM = $ 640,066
Fehr and Peers - Traffic $ 55,264
Hanson - Rail $ 88,964
Shannon & Wilson - Geotechnical $ 71,400
Sitts & Hill - Survey $ -
Abeyta & Associates - ROW Services (Allowance for Meetings and Consultation) $ 7,500
Widener & Associates - Environmental $ 129,810
TOTAL SUBCONSULTANTS = $ 352,937
SUBTOTAL PHASE 3B TASKS = $ 993,003
Page 4 of 4
67